User talk:54mods

January 2015
The article 54Mods has been deleted in accordance with Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion. There were two reasons for this: (1) The article appeared to be about a web site, but there was no indication that the web site was significant enough to justify inclusion in an encyclopaedia. (2) The article seemed to be substantially promotional, including an invitation for readers to "see more" by following a link to your web site. Wikipedia is not a medium for advertising or promotion of any sort.

Please also note that Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest discourage us from creating articles on subjects we have any close personal connection to, such as our own web sites. If a subject is truly notable, then probably some uninvolved outsider will create an article on it, from a neutral point of view. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:02, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 54Mods


A tag has been placed on 54Mods requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Theroadislong (talk) 16:03, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Message posted to wrong page
The following message was posted to the article 54Mods, but it belongs in a talk page, not an article in the encyclopaedia, so I am moving it here. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:20, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Thnak you for the update on the issue mention about creating the link to the information on the site.

I would like to have the account 54mods, remain and then continue to fine tune and use the sand box to pre test the presentation of over 30 years of photography work done for live concert shots to be shared by the site for others to enjoy.

This is a hobby, as I have never once sold any item, the images are always provided to the artist and management for there use with photo credit given. This is not an autobiographie.

Thank's for your time.

Any suggestions would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 54mods (talk • contribs) 16:15, 19 January 2015‎


 * 1) Unfortunately, you are making the same mistake that many new editors make. It is very easy for thinking that "anyone can edit Wikipedia" means that it is an ideal place for calling public attention to your own work. However, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information on just anything, and your web site does not satisfy Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. A subject does not qualify for inclusion unless it satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Those guidelines are quite extensive and complicated, and in my opinion Wikipedia would be better if we cut them down to about a tenth of their current length, but the main point is that there needs to be substantial coverage of the subject in multiple reliable and significant sources independent of the subject. (The subject's own web site would not be independent, nor would any other source written in whole or in part by someone connected to the subject. An amateur web site, blog, or wiki would not be a reliable source. Those are just a few examples to give you the general idea; more details are given here.)
 * 2) Another one of Wikipedia's policies is that any content which serves the purpose of promotion is unacceptable. Posting information about your web site "to be shared by the site for others to enjoy" means posting it to attract viewers to yours site, which is regarded as promoting your site. The fact that you don't stand to make any profit out of doing so makes no difference.
 * 3) In line with the policy that Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view, we have a guideline on conflict of interest, as I have already mentioned above.


 * You are, of course, very welcome indeed to start contributing to the encyclopaedia on subjects other than your web site, but if your only purpose is to bring your web site to a wider public, then Wikipedia is not the right place for you. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:35, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. If you intend to edit constructively in other topic areas, you may be granted the right to continue under a change of username. Please read the following carefully.

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.
 * Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Probably not, although if you can demonstrate a pattern of future editing in strict accordance with our neutral point of view policy, you may be granted this right. See Wikipedia's FAQ for Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again.
 * Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?


 * What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you may consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead. If you do intend to make useful contributions here about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:


 * Add the text on your user talk page.
 * Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
 * Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked.
 * Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Alexf(talk) 18:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC)