User talk:Danieditor

Nomination of Nuclio for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nuclio is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Nuclio until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MER-C 15:29, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

March 2019
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. MER-C 15:30, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

My only point in mentioning the six years is that you have not constantly edited in those six years which you cite in your first request; your statement made it sound like you had. It certainly is not required that you edit constantly, as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can. You don't have to have financial gain from something to be promoting it; merely telling the world about something is considered promotional here. Wikipedia does more, it is interested in what independent reliable sources state about article subjects that are notable as defined by Wikipedia, and has no interest in just spreading the word about things. Someone else will review your request. 331dot (talk) 08:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't edit about serverless computing to 'spread the word' and I added several reliable sources in the Nuclio article - media sources that Wikipedia accepts as notable. I then added stats in my first unblock request about the number of people involved in it as open source to prove it is not a niche project. Your last comment shifted from saying the article was advertorial to promotional. Does an article about democracy promote democracy? Wikipedia should encourage new articles about popular open source projects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danieditor (talk • contribs)
 * Only one open request is needed; subsequent comments should be standard comments without the unblock request formatting. 331dot (talk) 08:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Please do not remove other's comments; if you wish, once the conversation is over you may remove the entire conversation, but not bits and parts. As I said, you only need one open request.  You are free to alter your existing open request, but additional requests are not necessary. 331dot (talk) 08:46, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Advertising and promoting are basically considered the same thing on Wikipedia; the two words are a distinction without a difference. 331dot (talk) 08:47, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't mean to remove your comments (and ultimately didn't!), I thought I was to open a new request so corrected myself. Thanks for explaining. Surely the difference between advertising and promoting is a greater philosophical discussion. In my mind every single article on Wikipedia is a promotion of it. Can we agree to disagree? That would mean enabling my article and me as an (inconsistent) editor. It would also mean recognizing that Nuclio is a topic of interest to many people, as proven by the reliable sources I included. After all, that's why they're called reliable. The reason most editors are men is this combative environment, we can't even agree about how to disagree. Wikipedia's managers host all sorts of events to figure it out when the answer is right in front of them.
 * If you can convince the next admin that reviews this to unblock you, they may do so without consulting me. 331dot (talk) 12:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

What happens now? Am I supposed to do something to reach out to the next admin...?
 * Your request is visible and open; it will be reviewed in due course. Administrators are volunteers just as you are, please be patient. 331dot (talk) 22:00, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi again, it's been a couple of weeks since this happened. I'm still blocked and the post in question about Nuclio has been taken down. I want to say how disappointed I am in Wikipedia's handling of this case. First you block me and then the whole thing is just ignored. At least 331dot was responsive. This is a mistake on Wikipedia's part from the getgo, both in what you did and how you did it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danieditor (talk • contribs)
 * I'm sorry you have had to wait, but until administrators or Wikipedia editors in general get paid for what they do here, that's just the way it is. Stuff gets done when someone has time to get around to it.  331dot (talk) 20:46, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

I have no access to your internal information about gender, it's good old fashioned female intuition that led me to this conclusion. I stand behind my allegation of your prejudice: things are either black or white, you condescend to know what I will do before it happens and prefer to work with your own kind instead of thinking of things differently. Open source software is just like women, but here too you have not considered whether the entry is worthwhile due to its hundreds of users, you probably haven't even bothered to read it. You're too busy looking for ulterior motives. I have no motive, just like I have no access to Wikipedia's data about gender. This exchange will end up getting discussed in one of your many conferences about why there are so few women editing but that's the bottom line. You have a comfort zone and women aren't in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danieditor (talk • contribs)
 * I was going to fix your request for proper display(it was missing a bracket), but it isn't really an unblock request. You don't seem to be listening to what you are being told; if you do choose to make a new unblock request, it should actually ask to be unblocked and address the reason for the block.  If you are only going to use this page to attack others or otherwise not request unblock, I will remove your ability to edit this page.

331dot (talk) 12:46, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Go ahead and remove the ability to edit. We're done. I wish I could say "you win" but that's just not true, everybody loses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danieditor (talk • contribs)
 * I don't want to win, I want you to either make an actual unblock request that addresses the reason for the block. You haven't done that. 331dot (talk) 13:18, 21 April 2019 (UTC)