User talk:FriedOrange

January 2020
There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth 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 that reason, you must:
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of 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. To do so, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the text at the bottom of your talk page, replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason for thinking that the block was an error, and publish the page. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 08:15, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Just noting that if you are citing book passages, you should just be citing the book itself, and not your website. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I did cite the book passages, not the website. FriedOrange (talk) 10:04, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There are several instances in this edit where your website is part of the citation. If you are citing a book, you only need to provide citation information for the book itself, not where it can be viewed. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * In that case, I was mistaken in doing so. I must stress that the only reason the hyperlinks were added is that I have seen many similar citations (for non-webpage sources with web links provided) on other pages; I simply assumed that this was normal practice. I fully accept that assumption to be in error. In any case, I believe it is helpful for readers to actually be able to see the sources rather than just mentions of them -- and I only ever intended my edits to be helpful. The edits were not intended to imply that I needed credit in any way for the sources -- do note that the URL does not show up as visible text on the article, as viewed. The claim of "advertising" given as partial reason for my block is simply false (I don't have anything to advertise even if I wanted to!). I can definitely see, however, how it's not a good look for me to have added to the external links section -- I particularly regret not posting a suggestion for that change on the Talk page, regardless of the precedent of similar links to similar sites existing there already. Thanks for the response, I do appreciate the dialogue on this matter. FriedOrange (talk) 10:28, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, someone else will be reviewing your new request, out of fairness to you. 331dot (talk) 10:30, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I understand. I'm just putting what I have to say for myself here in writing, to hopefully provide a bit more context/explanation. FriedOrange (talk) 10:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)