User talk:Harvadace1

Conflict of interest
Hello, Harvadace1. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page User:Harvadace1/sandbox, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. – Athaenara ✉  21:05, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Blocked
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:. – Athaenara ✉  21:05, 31 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm about to look at this, but accusing others of paranoia is not a good way to start a relationship. Drmies (talk) 21:20, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't quite see how you modeled this after PACER (law), since that article has a bunch of text, much of which seems decently encyclopedic, and dozens of references, some of them proper secondary sources. But maybe there is something you can do--you might could present us here with a decent first paragraph, of the encyclopedic kind, and a couple of real secondary sources. And if feels like indeed you can write neutrally, according to our guidelines, they'll look more kindly on your unblock proposal, because I'm not going to consider unblocking unless they're OK with it. Drmies (talk) 21:31, 1 November 2019 (UTC)