User talk:Jdsdas123er4

September 2018
Hello, I'm Dlohcierekim. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. -- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 04:01, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

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.

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 by adding the text at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 04:01, 25 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I have renamed you from User:Voxxlr. Another admin will review your unblock. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:26, 26 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Someone else will be reviewing this block, but please state your association or relationship to this software. Please also understand that this software needs to have in depth coverage in independent reliable sources to merit an article here. If you haven't already, please review the links I posted in your request that I declined. 331dot (talk) 12:07, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I have just reviewed the WP:COI and WP:PAID pages. I am one of the founders and developers of Voxxlr and I will indicate that on my edits of the Voxxlr page, although I have not quite figured out yet which tag applies to me. From what I can tell though, the affiliation has to be indicated on the edit rather than my account? While it states that individuals with a conflict of interest are "strongly discouraged" they are not "prohibited" from editing. I understand and appreciate that there needs to be merit to articles on wikipedia. I suggest that I write the article first and then the administrators can decide if it has merit, based on the content rather than who wrote it. I assume for now that if some of the other articles about point cloud processing tools have merit, then Voxxlr is probably at that point as well.--Jochendotstier (talk) 12:46, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * If you are the founder and developer of this software, I presume you did so as part of your occupation or job duties. That makes you a paid editor and you should use that tag.
 * Please see WP:OSE. Other articles on this topic existing does not automatically mean yours merits one too. It is usually difficult for those in your position to write with the proper neutral point of view and independent sources needed.  Those sources cannot be press releases, brief mentions, the company website, or any other primary source to establish notability.  You would have to forget everything you know about what you founded/developed and only write based on the independent sources.  Most people cannot do this well enough(though it is possible).  If you are just here to tell the world about your software, it is unlikely you will be unblocked(though again, someone else will be reviewing your latest request).  If you want to be a general Wikipedia contributor, you should expand on what other contributions you want to make.  Thanks for your reply. 331dot (talk) 13:44, 27 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting back to me 331dot. I will not request another unblock or comment again if this get rejected. I do would like to say though that it took me less than 3 minutes to find an editor/contributor on another point cloud processing tool who uses their real name as the user id. A quick Google search reveals that they are a "Digital Marketing/Digital content specialist" at said company and their contribs history on Wikipedia shows that they have only contributed to that companies article and nothing else. If I am blocked, then shouldn't that person be blocked as well. I am actually blocked because I intend to do the same thing as them. I haven't even had a chance to write the article. I am assuming that a large amount of the content about organization is written by members of those organizations. I believe that is actually a good thing because those members are most knowledgeable and can provide the most relevant content. I thought wikipeadia is foremost about content and not censorship about who can provide this content. The only reason why we are having this conversation is because of my unfortunate choice of initial username, otherwise I would be in the same position as the "Digital Marketing/Digital content specialist".--Jochendotstier (talk) 14:11, 27 September 2018 (UTC)


 * So is it appropriate to rename them while blocked? We generally don't do that. &#8208;&#8208;1997kB (talk) 08:07, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , SQL asked me to look at this, and I've gone ahead and done it. This was originally a username block and I see no reason to force someone to use a real name they chose after being blocked in hopes of getting unblocked. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , Thanks, I asked because there was promotional edits in block log. &#8208;&#8208;1997kB (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * We rename people for spamu blocks all the time. If someone didn’t realize the implications of the rename when making an unblock request and chooses a real name, I don’t mind letting them have a second bite at protecting their privacy. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:53, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Removing closed unblock reviews
You may not remove closed unblock requests while you are blocked. See WP:BLANKING for more information. If you continue to do so, you will likely lose the ability to edit this page as well. SQL Query me! 05:00, 3 October 2018 (UTC)