User talk:SiftedSand

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. Alexf(talk) 22:06, 16 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Please understand that Wikipedia is not a place to merely post information. Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources state about article subjects, that indicate how they meet the relevant notability guidelines, in this case those at WP:NMUSIC.  Just posting the history of albums or musicians associated with your record label, based solely on you or your label's knowledge, would be considered promotional.  If that's all you want to do, you should do it on a website owned by your label.  Are there any other subjects that you as an individual want to edit about? 331dot (talk) 23:58, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't see the difference between me doing it and someone else writing it when it is the same album article with the same content. I encourage you to compare the one I wrote with information found on discogs, it does not include any knowledge that the label would have had separately from anyone else. The album has already been established and was released by someone else 30 years prior with all of the information on the wikipedia article. There was quite literally only one sentence in the article that could not have been found from simply looking at the discogs page here: https://www.discogs.com/Ric-Kaestner-Music-For-Massage-II/release/9178382. The sentence being "The album was re-released on November 9th, 2018 by Sifted Sand Records" which I will happily not include if it means that the page will exist. All of this information has been taken from the original cassette which pictures and information are available from a few sources such as allmusic https://www.allmusic.com/album/music-for-massage-ii-mw0000880831 I don't see how this could be seen as an advertisement when there was no promotional text and all of the information was publicly availably from discogs and allmusic, databases that are commonly cited on wikipedia. If you are unconvinced then you might have a few other articles to delete as well, because there are a large number of similar album pages with only those two sites as their sources and use similar language. The only problem I see if the conflict of interest clause, but wikipedia only strongly discourages it, not outright bans it. Please change my name so the obvious conflict of interest and promotional user name will be gone so I may continue writing the pages. Otherwise if your answer is to keep the block then kindly delete my account and all data pertaining to it, as I have no use for it here. SiftedSand (talk) 00:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Accounts cannot be deleted; if you no longer wish to use it, simply stop. You are probably right in that other articles could be deleted. With almost 6 million, volunteers will not always detect the ones that need to be. Can you do what it is you want to do without mentioning your company and only using independent reliable sources? You would also need to formally declare your COI and comply with WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 00:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * As you have an open request, subsequent comments do not need the request formatting. 331dot (talk) 01:00, 17 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes I have formally declared my COI on my wiki page as per the guidelines. If Discogs, Allmusic, and independent review sites are credible sources then I can write the articles I wish to without violating any of wikipedia's terms. I can do so with mentioning the label I work for only when absolutely relevant such as the "label" category on many releases, and removing the example I gave in the last response. Other than that I will not create a page for the label, only pages for music or artists.
 * You don't need to put each reply in a new unblock request. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 04:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know that, sorry about that. SiftedSand (talk) 04:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)