User talk:Signeros

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. Please read the following carefully.

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements, and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.
 * Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Probably not. See Wikipedia's FAQ for Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit again.
 * Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?


 * What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you will probably not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead. If you do intend to make useful contributions about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:


 * Add the text on your user talk page.
 * Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers 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 this reason, you must:
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the 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 below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Alexf(talk) 12:39, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Here are a few key questions:
 * Do you understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a business directory?
 * Do you understand conflict of interest?
 * Do you understand that to be considered for an encyclopedia article, the subject must be notable?

You are currently blocked because your username appears directly related to a company, group or product that you have been promoting, contrary to the username policy. Changing the username will not allow you to violate the 3 important principles above. Daniel Case (talk) 19:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your response. I appreciate the haste in which you brought these issues to my attention. I have understood the COI username issue and have requested to change it. I have re-read the NPOV and notability, and reliable source guidelines. There are reliable sources for the topic I wish to write about and I realize that my looking to other wikipedia pages about art magazines to compare my article to, which have minimal reliable sources eg. Frieze (magazine) or Texte zur Kunst was influencing my focus. I trust that the art magazine this topic relates to is appropriate for an article on wikipedia. It additionally aggregates information about many notable Austrian and central-European artists who should also find their way on to wikipedia. I have no intention whatsoever in violating the priniciples above. Please allow this new username and unblock my account. Kind regards (Signeross) Spikeart (talk) 10:13, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Just to advise, Frieze (magazine) is a pretty poor article, and comparing to the German Wikipedia is not a good idea, as our notability standards are very different (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I think that's what they meant - that looking at mediocre articles and de.wiki influenced their edits badly, and they plan to do better in the future. &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 04:11, 17 January 2013 (UTC)