User talk:Teoalida

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. If you intend to edit constructively in other topic areas, you may be granted the right to continue under a change of username. 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, although if you can demonstrate a pattern of future editing in strict accordance with our neutral point of view policy, you may be granted this right. 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 Wikipedia 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 may consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead. If you do intend to make useful contributions here 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) 14:09, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you JamesBWatson for unblock and for letting me to use my name!

I love architecture, real estate and automobiles. I may write in these fields.

I have registered on Wikipedia in 2010, intending to write an article about this ruined building https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatul_Cantacuzino_(Flore%C8%99ti) and include a 3D model "virtual reconstruction" that I designed (I would ran into conflict of interests?). But soon I posted both article and 3D model on my website instead. In 2011 another editor started that article on Wikipedia and added a link to my website for the 3D model (without even announcing me), but I was happy.

Over time I have spent time writing and designing numerous things, as hobby, voluntarily without intention to make profit, and posted them on my own website.

I could do same kind of volunteer work on Wikipedia. I wanted to write about new launched car models, but I haven't rushed and another editor did it. I wanted to write about buildings but I did not found any more notable buildings. I wanted to improve existing articles but most of them are well written already.

In the same time I was afraid to involve into a such big encyclopedia, I was afraid about being a waste of time since anyone can rewrite over me, also I considered that there are numerous editors and one more editor is not necessary. This is why I haven't done many edits. I am so sad that I started contributing by adding 2 links in articles about Singapore because I have an informative website about Housing in Singapore and I was sure that Wikipedia readers may benefits from it but I triggered the tag of possible conflict of interests and, even if I am an individual, independent, not related with Government of Singapore or any company that I wrote about it in my website, I ran into all these unexpected problems just because I used my name for website's domain name :(

OK... I will NEVER post any link to my website in any article page, but please advise 3 things:

- If I find errors in articles or I can improve a stub, should I edit directly or should use Talk page first?

- Can I suggest in Talk page to other editors to add a link to my website? Otherwise, sooner or later other editors may notice interesting articles on my website and may add the links anyway.

- Can I clean up this Talk page in the future, and have also the revision history cleaned, to remove all negative history and all stupid questions that I am asking now?

Teoalida (talk) 02:36, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I hope you have a successful time here, after your somewhat discouraging start. I am posting (above) a "Welcome" message, which includes links to various policies, guidelines, and other pages that may be helpful in understanding how Wikipedia works. Don't try to read all of them before you do any more editing, because there is far too much there to take in. However, do look at any of the pages which seem relevant to your needs at the moment, and come back to other pages later when other things become relevant.
 * A word of advice. In my experience, new editors who jump straight into writing new articles very often have a frustrating time, as they find that time and time again work they have done is deleted, because in one way or another it does not conform to Wikipedia's guidelines or policies. It is much better to start by making small improvements to existing articles, as that way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't be losing a lot of work. You will gradually learn what is considered acceptable, and after a while you will know enough about how Wikipedia works to be able to write new articles (if you want to) without fear that they will be speedily deleted. That is just my advice, and it is up to you whether to take it, but it is based on what I have seen happen to large numbers of new editors over the course of years.
 * To answer your questions:
 * 1) You are perfectly free to go straight into editing articles. If you are in doubt, you can post a note about what changes you propose to make on a talk page, and see if anyone responds, but if you are confident you know what you are doing that is not necessary. However, if you find that a change you make is reverted by another editor who disagrees, then either accept that and leave it, or else post your reasons for preferring your version on the talk page, and be willing to discuss the issues. Don't just keep changing back to your preferred version: doing so, known as edit warring, is a pretty good way to get blocked from editing.
 * 2) You can suggest on a talk page that a link be added to your website. Before doing so, think carefully whether the main purpose of doing so is to help readers know more about the subject of the article, or to attract people to your website, of which you are probably proud. The talk pages of articles about very prominent subjects get lots of activity, and virtually anything you post there will get a response fairly quickly. However, there are millions of less prominent articles where the talk page gets very little traffic, and a message posted there may remain unanswered for a long time. You can attract attention to a message by posting followed by whatever question you want to ask.
 * 3) You are perfectly free to remove almost any content from this talk page when it is finished with. There are a few exceptions, the main one being declined unblock requests while the block is still in force, but since your block is no longer in force, there is nothing to stop you from removing the stuff relating to that block now. You can read User pages if you want to. Probably you will want to just get rid of everything related to the block, but for normal talk page messages you may prefer to put them into an archive, which makes them easier to find if anyone has any reason to want to check old messages in the future. For the vast majority of messages, nobody will ever have any reason to do so, but someone just may want to check some of them some time. If you do decide to archive old talk page messages, you can either just do so manually, copying and pasting each message into an archive page as you remove it from this page, or you can have it automatically archived. Help:Archiving a talk page tells you all you might want to know on the subject, but in my opinion, like many of the pages about how Wikipedia works, there is just too much there, making it rather confusing. Go ahead and read all of it if you like, but I'll tell you how I get my talk page to be automatically archived, and you may or may not like to do the same.

I have the following at the top of my talk page:



This makes an automatic program (a "bot") move sections of my talk page to archive pages if they haven't been edited for 7 days (that's what the old(7d) does). It automatically starts a new archive whenever the latest archive is about to get longer than 200 kBytes, and calls the archives User talk:JamesBWatson/Archive 1, User talk:JamesBWatson/Archive 2, and so on. I also have on my talk page, which provides a little box with links to each of the archive pages. If you want to use this method, I suggest to begin with setting the time to something much longer than 7 days, perhaps measured in months rather than days, and then reduce the time limit if you start being so heavily involved in Wikipedia discussions that your talk page starts filling up too quickly. There are many very active Wikipedia editors who rarely get talk page messages, and other much less active ones who get tons of messages: it depends what sort of work you do here. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:48, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Two more points about automatic archiving that I didn't think to mention.


 * 1) The bit that says "counter = 58" is because I am currently up to archive number 58. Assuming you want to start with archive number 1, you would use "counter = 1".
 * 2) Any section of the talk page which does not end with a signature will not be archived, as it is by checking the last signature that the bot decides whether the section is due for archiving. Not a big problem: every now and then I have I have a section to archive manually. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:54, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I have just realised that I didn't answer your question about having the revision history of this page "cleaned". I'm afraid user talk page histories are not deleted except under exceptional circumstances, as there is sometimes good reason for wanting to check the history of messages on user talk pages. For example, if you ever post anything that looks as though it may be promoting your web site, it will be relevant for anyone dealing with it to know that you have been warned about doing so, and that you have been unblocked on the basis of your undertaking that you won't do so. I am not suggesting that I think you will do that, but just giving it as an example of the sort of reason why talk page histories are almost always preserved. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:35, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of SkyVille@Dawson
Hello Teoalida,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged SkyVille@Dawson for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Jayakumar RG (talk) 14:09, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of SkyTerrace@Dawson
Hello Teoalida,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged SkyTerrace@Dawson for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Jayakumar RG (talk) 14:10, 14 June 2014 (UTC)