User talk:Timbo56

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, TiLuPress! Thank you for your contributions. I am JackFrost2121 and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Questions or type at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! JackFrost2121( Frostbitten? / My Work) 01:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC) A tag has been placed on your user page, User:TiLuPress, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service, and which is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages: user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article

If you can indicate why the page is not blatant advertising, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to your user talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also edit this page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would help make it encyclopedic. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mdann52 (talk) 12:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Contested deletion
TiLuPress (talk) 01:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)TiLuPRess

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) 03:07, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear Daniel Case:

yes, I understand this totally, I have reviewed all of the above. Thanks for providing it.
 * I am a new user, and that Wikipedia supposedly has a policy of being welcoming to new users? (I know that does not extend to deliberate violation of policies, however I was not aware of the username policy when I chose the username in question).


 * I have apologized for my error, I can admit that it was wrong, but did not know before I was blocked that there was a username policy. I am very aware of that now, as well as all of the the above. I think I should have known about it, but the truth is I didn't know. (It was also a bit confusing to be welcomed with that username and not be told it was against policy).

A page at wikipedia that says 'Do not bite the newcomers' states:

Ignorantia juris may excuse [edit]

The principle Ignorantia juris non excusat (Latin for: "ignorance of the law does not excuse") is incompatible with the guidelines of "do not bite" and "assume good faith". In this case, ignorance of Wikipedia's guidelines can excuse the mistakes of a newcomer. Furthermore, you yourself violate Wikipedia's guidelines and policies when you attack a new user for ignorance of them

Enough already
The mess you have created above really has made it difficult to act on this request. By the way, you keep claiming igonaranta juris non excusat, which is quite similar to WP:IGNORANCE - but you were given a link to the rules on May 21, but not blocked until 2 days later - you'd been well-advised of the rules by then.
 * 1) It can take DAYS for unblock requests to be reviewed - you need to show some patience
 * 2) You are only permitted to have 1 unblock request open at any time
 * 3) Multiple unblock requests merely makes the review process more difficult, and less likely to succeed
 * No, you cannot leave messages elsewhere - ONE unblock template will draw the attention of dozens of admins (such as myself)
 * 1) Have you even read WP:GAB and WP:AAB as provided to you?

So, how would you like to proceed? Shall we decline them all? Would you like to combine them into one? It's an absolute MESS (✉→ BWilkins ←✎) 10:52, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Well certainly I did not mean to create a mess. Certainly we can combine the block into one request, but how to do that? Should I be the one to delete one and leave the other? Is it necessary to do that to get an unblock? Or I would like to create a new account, but my ISP was also blocked by Alexf. I read a user could create a new account while an old one is blocked? So could you please unblock at this point or unblock my ISP, or what? I am not meaning to be annoying in any way. I meant no offense filing two requests, after the first one was replied to by an admin with no success, I did not know if it 'closed' that one or not. Then I wrote a reply to that person and it was never answered. The same admins just seem to disappear and I also can't leave messages for them on their talk pages.TiLuPress (talk) 03:58, 28 May 2013 (UTC)TiLuPress
 * No - due to the nature of the block, you cannot simply create a new account: the block is right now against you, the person. I will start looking into helping you to create / combine a single request.  Remember, you're not convincing one admin to unblock, you're convincing the community, of which admins merely have technical tools to act upon.  As such, on unblock requests, you don't reply to the admin directly (✉→ BWilkins

←✎) 09:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much Bwilkins. I certainly appreciate it. I will wait patiently until such a time as you get back to me about this. Thank you so much.TiLuPress (talk) 14:14, 28 May 2013 (UTC)TiLuPress
 * Sorry for the delay - real world occasionally kicks in and takes up time. Your third request should be deleted - it does not address the block, and merely shows impatience.  Your first two unblocks are quite similar, so you could probably delete one - combine them into something that makes sense PLUS (and this is a big one) confirm that you will not a) write about any topic that you have conflict of interest and b) that you will not link to the website of the company or authors you work with.  There should only therefore be one unblock with username change request left on the page, and it should meet the requirements in WP:GAB (✉→ BWilkins ←✎) 11:19, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again, Bwilkins! I have tried to do as you suggested. I deleted the previous requests leaving only one request for a change in username. I left the comments here by the other administrator, because I read on Wikipedia that you should not delete the comments by other editors without their permission. I hope I am doing properly. Of course, I understand clearly and will state what you pointed out to me, that I must be very careful to follow COI policy and not make any edits that link to the company or the authors it represents, and do agree NOT to do that. Consequently if I make any edits it must be on topics that I do not have COI and can maintain neutrality on while assuring notability. Bwilkins I appreciate your help and the time it took in answering this newbie's requests. I do have another question, I am a lot wearied about this entire thing, regret the whole thing occurring. Because there is another side of this too, as th ere are real world ramifications about this for me, just besides Wikipedia's. Is there any rule about not deleting an account? Is it possible for me to do that instead? Because of how my error has made my company look and the fallout around that. If the username is allowed to be changed, does that help TiLu Press to clear their name? Or will they still be shown as a blocked user for unambiguous spam? Technically they won't be a user then, right? And they never can be. If deleting the account is the only way to assure that their name is not sullied because of my mistake, then I am willing to do that instead if it is possible.TiLuPress (talk) 05:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)TiLuPress
 * Tim, I honestly thought that someone else had actioned this - I don't see confirmation in your unblock that you will not directly edit areas where you have WP:COI ... I've watchlisted your page, and will act as soon as I can once fixed (unless someone else gets to it first). Sorry for the delay! (✉→ BWilkins ←✎) 10:36, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Bwilkins! I see, thanks. Yes I think I did address the COI concerns above-- ":I must be very careful to follow COI policy and not make any edits that link to the company or the authors it represents, and do agree NOT to do that. Consequently if I make any edits it must be on topics that I do not have COI and can maintain neutrality on while assuring notability." But of course I will not be making any edits on any pages where I have COI. Thank you for watch listing my page. Attendance to my request for change in username would be much appreciated. Thank you.TiLuPress (talk) 04:09, 9 June 2013 (UTC)TiLuPress
 * ✅ I have unblocked - please follow the instructions in the green box, and other than placing the formal name change request, please do not edit Wikipedia until your username has actually been changed. Cheers (✉→ BWilkins ←✎) 10:26, 9 June 2013 (UTC)