User talk:WKEDTR19

Northrop Grumman
Welcome to Wikipedia! Although you made some good edits to Northrop Grumman, they are generally not appropriate for information in an article's lead paragraphs. For our policy on this, please see MOS:LEAD for more information. Thank you. Sasquatch t&#0124;c 05:13, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Just to reiterate,, even if you see lead sections constructed a certain way on other articles, it's still preferable that you follow the manual of style at MOS:LEAD. The content you have added is okay but it's a bit on the promotional side. It just shouldn't be way up top. The stuff about the B-21 raider seems to be a little too current development pushing in tone. So is the Fortune 500 list and diversity stuff. I think that's better under another section further down if readers want to keep reading. Your change to the HQ location information is fine. We generally don't want the article lead to sound entirely like it was written by a PR firm but rather as a gateway to the rest of the article. If you have more things to discuss about this, you and reply there using and I will try to give you a response. Sasquatch  t&#0124;c 09:48, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

thank you for the unblock, in retrospect I completely understand how the confusion was caused. As far as edits, I see what you mean. The reason I included concrete airplane projects is to illustrate what the firm does for someone casually browsing. Saying just that it's a "global aerospace and defense company" is really vague to most people; I know it was for me before I even know what kind of work NG did. How about this, let the lead say its one of the largest defense firms in the world and then note a few of their past and current projects for illustration purposes. The rankings, diversity etc can go down to their dedicated sections that already exist below.--WKEDTR19 (talk) 22:32, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I think that is a wonderful compromise. After mulling it over more, I think adding some detail about projects that are highlighted later in the article may make sense. I'm still a little hesitant to highlight current developments as those change, but something like the B-2, which is quite iconic and referenced later in the article, may be a good addition to the lead. Thank you for being positive and calm about the entire thing. Sasquatch t&#0124;c 22:39, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019
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. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

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. To do so, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the text at the bottom of your talk page, replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason for thinking that the block was an error, and publish the page. Sasquatch t&#0124;c 06:41, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Please review our policy on WP:PAID and WP:UPE. From your username and your relatively promotional edits, it appears it is likely that you have a conflict of interest with the article you are editing. Sasquatch t&#0124;c 06:42, 1 July 2019 (UTC)


 * This seems plausible to me, but I am interested in hearing any comment you have. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I think it's plausible as well. My main concern was the addition of promotional puffery to paragraphs that make the article sound more like a corporate info-page than an encyclopedia article, but that's an easy mistake to make and I can hash it out with the user through the normal channels. Sasquatch t&#0124;c 09:41, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I have removed the block. Sasquatch t&#0124;c 20:43, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

globally renamed NGC94 to WKEDTR19
globally renamed NGC94 to WKEDTR19. Another admin will review the block. Dlohcierekim (talk), admin, renamer 07:13, 1 July 2019 (UTC)