User talk:Wiesel Werkstätte

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Wiesel Werkstätte, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Builder Levy, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Domdeparis (talk) 15:54, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Builder Levy[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Builder Levy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from builderlevy.com/bio.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Domdeparis (talk) 15:54, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017[edit]

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, 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 {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} 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 {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wiesel Werkstätte (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm not advertising anything; I was asked by the noted photographer, Builder Levy, to help him gain a Wikipedia entry. He is a respected, award winning photographer. My username was chosen as per the guidelines: I am using an alias to protect my identity. To quote the guidelines: "Your username is a nickname that will identify your account and thereby all of your contributions to Wikipedia. It can be your real name, if you so choose, but you should be aware of the risks involved in editing under your real name." (emphasis mine.) Wiesel Werkstatte is an individual, not a company. It is the alias I use for my various art projects, but I am not promoting any of my work here. If I have to, I will change my nickname, but this current name complies with the guidelines as far as I understand them. Wiesel Werkstätte (talk) 23:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Firstly, Wiesel Werkstätte is a company, and I rather doubt that the company is unrelated to you. Secondly, when you're copy-pasting the subject's website onto Wikipedia on the subject's orders, you are indeed promoting them. Thirdly, you're also violating the disclosure requirements laid out at WP:PAID. Huon (talk) 01:17, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wiesel Werkstätte (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Wiesel Werkstatte is just me, an individual http://losttrails.com/portfolio/index.html. Wiesel Werkstatte is not registered as a company in any official, taxable way in any municipality; it is just an alias I use for my work. If you read the information on my (inactive) Linkedin page that was refereed to by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Huon, it even says, "myself only" and "self employed". A Linkedin page does not suggest that the named party is a company; on the contrary, Linkedin pages are specifically designed for individuals to network with others in their field. I am not being paid by Builder Levy for posting his biography to Wikipedia, and I have an email record of the correspondence to prove it. I do manage his website, which I did not design, for a nominal fee. I no longer do web work or graphics work full time and am currently working an office job, but I maintain business relations with some previous, long-time clients. Since I am not being paid for this work I am in compliance with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PAID If submitting a Wikipedia entry because I was asked to do so, for no compensation, suggests that I am "promoting" that individual, then most biographical listings on the site entered by an intern can likewise be considered promoting an individual. I used Builder's existing biographical information from his website because I have the right to use that text (and I have added the copyleft information to the page as suggested by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Donating_copyrighted_materials), I am a bad writer myself, I was expecting that others would eventually improve the entry, and I really don't have the time to re-write it. What I did do though, was add many citations in order to back up many claims in the bio. In any case, the three things I am accused of: posting as a company, promoting an individual, and being a paid contributor can be solved as follows. As already mentioned, I would be happy to re-post using a different user name, even my real name if that's what it takes. I am not a paid contributor, but it seems that I have the onus of proving a negative, so I am willing to share the email exchange between Builder and myself. Since it's been twice implied that copy/pasting from another source somehow proves "promoting" (as opposed to plagiarism), may I suggest that someone else contribute the initial entry for Mr. Levy? He is a worthy addition to the encyclopedia (and I was surprised he didn't have an entry already), as I said previously I am not a good writer, and I apparently got in over my head when I decided to do an acquaintance a favor! Wiesel Werkstätte (talk) 03:17, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I have looked at the page you created, and it was unambiguously written to promote its subject. If you acknowledged that and made it clear that your future editing would be different then a possible block could be considered. However, it is clear from what you have written here that you are unable to see the promotional nature of your editing, which means that you are unlikely to be able to avoid doing the same again. (Incidentally, you are 100% right in saying "most biographical listings on the site entered by an intern can likewise be considered promoting an individual", and thousands of them get deleted.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:28, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Still think I'm not making my intentions clear, I'll try again[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Wiesel Werkstätte (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

In response to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JamesBWatson, I'm sorry for being a bit of a dunce with all this, but I think that I'm still not clarifying my intentions well, for which I apologize and ask for the chance to make another attempt. Yes, I copied the text from Builder Levy's website bio, which I was given permission to use, but it is not representative of my writing. I've already tried to say a couple of times that I was hoping and expecting that the text would be changed, since I struggle with writing. I also said that I supplied numerous citations that I had to look up, including, you may note, a few that corroborate the biographical information that I used. What I realize now was my error, was to be lazy with the writing by concentrating all my effort on the citations, with the expectation that an entry without citations would be immediately rejected, while hoping that the text would later be changed by someone more worthy than I. In any case, I would like to be able to make another attempt at creating a page for Mr. Levy, with my goal being to write more objectively about the subject. (With regard to my previous comment about interns and promotional bios, I didn't make myself clear when I had written "listings on the site" that I was referring to posted articles. I can't see rejected ones, anyway. See? I'm not a good writer.) Wiesel Werkstätte (talk) 05:41, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

On the basis of your statement below, I'm going to unblock you. Please remember that you should not edit articles where you have any conflict of interest, though you can make edit requests at the article talk pages. Also you should be aware that your editing is likely to be subject to extra scrutiny for a while after your unblock. I hope you have a happy and productive wiki career. GoldenRing (talk) 09:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wiesel, I think the issue here is your statement that you were "asked by the noted photographer, Builder Levy, to help him gain a Wikipedia entry". That presents you with a conflict of interest, which makes you basically ineligible to write about Builder Levy. At Wikipedia, it is highly discouraged for us to write about people with whom we have a buisness relationship, and especially where such a relationship is specifically to create a Wikipedia article for them. You should also read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure which has some more information. If you can assure admins that you no longer wish to use Wikipedia to spread information about your client (i.e. to promote them), then I think we can see that you will be unblocked. --Jayron 32 20:06, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from unblock request below Hi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jayron32, I certainly don't mind revoking my request to contribute Builder Levy's page, since as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COI I was requested as a friend to add Builder's page. My understanding from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure led me to believe that as long as I wasn't paid for my entry and that I put a disclosure of my relationship that it would not be a problem, but I stand corrected. Wiesel Werkstätte (talk) 18:15, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wiesel Werkstätte (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jayron32, I certainly don't mind revoking my request to contribute Builder Levy's page, since as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COI I was requested as a friend to add Builder's page. My understanding from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure led me to believe that as long as I wasn't paid for my entry and that I put a disclosure of my relationship that it would not be a problem, but I stand corrected. Wiesel Werkstätte (talk) 18:15, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline - keep one unblock request open at a time. I'll paste the content of this one as a comment on the one above. GoldenRing (talk) 09:34, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.