User talk:Robertstilton

Welcome!

Hello, Robertstilton, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Daniel Joseph Martinez, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

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 New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, 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! Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 16:20, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Daniel Joseph Martinez

The article Daniel Joseph Martinez has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 16:20, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

Hello Robertstilton. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Daniel Joseph Martinez, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Scopecreep (talk) 16:23, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Daniel Joseph Martinez

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 Daniel Joseph Martinez, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Scopecreep (talk) 16:42, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Daniel Joseph Martinez, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Scopecreep (talk) 16:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, celebrity or other well-known individual, 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.

Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?

Probably not. See WP:FAQ/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. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

What can I do now?

You are still welcome to write about something other than your company, organization, or clients. If you do intend to make useful contributions on some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:

Add the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} 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 {{unblock|Your reason here}} below but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Template:Z17 Daniel Case (talk) 04:27, 3 April 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

Incomplete Understanding of the process - see below for details

Decline reason:

You seem to have somehow missed the point. It is clear that this account exists to use Wikipedia on behalf of the business Roberts & Tilton to promote artists that have a business arrangement with that company. The fact that what you post for your clients is "approved" by those clients is not a commendation at all, as Wikipedia does not exist to publish people's "approved" accounts of themselves. Nothing you have said suggests that you intend to do anything other than to continue to edit on behalf of a business that promotes artists. (Also, being "vague" is nothing to do with the reason for the block.) JamesBWatson (talk) 09:24, 17 April 2012 (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.

I hereby request Wikipedia remove the blocking from my username Robertstilton. I am new to creating a Wikipedia page and reviewed your guide for contributing, but unfortunately still had difficulties. We have previously used Wikipedia to update and correct information currently posted. However, sometimes a fine artist’s practice is a bit abstract and can be difficult to put into simple text. I aim to be objective and now realize the first paragraph on the Daniel Joseph Martinez page I posted was too vague. This text was written by the fine art journalist Eve Wood and was approved by the artist before posting. I now realize my mistake and will only add information that is not in any way vague and furthermore will not include any information to promote the artist. Everything posted will be neutral and include source references where possible. Thank you for your consideration.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

I hereby request Wikipedia re-consider the block on my username Robertstilton. Daniel Joseph Martinez is a public figure and what we attempted to do was to bring the sources together to make an impartial, factual, honest and cohesive page. Regarding "approved" maybe that was the incorrect word to use; I should have used "fact-checked." Roberts & Tilton does not use Wikipedia to promote artists, rather we provide factual data which contains references. We take this very seriously as it is the history of a person. Also, the use of the word "vague" was only in response to the post by Scopecreep that the text in the first paragraph was a "large ball of meaningless fluff." What do you suggest we do to get unblocked? Any assistance you can provide, would be much appreciated. Thank you.

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I hereby request Wikipedia re-consider the block on my username Robertstilton.  Daniel Joseph Martinez is a public figure and what we attempted to do was to bring the sources together to make an impartial, factual, honest and cohesive page.  Regarding "approved" maybe that was the incorrect word to use; I should have used "fact-checked." Roberts & Tilton does not use Wikipedia to promote artists, rather we provide factual data which contains references.  We take this very seriously as it is the history of a person.  Also, the use of the word "vague" was only in response to the post by Scopecreep that the text in the first paragraph was a "large ball of meaningless fluff."  What do you suggest we do to get unblocked?  Any assistance you can provide, would be much appreciated. Thank you. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I hereby request Wikipedia re-consider the block on my username Robertstilton.  Daniel Joseph Martinez is a public figure and what we attempted to do was to bring the sources together to make an impartial, factual, honest and cohesive page.  Regarding "approved" maybe that was the incorrect word to use; I should have used "fact-checked." Roberts & Tilton does not use Wikipedia to promote artists, rather we provide factual data which contains references.  We take this very seriously as it is the history of a person.  Also, the use of the word "vague" was only in response to the post by Scopecreep that the text in the first paragraph was a "large ball of meaningless fluff."  What do you suggest we do to get unblocked?  Any assistance you can provide, would be much appreciated. Thank you. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I hereby request Wikipedia re-consider the block on my username Robertstilton.  Daniel Joseph Martinez is a public figure and what we attempted to do was to bring the sources together to make an impartial, factual, honest and cohesive page.  Regarding "approved" maybe that was the incorrect word to use; I should have used "fact-checked." Roberts & Tilton does not use Wikipedia to promote artists, rather we provide factual data which contains references.  We take this very seriously as it is the history of a person.  Also, the use of the word "vague" was only in response to the post by Scopecreep that the text in the first paragraph was a "large ball of meaningless fluff."  What do you suggest we do to get unblocked?  Any assistance you can provide, would be much appreciated. Thank you. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}