User talk:Iholdtheline

Welcome!

Hello, Iholdtheline, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 02:28, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Do not mass spam urls. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:40, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:23, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Request reason:

I completely understand (now) why you blocked me. Let me put my cards on the table: I was obviously tasked with going in and inserting relevant citations to our blog on species' pages, since we have done a lot of species profiles. This is my first time on this end of wikipedia, though I've been reading wikipedia every day for about eight years. I thought I knew, in general, what made a citation relevant but apparently it's way more strict than I expected—which is comforting. That being said, I just spent the last hour reading about why this is exactly what wikipedia doesn't want. What wikipedia wants is reliable, independent secondary sources for places where citations are needed. I have about one citation that meets this criteria I think I can actually provide to wikipedia on pages that are asking for citations. That's it for now. Could I please get unblocked in order to make one appropriate citation? If you don't find it appropriate, I am happy to oblige, though I would be mondo sad to get blocked from editing permanently. Thank you. Iholdtheline (talk) 19:23, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I'm accepting your request per your agreement below. If you have any questions, feel free to use the Teahouse or Help Desk. 331dot (talk) 20:04, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would you agree to not edit about or post links to your blog? Jauerback is there anything else you would like to see for an unblock? 331dot (talk) 19:29, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm okay with whatever decision you decide to make about unblocking. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 19:33, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Iholdtheline (talk) 19:45, 27 August 2018 (UTC) Wow, you're fast. I'm willing to agree with that, but can I ask whether the reason is primarily the inherent conflict of interest? For the future, if Project Upland gained enough substantial notability from discussion in appropriate sources, is the editing of a draft for a Project Upland page something I could participate in, even if I am plagued with the unremovable plague of bias? To be honest, the fact that I would want to participate sort of disqualifies me, I guess. I want to play by the rules, but also I need to do my job so my situation sort of sucks, haha. If I can in any way do some small portion of my job, which would be using a relevant citation to our blog, and also play by the rules, that would be great. TL;DR —> What would you recommend I do in my situation? Should we just leave wikipedia alone as a company, even if my supervisors are convinced we have sufficient notoriety? (Quick note: I am NOT convinced for an article, but am for citations.) If asking advice of you here is inappropriate, I can take my discussion to the teahouse and ask there. I just figure that you both saw my edits and know what I'm about from five minutes of reading my garbage.[reply]

I will amend my request slightly; would you agree to not directly edit about your blog, instead making edit requests on article talk pages?(I would suggest one at a time) It would be strongly advised that you not attempt to write an article about your blog per the conflict of interest policy.

Since you state that you work for Project Upland, you will need to review and comply with the paid editing policy(which is required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use). 331dot (talk) 19:59, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Iholdtheline (talk) 20:01, 27 August 2018 (UTC) That sounds entirely reasonable. I agree to that. Thank you.[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Iholdtheline! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 20:07, Monday, August 27, 2018 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge