User talk:Jebtorch

Jebtorch, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Jebtorch! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Nick Moyes (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:06, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Jebtorch! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! @Boothsift 00:00, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

December 2018

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 ~~~~}}. Yunshui ^雲 _水 09:17, 18 December 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

This account is not an advertising or spam facility: it is a means of creating relevant, quality content to the Homeric literature, philosophy and educative subjects on Wiki. My intention is to provide meaningful, relevant and apposite information and updates about knowledge and expertise in these matters. If the advertising suspicion comes from a link to one of my publications, Odyssey of Homer, currently available as a paperback, it is for the purpose of providing credibility to the edits already made on various pages relating to these subjects. I am well known as a writer and philosopher and have only the best intentions for Wiki. Please let me know how this matter may be resolved and my access re-instated. I have a lot to offer. Also, I wish to change the "jebtorch" page to my own name, Jerome Whitcroft, but can't find how to do this. Help please. Best wishes.Jebtorch (talk) 22:45, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're linkspaming to Amazon links of a book by a person who has the same name you claim to have. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:00, 19 December 2018 (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 request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Requested username:

Jerome Whitcroft (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Hello Tony. I cannot find a definition of "linkspam". I explained the reason for the link. Yes, I am Jerome whitcroft. How may this issue be resolved?Jebtorch (talk) 00:22, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Decline reason:

No reply to Scott in over a week. Please feel free to open a new request when you have the time to interact with us. SQL ^{Query me!} 18:14, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jerome, I've changed your unblock request to include your requested user name.

Unfortunately, I share the other administrators' concerns--it looks like you've primarily been inserting links and references to your own work, which appears to be self-published. Articles on scholarly topics should mainly reference works that have been peer reviewed, published by recognized academic presses, or otherwise vetted by the scholarly community. While citing your own publications is allowed within reason, the editing community considers excessive self-citing to be form of spamming (WP:REFSPAM). Self-citation also risks violating the policy against adding original research to Wikipedia articles. And in no case should a reference include a link to Amazon or other commercial booksellers.

All that said, the editing community highly values contributors with subject-matter expertise--please see WP:EXPERT. If you want to be unblocked, I would suggest reading the policy on verifiability and the guideline on identifying reliable sources, and then explaining how you intend to follow those rules in the future. -- Scott (talk) 00:39, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I thank you for the meaningful response. i shall do my homework and replu accordingly. Best wishes, jw