User talk:Kelley2011

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Volumepr, 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 Digitech Systems, Inc., 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! Eeekster (talk) 21:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Digitech Systems, Inc.

A tag has been placed on Digitech Systems, Inc., 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 as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Eeekster (talk) 21:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI conflict of interest guideline

see also: Wikipedia is not a soapbox and Wikipedia:User pages#What may I not have in my user pages?

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia in Digitech Systems, Inc. or other articles, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should 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;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant 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. – Athaenara ✉ 22:49, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Digitech Systems

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Digitech Systems, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that 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 general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Digitech Systems and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Syrthiss (talk) 18:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used mainly for spamming or advertising. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Syrthiss (talk) 18:42, 10 December 2010 (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).

Kelley2011 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm sorry. I had no intention of spamming. I am trying to write a strictly informative entry - I've never done this before. I respectfully ask to be unblocked so that I may continue to edit my entry. Any specific advice and/or edits you have are appreciated. Thank you for your time. Volumepr (talk) 16:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you create an article that is deleted, do you not think it would be wise to find out why it was deleted and what was wrong with it rather than immediately re-creating it? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:43, 5 January 2011 (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).

Kelley2011 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

After the article was deleted we made significant changes to the text. We took out all messages we considered promotional and provided more factual information. I am asking for more information regarding why why it was deleted so I can make further edits and produce an article that meets all of Wikipedia's standards.

Decline reason:

Please have only one unblock request open at a time. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:05, 10 January 2011 (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 took a look at the article as it was deleted, and agree that it was very promotional and unsalvageable as it stands. The problem here is that you're a PR professional trying to write an article that fits the needs of your client, which is very much incompatible with an encyclopedia such as Wikipedia. Articles here are not designed to be used for marketing purposes - they're designed to be informative in an encyclopedic manner, and must be shown to be encyclopedic through the use of independent outside references regarding the subject of the article.

At this point, I expect that this account will not be unblocked, specifically because of the username. You can use an unblock to request a change of username to one less promotional, but you will have to also show your understanding of a few key policies and guidelines first. Those would be conflict of interest, notability, and our sourcing guidelines at the very least. I highly suggest reading these and their related pages and considering whether your client is notable enough to be included before continuing. Tony Fox (arf!) 22:20, 5 January 2011 (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).

Kelley2011 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Thank you for your advice. I would like to submit the following request for a username change:

VolumePR → VolumeKelley

   * Current name: VolumePR (talk · contribs · deleted · listuser · global account browser · logs · target logs)
   * Requested name: VolumeKelley (talk · contribs · deleted · listuser · global account browser · logs · target logs)
   * For bureaucrat use: rename user
   * Datestamp: 23:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
   * Reason: I would like to change my username to one that isn't promotional Volumepr (talk) 23:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I have read the suggested policies, as well as related pages and have a deeper understanding of conflict of interest, notability, and sourcing guidelines. To show my understanding of the aforementioned guidelines I make the following pledges: In all future submissions I will include multiple independent outside references regarding the subject of the article. Reliable sources I will cite are newspapers, magazines, journals, and expert-moderated online sources. I will also post my COI on my user page/talk page so that it is clear I am trying to do the right thing. Thank you

Decline reason:

I have waited for three days for you to respond to the advice given below, but you have still not suggested a suitable user name. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:05, 10 January 2011 (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 appreciate that you're up on the rules now, but your name will probably be rejected, as it still reflects your company name; you might want to try something else. Tony Fox (arf!) 00:46, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kelley2011 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Apologize for the delay - I have been out of town. Again I would like to thank you for your continued advice and recommendations in this process. I truly appreciate it. The following is my updated request for a name change === VolumePR → Kelley2011 ===

   * Current name: VolumePR (talk · contribs · deleted · listuser · global account browser · logs · target logs)
   * Requested name: Kelley2011 (talk · contribs · deleted · listuser · global account browser · logs · target logs)
   * For bureaucrat use: rename user
   * Datestamp: 18:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
   * Reason: I would like a name that doesn't include anything regarding PR and reflects a new start. Volumepr (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC) Volumepr (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC) Volumepr (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Accept reason:

This looks reasonable. Please make sure that you go to the proper venue for username changes as soon as possible to make this request officially. Tony Fox (arf!) 19:29, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]