User talk:SS132021

Welcome!

Hello, SS132021, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!--MollyPollyRolly (talk) 21:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 01:01, 4 January 2022 (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).

SS132021 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi! My name is Ashley, and I work at Safespill. The system's technology (an ILDFA) has been recently adopted and approved in code for the fire protection industry, and I was editing to add the edition (if you review my edits). My apologies on if I submitted too many edits, still trying to get the formatting correct. The system is an equivalent fire protection system in NFPA 409 and has 2 FM Approvals under standard 6090. This information should be listed under fire protection for hangars, active fire protection, fire protection, and intermediate bulk containers - as all of these are relevant for an approved system and should be made aware of. This is not advertising or spam; the sources are available for reference. I appreciate the removal of the block, so I can input the valid and current information for the public. Thanks. SS132021 (talk) 01:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)SS132021[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not convince me you've read, let alone understand and plan to comply with, WP:COI and WP:PROMO. If your only goal is to write about Safespill and related topics, this is the end of the line. Yamla (talk) 10:13, 4 January 2022 (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).

SS132021 (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 response. There is no goal to write about Safespill. The goal is to update the descriptions with valid and current industry standard and codes. I have read the WP:COI, of which says, "the content they add is typically unsourced or poorly sourced and often violates the neutral point of view policy by being promotional and omitting negative information." - where the sources for all information for the update were listed. I have also read What WikiPedia is not, and it is understood - which is why it is written from unbiased wording in an approved industry code in fire protection - unbiased, informative, and factual; ultimately leading to it not being an advertisement, propaganda, promotion, opinion piece, or marketing. The system is in aircraft hangars as a fire protection system. Please reference the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 409 code here, that is the fire protection standard for aircraft hangars.

I'm failing to understand how that can be false representation of fire protection. Under this same premise, why are the below approved and allowed on Wikipedia if they are in the same industry code and being used in the same hangars as an ILDFA (the edits submitted). In this case, without including an ILDFA, Wikipedia would be falsely representing the facts: Wikipedia Fire Protection - Components → Active fire protection - manual and automatic detection and suppression of fires, such as fire sprinkler systems and (fire alarm) systems. Wikipedia Hangar - Fire Protection → Low-level AFFF system are used in some large hangars.[6][7][8] Trenches with "vee" shape bottoms are used minimize odors and bugs. The trenches have several discharge connections, spaced every 80 feet, so that jet fuel spills are quickly drained from the trench into underground concrete drain collection piping.[9][10] Wikipedia Active Fire Protection - Automatic fire suppression Automatic control means are any form of suppression that requires no human intervention these can include a fire sprinkler system, a gaseous clean agent, or Automatic foam suppression system. Most automatic suppression systems would be found in large commercial kitchens or other high-risk areas. → Sprinkler systems → Gaseous clean agent → Foam suppression system

  Low expansion
  Medium expansion
  High expansion

Wikipedia states it is "as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia's mission is to provide the public with articles that summarize accepted knowledge, written neutrally and sourced reliably. Readers expect to find neutral articles written independently of their subject, not corporate or personal webpages, or platforms for advertising and self-promotion. Articles should contain only material that complies with Wikipedia's content policies and best practices, and Wikipedians must place the interests of the encyclopedia and its readers above personal concerns." ^ Based on the above, the submitted information on pages follow this and are neutral. If there are revisions you believe that need to be made because it does not appear factual, please inform so it can be corrected, but all sources were referenced, in addition to using the objective language in the industry codes and standards. When writing codes and standards, it is their job to remain without influence because it is the ruling premise of the fire protection and aircraft hangar industry. All stakeholders will reference the code. A company did not say this. Could you please read through the edits proposed to the pages after the aforementioned? It should discern a neutral tone, no new information or biased writing style was input, only what has been approved outside of Safespill. If you believe there is a bias there, I can 1) provide more sources to display that there is data and testing determining language (Safespill did not) 2) ask for a {{request edit}} alternatively. --SS132021 (talk) 19:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)SS132021 Your reason here SS132021 (talk) 19:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This unblock request is pretty lengthy but I gather that you only intend to contribute in the area of your conflict of interest, and I'm not satisfied that you will do this as WP:COI and WP:PAID requires(you must declare as a paid editor if you work for Safespill). I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 11:50, 22 January 2022 (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.

Please make this unblock request more concise and written according to the instructions at Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. I'm pretty sure that nobody here is going to care about fire protection systems in aircraft hangars. That sounds like an important topic, but, off the top of my head, I can't really think of anything less interesting, and my eyes glaze over every time I try to read this unblock request. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:45, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]