User talk:Vizzmedia

Welcome!

Hello, Vizzmedia, 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:

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 your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Atul Limited may have broken the syntax by modifying 5 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:02, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vizzmedia. 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 Atul Limited, 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. AllyD (talk) 12:26, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

Hello Vizzmedia, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition to Atul Rajasthan Date Palms has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Ruby Murray 13:53, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. If you intend to edit constructively in other topic areas, you may be granted the right to continue under a change of username. 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, website 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, although if you can demonstrate a pattern of future editing in strict accordance with our neutral point of view policy, you may be granted this right. See Wikipedia's FAQ for 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 Wikipedia again.

What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you may consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

If you do intend to make useful contributions here about 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. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:32, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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

Requested username:

NakulMehra (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

We did not try to promote any thing on wikipedia, we even edited the content many times but I guess failed to meet the requirements. I totally understand your policies now, so in future we won't make any edits using this account

Decline reason:

If, as you say, you did not intend to promote, then you are so unaware of what you are doing that you are unlikely to be able to avoid doing so again. Your editing, full from beginning to end of such pure marketing speak as "legendary" "inspiring" "pioneering" "leading" "flagship" "unique" "world-class" etc etc was about as unambiguous promotion as I have seen on Wikipedia for quite a while. Also, although you have said in vague terms that you will not do the same again, you have not actually said what editing you will do, nor made it clear how it will be different. I suggest that you may like to carefully re-read the part of the block notice that begins "If you have no interest..." The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:05, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vizzmedia (talk) 09:45, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few key questions:

Do you understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a business directory?
Do you understand conflict of interest?
Do you understand that to be considered for an encyclopedia article, the subject must be notable?

Also, given that an account can and must be edited by one person only, what do you mean in your unblock request by "we"?--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 20:20, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are currently blocked because your username appears directly related to a company, group or product that you have been promoting, contrary to the username policy. Changing the username will not allow you to violate the 3 important principles above. Daniel Case (talk) 13:47, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sir, I totally understand that Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and not a business directory. Again I would say, my intentions were not at all directed towards promoting anyone or anything, all I wanted to do was to add a piece of information which had some value (at-least according to me). However I failed to abide by the rules that too by mistake. I apologize for the same. Now I do understand conditions like conflict of interest and putting up notable content only. Please unblock my account, I won't be a trouble in future. Also, with respect to my previous request where I quoted “we” intead of “I” was solely by mistake. Kindly ignore.122.160.1.148 (talk) 12:54, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You say that you were not trying to promote, but Vizz Media describes itself as "a Digital Marketing company", so if you are working for Vizz Media and are not trying to promote your client then you are not doing the job you are being paid for. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:09, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir, you brought it up quite well but that's where the catch is. Yes we are a digital marketing agency but this was a rare case that we tried putting up information on Wikipedia for our clients. But then this does not mean we won't do our job, we would surely educate our clients from now onwards how to go about it, since we have learnt it now, the right way I say. So, again I request you to unblock this account and would also like to assure you that I won't repeat any such case in future.Vizzmedia (talk) 08:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]