User talk:Adamlawrence996

Welcome!

Hello, Breinrock!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Breinrock/sandbox

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Breinrock/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (November 25)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Timtrent was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Breinrock! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because it has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Also, your username gives the impression that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or website, which is against the username policy.

If you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization, you may request unblock and a username change. In your reasons, you must follow all these steps:

Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement; and
Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked; and
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked; and
Provide a new username.

To do this, insert the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked.

Please note that the new username you choose cannot already be taken and in use by another account. You can search to see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns that no global account with that username exists, that means it is still available.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page.

Stephen! ^Coming... 12:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia Administrators,

I understand my account was blocked for promotional edits and an inappropriate username. I apologize for these mistakes and now fully understand Wikipedia’s guidelines against promotion and the importance of neutrality.

I am not receiving any compensation for this Wikipedia page contribution. I have reviewed Wikipedia’s policies on neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing, and I commit to adhering to them.

If unblocked, I plan to contribute by improving articles in a neutral, well-sourced manner. I am happy to change my username to Adamlawrence896 to comply with your policies.

Thank you for considering my request.

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.

Adamlawrence996 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

Adamlawrence896 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Changing to nickname rather than a business name. I understand that my previous editing may have raised concerns, but I am genuinely committed to contributing positively to Wikipedia. My goal is to help build a free, reliable encyclopedia by making neutral, factual, and well-sourced edits that benefit readers. I am prepared to follow Wikipedia's core policies, including neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research. I am willing to learn and collaborate with the community to improve content in a constructive manner. My intention is to make meaningful contributions that adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines and help expand knowledge for readers worldwide. Breinrock (talk) 08:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your choice of new username would be acceptable. Please describe your connection to the company and tell us what edits you will make now that you know that, at least in the short term, you will not be permitted to edit about Breinrock or any topic for which you have a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I merged your requests, as only one open request is needed at a time. You don't need separate requests for your username and the block itself- just use the template that allows you to propose a new username. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, kindly check response below please thanks. Breinrock (talk) 10:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the prompt response. Kindly advise how I can complete the article on Breinrock and remove any bias or promotion-based information, as I do a lot of blogging on Payment Solutions, and that is how I came to write this article so I do not see how there is a conflict of interest, especially since i will edit this meticulously to follow Wikipedia's guidelines. Also, kindly let me know when the approved username change will take effect. Thank you.

UTRS appeal #97747 is closed. @331dot: Please see above.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Admins ,

Thank you for your feedback. Upon careful reflection, I recognize that my previous attempts to edit the Breinrock article were inappropriate due to my clear conflict of interest as a blogger in the payment solutions space.

I now understand that: - My close connection to the subject, having worked with them before on email newsletters makes me an unsuitable editor for this article - Promotional language and lack of neutral sourcing are serious violations of Wikipedia's core principles - Editors must maintain strict neutrality, especially when connected to the topic

Given these insights, I would like to propose an alternative approach: - I am willing to completely edit the article and have it reviewed by third-party editors to confirm nothing was promotional about it. - I can provide a list of verifiable, third-party sources that a neutral Wikipedia editor might find useful - I commit to learning more about Wikipedia's guidelines and contributing neutrally in areas where I have no direct professional involvement

I appreciate the opportunity to learn from this experience and improve my understanding of collaborative, unbiased content creation.

@331dot: @Deepfriedokra:

I would like to see that you have learned about our guidelines and contributing neutrally first, before you submit a draft about Breinrock or a topic for which you have a conflict of interest. My experience is that allowing those in your position to dive right back into contributing in the area of their COI is usually a waste of time for everyone(including the editor) as the person's interest in the COI-related topic colors their judgement. (for example "promotion" has a much broader meaning here than many in the business world take it to mean). I would want to see edits in other areas first(something like 6 months/250 edits, whichever is longer) before considering permitting you to make COI related edits. That's just my opinion as a reviewer, you may make a new unblock request for someone else to review and see if you can get a better deal from another admin. Any decision will be up to them in consultation with the blocking admin, not me. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Thank you for the detailed explanation. While 250 edits seems extensive, I appreciate the underlying intent to ensure meaningful, neutral contributions.

Regarding my prior editing history, I would like to highlight that I've already made approximately 10 constructive edits across various topics before my initial article creation. These edits demonstrate my potential to contribute positively and learn Wikipedia's guidelines.

I'm committed to:

- Continuing to learn and improve my understanding of Wikipedia's policies

- Making neutral, well-sourced contributions

- Avoiding any areas where I have a conflict of interest

Would it be possible to consider a more graduated approach, perhaps reviewing my existing edits and setting a lower threshold for demonstrating my ability to contribute neutrally?

I'm open to your guidance and appreciate the opportunity to become a responsible Wikipedia contributor. I am happy to also propose a new draft, should that be of interest. Adamlawrence996 (talk) 09:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, that's just my opinion, and you may make a new unblock request for someone else to review to see if you can get a better deal from them. Yes, you've made some edits, mostly minor things like rewording, fixing, or adding links. Those are important, but don't really show your understanding of policies about tone, neutral point of view, and sourcing. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do i do appeal unblock request from here or through the appeal link? Adamlawrence996 (talk) 10:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please appeal on this page, using the unblock request template as you did previously. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Adamlawrence996 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Upon careful reflection, I recognize that my previous attempts to edit the Breinrock article were inappropriate due to my clear conflict of interest as a blogger in the payment solutions space.

I now understand that: - My close connection to the subject, having worked with them before on email newsletters makes me an unsuitable editor for this article - Promotional language and lack of neutral sourcing are serious violations of Wikipedia's core principles - Editors must maintain strict neutrality, especially when connected to the topic

Given these insights, I would like to propose an alternative approach: - I am willing to re-edit the article with scrutiny and objectivity and have it reviewed by third-party editors to confirm nothing was promotional about it. - I can provide a list of verifiable, third-party sources that a neutral Wikipedia editor might find useful - I commit to learning more about Wikipedia's guidelines and contributing neutrally in areas where I have no direct professional involvement

I appreciate the opportunity to learn from this experience and improve my understanding of collaborative, unbiased content creation.Adamlawrence996 (talk) 10:48, 9 December 2024 (UTC)idletimestamp=20241217013822[reply]

Accept reason:

See the discussion below. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:16, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there and thank you for your response! Beyond edits with COI issues, what types of edits would you like to make to Wikipedia if you were unblocked? Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 18:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi (User talk:Significa liberdade), thank you for your response! I aim to contribute to Wikipedia by ensuring that accurate sources are cited, references are properly attributed, and grammar is correct. Additionally, I strive to make information clear and well-presented in the articles I edit.

Hello again! I am not interested in hearing what ChatGPT would do if it were able to edit Wikipedia. I would like to hear from you. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 05:57, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, thanks for the prompt response. Sorry, as the substance of the above wording was my exact thoughts, but to speed things up, I occasionally use AI for any proofing. In any case, I would like to contribute by taking the time to edit articles, particularly ones that I'm familiar with, and checking for issues in grammar, citing, structuring, references. Also, I would like to delve into different subjects in the world of payments and see if there are any missing articles that I may be able to write on. Please let me know if you'd like anything else from my end. I have been in touch with you guys since Nov 25th trying to resolve this to show that I am open to learning, and serious about doing this right. Thanks again.

{{Ping|Significa liberdade}} Adamlawrence996 (talk) 08:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you were to realize there were a missing article, what might be some steps you would take in potentially creating that article? Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:37, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would begin by researching on that specific subject, noting areas like establishment date, history, related articles and news, categories it falls under, figures, websites, etc. I would then proceed to structure it accordingly, and create a draft article in the sandbox, being cautious of things like promotional language, or biased opinions. I would make the first section a summary of the subject with any key highlights. Following this would be things like History, Services, Criticism, References assuming it were a company. If it is a concept/practice within a specific field, I may add sections like Notability, See Also, Controversies, References. Adamlawrence996 (talk) 06:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me! As you move forward, make sure to use reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. You can see a list of sources for which the Wikipedia community has discussed reliability at WP:RSP. Otherwise, I often recommend considering the CRAAP test. :) Courtesy ping to Timtrent. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Significa liberdade I have no issues with this declaration. The words are good. The behaviour must match the words going forward. None of the words should be created by a Large language model, neither in conversations nor in drafts/articles.

Let me add a potentially helpful essay, one of many guides on article creation. It contains a process that will be successful for any subject which passes notability in a Wikipedia sense. It cannot succeed where notability is not demonstrable. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:07, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Significa liberdade The user rename needs to take effect. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for catching that, Timtrent. Since I saw the user had a different signature, I thought the rename had taken place. I'm still learning! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional username

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your account has been blocked from editing because your username gives the impression that the account represents a group, team, club, organization, company, product, department, or website. Your username is the principal reason for the block. You are welcome to continue editing after you have chosen a new username that complies with Wikipedia's username policy.

You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable, regardless of the username that you choose. Additionally, if your contributions to Wikipedia form all or part of work for which you are, or expect to be, paid or compensated in any way, you must disclose who is paying you to edit here. You may also read our FAQ for article subjects.

Please take a moment to either create a new account, or request a username change to this account.

To create a new account with a different username, simply log out of this account and then click here to make a new one.
If you prefer to change the username of this account, you may do so by adding the following text to the bottom of your user talk page (this page): {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Important items to note:

The new username that you choose must represent you as an individual person, and it must comply with Wikipedia's username policy.
- You are permitted to use a username that contains the name of a company or organization if it also identifies you individually. Examples include: "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87", but not "SEO Manager at XYZ Company".
The new username you choose cannot already be taken and used by another account. You can search here to see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns, "There is no global account for [username]", that means it is available.

Appeals: If your username does not represent a group, organization, department, website, or other entity described above, and if you believe that this block was incorrect or made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the following text to the bottom of your user talk page (this page): {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Thank you.

Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the confusion! Please select a new username, after which you will be unblocked again. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:10, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've renamed and unblocked. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Elli! Cookies for you! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone! Just to confirm that I am good to go ahead and begin making edits and writing articles again. Anything else I should keep note of in addition to the above recommendations like the CRAAP test, and the helpful essay shared by Timtrent? Would I be able to go back to my original draft sandbox article on Breinrock and re-write it from scratch? Thanks. Adamlawrence996 (talk) 11:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your question, Adamlawrence996! I would recommend refraining from editing anything related to Breinrock for a while. You aren't prohibited from doing so, though if you decide to, be very aware about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines regarding payment disclosures and conflicts of interests. Additionally, please note that if another administrator believes it is worthwhile to block you for promotional editing again, it will be more difficult to be unblocked. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]