User talk:LiveStreamingExpert

Hello Meridix. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Meridix. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Meridix|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. - Frood (talk!) 03:29, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am an employee of Meridix, but am not being compensated directly or indirectly specifically to make the edits. We are objectively trying to update publicly available information regarding the company and its existence in the live streaming industry. We are not attempting to promote certain interests or an agenda. - Meridix (talk) 03:45, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Meridix, please carefully read and follow WP:COI before making any further edits. Even if you are not being paid for this specific task, as a company employee you have a strong conflict of interest and should not edit related mainspace articles (you are welcome to prepare a draft in draftspace though or to make suggestions on article talk to improve outdated information). Aside from the COI aspect, your edits also changed the focus of an existing valid topic and added promotional product information that does not belong in an encyclopedia (for example detailed price and feature information). If you have any questions about the COI guideline or Wikipedia-editing in general, please feel free to ask at WP:Teahouse, a forum for new editors. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 05:18, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to think critically about your comment that updating the Meridix entry "changed the focus of an existing valid topic", we assume you might mean that the old entry referred to a conglomerate and the edited entry referred to a narrowed platform - this is accurate. The company shed many lines of business and essentially the live streaming platform and the company are now one and the same. Is that type of update not allowable? Regarding "promotional product information that does not belong in an encyclopedia", we believed our entry was appropriate because it simply followed the template of other live streaming companies, such as Vimeo. What is it about Vimeo's (obviously allowed) entry that differs from our attempt? We are asking questions to simply understand the rules better, appreciate your clarifications. Thank you. Meridix (talk) 14:35, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post 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 a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth 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 that reason, you must:

• 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.
• 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. To do so, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason for thinking that the block was an error, and publish the page. N.J.A. | talk 10:44, 5 September 2019 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

We understand the reason for the block, due to the appearance of a conflict of interest. We will not repeat these edits directly again. Our goal is to ensure company information is up to date. The reason the edits were made is because interested parties are routinely contacting us about services listed on Wikipedia which no longer exist, or information which is woefully out of date. We would highly appreciate that if we request information changes via the talk section and other alternative mechanisms, that these are addressed in a timely manner.

Decline reason:

You clearly do not understand the reason for the block. Read the message above again. You will not be unblocked until:

• you propose a new username that meets the username policy
• you confirm that this account is used by one individual only
• you agree to avoid creating or directly editing articles related to your organisation (requested edits will still be permitted)
• you agree to abide by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and disclose your paid relationship in accordance with the paid contributor policy
• you indicate what areas of Wikipedia you intend to edit in the future

If you have no interest in editing Wikipedia beyond writing about your organisation, then you will not be unblocked. If this is the case, I recommend you consider alternative outlets. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:23, 5 September 2019 (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.

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

---

Requested username:

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

Request reason:

Addressing each one of the points above:

• new username proposed - LiveStreamingExpert
• account is used by only one individual - confirm yes, myself
• will no longer directly edit pages related to our organization - will submit requested edits as the information is still woefully outdated and inaccurate
• agree to abide by TOS, but no need to disclose paid relationship since any edits we make are no longer allowed to be related to our company, so edits will simply be in the relevant area of expertise without compensation
• this is my first time using Wikipedia... while I was encouraged to sign up to accomplish edits to company info, a vast number of entries could be enhanced objectively with my expertise, areas including live streaming, encoding, codecs, content distribution networks, and related articles and technologies.

Decline reason:

I've renamed your account from Meridix. This is better than your first request, but not quite there yet. You still need to comply with WP:PAID as you state that you intend to submit requested edits, in addition to the fact that it was editing for your employer which brought you here in the first place; compliance with the policy is a Terms of Use requirement and not optional. It's going to be difficult for you to directly edit in the areas you indicate as that is the field of your COI. It might help you to read this plain language explanation of the COI policy. You will need to explain how your edits generally will comply with WP:COI as well as indicate any other subject areas you want to edit in. I must decline your request. 331dot (talk) 18:26, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

---

Request reason:

Thank you for the username update. I will add the paid disclosure as requested, though technically that would only be relevant to information we request to be updated for a company (my employer). For contributions I make elsewhere, complying with COI rules and using plain/neutral language will be straightforward. I would not be paid or compensated in any way for these edits, though I will remain branded as a paid contributor. My company might be in the streaming industry, but a contribution I make to HTTP Live Streaming or H.264 can without question enhance public understanding while avoiding or promoting anyone in particular, by using neutral language and outside citations. At the moment I appear unable to add the disclosure to my user page due to being blocked, but will add it once unblocked. As stated previously, I have expertise in encoding, streaming and transport protocols, codecs, content delivery networks, broadcasting, and other related topics, and plan to make contributions or enhancements to these subject areas without the influence of, or referring to, my employer.

Accept reason:

Per user acknowledgment of relevant policy and undertaking to make the required disclosures and to edit in accordance thereunder. The user is advised failure to do so will result in immediate blocking without warning. N.J.A. | talk 11:00, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, appreciate your consideration of the matter. I have posted the required WP:PAID statement to the user page. I will now suggest company information updates via your directions above: "you are welcome to prepare a draft in draftspace though or to make suggestions on article talk to improve outdated information". Subsequently I will make additions/suggestions to relevant streaming articles. LiveStreamingExpert (talk) 15:00, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Barkeep49 were:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Meridix instead.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Mainspace article is up for deletion, where this draft has been noted. If that is kept, non-promotional parts of this may be incorporated into that as an edit request. If that is deleted than it will have failed notability already.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Meridix and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Meridix, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Barkeep49 (talk) 01:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LiveStreamingExpert! Having an article 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! Barkeep49 (talk) 01:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since the M* article is at AfD already, you might as well just paste your new version over the old version (do not delete the AfD notice), and then ask the other participants in the AfD discussion whether they agree that you have resolved the issue.

(I haven't read either version of the article, so I have no opinion as to whether you've succeeded.) DS (talk) 21:56, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ToBeFree was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I have provided detailled explanation of my reasoning at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meridix and would reject this draft, preventing further submission, if the deletion closure text didn't mention "resubmission" as an option.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Meridix and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Meridix, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:23, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Meridix, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LiveStreamingExpert. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Meridix".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Bkissin (talk) 13:04, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]