User talk:The99declaration
Single purpose account. Misuse of article space for personal soapbox is unacceptable.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:28, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- While Wikipedia does not have strict rules and policy, we have guidelines. As part of the respect for those guidelines I offer an apology for Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers. I assume the teeth marks will eventually wear off.--Amadscientist (talk) 05:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Please see Talk:99 Percent Declaration#Comment from Michael Pollok for details about this dispute. That section has been blanked four times from Talk:99 Percent Declaration by Amadscientist. Dualus (talk) 05:14, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, The99declaration, 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:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
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! Dualus (talk) 04:03, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Hold on
Michael, I know things might seem confusing now, but please don't give up on Wikipdia yet. Amadscientist has been trying to push an agenda, as you've noticed, and I will try to help the best I can. In the mean time I hope you can look at some of the links in the Welcome message above, and please don't give up on us!
By the way, what do you think about Tom Udall's constitutional amendment introduced in the Senate on Nov. 1st? Dualus (talk) 05:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- Agenda editing is not my way, but the number of complaints against User:Dualus may show his.--Amadscientist (talk) 05:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
How can I be blocked by two people who are printing false statements on Wikipedia? This article is completely false and inaccurate. They don't even refer to the National General Assembly; they call it a United States General Assembly. Did they even read the document. How can we correct a false article. There are 2300 of us in our working group and we demand this article be taken down unless it is corrected. I hate to have to threaten legal action but if I am forced, I will bring Wikipedia to court and seek a court order to block false information You are damaging the reputation with materially false and defamatory statements. This is the last waning I am going to give. Take it down. Michael Pollok, Attorney for the 99% Declaration Working Group
- Please see WP:NLT. Until and unless your threat of legal action is retracted, this account will remain blocked. This is a long-standing Wikipedia policy, and it is not flexible. Regards, Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 14:28, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
November 2011
Hello The99declaration. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article 99 Percent Declaration, 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 you, 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. Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 15:04, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
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, celebrity or other well-known individual, 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. See WP:FAQ/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 again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.
- What can I do now?
You are still welcome to write about something other than your company, organization, or clients. If you do intend to make useful contributions on 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.
--Orange Mike | Talk 16:48, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
I WITHDRAW MY INTENTION TO BRING LEGAL ACTION. PLEASE ALLOW ME TO CORRECT THIS ARTICLE. THE FOLLOWING VIDEO PROVE THAT THE 99% DECLARATION WORKING GROUP WAS ANNOUNCED AND ESTABLISHED BY ME ON 10-15-11 AT 7:45PM. HOW CAN YOU NOT HAVE TAKE CORRECTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE VERY GROUP YOU ARE WRITING ABOUT. THIS IS AN AGENDA ARTICLE AND WE ASK THAT IT BE TAKEN DOWN OR CORRECTED. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le5YI_QPPKk
- The99declaration (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
- 24.161.123.221 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Block message:
complaints of inappropriate e-mails
Decline reason: You have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock | your reason here}} to the bottom of your talk page, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.
Perhaps Talk:International human rights instruments and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=99_Percent_Declaration&oldid=458998685 will interest you. I note that there was an objection to your username, which may be related to why you were blocked. If you come back as another user, please leave a note on my talk page: Dualus (talk) 17:59, 4 November 2011 (UTC)