Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because of the following problems: 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, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of username and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, 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 your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

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.
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.

Moyo3323 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

Moyo3323 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

I am writing to appeal the block placed on my Wikipedia account due to my username not complying with the username policy along with the edits I made, which were correctly perceived as promotional and a violation of the guidelines. I fully acknowledge that my actions were in error and stemmed from a lack of understanding of the rules and etiquette of Wikipedia, particularly regarding conflict of interest (COI) editing.

I recognize that as a representative of my client, [was the subject of the page I edited], I should have been more cautious and mindful of the COI guidelines. I want to emphasize that my intention was not to promote or manipulate information but rather to provide relevant updates to the page in accordance with my client's requests. They provided the edits and new content with all references for me to simply input, which I now understand was the incorrect approach. The compensation for this work is $500 and will be paid by Mariana Atencio, the subject of the article I edited.

Upon reflection and further research, I now fully understand that as someone with a COI, direct editing of a page is discouraged. Instead, I should have followed the proper protocol by submitting requested edits for review, ensuring they adhere to Wikipedia's standards and guidelines. In hindsight, I should have been knowledgable of this fundamental principle.

To rectify my mistakes, I am committed to strictly adhering to the guidelines moving forward. I will refrain from directly editing any pages related to my clients and will adhere to the protocol of submitting requested edits for review and approval by the Wikipedia community. I understand the importance of maintaining a neutral point of view and ensuring that all edits contribute to the integrity and reliability of Wikipedia's content.

I genuinely apologize for any disruption or inconvenience my actions may have caused to the Wikipedia community and its readers. This is not a service we provide our clients. It was a unique request made by an existing client which we do software development for. I assure you that my intentions were always aimed at providing accurate and valuable information, but I now understand the potential pitfalls of COI editing and the transparency needed from paid editors.

I was also informed that my username is in violation of Wikipedia policies given that it is the name of the Enterprise I work for. I am not sure if I am following protocol here by asking for a username change and for the unblocking of my account as it was not clear to me in the message on my talk page whether they should be separated or not.

I also read in "Wikipedia:Username policy" that it may be better to create a new account from scratch but I want be as transparent as possible, even if that is the recommended approach I should take. In submitting a request to edit the article, I don't want to come off as deceptive or trying to get around this blockage by using a new account.

I kindly request your reconsideration of the block on my Wikipedia account, as I am fully committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity and adhering to the guidelines set forth by Wikipedia. I sincerely appreciate your time and attention to this matter.

Decline reason:

Please make a request that you write in your own words without the aid of an AI. 331dot (talk) 20:48, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You should not create a new account, that would be block evasion, as you suspect. The guidelines you refer to are for those who are not blocked. 331dot (talk) 20:33, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you write this request with the aid of an AI bot? 331dot (talk) 20:35, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did use an AI bot to assist me in structuring the content of this appeal. But the original draft and the research was done by myself. My intention was to make this read well as I was struggling to express myself appropriately. Everything written in my response was drafted and researched by myself and I am fully committed to what is being expressed. Simple Solutions FS (talk) 20:43, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not looking into unblocking an AI, I'm looking into unblocking you. You need to write the request. I(and other admins) don't want to read about how you will uphold high standards of integrity and committment and how you will strictly adhere to guidelines or what have you. Please just follow the instructions provided in the block notice, one human talking to another. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 20:49, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Apologies for the issue. I will provide the content above in my own words. Is the format that I submitted my request correct though? I am not sure if I needed to separate the username request and appeal separately Simple Solutions FS (talk) 20:55, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You made the actual request correctly, you do not need separate requests for your username and the block itself. 331dot (talk) 20:58, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
Just wanted to follow up here. I have not heard back since resubmitting my block appeal. Not sure how long the process usually takes. You responded within the same day of my original appeal so just wanted to check in. Thank you Simple Solutions FS (talk) 14:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There isn't a specific time frame; that I did it quickly was pure chance. A heretofore uninvolved admin will eventually review your request. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Thank you for clarifying 204.28.111.26 (talk) 20:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I assume this was you; remember to log in before posting. 331dot (talk) 20:09, 13 June 2023 (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.

Moyo3323 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

Moyo3323 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

My Account was blocked due to my username not complying with the username policy along with the edits I made, which I now understand are a violation of the guidelines. I understand that the initial edits made are considered promotional and why that is the case. When initially communicating with the admin reviewing my edits, they directed me to read through the COI project page. I acknowledge that there is a COI in my edits as the subject of the article I had edited is a client of the agency I work for. At the time of submitting my edits I was unaware of the processes for adding/editing content on Wikipedia and I take full blame for not educating myself beforehand.

For context, the client provided the edits and new content along with all the references, which I simply input without proofreading. I now understand that this was the incorrect approach. The compensation for this work is $500 and will be paid by Mariana Atencio, the subject of the article I edited. This is not a service we provide to our clients. It was a unique request made by an existing client which we do software development for.

After reading through the COI page and, specifically, the Paid Editing section, I now understand the appropriate approach to requesting these edits instead of directly editing an article where applicable. I will also make sure to revise the content that was passed to me by the client and try to express the requested adjustments from less biased perspective. Moving forward, I will also make sure to identify myself as a paid editor (if applicable) on talk pages and on my user page in the proper format.

I was also informed that my username is in violation of Wikipedia policies , as it matches the name of the agency I work for. I have provided an alternate name with no relation to the agency I work for in the request.

I would greatly appreciate your reconsideration of blocking my account. I will follow the guidelines as instructed and inform myself in the areas I lack knowledge in. Thank you for you time and consideration.

Decline reason:

Below, you state that your only intention is to edit Mariana Atencio. The goal of Wikipedia is to build an encyclopedia. If you are only interested in editing one page, for which you are being paid for, then your goals do not align with Wikipedia's priorities. Z1720 (talk) 16:20, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Moyo3323, please answer the following questions:
  1. How can editors disclose their paid-COI status on Wikipedia, and what method will you use if unblocked? (WP:UPE has this information)
  2. If unblocked, what articles do you intend to edit on Wikipedia?
I look forward to your responses. Z1720 (talk) 13:10, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for addressing my request.
1. I will be disclosing my paid-COI status using the "Connected Contributor Template" on my user page and putting {edit COI} before any edits I am requesting on an article talk page.
2. My only intention for this account was to edit the "Mariana Atencio" article. Through this process I have become aware of the guidelines I must follow as a paid-COI. I will not be making any direct edits to the article and will instead request edits through the talk page. I understand that my account is WP:SPA. I am not sure if that prevents me from making requests for edits. If that is the case, I would like to understand how I could possibly propose information to be updated for this article in accordance to the guidelines. I acknowledge that part of or all of my requests may be rejected and hope to get constructive responses on the necessary adjustments I would need to make to the content provided. I have read through WP:ADVOCACY, WP:SPA, and WP:COI to better understand what procedures I need to follow and what I need to avoid doing.
This is not a service the company I work for provides. It was a unique request by our client in addition to the web development work we do for them. We do not intend to accept more Wikipedia article editing work moving forward.
Thank you for your time. Moyo3323 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is there not a difference in distinguishing between requesting edits and directly editing an article? Based on the guidelines, I feel like I am following the process and being transparent. While I am being paid for this service, my intention is to work within the guidelines expressed in the various articles I have linked. I am not trying to get around anything here and fully intend to comply with the direction provided by the reviewers.
I understand if the above will not suffice, but would like to understand how a paid editor can exist within the Wikipedia ecosystem. Why does it matter if I am being paid to edit a single article or a variety of articles? Is it against the rules to be solely be a paid editor? Does a paid editor need to also contribute to articles that they are not being paid for for them to be in good standing?
Apologies for bombarding you with a bunch of questions. My intention is not to dispute my blocking, but to better understand the reasoning. Thank you. Moyo3323 (talk) 16:40, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
More