User talk:Dcp005
Welcome!
Hello, Dcp005, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Dundee Cell Products, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.
There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
- Starting an article
- Your first article
- Biographies of living persons
- How to write a great article
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Help pages
- Tutorial
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Cntras (talk) 14:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Dundee Cell Products
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Dundee Cell Products, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Cntras (talk) 14:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Conflict of interest
Hello Dcp005. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Dundee Cell Products, 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 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. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:03, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
April 2011
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Sockpuppetry case
|
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dcp005 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Karl 334 ☞TALK to ME ☜ 15:59, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Dcp005 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
because the username was chosen by me and the name is not the name of an organisation Dcp005 (talk) 12:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Decline reason:
And yet you went and created Dundee Cell Products. And you're under investigation as a sock. — Daniel Case (talk) 14:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
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.
Dcp005 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
OK, Daniel I did not think that using the letters DCP in my username would be a problem. It was a stupid thing for me to do. Could you please tell me how to resolve this problem without having to create a new account? It is unfair and unreasonable for me to be considered as a sock since I have no reason to deceive or hide my identity. Thanks Dcp005 (talk) 15:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Using two accounts without legitimate reason is sockpuppetry WP:SOCK. Having a username that appears (note the word) to represent an organisation is against WP:USERNAME. This account can stay blocked, so far as I am concerned, until we are sure that you understand what the problems were. Peridon (talk) 15:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
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.
Dcp005 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Peridon, I am shocked and surprised by your rudeness. Just because you have the power to block users even if they made a mistake due to ignorance rather than malice does not justify being discourteous. What I have asked for is a bit of advice on how to resolve a problem but did expect to be treated as a naughty child or with such discourtesy. I do understand the problems now and that is why I want this resolved. Dcp005 (talk) 16:05, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You don't get unblocked by accusing others of rudeness and discourtesy, neither of which I see - in my opinion you were treated factually and civilly -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:25, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
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.
- Looking at it again, I'm not too happy with my wording (a rare thing for me, that). The intention was to make plain what the problems were as I see them, and to indicate that others might feel differently about your understanding of them. I am curious as to why this request has taken so long, and why it is being made when the article has been re-created already (by a user with no obvious name connection to the company - until one looks at the name of the CEO...). I've tagged the article for over-reliance on primary sources - not usually a cause for hurry, but needing addressing sooner rather than later if possible. Two of the references are not connected to the company or its staff, and those don't seem to me to establish notability. WP:RS is the place to look for information on what is needed. Peridon (talk) 19:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)