User talk:Jngfletcher

Welcome!

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).

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

Request reason:

My website www.aboutdartford.co.uk which I added as an external link on the Dartford webpage is not intended to be spam or advertising it contains further detailed information about the town which complements that on the Dartford Wikipedia page itself.I feel my intent has been totally misunderstood and misrepresented by those contributors who requested that I be blocked and who refused to take part in the Wikipedia negotiation to resolve this issue amicably. I hope you will review this matter and unblock my account accordingly. Jngfletcher (talk) 20:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were asked not do this; you could at least have discussed this with the editor(s) warning you, warnings of which you had to have been aware, yet instead you forged on ahead. Surprise surprise ... you got blocked, just like we promised you you would. Meanwhile you could take a look at our criteria for exactly the sort of addition you were trying to make and understand better why we might not have accepted it. — Daniel Case (talk) 21:35, 15 August 2014 (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 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).

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

Request reason:

I think you are unilaterally restricting other people's valid use of Wikipedia and that is against the spirit of everybody's right to express a reasoned opinion, and thus not in the true spirit of Wikipedia. In fact I was willing to discuss this with the editor's and requested an online mediation meeting with them which they declined to participate in. By the nature of your response to my appeal I am assuming you are a representative of those editors and working on their behalf rather than an independent and objective party in this matter and thus I question your impartiality to adjudicate in this matter. (UTC)

Please include a decline or accept reason.

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.

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Fiddle Faddle 21:32, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Hello, I'm Charlesdrakew. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Dartford, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Charles (talk) 22:05, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Dartford. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. The links fail WP:ELNO #11 and WP:ADV. Wikipedia does not encourage editing with a conflict of interest, which you as the webmaster of that site would have. Also, see WP:OWN. If you don't want a change to be altered, removed, or otherwise undone, don't make that change here. Ian.thomson (talk) 16:28, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Dartford. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Charles (talk) 13:16, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because of my warning at your other talk page, I've reported your last spam attempt. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Request for incorportion of a relevant webpage to Wikipedia Dartford site". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 14 August 2014.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 15:31, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 19:13, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Request for incorportion of a relevant webpage to Wikipedia Dartford site, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, Sunray (talk) 17:45, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)