User talk:Bxpqxd
Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Girth Summit (blether) 11:50, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Bxpqxd (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I was converting a Wiki Professionals page of Michael Lyon, who I am an associate of, into a Wikipedia page and had no prior knowledge that this draft page was previously submitted for approval. Therefore, the sources and text used are the same as the June 18, 2021 upload. I made sure to revisit each source to ensure that the information presented in the page was factual. However, I am not affiliated with the BrookeCook account and am simply a new user who tried to edit my first page. My proficiency in the editor has come from me looking at edits on other pages to learn how to cite references, link to other pages, add images, etc. This is why I should be unbanned.
Decline reason:
I believe that you are a different person, but that only makes this meat puppetry. You also seem to have a conflict of interest. Perhaps you should ask Mr. Lyon if he has asked others before you to edit Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 17:05, 28 July 2023 (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.
Bxpqxd (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
After asking Mr. Lyon about previous editors for his page, he informed me that he had requested someone to create his page but that person never told him that he had submitted the page for review, leading Mr. Lyon to believe that my submission would be the first for his page. As for the conflict of interest, I am now reading that there is a place for me to disclose my relationship with Mr. Lyon, so if I do that would that lead to my account being unbanned and the page to continue to be reviewed?
Decline reason:
We are not interested in you editing Michael Lyon's page because you have a conflict of interest with this person. Also, your connection with wikiprofessionalsinc will need to be explained. Z1720 (talk) 16:18, 11 August 2023 (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.
Please answer the following questions:
- If unblocked, what articles do you intend to edit?
- What is meat puppetry and why is it not allowed on Wikipedia? (WP:MEAT has this information).
- How does an editor disclose a paid COI on Wikipedia, and do you commit to this disclosure? (WP:PAID)
- Where did you get the text that you submitted for Lyon's article?
Please respond below. Z1720 (talk) 14:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Answers
- I intend to edit the Michael Lyon page as well as other articles of interest to me, such as those of ancient organisms/fossils which I have an acute interest in.
- Meat puppetry is when an editor brings a like-minded editor to edit their article to ensure that their vision of an article is what happens. It isn't allowed because it leads to disputed content being repeatedly added to a page.
- Editors add this tag to their main user page, talk page, or their edit summaries:
{{paid|employer=name of employer|client=name of client}}. I did not get paid to write this article. - I got the text for this article from this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bxpqxd (talk • contribs)
- Only one open request is needed at a time, so I have removed the unblock request formatting from the above. Subsequent comments should be as standard, unformatted comments. 331dot (talk) 15:07, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
My connection with wikiprofessionalsinc just included me being sent the link to use for the text for the article. Furthermore, if I am prevented from editing Michael Lyon's page, does that mean his page will still not go up and would my account be unbanned as I am not a sock puppet nor a meat puppet?
Bxpqxd (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I wanted to clarify the facts about the Lyon submission. I just finished high school and went to school with Mr Lyons son. He was an advisor to our astronomy club and as I learned more I thought it would make sense to do a Wikipedia page. Mr Lyon agreed and gave me some materials he had gathered to start with. I did not know he had used another firm to help him several years ago. I have found out now that firm had approached Mr Lyon about a posting and he agreed. He had no idea that they would violate wiki rules and was disappointed to learn that the firm was a scam. He discontinued contact with them years ago. I had absolutely nothing to do with that firm or any knowledge about it. So the facts are I am not associated with them in any way and should not be disadvantaged in anyway. Moreover, everything in the post about Mr Lyon is 100 percent true. Given his leadership role in space tourism and commercial space sector and cycle touring which is all documented, I am not sure why you should not publish the page. But of course, this is all up to you. Thank you for your consideration.
Accept reason:
accepted, subject to topic bans from WP:BLPs, commercial companies and products, discussed below. Girth Summit (blether) 14:27, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- Bxpqxd Copying the content of a fake Wikiprofessionals page was not a good idea - quite apart from them being persistent spammers, copying stuff from a website and posting it here is a violation of our copyright policies. Nevertheless, your explanation of the events that led to your block is credible, and I'd be willing to give you a chance here, but I obviously can't be 100% certain that you are not yourself connected to Wikiprofessionals. Would you be willing to accept an unblock with some restrictions? I don't imagine that many people pay spammers to write about ancient organisms or fossils - I'd be willing to unblock your account if you were to accept topic bans from living people, and from commercial organisations and products. Those restrictions could potentially be lifted after a year or so of productive, non-promotional editing in other areas. Best Girth Summit (blether) 12:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I'd be willing to accept those restrictions and make edits to articles about non-living people. Thank you so much! Additionally, would the Michael Lyon page still be under consideration to be added?
- Non living people? I thought you wanted to edit about fossils and ancient organisms. Well, so long as they're not recently deceased you should be OK. You're not going to be able to write about Michael Lyon though - if, as you say, you know him personally, you have a conflict of interest with him so it would not be appropriate for you to write about him. That rule applies to everyone - quite a few of my friends have articles about them, and I never edit them. I spent a few minutes on Google and I have to say that I am not convinced that it would be possible to write an article about Lyon, I don't think he would meet our notability requirements. His books about cycling are self-published, and I can't find any reviews of them in reliable sources, so WP:NAUTHOR wouldn't work, and I don't think there's enough coverage of him as an individual to satisfy the general notability guideline.
- If I go ahead and unblock you, understand that these topic bans don't just cover article creations - you can't edit existing articles about living/recently deceased people, or about commercial companies or products. Deal? Girth Summit (blether) 14:11, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, that's understood. I mistyped when I said non-living people, I meant ancient organisms and fossils.
- OK - I'm unblocking your account. I have logged your editing restrictions at WP:RESTRICT. They are in the 'voluntary' section - that doesn't mean that abiding by them is voluntary, it means that you entered into them voluntarily as a condition of being unblocked. Be advised that you'll likely be under some scrutiny - if you appear to be doing anything that looks like undisclosed paid editing, or editing with a conflict of interest, you'll be blocked again - read WP:PAID and WP:COI for more on this. Best to stick to subjects that aren't the kind of thing anyone might pay for. Good luck. Girth Summit (blether) 14:27, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you so much for allowing me to continue editing under these restrictions. Regarding Michael Lyon's notability I respectfully disagree but it is your call. He was featured in Harvard magazine last year about cycling, wrote an article for Sunday NY times about savings and loan crisis, and was just this year published op-Ed in the Washington Post. He self published to control marketing which is pretty limited for niche publishers, but his books seem to have performed better than cycle touring books from other publishers. No doubt he is an expert on European cycle touring, but like I mentioned, it is your call whether the page gets put up for review or not. Again, I cannot express how grateful I am for my account being unblocked and for the lessons I've learned about Wikipedia's editing through this entire saga.
- Well, congratulations - you just breached your topic ban with your first edit after being unblocked. It's not just that you can't create articles about living people - you can't discuss them on talk pages either, so arguing in favour of someone's notability here is a no-no. Don't worry, I'm not going to reinstate the block for a simple breach like that, but you need to tread carefully.
- I don't want to encourage you to continue breaching the ban, but I will give you a few more pointers on the concept of notability, and how we establish it. It's obviously related to how well-known someone is, but really it's a measure of how many reliable, independent and secondary sources are available for us to build an article with. It doesn't matter how much a person has written - Harper Lee was notable long before her second book came out - it's about how much other people have written about you or your work. In Lyon's case, I considered the Harvard source, but it's not ideal - it's an alumni magazine, and Lyon is a Harvard alumnus, so its independence is questionable. Writing op-eds, articles and self-published books doesn't establish notability - reviews of someone's writing might though, but the only review of Lyon's writing I could find was on a self-published cycling blog, so, no joy there.
- Now, I don't personally get to decide whether someone is notable or not. Decisions on notability are decided through discussion amongst editors, at a part of the project known as WP:AfD. I have taken part in hundreds of discussions like that, and the view I expressed matched the final outcome in over 90% of those discussions, so I flatter myself that my judgment is reasonably well-aligned with that of the community at large when it comes to notability. So, it is possible that someone who is not connected to Lyon might one day come along and write another article about Lyon; if they did, however, I expect it would end up being deleted. Whether or not that happens, however, shouldn't be any concern of yours - from this point on, as far as your activities here are concerned, you need to act as if Lyon doesn't exist. Best wishes. Girth Summit (blether) 15:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)