User talk:Singingsleddogs

February 2022

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:

• Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
• Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
• Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

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|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.

Cullen328 (talk) 18:45, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

February 2022

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:

• Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
• Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
• Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

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|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.

Cullen328 (talk) 18:48, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Please realize that Wikipedia is unconcerned with what an organization wants to say about itself. An organization is not entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because it exists. Like other Wikipedia topics, it must be notable by Wikipedia's definition, specifically the notability criteria for organizations. To be considered notable, the organization must have already received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization itself. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:49, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I have read over the pages notability criteria and sources, and would ask for advice regarding how notability is established for an arts organisation. For example, when I look at the Winnipeg Symphony Orchestra entry, I see that their references come mostly from reviews in the Winnipeg Free Press. The Manitoba Chamber Orchestra has an entry in the Canadian Encyclopedia, but other than that mostly references to internal sources. The Royal Manitoba Theatre Centre is in a similar situation, as is the Prairie Theatre Exchange. I picked Winnipeg arts organisations just for comparison purposes. These are all notable organisations with a long and important history in the Canadian cultural scene, but it seems that it is difficult for them to establish this notability. Your perspective on this issue and any advice for going forward with this would be much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GSnewmusic (talk • contribs)

Using other articles as a basis for your own can be a double-edged sword. Unfortunately, with over 6 million articles and an entirely volunteer-based editor community, unsuitable articles will slip in and not be noticed for some time. The Royal Manitoba Theatre Centre is an example of a poorly sourced article, as it uses mostly primary sources affiliated with the organization. I'll look at that one in detail later - it might need paring back to a stub article, or deleted outright.

Notability must be established by significant mention in reliable sources (online or print). Even if an organization is long-lived and well-known locally, it's not notable enough here if there is inadequate significant coverage to verify its claim of significance.

One last thing. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:19, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

---

Requested username:

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

Request reason:

Apologies for the user name. I obviously misunderstood the policy. GroundSwell is a Canadian nonprofit new music presenter. We have been in existence for 30 years and have a notable profile in the Canadian music scene. As a nonprofit and registered charitz we receive the majority of our funding through granting agencies. The Wikipedia articles that we were thinking of as rough templates for our article are, for example: Forum Zeitgenössischer Musik Leipzig and: Other Minds (organization). GroundSwell has a group of five artistic directors, none of whom receive a salary. We have one paid executive director position. Two of our artistic directors are original founding members, and it was our intent to gather information from them about the history of the organisation; our goal was that the Wikipedia article would have an archival rather than a promotional function. No one would receive any compensation for their contributions to the Wikipedia article. Please advise if there is a better way to do this. Thank you.

Decline reason:

Your choice of new username would be acceptable. On Wikipedia, the word promotional has a broad meaning- it doesn't just mean soliciting customers, selling something, or talking about how great the topic is- it includes just merely telling about the existence of the topic and what it considers to be its own history. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about(in this case) an organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. To put it another way, Wikipedia has no interest in what an organization says about itself, only in what others completely unconnected with the organization choose to say about it. If you just want to tell the world about the existence of your organization and its history, that should be done on social media or a website owned and operated by your organization. Please read about conflict of interest. You won't be unblocked to, in the short term, edit about your organization. If that is your only goal here, this is the end of the road. If you are interested in being a general contributor and editing about topics unrelated to your conflict of interest, such as Joe Biden or Justin Trudeau or the history of Canada, please tell what topics you might edit about. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 10:09, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I've re-placed this outside the block notice for formatting purposes. 331dot (talk) 18:37, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for considering the request. I would be interested in being a general contributor, with a particular interest in Canadian arts and culture.

GSnewmusic (talk) 13:35, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@331dot: The user has agreed to the above terms, do they need to open a new unblock request? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Drm310 Cullen328 is the blocking admin. 331dot (talk) 20:42, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I do not object to an unblock as long as the editor understands that original research is not permitted on Wikipedia, and that includes gathering unpublished information from the original founding members. Press clippings they may possess, on the other hand, may be useful. Cullen328 (talk) 22:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Understood.GSnewmusic (talk) 11:16, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Just checking in to see if I need to do anything. GSnewmusic (talk) 10:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Checking in to see if the unblock is going forward or if there is any further discussion. Thanks. GSnewmusic (talk) 10:33, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Pinging Cullen328 - the user has agreed to the terms you laid out for an unblock. Should they submit a new unblock request or is that not required? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:18, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I suggest a new unblock request to be reviewed by another administrator. Cullen328 (talk) 17:28, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Requested username:

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

Request reason:

As per the above suggestion from administrator Cullen328, I am requesting an unblock. I agree to the terms specified above.

Accept reason:

Your unblock request is accepted per the criteria above, namely that you won't edit about your organisation and will avoid original research. As the other admins didn't specify any timeline on appealing the restriction (OR is never allowed), I'm going to opt for not earlier than 4 months (that would be the 22nd of July), and (if unsuccessful) every six months thereafter. Normally I'd just go for a 6 month minimum, but your engagement in the unblock process was positive. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:05, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

globally renamed GSnewmusic to Singingsleddogs

globally renamed GSnewmusic to Singingsleddogs. A member of the unblock request review team will review your unblock request. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2022 (UTC)