User talk:Eihsok

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Eihsok, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Milton, Ontario, seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising. For more information on this, please see:

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page and how to develop articles
Help pages
Tutorials
Article wizard for creating new articles
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Whpq (talk) 02:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022[edit]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Milton, Ontario. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 09:04, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Magnolia677,

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I apologize for adding promotional material to the Wikipedia page for Milton, Ontario. I didn't mean to add promotional content and I understand that Wikipedia is not a platform for advertising or promotion. I will make sure to be more careful in the future and review Wikipedia's guidelines on objective prose to ensure that my contributions meet the necessary standards. Thank you for your help in keeping Wikipedia a reliable and neutral source of information.

Sincerely, Eihsok. Eihsok (talk) 02:57, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Hello Eihsok! Your additions to Eyelash extensions have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 04:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Eyelash extensions, you may be blocked from editing. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 04:32, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I apologize for any confusion regarding the material I added to the Wikipedia page for Eyelash extensions. The content that I posted is actually part of the Wiki Media Commons, which is a repository of freely-licensed media files that are available for use on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. I understand that promotional or advertising material is not appropriate for Wikipedia and I will make sure to be more careful in the future to ensure that my contributions comply with the appropriate guidelines. Thank you for your help in maintaining the integrity of Wikipedia as a neutral and reliable source of information.

Sincerely, Eihsok Eihsok (talk) 04:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising, as you did at Eyelash extensions. Please stop trying to promote that "Secret Lash Club". Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 05:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You uploaded those images yourself and claimed that they were your own work. Therefore, you clearly have a conflict of interest and absolutely should not be inserting that company into Wikipedia articles yourself. If you want the images to be used, you need to remove the watermarks and leave off any mention of "Secret Lash Club" (in the article's image description or on the image itself). Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 05:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for any misunderstanding. I did not intentionally upload any images or edit any Wikipedia articles with a conflict of interest. I have permission from the artist Ella Ramzi and the business that owns the photos, Secret Lash Club, to use and post the photos. I am neither of those people I am very familiar with the topic of Eyelash Extensions though.

The reference images that I am replacing clearly state another brand in the photo, showcasing who the image belongs to. If the reference images are allowed, I do not see why my images should not be classified as allowed as well.

As for the first image on the Eyelash Extension page, I agree that it may be showing Eyelash extensions in a negative light. If there are no objections, I would suggest replacing that image with one that portrays Eyelash extensions in a more positive manner. Eihsok (talk) 07:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could I receive and update on this? I have no clear conflict and it seems that you removed some of my other edits of well without mentioning the above could I get clarification on this? @Apparition11 Eihsok (talk) 08:02, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of whether you think you have a conflict of interest, your edits demonstrate a lack of WP:NPOV and appear focused on promoting a certain company. That's not allowed. DMacks (talk) 08:28, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want people to believe that you have no conflict of interest, then there is a simple way to do that: Stop adding the name of that company and images with their name watermarked on them to articles. More and better images would be greatly appreciated, but they must confirm to WP:IUP. I didn't remove any other of your edits. I only removed what included the spam or a copyright violation. In my last edit, I manually edited out your images and left your lead change. I only reverted your lead change earlier because it was sourced to the company's website. Any edits that do not contain obvious advertising, I am not endorsing or objecting to. I have no interest in eyelash extensions, I'm just trying to stop the article from looking like a company's billboard. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 13:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message and for bringing this to my attention. I understand your concerns about the inclusion of the name of the company and images with their name watermarked on them in the Wikipedia articles. I assure you that I have no conflict of interest and did not mean to add promotional or advertising material to the articles. I have long removed the name from the business from the images, yet you still removed them multiple times without providing a reason. I wonder if it would be better if I left no references at all. I understand that adding multiple links to a company website would be considered advertising, but citing a reference is not necessarily obvious advertising especially if its only once citation.

You seem to be stopping the page from being updated with current and important information, rather than stopping the article from looking like a company billboard. Eihsok (talk) 19:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have stopped the page from having WP:COPYVIOs and company name dropping added to it. You added copyright violations (images and text). You repeatedly try to name drop that company. I have not stopped any content from being updated using reliable sources (which Secret Lash Club is not one). If you have any desire to be unblocked, you may want to try examining your own behavior and stop casting asperations about me. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 19:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not accept responsibility for any copyright violations or company name dropping that may have been added to the page. It is not clear to me how you arrived at this conclusion or what specific material you are referring to. I have not intentionally included any such material and I do not appreciate being accused of doing so. I expect that you will provide evidence to support your allegations and that you will refrain from making unfounded accusations in the future.

Furthermore, it is not within your place to determine what constitutes a notable company, especially when it pertains to an industry that you claim to not care about. I am simply trying to provide quality information and I do not appreciate being blocked or restricted in any way. I expect that you will respect my right to contribute to the site and will refrain from imposing your own biases or personal opinions on the material that is included. Eihsok (talk) 19:49, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You made an edit to the article Range Rover Classic, with which you gave a very detailed edit summary, describing a number of very small changes which you made. However, in the same edit you also made a much bigger change, namely removing some references, but you didn't mention those in your edit summary. You may like to watch out to avoid similar mistakes in future.

In the same edit you replaced "moulded" with "molded", and in several places "aluminium" with "aluminum". Wikipedia does not give preference to any national variety of English over others. In some cases there is a good reason for using one national variety; for example in the article Winston Churchill it makes sense to use British English, while in the article San Fransisco it makes sense to use US English. However, when there is no such specific reason for preferring one version, it is not acceptable to change content of an article to comply with one's own preferences. In this case, where the article is on a British subject, imposing specifically American forms of words isn't a good idea. JBW (talk) 10:57, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for replacing "moulded" with "molded" and "aluminium" with "aluminum" in the article. I understand that Wikipedia does not give preference to any national variety of English over others, and that it is important to respect the conventions of the language used in the original article. I did not mean to impose my own preferences or to change the content of the article to comply with a specific national variety of English. I will make sure to be more careful in the future to respect the conventions of the language used in each article. Thank you for your help in maintaining the accuracy and integrity of Wikipedia. Eihsok (talk) 19:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am new to Wikipedia and am still learning how things work. It appears that user @Apparition11 may have asked their friends to report my account after I called out their apparent intentions in leaving a page the way it was. I apologize if my actions or words were inappropriate and I will strive to better understand and adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines in the future. I would like to appeal for a ban if one has been imposed. I also can't reply to any of the users that reported me. I find the system unfair I was just trying to provide the knowledge I have in a certain industry. Eihsok (talk) 19:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eihsok (talk) 19:30, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did not ask anybody for help. While I was asleep, you posted at ANI. This is what we call a WP:BOOMERANG. Other editors saw what you were doing, and this was the result. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 19:33, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is concerning that you appear to take pride in my block. Your quick reference to the relevant article suggests that this may be a common occurrence for you. It is unfortunate that Wikipedia often prevents new users from contributing and instead opts to ban them, rather than teaching and working with them. This behavior suggests an intention to control and steer the narrative, rather than fostering a collaborative and inclusive environment. I am also unable to reply to comments on the Talk pages, which further hinders my ability to engage with the community and share my perspectives. Eihsok (talk) 19:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm obviously wasting my time. I am going to take this page off my watchlist. You can continue to chastise me for all of the wrongs in the world, but I won't be reading it anymore. Have a nice day. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 19:55, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree you should move on. I didn't want to start anything with you but I will state my facts that you are clearly in the wrong here and using your 'friends' to push your narrative.

Proof: https://i.imgur.com/A2tXrTA.png https://i.imgur.com/HY3Hi7H.png Eihsok (talk) 20:11, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I am new to Wikipedia and am still learning how things work. It appears that user @Apparition11 may have asked their friends to report my account after I called out their apparent intentions in leaving a page the way it was. I apologize if my actions or words were inappropriate and I will strive to better understand and adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines in the future. I would like to appeal for a ban if one has been imposed. I also can't reply to any of the users that reported me. I find the system unfair I was just trying to provide the knowledge I have in a certain industry.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only, a second appeal is open below. One appeal at a time. -- ferret (talk) 21:01, 1 January 2023 (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.

Request for unblock:[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Dear Wikipedia community, I am writing to appeal my block and to request that it be lifted. I understand that I am blocked for Disruptive editing I can assure you that I will not engage in this behavior again and that I will make productive contributions to the site instead. I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience or disruption that I may have caused, and I hope that you will consider lifting my block. I am committed to following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and to contributing to the site in a positive and constructive manner.

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but your unblock request is too vague. You mention that you were blocked for disruptive edits, but did not specify why your edits were disruptive. Perhaps the biggest issue I see right now is your insistence that other people were wrong per this comment. It should be noted that you had reported Apparition11 to a public noticeboard, where any Wikipedia editor can see and leave their input on. Your later accusation that they recruited their friends to report you is an example of casting aspersions, which is not permitted.

For your unblock request to be accepted, you will need to properly explain why you were blocked. You will need to focus on your own actions, and not the actions of other people. Unblock requests that claim that others were wrong and you were right are generally declined. Currently, I do not see any indication that you are aware that your edits were problematic and that you were blocked for that reason. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 21:21, 1 January 2023 (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.

Request for unblock:[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Dear Wikipedia Members, I am writing to request an unblock. I understand that my recent edits were deemed disruptive, and I take full responsibility for my actions. I did not realize at the time that my edits were causing problems, and I apologize for any disruption that I caused. Upon reflection, I realize that my edits did not adhere to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Disruptive editing was not followed in my edits. I understand now that it is important to follow these policies and guidelines in order to maintain the quality and integrity of the encyclopedia. I have learned from this experience, and I am committed to improving my editing skills and making more constructive contributions to Wikipedia in the future. To that end, I am willing to do the following: • Review and familiarize myself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, particularly those related to [policy or guideline that you violated] • Seek guidance from more experienced editors or participate in Wikipedia's mentorship programs to improve my understanding of how to edit effectively and constructively • Engage in good faith discussions with other editors and seek consensus when making changes to articles • Avoid making disruptive edits or engaging in behavior that may violate Wikipedia's policies and guidelines I also understand that casting aspersions on other editors is not permitted, and I apologize for any accusations or insinuations that I made. I will make sure to focus on my own behavior and avoid making such comments in the future. I understand that my actions have consequences, and I am willing to accept any terms or conditions that may be imposed on me as a result of this unblock request. I hope that you will consider granting my unblock request and give me the opportunity to demonstrate my commitment to following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines going forward. Sincerely, Eihsok

Decline reason:

"particularly those related to [policy or guideline that you violated]" I'm offended at the lack of effort you are demonstrating. Yamla (talk) 21:55, 1 January 2023 (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.

Unblock Request:[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Dear Wikipedia Members, I am writing to request an unblock. I sincerely apologize for my recent disruptive edits and for any problems that I caused. In hindsight, I realize that my actions did not adhere to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and I understand the importance of following these guidelines in order to maintain the quality and integrity of the encyclopedia. I take full responsibility for my mistakes, and I am committed to learning from this experience and improving my editing skills. I promise to be more mindful of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines going forward, and to make only constructive contributions to the site. To that end, I am willing to do the following: • Review and familiarize myself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, particularly those related to Disruptive Behavior & User Interactions. • Seek guidance from more experienced editors or participate in Wikipedia's mentorship programs to improve my understanding of how to edit effectively and constructively • Engage in good faith discussions with other editors and seek consensus when making changes to articles • Avoid making disruptive edits or engaging in behavior that may violate Wikipedia's policies and guidelines I also understand that casting aspersions on other editors is not permitted, and I apologize for any accusations or insinuations that I made. I will make sure to focus on my own behavior and avoid making such comments in the future. I understand that my actions have consequences, and I am willing to accept any terms or conditions that may be imposed on me because of this unblock request. I hope that you will consider granting my unblock request and give me the opportunity to demonstrate my commitment to following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines going forward. Sincerely, Eihsok

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. — Voice of Clam (talk) 08:23, 6 April 2023 (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.

You are not permitted to modify (or remove) declined unblock requests for your currently active block. Do not do so again. --Yamla (talk) 22:33, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I will make sure not to modify or remove any declined unblock requests for my currently active block in the future. Eihsok (talk) 08:11, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please clarify the following point. You have posted photographs to Wikimedia Commons which you said were sourced from a particular web site, and that those photographs were your own work. You also said that you had permission from the owners of that web site to post those photographs. Clearly, therefore, you have a close relationship with the business which owns the website. What exactly is the nature of your relationship to that business? JBW (talk) 23:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the misunderstanding. I made a mistake when uploading the images to Wikimedia Commons. I have since received further verification from the Discord group on what I am allowed to post. The images were meant to be used on behalf of the business, who gave me permission to use their photos in order to demonstrate my knowledge of the industry. I know the business as an industry leader and have spoken to the owner at a Chamber of Commerce meeting. I generally meet many business leaders in the Beauty industry through Chamber of Commerce & events alike. Thank you for understanding. Eihsok (talk) 23:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My current inclination is to decline your unblock request, because I see no indication that you are not likely to continue to edit for promotion, as you have done in the past. However, rather than declining your request now, I am willing to give you an opportunity to state what kind of editing you expect to do in the future, if unblocked. Before you do so, I suggest that you read the guideline on conflict of interest, if you haven't already done so. JBW (talk) 11:30, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]