User talk:Euryalus
(Redirected from User talk:Euryalus2)
 | Euryalus is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon. |
|
|
FYI
[edit]Similar discussion, new venue: Wikipedia:Blocking policy/RFC on promotional activity. El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 20:54, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Beeblebrox: thanks for posting this. Will be good to get this settled. Wouldn't apply to either of the recent examples we were discussing, as both were making promotional edits in article space. But worth establishing consensus on the overall principle. -- Euryalus (talk) 22:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- The Rock line guy's edits, while clearly in an area where their username implies a COI, did not seem particularly promotional in nature to me, which is why I went for discussion. El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 22:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well YMMV (never actually seen the source ad for this but apparently its a saying?). You warned them after their first edit, which was to a film produced by their company but was not otherwise objectionable. However several hours after your warning they made a series of further mainspace edits to remove criticism of the film. These edits were more clearly promotional than their first innocuous change for which the warning was given. I can't guarantee they saw your warning, so maybe they still believed there was no problem with promotional edits. Either way a block seemed necessary to prevent continued promotional changes and to force their attention to the talkpage request that they change their name. Hence the block. As with the Kepri Estates guy, a name change and some indication that they understand wp:COI and possibly wp:paid would be enough to secure an unblock.
- The Rock line guy's edits, while clearly in an area where their username implies a COI, did not seem particularly promotional in nature to me, which is why I went for discussion. El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 22:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- And again, thanks again for reposting the RfC, and hopefully it ends up with a clear consensus on any changes to UAA policy. I've supported the idea of advice to admins not to reflexively impose no-warning blocks on accounts whose only edits are to draft or userspace (option 1), but ofc that's not where this or the Kepri Estates guy's editing occurred. -- Euryalus (talk) 06:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- As a mild addendum, I agree with your RfC comment that
If they ignore the concern and keep editing, especially if they add more promotional content, the discussion attempt has failed and a block is justified and uncontroversial.
This succinctly describes the Rockline Entertainment scenario. -- Euryalus (talk) 20:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- As a mild addendum, I agree with your RfC comment that
- And again, thanks again for reposting the RfC, and hopefully it ends up with a clear consensus on any changes to UAA policy. I've supported the idea of advice to admins not to reflexively impose no-warning blocks on accounts whose only edits are to draft or userspace (option 1), but ofc that's not where this or the Kepri Estates guy's editing occurred. -- Euryalus (talk) 06:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)