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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hi, I would like to request my account to be unblocked and the opportunity to rework on my wikipedia page. In order to create this page, I have followed the model from a few other colleagues in academia that are also on Wikipedia, such as Dietram Scheufele ( /info/en/?search=Dietram_Scheufele), Mimi Sheller ( /info/en/?search=Mimi_Sheller) and Gerard Goggin ( /info/en/?search=Gerard_Goggin). There are many others, but these are just a few examples of pages that are also biographical and reporting on an academic person. I do not understand why the page I created was tagged as advertising if the other ones are not. if it is just a matter of asking someone else to write the page, I'm happy to do it. Otherwise, I would appreciate a more detailed explanation of what information needs to be added or or considered "advertisement". Thank you and I hope to hear back from an admin soon! Adriana

Decline reason:

The others you mention do not, as far as I can tell, seem to have created and constantly recreated their own pages; that is in fact something we strongly discourage. — Daniel Case ( talk) 06:36, 13 September 2022 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Daniel: I understand about not creating my own page. But I didn't constantly recreate. I tried to do it last year, but was told the page should have included citations and supporting sources. So I recreated it this year to match the wikipedia model, adding sources and supporting material. I won't submit the page again, but I do not think i should be blocked from the site for trying to fix an error based on the feedback I got. I genuinely thought it would be ok to create that page as long as it followed the model of other similar pages. Thanks for considering it.

Decline reason:

Duplicate request. 331dot ( talk) 13:11, 14 September 2022 (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.

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

please read WP:REFB for help with formatting sources correctly

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Adriana de Souza e Silva and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Adriana de Souza e Silva, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{ Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong ( talk) 21:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, Asouzaesilva! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong ( talk) 21:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Adriana de Souza e Silva and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Adriana de Souza e Silva, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{ Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic ( talk) 21:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, Asouzaesilva! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic ( talk) 21:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions; however, it appears you may have written a Wikipedia article, or a draft for a Wikipedia article, about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Thank you. Theroadislong ( talk) 21:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC) reply

The page Draft:Adriana de Souza e Silva has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from http://souzaesilva.com/about/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review — Diannaa ( talk) 12:38, 20 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Adriana de Souza e Silva and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 ( talk) 23:55, 11 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Asouzaesilva. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{ request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. S0091 ( talk) 23:56, 11 September 2022 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Draft:Adriana de Souza e Silva, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
• It appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.souzaesilva.com/. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
  If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. S0091 ( talk) 23:59, 11 September 2022 (UTC) reply

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising. S0091 ( talk) 00:00, 12 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm not using wikipedia for promotion or advertising. I have several colleagues in academia (e.g., Dietram Scheufele, Mimi Sheller) who have wikipedia pages that follow a very similar format -- in fact, I followed those models to create this page. What else could I do to make this page available at Wikipedia? Thank you for your help. Asouzaesilva ( talk) 00:16, 12 September 2022 (UTC) reply

I was actually referring to my other draft page: /info/en/?search=Draft:Adriana_de_Souza_e_Silva Asouzaesilva ( talk) 00:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

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 ~~~~}}.

– Athaenara ✉ 02:15, 12 September 2022 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I understand about not creating my own page. But I didn't constantly recreate. I tried to do it last year, but was told the page should have included citations and supporting sources. So I recreated it this year to match the wikipedia model, adding sources and supporting material. I won't submit the page again, but I do not think i should be blocked from the site for trying to fix an error based on the feedback I got. I genuinely thought it would be ok to create that page as long as it followed the model of other similar pages. Thanks for considering it. Asouzaesilva ( talk) 13:53, 13 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Decline reason:

I'm closing this request as stale for the most part- I think it would help immensely if you could describe an edit you would make to an existing article. 331dot ( talk) 14:36, 15 October 2022 (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.

If you aren't going to edit about yourself, what will you edit about? Please see other stuff exists as to why it's not always a good idea to use other articles as a model- in short, it could be that the other articles you used are also problematic. If you want to use other articles as a model, use those classified as good articles. 331dot ( talk) 08:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Some times i just do minor edits in other wikipedia pages for accuracy and content, and would like to have that right back. I have never done anything else inappropriate in wikipedia, so I believe i should be able to edit other pages too. Also, would it be possible to have my draft page back as a draft? I won't publish it, but just would like to copy the content for myself. I put a lot of work on that page, and just would like to have it for my records. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asouzaesilva ( talk • contribs)

Not every statement needs to be an unblock request- additional comment should be standard, unformatted comments like this. The draft can be emailed to you; the main problem was that it was almost exclusively sourced to your own work and read like a resume or CV; any article about you should summarize what independent reliable sources choose on their own to say about you. Athaenara are you okay with an unblock if this user agrees to not edit about themselves? 331dot ( talk) 13:10, 14 September 2022 (UTC) reply

@ 331dot: Usually in these situations I say OK fine, whatever you decide, but this is an exception. This user has made precisely one edit that wasn't self-promotional (changed the word "book" to "textbook"), regardless of lofty claims to the contrary. And no, Wikipedia is not just a free editing service to be exploited at will. – Athaenara ✉ 15:08, 14 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Further: I've expressed my view, and will not give anybody a hard time if they hold different views and/or decide to unblock this user. – Athaenara ✉ 00:11, 15 September 2022 (UTC) reply

• I must confess that after all these years I am still baffled by people who think putting up a page about themselves is a legitimate use of this encyclopedia. It's not, and they should know that. – Athaenara ✉ 14:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC) reply

@ Athaenara: Thanks for your answer; I kinda had that thought in the back of my mind. Asouzaesilva, you mentioned that you "do minor edits", but this account only shows a single edit. Have you made edits with another account, or while logged out? 331dot ( talk) 15:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC) reply

@Athanaera and @331dot: I don't really remember how many edits i did in the past. It might have been just this one recently. But I do engage with Wikipedia since its inception in the early 2000s. I teach higher ed classes on Wikipedia, about its history, and how it contributes to knowledge creation via user generated content. I would very much like to start contributing to it on a more regular basis, this is why i'm so disappointed for being blocked on my first attempt. I just read the Wikipedia article about creating autobiographies where it says it is strongly discouraged. I do agree with the premises and won't recreate the page. However, i don't think this should be reason to permanently ban me from editing anything else or attempting to create any other page. Thank you. Asouzaesilva ( talk) 17:19, 14 September 2022 (UTC) reply