Managing a conflict of interest edit

  Hello, Eyesofagony. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Scardust, 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:

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.

Your edit summaries describing communicating with the band members and their "approval" indicates a misunderstanding about how Wikipedia articles should be sourced. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 05:56, 30 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I only made those comments because I saw a volatile history with the article. I don't know anyone involved before my contributions.
I did source things correctly; I did my research independently I only confirmed with the band members to make sure it's true Should have left those comments out. I am not editing for advertising purposes, I was just unhappy with the previous state of the article. Please do not accuse me of being paid or working for them. I did this altruistically, by my own provocation.
I understand your concern with my editing comments. But nevertheless, I have no connection to the artist themselves. I felt the previous article was all over the place and only wanted to clean it up. I basically asked the band members if the information I wanted to add is accurate, based on the sources I used, and they confirmed it is all good. If that's not allowed, I won't do it in the future. Thank you for telling me. Eyesofagony (talk) 06:13, 30 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
The warning templates are perhaps somewhat overbroad in that they need to cover everything from serious paid editing problems all the way down to cases where the conflict of interest is, as in this case, pretty minimal or nonexistent. Now that you've made your situation clear, we can put this particular issue aside. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 06:41, 30 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. Regarding the picture that was removed, I was given full access by the copyright owner of the image to use on the Wikipedia page, which is acceptable by Wikipedia copyright standards, if I understand correctly.
What's the process for having this uploaded? I was told I had seven days to prove my eligibility to use it, but it was just removed now. Noa seems to have stopped replying to my emails, so I don't think i'll be about to get her to email an address given her for authenticity. Would a screenshot or a forward of the email suffice?
Alternatively, there is a picture on the Hebrew page that is significantly better than the present one, but it does not seem to be in the commons Is there a way to access this for the english page? Not that the lineup in this photo is outdated, which is why I liked the one I used. Eyesofagony (talk) 06:50, 30 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hmmmm. I have to note that I had this reaction to your request. Good luck. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 15:58, 30 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Okay thank you. Eyesofagony (talk) 16:43, 30 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Talk page etiquette edit

Please read this section of WP:TALK. What you did in these two edits is considered very rude. Please dont do anything of the sort again. Thanks. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 13:06, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

What's rude? Eyesofagony (talk) 13:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
It appears that I answered your question, by adding to my post above, just before you asked it. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 13:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

deleting it? Eyesofagony (talk) 13:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Blocked as a sockpuppet edit

 
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Jizzygizzyfoshizzyyy per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jizzygizzyfoshizzyyy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
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 ~~~~}}.  -- RoySmith (talk) 22:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)Reply