You may request a change of name and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions other than 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:
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.
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.
I wasn't aware that you weren't allowed to have a username reflecting our company name, apologies! Please also let us know how we're violating guidelines since we are updating our page to reflect correct data as previous page was showing outdated and incorrect info Hi Cullen328, I'm very new to Wikipedia and this is my first time editing the page on behalf of our company. I don't believe our page is showing too much promotion or advertising since the data added reflects our company data and info. I can remove examples of lists (the nonprofits we work with, companies we work with, etc. if that helps reduce the 'spamming effect', however, that was not the goal of the info and apologies if that was what it came across as. Please advise how I can resolve this to remove the block so I can continue to fix and adjust the page to Wikipedia standards.
Decline reason:
Your choice of new username seems to be acceptable. Note that it is not "your Wikipedia page" but a Wikipedia article about your company. You have no special rights to it as the representative of the company, and it will not necessarily say what the company wants it to say. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wants to say about itself, only in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. That does not include press releases, staff interviews, announcements of routine business transactions, or other primary sources. Please review conflict of interest and paid editing. You won't be unblocked to, in the short term at least, edit about your company. If that is your only goal here, this is the end of the road for your Wikipedia career. If you want to be an individual, general contributor and edit about topics completely unrelated to your conflict of interest, please tell what those might be. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 00:40, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Wikipedia does not accept articles about companies just because they exist. Companies must pass the notability criteria to be considered worthy of inclusion. To be considered notable, a company must have already received significant coverage from multiple reliable, third-party sources. Wikipedia has no interest in what a company's representatives wish to say about it. --Drm310🍁 (talk) 20:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Hello, please let me know how I can resolve this as this was my first time editing our Wikipedia page to reflect correct data (as the previous was incorrect, or outdated). I apologize for the oversight as this was not intentional. I can adjust to remove any pieces that violate terms, and can continue to cite reliable sources per your linked note about notability. What are your suggestions to correct this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loveyourmelon (talk • contribs)
