ShellyOberon

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

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 ~~~~}}.  --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 05:32, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Unblock request

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I Agree It's Wrong To Promote Something & I Hope Not To Repeat That In Future

Decline reason:

Given that all your edits so far consisted of blatantly spamming links to that website, I find it difficult to imagine what else you would do. You'll need to be more specific than "sharing knowledge". Please review WP:Identifying reliable sources and explain what sources you'd use in the future. Huon (talk) 02:36, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

---

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.

I agree it was wrong of me to promote the same website again and again but the knowledge was worthy and prominent. Having said that, I didn't know (read) the norms of Wikipedia and as now I do, I can promise not to mention the same website again and again. I am sorry and guilty for my deed. If you can give me a second chance to share knowledge and not just publicity then, it would be a great reward. Thanks.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Request reason:

I Agree It's Wrong To Promote Something & I Hope Not To Repeat That In Future

Accept reason:

I've taken your promises at face value. Please be sure to edit constructively in order to avoid being blocked again. Welcome back to Wikipedia! kingboyk (talk) 22:09, 24 July 2019 (UTC) [Note: Blocking admin had no objections].

'Sharing Knowledge'- I meant writing content and not referring to any website (I may refer to various websites *valid). I apologize once again for my mistake and ask for a second chance.

Note to reviewing admin: this user is the owner of the site being promoted in their edits. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 04:54, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Do you undertake to not post links to your website(s)? What articles do you plan to edit, and what (in brief) do you plan to add or alter? What sources will you be using? --kingboyk (talk) 05:25, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

I Agree It's Wrong To Promote Something & I Hope Not To Repeat That In Future

Yes, I am the owner of the website and I didn't read the policy before editing Wikipedia. However, whatever content I have published so far is really acknowledgeable - if you see the facts. I promise not to link my own website links on Wikipedia but I may refer (not always) another relevant website's links if needed. I can't tell which website links I will refer but you can always check that there is no connection of my domain. If you found anything irrelevant next time, you can block me right away and I won't ask for the apology next time. But I do owe a chance because I didn't know the policy of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShellyOberon (talk • contribs) 17:50, 22 July 2019 (UTC)