User talk:HeatherPopeTurner

December 2016

Hello, I'm J. M.. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. —J. M. (talk) 01:15, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also see the conflict of interest guideline; if you are affiliated with Today's Military, you shouldn't even be adding links to it at all. Graham87 02:34, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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 why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:18, 7 December 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

We understand the reasoning for the block.

Decline reason:

Great. Please explain why your edits were inappropriate and describe in general terms, how your future edits will be different. That way, we'll be able to judge whether it's safe to unblock you. Yamla (talk) 18:28, 20 December 2016 (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.

Who, exactly, is "we"?

In addition to answering that, you should also read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks before writing your unblock request. It is clear that you didn't do that. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:52, 20 December 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

As an employee of the Department of Defense, I now understand the conflict of interest that put my edits into question. I wished to provide an educational resource by providing links on military careers to the website, Today's Military: http://todaysmilitary.com/. The site provides valuable information on the career requirements and other processes necessary for someone to join the military. HeatherPopeTurner (talk) 15:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm afraid that that is regarded as spamming. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not social media, and it isn't a collection of links. It also isn't a career bureau. Peridon (talk) 22:02, 21 December 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

Thank you for providing this rationale. I will no longer modify pages in such a way, and I am now familiar with Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy after reading the page thoroughly. 170.200.86.2 (talk) 15:08, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Given that you are not allowed to do what you said you wanted to do, what now do you want to write about?--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 16:33, 3 January 2017 (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 accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

I simply wish to have my account unblocked for any future edits that I could make. I understand what I am not allowed to post due to the conflict of interest guidelines, and I will make no such further changes. HeatherPopeTurner (talk) 14:38, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

As you have agreed not to make any edits on subjects with which you have a conflict of interest, I have unblocked your account. Welcome back. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:05, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]