User talk:Reddunefilms

July 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Battle of Long Tan do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. However, I noticed that your username (Reddunefilms) may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because This account was used for promoting Red Dune Films on Battle of Long Tan.. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account to use for editing. Thank you. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:53, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, you cannot be serious? Who is putting up spam links? All I did was put up links to official documents and materials which I have uncovered and sourced as part of my research into this event and the making of the Long Tan documentary? So, once again a contributor has wasted their valuable time contributing to this site simply for someone else to come along and undo their contribution. Not a single person has made any money out of the research I have done or the documentary I made and partly financed. I have spent more than $200k of my own personal savings and I've not earned a cent or been reimbursed for anything I've outlaid to bring this story into the public domain and to bring together as much research as I can for public benefit. I have a day job as a GM Marketing and if it wasn't for my time, money and marketing and publicity efforts over the past 6 years hardly anyone would know of this story or be interested in visiting this page. Also, why after 6 years of contributing to this page is my user name suddenly a "violation" of Wikipedia policy? No wonder this site is going downhill with over zealous 'community' police. So, if I change my username to my own name Martin Walsh that means I can contribute and put up links to official documents relating to this event without any problems? I've been trying to contribute objectively to this page since 2005 and almost every time some ridiculous and over zealous person changes material, or complains about this or that, particularly people who have never done any research or contributed anything to uncovering or telling the history behind this event. The reason I haven't bothered contributing to this page for so long is exactly what has happened here which simply adds nothing or even protects anything related to this event or Wikipedia. All you do is piss well meaning people off and continue to demonstrate how frustrating and maybe pointless Wikipedia really is becoming. You should read this article on ZDNet just yesterday, it speak volumes: "Wikipedia losing contributors: Fatal flaw, the community editors?" http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/wikipedia-losing-contributors-fatal-flaw-the-community-editors/54144?tag=search-results-rivers;item18

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

See report here - FlightTime (open channel) 14:54, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Incidents noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive user making edits to Wikipedia entry. — Newslinger talk 15:08, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, 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 a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In that reason, 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.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block. To do so, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason for thinking that the block was an error, and publish the page. Bbb23 (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

why have I been blocked from Wikipedia? Nobody is paying me to make entries onto Wikipedia, I am one of the producers of the movie. You state I have been advertising or promoting. User Truth6557 has been disruptively editing the Wikipedia entry for our movie Danger Close: The Battle of Long Tan. He added himself as a Producer when he is not a Producer or entitled to a credit as one. As such I corrected the Wikipedia page to include the correct information. How is that advertising or promoting? User Truth6557 has then removed my name - Martin Walsh - three times as the lead producer and now it is still edited out of the page. Here's our distributor listing - https://www.transmissionfilms.com.au/films/danger-close-the-battle-of-long-tan and IMDB - https://imdb.com/name/nm1814822 I reported this disruptive behaviour to Wikipedia and the next thing I know I am blocked? How is it advertising if I am simply correcting information on a Wikipedia entry about my own movie when someone else is deliberately putting false information on the entry and removing my name all together. He is doing it to be disruptive. He is trying to trade of our film by making false claims he is a Producer. If you are saying I am not allowed to provide correct information to our movie listing then what is the point of Wikipedia if it allows false information to be published? If this is a rule then I am sorry, I don't understand how that is considered advertising or promotion. I was genuinely simply correcting wrong information as I am the primary source of credits and other factual information about our film - cast, crew, producers, budget etc. I won't do it again but how do I deal with someone putting false information on the page?

Decline reason:

Beyond the username issue, there's also personal attacks and WP:OUTING. And there's a heavy dose of linking to your own website. Regarding your question, WP:COI describes the best practices for editors with a conflict of interest. Huon (talk) 22:01, 17 August 2019 (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.

Are you not paid as producer? 331dot (talk) 15:53, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For 15 years I have been telling the story of the Battle of Long Tan whilst holding down a paid full-time job and using my own money to fund the documentary, the film and publicity for the Long Tan Vietnam Veterans. I have never been paid for either my documentary or this movie and in fact have spent over $700k of my own money - all savings and loans. We had to reinvest all our intended producer fees into the film so for the past three years after giving up my job I have not been paid. I have just gone to another section of Wikipedia and for the first time I see that there is a policy that a username must be representative of a person. I am sorry I genuinely had no idea and will not use this user name again. In fact I haven't even been on Wikipedia for many years. However, nobody has addressed the reason I made a contribution to the page or my report of disruptive entries to the page. For reporting the disruptive behaviour I've been blocked but the disruptive edit hasn't been removed and my name - the lead producer is missing off the entry. Are you saying I now need to create a new account so I can edit the page to undo the disruptive edits so my own name as the lead producer in the entry for my own movie is added back? reddunefilms (talk) 01:59, 18 August 2019 (GMT+10)

You will need to propose a new username as instructed in the block notice that you want to use; if you do so, I or another renamer can perform the rename. 331dot (talk) 16:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: This is a hard block, and the user needs to do more than propose a new username. They must detail what other areas of the encyclopedia they will edit in ("If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock."). Based on their response and their history, I think it unlikely they will be able to satisfy that prong of their request to be unblocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:50, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that; I was simply addressing their username comments. 331dot (talk) 16:56, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a new account to continue editing is not a good idea, see Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Evasion and enforcement and Wikipedia:Sock puppetry - FlightTime (open channel) 16:23, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note the personal attack ("mental issues") in Special:Diff/911239816. — Newslinger talk 16:49, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why everyone is so hostile when I have simply tried to make good faith corrections to information? OK, I get the block. But just so I understand this, the person who is disruptively editing the Wikipedia entry removing my details as lead producer and adding himself, is doing so to associate himself with the same entry in which he claims to have an interest, but his account is not blocked and the false entries he's made have not been reversed? Based on the explanations above about myself and I will always obey the umpires ruling, User Truth6557 is 'advertising' and 'promoting' and he's making entries about himself - irrespective of whether he is a producer. But he has not been blocked or the false editing reversed? The person who has been making the changes is also making changes to our IMDB entries and sending defamatory, abusive and threatening emails - hence my legitimate comment about the person having mental issues - no normal person does what he is doing. Anyway, as I said I accept your issue and piolicy around my username (which was never about promoting me or reddunefilms). I was genuinely trying to contribute to Wikipedia on the Battle of Long Tan entry all those years ago and haven't been on since. All I ask is you please be consistent and block user Truth6557 or at least block him from editing and removing legitimate information on the page for our movie. Thanks for your time and sorry if I'm not using Wikipedia correctly. Regards, Martin

This is a complete waste of time. Despite warnings, the user continues to make personal attacks and smear the other user. I have revoked Talk page access.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:51, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you now wish to be unblocked, you won't be able to post here because your talk page access has been revoked. There are other avenues to request an unblock if you wish... see Help:I have been blocked#Additional information. You can request an unblock through the IRC channel, or by using the Unblock Ticket Request System. --Geniac (talk) 15:32, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]