User talk:DocuWerx

Welcome!

Hi DocuWerx! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Innisfree987 (talk) 04:54, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

Hello, I'm Spencer. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to LexisNexis Risk Solutions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Spencer^T•C 06:48, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Vector Security, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Spencer^T•C 06:48, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at High-heeled shoe, you may be blocked from editing. Spencer^T•C 06:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism.

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 ~~~~}}. Spencer^T•C 06:50, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spencer and the community, I am not vandalizing the accounts it was an honest mistake my auto correct must of editted them out I did not perform this on purpose, I am trying to establish a Wikipedia Company profile. I will do 20 edits to make up for my unmanned errors. Please forgive me. I did not mean any malice. what can I do to reverse my error? DocuWerx (talk) 06:53, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spencer and the community, I am not vandalizing the accounts it was an honest mistake my auto correct must of edited them out I did not perform this on purpose, I am trying to establish a Wikipedia Company profile. I will do 20 edits to make up for my unmanned errors. Please forgive me. I did not mean any malice. what can I do to reverse my error? DocuWerx (talk) 06:53, 18 September 2022 DocuWerx (talk) 06:54, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spencer and the community, this is a rookies mistake, I did not purposely create this account to vandalize any page, I created the account as a co-founder of our legal tech start up our proof of trust is our startup's landing page, social media accounts all by the same name of DocuWerx, additionally you can verify that our company is legitimate and fomalized through the state of texas where you will find a certificate of good standing. we are not a gaming system nor a robot. DocuWerx (talk) 07:18, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No one doubts the legitimacy of your company. Here on Wikipedia, accounts are for individuals, not groups or businesses, and are strictly single person use only. You must tell us a new, individualistic username that you want this account renamed to. A name such as "JohnPublic of DocuWerx" would be acceptable. You will need to make a new unblock request, but if you are not prepared to do as I've described below, this is the end of the road. 331dot (talk) 08:02, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please change account name to Alex Avalos DocuWerx (talk) 08:36, 18 September 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

Since the incident I have read the instructions on how to properly contribute with the community at large, I see why the current systems are in place, and how and why individuals like myself are blocked. I would like to request for a consideration to remove the block, and restore the initial permissions, going forward I will be extremely mindful and even more so careful on how I edit the information, specifically removing the auto spell correct function I look forward to a positive response, as I am remorseful and disturbed of this issue still on going thank you. DocuWerx (talk) 18:01, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Inadequate response to WP:PAID concerns. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:29, 29 December 2022 (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.

DocuWerx (talk) 18:01, 21 December 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

Spencer and the community, I am not vandalizing the accounts it was an unmanned mistake as the auto correct must of edited them out during my performance of the edits, I am trying to establish a Wikipedia Company Article. My core competency is building synergy between wikipedia readers and the articles. Please allow to perform 20 edits to make up for my unmanned errors and I allow me to create article. Please forgive me. I did not mean any malice. what can I do to reverse my error? DocuWerx (talk) 07:00, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I don't think it was a mistake at all, you were gaming the system to get autoconfirmed so you can directly create articles. The system exists for a reason. Wikipedia does not have "company profiles", not a single one. Wikipedia has articles about companies, typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the topic. Clearly you are a paid editor, which the Terms of Use require to be disclosed, and you have a conflict of interest about what I assume is the company your username represents. In any event, you will need to tell us a new username that this account can be renamed to that is more individualistic, and tell what edits you will make if unblocked as you won't be unblocked to, in the short term, edit about your company. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 07:09, 18 September 2022 (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.

331dot Note as well that these "gaming" edits were clear vandalism/disruptive editing, and the user was blocked for such, such as removing refs from articles with the edit summary "Minor grammatical errors" or introducing grammatical errors instead of fixing them (maybe that is what was intended by the summary "Minor grammatical errors"?). Spencer^T•C 01:36, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #63221

is open. Please, do tell us about "this" happening on three accounts. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:10, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These are the accounts I corrected by using spellcheck built into the chrome browser that I am using, I did not notice it until I received the notifications and by then it was too late to fix, if I am allowed to fix them it would show my integrity to own up to errors and the remorse is again the proof of trust that I did not purposely vandalize the accounts, additionally there are other reviews the we submitted with out any errors.

We were acting in good cause and the administrator has over reach of power and influence, this is an indicator of probably cause to investigate my assumption that I am not the only user he has harassed into an indefinite block off the platform.

I am almost confident of the following assumption and I request for an internal or independent investigation of this blocked user accounts historical data and if that volume and allow the data to confirm or deny my assumption, this review and investigation should include a thorough audit of all of his data, archived, deleted and metadata

this is the hyperlink to the administrator account User:Spencer - Wikipedia

these are the affected reviews: National Hispanic Caucus of State Legislators ; 2017 Los Angeles Measure S - Wikipedia; LexisNexis Risk Solutions - Wikipedia; Vector Security - Wikipedia; High-heeled shoe - Wikipedia; Consumers Credit Union - Wikipedia DocuWerx (talk) 16:54, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how links are done. In any event, you are free to make a new unblock request. 331dot (talk) 04:57, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]