User talk:DavidPMaynard

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

May 2025

[edit]
Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because it has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Also, your username gives the impression that the account represents a business, organisation, group, website, or role, which is against the username policy.

If you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization, you may request unblock and a username change. In your reasons, you must follow all these steps:

  1. Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement; and
  2. 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; and
  3. Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked; and
  4. Provide a new username.

To do this, insert 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.

Please note that the new username you choose cannot already be taken and in use by another account. You can search to see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns that no global account with that username exists, that means it is still available.

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|reason=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. Bbb23 (talk) 15:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tell me what & where I have been advertising or promoting please. David Maynard Photography (talk) 16:50, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23: I don't think this block is warranted. David is a photographer we recruited through WikiPortraits to help contribute quality photos of people and bands. Their photo additions are solid, including adding photos to articles that don't have any. The primary issue, I think, is the username, and I think the first step there could've been a simple request for a rename instead of the hammer. I know our everlasting challenge of keeping promotional users at bay, but this is an opportunity to encourage a contributing photographer. I talked to David and they'll be requesting a rename shortly. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:01, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb23 I would tend to agree with SuperHamster, I'm not really seeing what they were promoting. 331dot (talk) 18:39, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: He is promoting himself and his company. As for being "recruited", there is no way for me to have known that. Nonetheless, if you think he should be unblocked and the new username he's requested with just his name is acceptable, go ahead.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Other than the username, where has his company been promoted? His images don't have watermarks, and he hasn't made any text edits. I'm happy to agree with you if I've missed something. 331dot (talk) 18:50, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The last edit he made before I blocked him was to Dice (Australian band). He added 3 images that he took and uploaded. If you click, for example, on the image in the infobox, it shows that it is his work and that he is the copyright holder (I'm assuming the licensing is okay - I'm not an expert on that). That is what promotes his company.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:57, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Editors are allowed to add their own photos to articles, and they can choose how they wish to be attributed on Commons. I think it's one thing if an editor is going through articles and replacing others' good photos with the intention of trying to promote their own work above others, but I think it's a stretch to say that an editor adding quality photos to an article that has no photos is promotional just because of their desired attribution. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 19:06, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

requesting rename to comply with username rules so I can continue to contribute photos of bands & people to articles that need them.

Accept reason:

I'm going to respectfully differ from Bbb23 on this and unblock per their acquiescence to me doing so above. We all are allowed to contribute our own photos(I've done a couple myself) and in fact it's usually easier to do so than using a photo someone else took. I don't think that the fact they are a professional photographer is particularly relevant; if they hadn't chosen their business name as their username I don't think this would have been noticed at all. The images do not have watermarks, the user hasn't edited about their business, and they aren't trying to exclusively supplant other images with theirs as far as I can tell. How they wish to be attributed is up to them and policy. Being a professional photographer in and of itself shouldn't be a barrier to freely contributing images they wish to contribute. A little expertise/skill might result in better images, which is what we all want. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

June 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Referentis. Thank you for your recent contributions to Tom Ravenscroft. I noticed that you added an image to the article's infobox as a thumbnail. In future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox, as this is against the Manual of Style. When adding an image, supply only the filename to the |image= parameter and the caption to the |caption= parameter instead. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using; please consult the Template page for the infobox being used on that page for proper instructions and documentation. Thanks! Referentis (talk) 16:25, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm a bit of a novice at editing & didn't realise that. Thanks for letting me know.
D. DavidPMaynard (talk) 17:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]