SIGEPJEDI

Paid Contribution Disclosure: I am employed by RUDIS and edit Wikipedia articles related to this organization and its affiliated athletes or products. As required by Wikipedia's policy on paid editing (WP:PAID), I will always disclose my employer when making relevant edits and adhere strictly to Wikipedia’s content guidelines, including neutrality and verifiability. My goal is to contribute constructively and transparently.

Unblock request

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

127.0.0.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

---

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "SIGEPJEDI". The reason given for SIGEPJEDI's block is: "spammer (also sock of JOSH CARRICO ".

• Blocking administrator: AlisonW (talk • blocks)

---

Decline reason: Autoblock seems to be working as intended. Huon (talk) 21:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

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

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

---

Request reason:

I acknowledge that my account was blocked in 2015 and apologize for any policy violations at that time. Since then, I have familiarized myself with Wikipedia’s guidelines and am committed to making constructive, well‑sourced, contributions. I have not engaged in any spamming, and my recent edits attempts (e.g. /wiki/Marcus_Blaze) demonstrate my dedication to improving content. I respectfully request that my editing privileges be restored so I can continue supporting the encyclopedia.

Accept reason:

Unblocking for another chance at this, with the understanding that adding more promo and failing to adhere to WP:PAID will result in a reblock. -- asilvering (talk) 19:05, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

I have moved your unblock request to the bottom of the page. Please place new talk page postings at the bottom, so that discussions appear in the correct chronological order. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:33, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

So which edits in the Marcus Blaze edit history were made by you? This means you either edited as an anonymous user, or you have another account. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:38, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I added the addition of the 2025 section in the career portion. This was performed when I had thought I was logged in, but after creating and submitted I noticed it said I was anonymous and then I logged in to my account. I do not have another account. SIGEPJEDI (talk) 18:44, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I would also like to provide disclosure information that I am posting information about my employer, however I am unable to do so because of this block. I appreciate your review of this matter and re-enabling my abilities to contribute to the platform from this very old block. SIGEPJEDI (talk) 23:39, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

For interested admins, this is the diff SIGEPJEDI refers to. I've removed the promo wording. StartGrammarTime (talk) 09:55, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying that. Your unblock is still awaiting evaluation by an administrator. There is a backlog of requests, and admins are volunteers like all other Wikipedia users, so it may take some time before it is reviewed. While you await their decision, please review the paid editing disclosure policy and conflict of interest guidelines, if you haven't done so already. Both of them apply to you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:49, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Uh, wow. This isn't a block from 2015 - you were originally blocked for spamming in 2006. And it looks like you used at least a couple other accounts two decades ago that missed getting blocked at the time. Ordinarily I'd say that's all water under the bridge, but you're still at it. I'm almost impressed.

We're not any more excited about promotionalism now than we were 20 years ago. If I unblock you and you write more additions like that one that was removed from Marcus Blaze, you're just going to get blocked again. Can you write an example of a neutral sentence that you'd like to have added to an article? -- asilvering (talk) 02:41, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

20 years ago I was certainly not proficient with Wikipedia standards and requirements with regard to neutral, fact-based writing style. I have however continuously focused on providing contributions reflecting trustworthy references in providing accurate and accessible knowledge.

Here is an example of "an example of a neutral sentence that you'd like to have added to an article?"

EXAMPLE: On August 30, 2021, Spencer Lee entered into a sponsorship agreement with RUDIS, a wrestling apparel company, under the NCAA's Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) policy. He also signed agreements with Ironside Apparel and MGC Sports Agency.

ARTICLE TO ADD TO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spencer_Lee SIGEPJEDI (talk) 18:36, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, of course you weren't 20 years ago, and it would be water under the bridge if that's all it was. But you've also been adding promotional content this year. But alright: you have written a neutrally worded sentence, so you do know how to do this, and I can unblock you. Please be aware that you must clearly disclose your paid status on your userpage and follow all the guidelines at WP:PAID. If you don't, you will certainly be reblocked. -- asilvering (talk) 19:03, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: RUDIS (May 2)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by BuySomeApples were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:RUDIS and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

BuySomeApples (talk) 22:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, SIGEPJEDI! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! BuySomeApples (talk) 22:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:RUDIS

Hello, SIGEPJEDI. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:RUDIS, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:08, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:RUDIS

Hello, SIGEPJEDI. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "RUDIS".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply , and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 23:26, 23 December 2025 (UTC)