User talk:NellyOriginPMOD

Archives

This is the Current Talk Page for 2017

Disambiguation link notification for March 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mateo Camargo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I added the edit due to it stating Mateo moved to Chicago just before forming Madina Lake. It is unknown if he holds citizenship or green card but as I know he is Cambodian American. NellyOriginPMOD (talk) 04:05, 27 March 2017 (UTC) NellyOriginPMOD (talk) 04:05, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To refix what I mean, he is Colombian NellyOriginPMOD (talk) 05:21, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Mark Castillo, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:40, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making those large changes to Rise Against as well. Even beyond the fact that they are unsourced and you have repeatedly re-added them without providing your own sources. (Which is your WP:BURDEN in these situations.) Most of the changes aren't even necessary to denote in the first place. Things like "Lead guitar, occasionally rhythm guitar" are unnecessary - we don't state the frequency of band member roles, and it kind of goes without saying. Virtually all lead players are going to be rhythm on occasion. Its to be assumed. It's not like they're playing a different instrument or something.

Rather than continually re-adding the content, which is called edit warring and could get you blocked, please instead discuss on the talk page, if you still want to pursue this. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 14:45, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please read up on how to add sources to articles at WP:REFB, as it seems that, looking through your contributions, you not adding sources to articles seems to be a recurring issue. Adding sources to back your additions is a required ability to contribute to Wikipedia, so please read up on this and start doing it. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 15:28, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:NellyOriginPMOD, circa December 2015.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:NellyOriginPMOD, circa December 2015.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:24, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, generally the copyright holder of a photo is considered to be the photographer who took it, not the subject of the photo. Photos appearing on Facebook are not freely licensed for Wikipedia's puprposes and only the original copyright holder of the photo (in the absence of an official copyright transfer agreement) can agree to freely license it. So, if you know the photographer, then just follow the instructions listed at WP:DONATEIMAGE or c:COM:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder. Be advised that releasing a photo under a free license means that the copyright holder is agreeing to allow anyone anywhere in the world to download the photo and anytime and use it for any purpose, including to commercial. Moreover, once a free license has been given it cannot be revoked as explained here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:47, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about yourself

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but it appears you have written or added to an article about yourself, at User:NellyOriginPMOD/Sandbox/8. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:25, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NellyOriginPMOD. Just to clarify the above, if you are attempting to create an article about yourself or someone you are connected to, then you have what Wikipedia's considers to be a conflict of interest. Wikipedia does not explicitly prohibited conflict of interest editing, but it is something which is highly discouraged because it can lead to other more serious problems. So, I suggest that you read through Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide to better familiarize yourself with the kinds of edits Wikipedia considers acceptable for a COI editor to make.

In addition, there writing about oneself is highly discourage because of the reason listed in Wikipedia:Autobiography. You can continue working on your draft, but I strongly suggest that you submitted via Wikipedia:Articles for creation when you feel its ready for review. The draft will be checked by an AfC reviewer who will determine if its ready for upgrading to article status. AfC reviewers tend to be quite experiened editors who are familiar with Wikipedia:Notability and other relevant policies and guidelines. The reviewer will either upgrade the draft to article status, or provide comments on what still needs to be improved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:34, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image use

Hi NellyOriginPMOD. The licensing of each image you see on Wikipedia is determined by it copyright status and not every image file you see on Wikipedia is licensed the same. Some files are licensed as public domain or licensed under a free licensed suitable for Wikipedia and these are often collectively referred to as "free images". Other files are licensed as non-free content because of their copyright status and these file are commonly referred to as "non-free images". Non-free image use is highly restricted and each use of such an an image must satisfy Wikipedia's non-free image use policy. One of these restrctions is WP:NFCC#9, which says that non-free content can only be used in the article namespace. Non-free content should not be used on usepages or their subpages as explained in WP:UP#Non-free files which is why I have removed File:ProjectBrittany.png from your User:NellyOriginPMOD/Sandbox/8. Perhaps you did not notice the edit sum I left the previous time I removed the image; therefore, I'm posting this here to provide more explanation. Taking a screenshot of copyrighted content does not make you the original copyright holder; so, unless you are claiming that you created the video game using the imagery, you cannot claim it as your own. For example, a singer songwriter who writes a song is considered the copyright holder of the music and lyrics; a person who downloads the song from iTunes or makes dub of it off a CD or the radio is not. When you buy an X-box or an X-Box game, you are purchasing the physical product itself, not the copyright over all of the creative content or the technology involved in creating either. Please do not re-add this file again because doing so is clearly in violation of relevant Wikipedia policy and continuing to re-add it will lead to an administrator being asked to get involved. If you have any questions about this, you can ask for help at WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:22, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ProjectBrittany.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ProjectBrittany.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

You have been blocked from editing for abuse of editing privileges in relation to information which has been removed from Wikipedia's public records.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-enwikimedia.org.

Administrators: Information which has been oversighted was considered when this block was placed. Therefore the Oversight team or the Arbitration Committee must be consulted before this block can be removed. Administrators undoing oversight blocks without permission from an oversighter risk having their administrator rights removed by the Arbitration Committee (per this announcement).

-- Katie^talk 20:56, 31 May 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Unnecessary block

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Huon (talk) 22:11, 31 May 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 declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

That still CLEARLY doesn't answer why I'm blocked. I did absolutely nothing wrong and got 2 sandbox pages removed as well as my main user page for an unknown reason. I haven't done anything wrong (ex. Vandalize, damage, or disrupt pages besides my own sandboxes) and have made very useful contributions to band pages which I specifically said on my main page is what I will mostly work on with my sandboxes as well being very useful as they soon could be actual Wikipedia pages.

Decline reason:

See below. Katie^talk 08:39, 1 June 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.

Ping KrakatoaKatie for her input. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:30, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NeilN I wish I could but I cannot edit any other page besides my talk page. NellyOriginPMOD (talk) 22:33, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My note will send her a ping. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:35, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NellyOriginPMOD, you were blocked for your own protection since you persisted in revealing your personal information on Wikipedia. If you agree to avoid posting identifying information on Wikipedia in the future then I have no doubt that you can be unblocked. I would also recommend you read Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors - Wikipedia is not a social network and it's very inadvisable to try and use it as one. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:56, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, NeilN. Nelly, Yunshui is correct. Your user page was deleted and suppressed once for your protection in 2016 by Opabinia regalis. You not only recreated it there, you put it in a sandbox page as well. In addition, you have several sandbox pages that contain or contained unreferenced information about minors. This is an {{OversightBlock}}, placed for your protection to prevent you from adding the personal information of minors to this site. It is not appealable through the use of the {{unblock}} template. The Oversight team was notified that I placed this block, and you can appeal by emailing Oversight-l@lists.wikimedia.org (the Oversight mailing list) or by contacting the Arbitration Committee. Katie^talk 08:39, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]