User talk:Cyrus Azamfar

Welcome!

Hello, Cyrus Azamfar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! GermanJoe (talk) 15:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Citing own or closely connected research

Hello, Cyrus Azamfar. We welcome your contributions, but it appears as if your primary purpose on Wikipedia is to add citations to research published by a small group of researchers.

Scientific articles should mainly reference review articles to ensure that the information added is trusted by the scientific community.

Editing in this way is also a violation of the policy against using Wikipedia for promotion and is a form of conflict of interest in Wikipedia – please see WP:SELFCITE and WP:MEDCOI. The editing community considers excessive self-citing to be form of spamming on Wikipedia (WP:REFSPAM) and the edits will be reviewed and the citations removed where it was not appropriate to add them.

Finally, please be aware that the editing community highly values expert contributors – please see WP:EXPERT. I do hope you will consider contributing more broadly. If you wish to contribute, please first consider citing review articles written by other researchers in your field and which are already highly cited in the literature. If you wish to cite your own research, please start a new thread on the article talk page and add {{requestedit}} to ask a volunteer to review whether or not the citation should be added.

GermanJoe (talk) 16:20, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from a possible connection to the author, these additions were vague passing mentions without tangible facts about the articles' main topic. Both articles already contain a lot of applications and use cases. Adding further indiscriminate examples doesn't add any relevant information about the main topic itself. GermanJoe (talk) 16:20, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this notice carefully.

You are receiving this notice because you recently edited one or more pages relating to blockchain or cryptocurrencies topics. You have not done anything wrong. We just want to alert you that "general" sanctions are authorized for certain types of edits to those pages.

A community decision has authorized the use of general sanctions for pages related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after the editor has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Proposed deletion of Industrial blockchain

The article Industrial blockchain has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article is not needed. Business applications of blockchains are already mentioned in Blockchain#Uses, the rest of the article is a WP:COATRACK about how blockhain might "enhance" and "contribute to the advancement" of Cyber Physical Systems.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:47, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Industrial blockchain for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Industrial blockchain is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Industrial blockchain until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Thjarkur (talk) 02:40, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

my thoughts on this

This page "industrial blockchain" has been created to motivate researchers for contributing to industrial applications of blockchain technology and more precisely focus on smart manufacturing. Although there is another page talking about blockchain in general, but smart manufacturing (or cyber-physical-system) is itself a very big industry with its own challenges and limitations. Recently GE, IBM, Mazak, P&G, etc have shown a huge interest in using blockchain in their manufacturing progress towards industry 4.0. This page would serve as a guideline that gradually would be completed and used for industrial people with the main focus on their specific needs rather than some shallow discussion on some other pages.

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jayleecincinnati, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

MrOllie (talk) 01:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked from editing

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Jayleecincinnati per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jayleecincinnati. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:46, 13 April 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here Cyrus Azamfar (talk) 01:29, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please address the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jayleecincinnati/Archive, which essentially says you're using your account to promote Jay Lee. I think it is indeed possible that there are multiple people promoting Jay Lee, but meat puppetry is against our rules, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:32, 14 April 2020 (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.

I dont know account jayleecincinnati and that is a totally different person. Please fix the problem and unlock my account.

Thanks