User talk:Liztaylorcollection

January 2013

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Isabel Toledo was changed by Liztaylorcollection (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.902031 on 2013-01-12T09:05:22+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 09:05, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Isabel Toledo with this edit, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. RandomAct^{(talk to me)} 09:06, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Mabalu. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Isabel Toledo because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Mabalu (talk) 11:14, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional user name concern

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Liztaylorcollection", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because promotional user names are not allowed. In addition to this, you have been making self-promotional edits to List of fashion designers (also as User talk:Designer Liz Taylor), and, using this username, edits to Isabel Toledo that constitute WP:Vandalism, which places you at additional risk of having action taken against you.. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. Mabalu (talk) 11:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at List of fashion designers, you may be blocked from editing. You've already been advised that your user name is a problem and that you should not be adding spam entries to that list. If you keep doing it, other editors will keep removing them. Eventually, you'll likely end up being blocked. Please stop now. Msnicki (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising, as you did at List of fashion designers, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Msnicki (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Liz Taylor (fashion designer)

Hello Liztaylorcollection,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Liz Taylor (fashion designer) for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Mabalu (talk) 17:18, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Liz Taylor (fashion designer). If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - Mr X 17:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Liztaylorcollection. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Tgeairn (talk) 19:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at List of fashion designers shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Msnicki (talk) 04:35, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 04:54, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]