User talk:Mediapub

Welcome!

Hello, Mediapub, 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 take 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! South Nashua (talk) 16:42, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Hello, Mediapub. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Suliman Facet Hasan, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 02:52, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the wikipedia policies on notability and verifiability carefully. You have continued to re-insert references that do not mention the subject of the article or support the claims it makes, as well as including language that is not neutral and formatting that is not according to the guidelines. Continuing to revert edits that have been explained according to policies is the kind of editing behaviour that can lead to you being blocked from editing, so please slow down and take the time to understand the problems, ask questions or discuss the issues rather than simply re-adding the same problematic content. Melcous (talk) 02:52, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Please stop continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Suliman Facet Hasan, without resolving the problem that the template refers to. This may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. Melcous (talk) 04:09, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I note that you have now "followed" me to various articles I have edited previously (including María Cano, African Queens and Women Cultural Leaders Network, Daniel Webber (actor) among others) and removed content claiming it is unsourced. Please see WP:LEAD - lead sections do not require references if they summarise content that is later sourced to reliable references within the body of the article. More importantly, this kind of behaviour, essentially undoing edits I have previously made because you are unhappy with me personally is considered disruptive and can lead to you being blocked from editing. If you continue this kind of behaviour, you will be reported. Melcous (talk) 04:09, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 05:09, 4 April 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).

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

Request reason:

Every reason of revision I clearly stated and gave adequate reasoning to. The user Melcous have trolled every revision I have made and requested I be blocked rather than correct their contributions. Mediapub (talk) 05:31, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is just not true. Looking at your last three edits, for example, you note each contains content in violation of WP:COI but provide no reasoning behind this. Now, maybe it's true, maybe there are COI violations going on. But it is not accurate to say you "gave adequate reasoning to" these edits. Yamla (talk) 11:30, 4 April 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.

Proposed deletion of Facet Lingerie Party

The article Facet Lingerie Party has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not appear to meet WP:N(E); promotional article created by WP:COI editor

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. Melcous (talk) 08:17, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]