Jump to content

User talk:RandomBeat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your submission at Articles for creation: Simon T. Bailey (July 1)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jamiebuba was: 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.
Jamiebuba (talk) 14:26, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, RandomBeat! 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! Jamiebuba (talk) 14:26, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

[edit]
Information icon

Hello RandomBeat. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:RandomBeat. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=RandomBeat|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. S0091 (talk) 17:17, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The article J.W. Oliver has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails to establish notability of either this businessperson or their business(es). Too much sourcing is to dubious churnalism or interviews of the subject themself, best example YouTube clip "How to Elevate Your Dental Group Practice's Culture with the Right Team Members with SupportDDS". Best path forward is WP:TNT this and try again on the business.

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. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of America Mortgages for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article America Mortgages 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/America Mortgages 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 until the discussion has finished.

StrongDeterrence (talk) 09:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Simon T. Bailey (September 22)

[edit]
Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Spiralwidget was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Read: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon T. Bailey. Not notable.
Spiralwidget (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

[edit]
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Elizzzzz per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Elizzzzz. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
Izno (talk) 01:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]