Jump to content

User talk:Quodprod: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Quodprod (talk | contribs)
Line 58: Line 58:
:Your speedy deletion nomination has been strongly disputed on the article page. This is a matter that should eventually be submitted to detailed due process. The arbitrary and capricious nature of the editorial decision-making is highly problematic, and with all due respect, suspicious. If you have specific, well grounded, concerns about the article, please let us hear them and address them. [[User:Quodprod|Quodprod]] ([[User talk:Quodprod#top|talk]]) 01:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
:Your speedy deletion nomination has been strongly disputed on the article page. This is a matter that should eventually be submitted to detailed due process. The arbitrary and capricious nature of the editorial decision-making is highly problematic, and with all due respect, suspicious. If you have specific, well grounded, concerns about the article, please let us hear them and address them. [[User:Quodprod|Quodprod]] ([[User talk:Quodprod#top|talk]]) 01:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
::If you want to use DRV, sure. But you don't get to do that and also keep recreating the article. [[User:MrOllie|MrOllie]] ([[User talk:MrOllie|talk]]) 01:31, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
::If you want to use DRV, sure. But you don't get to do that and also keep recreating the article. [[User:MrOllie|MrOllie]] ([[User talk:MrOllie|talk]]) 01:31, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
:::Dear MrOllie,
:::You made specific allegations about the article, which I am challenging. However, it is perfectly sensible to also alert others about deeper concerns we have about this editorial practice of applying "speedy deletion" tags to articles you could not possibly have reviewed diligently (did you seriously evaluate all the references and contextual information etc) to come to a sound conclusion about "blatant promotion". Wikipedia favours certain values. Let us all endeavour to operate in the spirit of those values. Thanks. [[User:Quodprod|Quodprod]] ([[User talk:Quodprod#top|talk]]) 01:37, 12 June 2022 (UTC)


== [[WP:NOSHARING]] ==
== [[WP:NOSHARING]] ==

Revision as of 01:37, 12 June 2022

May 2022

Information icon

Hello Quodprod. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to COVID-19 vaccine card, 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. 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 very 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 extremely 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:Quodprod. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Quodprod|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. MrOllie (talk) 14:35, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Quodprod, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Quodprod|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. MrOllie (talk) 16:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You still have not adequately responded or taken action to the inquiry regarding your appearance as an undisclosed paid editor. If you make any additional edits without complying, you may be blocked from editing. MrOllie (talk) 18:29, 23 May 2022 (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).

Quodprod (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 154.160.2.144. I am using an MTN internet service (former name: "Scancom"). MTN is by far the largest internet service provider in our region. If you are blocking everyone using MTN as their service provider by default then you are excluding millions of contributors to Wikipedia from Africa, which would be extremely discriminatory and completely at variance with the open and progressive values of Wikipedia. Thank you. Quodprod (talk) 16:17, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I can't speak for whoever made the block on the IP, and since it involves networking expertise that I don't have I am not in a position to do it myself. But... you or anyone else so blocked can easily go to WP:IPECPROXY, follow the directions there, and request IPBE which makes these blocks irrelevant. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:35, 30 May 2022 (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.

Dear MrOllie, I notice that the speedy deletion notice on PanaBIOS has not been released. This is rather unfair as this is a highly notable initiative supported and deployed by both the African Union and the UNDP. In fact, of services and platforms in that category, it is the most prominent African-focused initiative. That alone makes it extremely notable and deserving of encyclopaedic documentation and memorialisation. Nothing that I wrote about the initiative was promotional or even remotely advertorial. The information was rigorously sourced and presented in a factual and unbiased manner to educate readers about a truly important initiative with broad intergovernmental and governmental support across many major countries. I do not understand how you could just delete the article without carefully perusing the sources to establish from the source material the notability and relevance of the subject matter. Kindly review your stance on this matter and outline clearly what content in the proposed article is not sufficiently neutral or appears promotional. As a frequent traveller and an African, I consider this initiative to be the most notable one in a vast continent and one that deserves a place on Wikipedia. To the extent that it is not a commercial initiative, I cannot relate to the point about me being a "paid editor". What could have given you the impression that anyone would pay for this subject matter to be documented here? I find the suggestion conclusory and very problematic. I notice with disquiet that all the coverage about digital COVID passes on Wikipedia are centered on the Global North, especially the West. If you are hastily deleting any pages that talks about initiatives on other continents, then it doesn't surprise me that important developments on other continents around the world are simply being denied representation here. My humble view is that this is wholly in conflict with Wikipedia's universal values as championed by Jimmy and being taken forward by Maryana Quodprod (talk) 20:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that you didn't answer. Can you please explain specifically what connection you have to PanaBIOS, or to the governments and companies involved in its implementation? - MrOllie (talk) 20:59, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dear MrOllie,
As I rightly said, I am an African and a frequent traveler who has got no association with PanaBIOS, the African Union or the various governments on the African Continent.
Kindly inquire more about traveling to Africa and you'll notice that all the edits I've made on Wikipedia are to help other travelers like myself travel smoothly without any issues or whatsoever.
Please review your decision and restore all deleted edits accordingly.
Thank you. Quodprod (talk) 14:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on PanaBIOS requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 16:04, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the record your draft is now located at Draft:PanaBIOS instead of the userpage of the nonexistent user User:PanaBIOS. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 16:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dear IAmChaos, I notice that the speedy deletion notice on PanaBIOS has not been released. This is rather unfair as this is a highly notable initiative supported and deployed by both the African Union and the UNDP. In fact, of services and platforms in that category, it is the most prominent African-focused initiative. That alone makes it extremely notable and deserving of encyclopaedic documentation and memorialisation. Nothing that I wrote about the initiative was promotional or even remotely advertorial. The information was rigorously sourced and presented in a factual and unbiased manner to educate readers about a truly important initiative with broad intergovernmental and governmental support across many major countries. I do not understand how you could just delete the article without carefully perusing the sources to establish from the source material the notability and relevance of the subject matter. Kindly review your stance on this matter and outline clearly what content in the proposed article is not sufficiently neutral or appears promotional. As a frequent traveller and an African, I consider this initiative to be the most notable one in a vast continent and one that deserves a place on Wikipedia. To the extent that it is not a commercial initiative, I cannot relate to the point about me being a "paid editor". What could have given you the impression that anyone would pay for this subject matter to be documented here? I find the suggestion conclusory and very problematic. I notice with disquiet that all the coverage about digital COVID passes on Wikipedia are centered on the Global North, especially the West. If you are hastily deleting any pages that talks about initiatives on other continents, then it doesn't surprise me that important developments on other continents around the world are simply being denied representation here. My humble view is that this is wholly in conflict with Wikipedia's universal values as championed by Jimmy and being taken forward by Maryana Quodprod (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on PanaBIOS, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. PRAXIDICAE💕 16:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Praxidicae, I notice that the speedy deletion notice on PanaBIOS has not been released. This is rather unfair as this is a highly notable initiative supported and deployed by both the African Union and the UNDP. In fact, of services and platforms in that category, it is the most prominent African-focused initiative. That alone makes it extremely notable and deserving of encyclopaedic documentation and memorialisation. Nothing that I wrote about the initiative was promotional or even remotely advertorial. The information was rigorously sourced and presented in a factual and unbiased manner to educate readers about a truly important initiative with broad intergovernmental and governmental support across many major countries. I do not understand how you could just delete the article without carefully perusing the sources to establish from the source material the notability and relevance of the subject matter. Kindly review your stance on this matter and outline clearly what content in the proposed article is not sufficiently neutral or appears promotional. As a frequent traveller and an African, I consider this initiative to be the most notable one in a vast continent and one that deserves a place on Wikipedia. To the extent that it is not a commercial initiative, I cannot relate to the point about me being a "paid editor". What could have given you the impression that anyone would pay for this subject matter to be documented here? I find the suggestion conclusory and very problematic. I notice with disquiet that all the coverage about digital COVID passes on Wikipedia are centered on the Global North, especially the West. If you are hastily deleting any pages that talks about initiatives on other continents, then it doesn't surprise me that important developments on other continents around the world are simply being denied representation here. My humble view is that this is wholly in conflict with Wikipedia's universal values as championed by Jimmy and being taken forward by Maryana Quodprod (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on PanaBIOS (African Union), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. PRAXIDICAE💕 18:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Praxidicae, I notice that the speedy deletion notice on PanaBIOS has not been released. This is rather unfair as this is a highly notable initiative supported and deployed by both the African Union and the UNDP. In fact, of services and platforms in that category, it is the most prominent African-focused initiative. That alone makes it extremely notable and deserving of encyclopaedic documentation and memorialisation. Nothing that I wrote about the initiative was promotional or even remotely advertorial. The information was rigorously sourced and presented in a factual and unbiased manner to educate readers about a truly important initiative with broad intergovernmental and governmental support across many major countries. I do not understand how you could just delete the article without carefully perusing the sources to establish from the source material the notability and relevance of the subject matter. Kindly review your stance on this matter and outline clearly what content in the proposed article is not sufficiently neutral or appears promotional. As a frequent traveller and an African, I consider this initiative to be the most notable one in a vast continent and one that deserves a place on Wikipedia. To the extent that it is not a commercial initiative, I cannot relate to the point about me being a "paid editor". What could have given you the impression that anyone would pay for this subject matter to be documented here? I find the suggestion conclusory and very problematic. I notice with disquiet that all the coverage about digital COVID passes on Wikipedia are centered on the Global North, especially the West. If you are hastily deleting any pages that talks about initiatives on other continents, then it doesn't surprise me that important developments on other continents around the world are simply being denied representation here. My humble view is that this is wholly in conflict with Wikipedia's universal values as championed by Jimmy and being taken forward by Maryana. Quodprod (talk) 16:29, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on PanaBIOS, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. MrOllie (talk) 01:01, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear MrOllie,
Your speedy deletion nomination has been strongly disputed on the article page. This is a matter that should eventually be submitted to detailed due process. The arbitrary and capricious nature of the editorial decision-making is highly problematic, and with all due respect, suspicious. If you have specific, well grounded, concerns about the article, please let us hear them and address them. Quodprod (talk) 01:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to use DRV, sure. But you don't get to do that and also keep recreating the article. MrOllie (talk) 01:31, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dear MrOllie,
You made specific allegations about the article, which I am challenging. However, it is perfectly sensible to also alert others about deeper concerns we have about this editorial practice of applying "speedy deletion" tags to articles you could not possibly have reviewed diligently (did you seriously evaluate all the references and contextual information etc) to come to a sound conclusion about "blatant promotion". Wikipedia favours certain values. Let us all endeavour to operate in the spirit of those values. Thanks. Quodprod (talk) 01:37, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been using plural pronouns from this account. Please note that multiple people using an account is against policy, as linked in this section header. If you are not sharing this account please explicitly state so below. If you are sharing the account, please stop doing so immediately. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:20, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"We" is a well-known grammatical device in formal writing. It is called the "royal We". Please read about it on Wikipedia: Royal we. Quodprod (talk) 01:21, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is not an explicit denial, but thank you for responding. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dear IAmChaos, it is more than a "denial". It is an emphatic repudiation. Thanks for your prompt responses. They are much appreciated. Quodprod (talk) 01:25, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]