User talk:Princeromuald

Princeromuald, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Princeromuald! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GreenMeansGo (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruno Maïorana (March 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by -noah- 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bruno Maïorana and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Bruno Maïorana, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Noah ^💬 15:41, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of fictional princesses, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Delcourt. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Carol Drinkwater, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page All Creatures Great and Small.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alain Ayroles has been accepted

Alain Ayroles, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Sionk (talk) 14:52, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Bruno Maïorana

Hello, Princeromuald. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bruno Maïorana, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:02, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Important query

Are you, or do you know, the person who owns the account Hugezoomlens (talk · contribs)? Mz7 (talk) 05:53, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Don't think so. Princeromuald (talk) 09:00, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Princeromuald. 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 ~~~~}}.  Mz7 (talk) 05:18, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

You were right, it turns out I do know Hugezoomlens. They thought they were being 'helpful.' I am a middle-aged academic based in France, so I think it would be Wikipedia's loss if I were blocked from making future updates. I have a unique knowledge of France and am a native English speaker. I live to write faultless fact-based articles.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 09:51, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

---

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.

Unblock request

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).

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

---

Request reason:

In response to User:Yamla - I fully understand the reasons for the block. I did not realize there was such a thing as sockpuppetry. I do understand how it might be used to damage content on wikipedia. However, I would contest whether my poor knowledge of the rules has led to damage of content or disruption. I feel I have done nothing but improve the accuracy and reliability of the information that I have edited over the years. I am a stickler for good reference practice - and because Wikipedia contains so much outdated information I feel I have the skills, knowledge and experience to help improve it. I concede that a slap on the wrist is duly warranted, but an indefinite block would simply be counter-productive. Princeromuald (talk) 10:38, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You seem to be availing yourself of the standard offer. 331dot (talk) 18:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

---

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.

• Honestly, I was inclined to accept this unblock request. At the SPI, I noted that the technical data was not inconsistent with two individuals sharing an Internet connection, and that if Princeromuald simply made explicit their connection to Hugezoomlens, that would be sufficient. However, this user has not been consistently forthcoming with us. Please note that they were caught evading this block on the account Wonderconboy (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) just a few days ago, and their edits seem to indicate some kind of external relationship with the topics they are writing about, such as DxO Labs. Because of this, I am no longer inclined to accept this unblock request outside of the standard offer. Mz7 (talk) 07:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

  @Mz7 Fair enough. I am a bit disappointed that the quality and an accuracy of my edits (across all pages) seems to count for nothing when my kid decides to use my PC on the same page. Ah well, rules is rules I guess. See you in Six months. Princeromuald (talk) 11:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

  @331dot I'm not going to waste any more of my time trying to convince people of the high quality of my updates. Either Wikipedia wants people like me to improve content or they don't. Judging by my attempts to update the page for one of my favorite bits of software Photolab my knowledge counts for zero anyway when there's an English admin who thinks he/she knows better (or is paid by a rival firm). I'm an academic, not a computer buff. Princeromuald (talk) 06:39, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

So, when can I expect access again? There are several pages I'm keen to update.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=So, when can I expect access again? There are several pages I'm keen to update. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=So, when can I expect access again? There are several pages I'm keen to update. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=So, when can I expect access again? There are several pages I'm keen to update. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}