User talk:FreakBrainAtWork

Nomination of Andrew T. Miltenberg for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew T. Miltenberg 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/Andrew T. Miltenberg 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. ... discospinster _talk 01:36, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sydney Fe Blankenship

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 Sydney Fe Blankenship, 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 (talk) 12:22, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Samit Garg

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 Draft:Samit Garg, 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. Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:30, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020

Hello, FreakBrainAtWork. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. I'm sorry, but a page you created  Draft:Samit Garg has been deleted as meeting one or more of the Categories for Speedy Deletion.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects of articles must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources which are unconnected with the subject and which provide verifiable information. Someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. Also, encyclopedia articles must be neutral in tone and not use language that promotes or advocates for a subject, or tries to cast the subject in a favorable light. Sometimes creators of promotional/advocational content are bewildered that it is considered such. If one has been trained to write such content, or if one has spent some time writing such content, one may simply be blind to non-neutral phrases or styles. A common assumption is that the prohibition against promotional editing applies only to businesses or organizations. Anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc. and CV/resumé's are by their nature promotional. Writing about oneself or any connected subject is discouraged,as the connection can make objectivity difficult. Information on avoiding advocational content and common pitfalls is here and here, however be aware that these are not exhaustive.

New article creation can be difficult, but the Article Wizard can help you. The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems. You can also ask for help at the TEAHOUSE

 --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:25, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello, FreakBrainAtWork, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Djsnape (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:27, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

I have no connection with the mentioned account and checked the contributions of the profile, I don't see why you said what you said.FreakBrainAtWork (talk) 11:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Daily Mail reference at Omar Yabroudi

Hi. Please do not use the Daily Mail as you did at Omar Yabroudi. It is not a reliable source. See WP:DAILYMAIL. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 12:24, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed Wikipedia filter rejects it. I'll definitely not use it in my next researches. ThanksFreakBrainAtWork (talk) 11:49, 25 December 2020 (UTC)