User talk:Exemplo347

This is Exemplo347's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: 7 days

Please read this box first!

Welcome to my talk page! Please leave me a message below; new topics should go at the bottom of this page, and please sign your topic by placing ~~~~ (four tildes) at the very end, and please remember to assume good faith on my part.

If I have nominated your article for Speedy Deletion, please read this article which lists the Criteria for Speedy Deletion.
If your article has been deleted, direct your queries to the Administrator who deleted your article.
If anything I have done has upset you, then let's please talk about it! You can click HERE to start a new topic.
This talk page is automatically archived - topics more than 7 days old are removed by an automated process.

Question about the changes

Now that you have have deleted what ever you see is wrong with the article, is there anything else I can do to get the warning type sign at the top, removed? Thanks! Al — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allotnap (talk • contribs) 01:48, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the improvement templates can't be removed until every single problem they address has been sorted out. That includes a WP:COI concern - have you read WP:COI? You really need to. You can't claim to have no connection, because that article is the only thing you've been editing and new editors without connections never act like that. Openness & honesty are your friend here. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 01:50, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is being a big fan a connection? Is the source material sub par? I just wanted to get it right. there are a lot of uninformed articles out there. Yes I have read the WP:COI. Thank you for pointing it out. Is there anything else about the article that needs help? Please advise. Allotnap (talk) 02:05, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Each of the individual improvement notices has a link to a helpful page that addresses the individual concern. If, after reading through all the pages, you have any further questions then the best place to ask is Wikipedia:Teahouse - hit the "Ask a Question" button and someone will help you as soon as they can. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 02:08, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New to this and will get better. Thank you for all your help! Allotnap (talk) 02:12, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's no problem. It may seem like myself and other editors are being unhelpful in removing your edits from your article, but in fact the edits that have been made are preventing the Speedy Deletion of your article (under this criteria) which can happen without warning if articles are too promotional in nature. Good luck with your future editing! Exemplo347 (talk) 02:15, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you have scheduled Jozeff for deletion, there are plenty of notable links on there. There are hundreds of other artist pages/biographies we used for reference when creating the wikipedia page Jozeff, yet they are not removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:40E:9600:A8BB:ECF4:4AB3:C8E8 (talk) 12:00, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign in before you edit, otherwise I have no idea who I'm talking to. Exemplo347 (talk) 12:03, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jozeff

Apolagies Exemplo347.

The last post regarding 'Jozeff' was myself. Can you suggest any changes that would reverse the page deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danieljames9090 (talk • contribs) 12:07, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that no sources can be found that satisfy Wikipedia's General Notability Guideline - I pointed this out to you with the Improvement notices I placed on the article, which you deleted without fixing the issue. Read through WP:RS - improve the article if you can, but do not delete the Article for Deletion notice again. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 12:13, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Black English listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Black English. Since you had some involvement with the Black English redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --BDD (talk) 14:18, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please allow me to delete the Rotair wiki page. As you are a contributor

Please allow me to delete the Rotair wiki page. As you are a contributor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jake505k (talk • contribs) 23:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jake505k: I'm afraid that's not how Wikipedia works. When you first published the article, you legally released control of the text. Even if I wanted the article to be deleted, it would be extremely unlikely to happen - the article meets Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion so there's no legitimate reason for its deletion. Exemplo347 (talk) 23:05, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About Alex Daoud

Hi, Exemplo! I'm responding to your request for page protection of this article. I did not impose protection because I temporarily blocked the current problem editor, and the previous one is indefinitely blocked. But it is clear that the article is being attacked by sockpuppets and there are likely to be more. I have filed a sockpuppet investigation request at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alexisdaoud. If you have an ongoing interest in that article, you might want to take note of it. Because if they do identify a sockmaster, then when new users show up at that article doing the same thing, you can report them to WP:SPI (or for that matter to me) and get them dealt with quickly. --MelanieN (talk) 22:37, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MelanieN: Thanks for that! I added the article to my watchlist last month because of the long term, slow motion vandalism, so I'll continue to pop over to it whenever it's vandalised (as it surely will be!) by yet another sockpuppet. I'll keep my eye on the SPI too. Thanks again for your help! Exemplo347 (talk) 22:42, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The two most recent ones were determined to be socks. They didn't evaluate the earlier IPs but they were obviously socks too. The sockmaster is Alexisdaoud, for future reference. BTW I just spent a couple of hours cleaning up and referencing that article. Might as well have a well-developed Wikipedia article for them to try to mess up. 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The silly thing is, I only found out about the deleted content (it was deleted months and months ago) when I noticed them messing about with the article. If they'd left it alone, that deleted section would have probably never been restored! Exemplo347 (talk) 00:28, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. Wikipedia has strong defenses and we do catch up with mischief eventually. --MelanieN (talk) 00:45, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

COI

Hi Exemplo347,

No COI to declare. Being a resident of Mt Roskill, Auckland. I am just really inspired by the young Shail Kaushal, born overseas but grew up in Mt Roskill and is now on the Auckland's local government representing my area. He has doorknocked my place number of times. Also the first Indian-born to be ever elected by the people in Auckland, New Zealand, and one of the youngest. My next contributions would be on page Puketapapa Local Board, and local MP Michael Wood.

Thanks,

Bondj

@Bondj: Greetings. Two things you need to know - firstly, you should be signing your posts with 4 tildes ~. Secondly, during Articles for Deletion discussions, you should only be voting once - that includes votes cast while you're not logged in. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 00:00, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Examplo347: thanks, noted. (talk) 00:12, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting the page titled MonsterIndia.com

Hi-I wanted to check why the page was deleted when I've cited several independent sources verifying all the information that I have listed about Monsterindia.com. There are other job sites like Naukri.com with wiki pages written in a similar fashion on wikipedia - could you let me know why they aren't considered promotional content? Please see links below - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naukri.com Thanks Sonal nerurkar (talk) 21:59, 19 March 2017 (UTC)sonal nerurkar[reply]

As you can see here, your article was deleted because it was unambiguously promotional in nature. In the future, I recommend using the Article Creation wizard - you can create your draft and then submit it for review, and experienced editors will give you tips. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 22:02, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-how can I access the page to upload it in Article Creation wizard? Will I have to recreate it? It would help if you can make it available for me. Thanks Sonal nerurkar (talk) 22:09, 19 March 2017 (UTC)sonal[reply]

If you ask the Administrator who deleted your page (@Athaenara:), they may be willing to recreate the article in your Sandbox. It's their decision though, so I can't promise that they will do it. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:12, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On this day, 1 year ago...

Hey, Exemplo347. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Lepricavark (talk) 02:59, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EDITS FROM THE PENTECOSTAL MISSION ARTICLE

Sir, This is with regard to the following MESSAGE " Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at The Pentecostal Mission, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Exemplo347" received from your side.

It has come to my notice that there is a section in the The Pentecostal Mission Article called Criticisms and controversies.It contains unsubstantiated information and allegations without any basis. So when I remove this, you reinstate it back. I have already given my explanation that it is just allegations with no proof.

I want to know who posted this information in the first place and what proof was given of these Criticisms and controversies. Please produce your information to substantiate these Criticisms and controversies in The Pentecostal Mission Article or PLEASE REMOVE IT IMMEDIATELY. STOP PUTTING WRONG INFORMATION. ANY PERSON CAN MAKE UP CONTROVERSIES. I HOPE WIKIPEDIA WILL MOVE TO A HIGHER STANDARD — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomasmath72 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. If you wish to see who added information to an article, click on "View history" and you will be able to see which editor added the information. If you want to see how the information is substantiated, click on the reference that can be found at the end of the particular sentence or paragraph. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 07:29, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why You want to Delete ZEBRONICS page

HI Exemplo347 Can I know the reason for why you are applying to delete the page ZEBRONICS. I don't think it has any errors nor looks like a advertisement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keschristo (talk • contribs) 11:33, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. The reasons for the Speedy Deletion are stated in the Speedy Deletion template - namely, the following criteria apply - WP:A7 and WP:G11. Also, when an article is protected from creation, you shouldn't create an all-capitals version of the title to bypass the protection. Regards.Exemplo347 (talk) 11:37, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion of page is not applicable

HI Exemplo347,

I feel G11 is not applicable kindly read it carefully before applying.

Well you're incorrect. It applies. Please note that using multiple accounts to edit Wikipedia is not allowed. Exemplo347 (talk) 11:44, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Exemplo347 no it is not applicable. Anybody can edit the pages in Wikipedia. Many people editing a same article can't be considered as spammers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kesavanchristo (talk • contribs) 11:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is applicable. Anyway, the place to discuss this isn't on my talk page - you should press the "contest this deletion" button on the article, make a short statement why you disagree and then wait for a response from an administrator. You should only press the button once - don't use multiple accounts to do it. Exemplo347 (talk) 11:49, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Exemplo347,

Yeah already reported about your activies under edit warring and also for spamming activities also appealed to delete the user. Hope it will work. Let see

I have no idea what you're talking about. Please do not use multiple accounts to edit Wikipedia. Exemplo347 (talk) 12:18, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kesavanchristo: cut it out or you're going to end up blocked. @Exemplo347: multiple accounts? Please fill me in, so I can block them -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 12:18, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@There'sNoTime: See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Infozeb. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 12:20, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked a checkuser to take a look, but it seems very likely to me - we'll known shortly -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 12:26, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is no sign of spamming i feel @exemplo347 is ment to do edit warring like he always does. kindly do check it