Please add your message to the bottom of this page, give it a heading and sign it using four tildes ~~~~.

Help with upload or input into Wik

Hello again JimfBleak,

you recently removed an edit from me: Tcl1970

I wasn't finished placing tags on this company, this company is similar to Timothy Oulton or Sotheby's Real Estate which educated to the public on such practices. See links to be added below, what would you recommend to place inset into Wik?

here is from my sandbox from you to me, please forgive me if I'm infomral as I'm just learning how to help input into Wik on real estate business and companies who operate and are published already into Wik that have wrong or not relevant data:

10:42, 6 September 2018 Jimfbleak (talk | contribs) deleted page User:Tcl1970/sandbox (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: no independent sources, no evidence of notability, see WP:YFA, WP:Paid notability guidelines) (thank) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcl1970 (talk • contribs)

http://www.constructiondive.com/news/want-to-sell-more-houses-try-these-unique-extras/372565/ http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/columnists/sarnoff/article/Too-busy-to-shop-for-furniture-This-house-has-it-6104016.php http://blog.chron.com/primeproperty/2015/02/new-listing-in-woodside-but-its-not-just-the-house-thats-for-sale/ http://houston.culturemap.com/news/real-estate/02-26-15-this-238-million-ranch-mansion-gives-new-definition-to-turnkey-talk-about-millionaire-ready/ http://blog.chron.com/primeproperty/tag/lewbonne/ http://www.chron.com/business/real-estate/slideshow/quot-Modernist-Rancher-quot-104059/photo-7572026.php http://hookedonhouses.net/2013/03/21/a-craftsman-staged-like-a-restoration-hardware-catalog/

Replied on user talk page, no independent sources or evidence of notability, blatant fact-free spam, copyright violation, undeclared paid editor. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:54, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blockbox AC

Dear Jim,

I would like to rephrase my page on Blockbox AC. Please allow me to edit it again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leshchenkodasha (talk • contribs) 14:37, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on user talk page, already given guidance. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:26, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Web Media Jim

Hey Jim,

we have the same name! I would like to find out why my page Draft:NEME$1$ got deleted. I can fix any issues there is on there.

Jim Daofficialnem (talk) 06:36, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific on how I can get that page back? it took a while for me to make it. I really don't want to lose all that work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daofficialnem (talk • contribs) 06:39, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Daofficialnem, I've seen this message, and I'll explain in detail on your talk page when I get a bit oftime, really busy in RL at present. Don't attempt to recreate until you've seen my comments, cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:35, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Posted conflict of interest warning, account now blocked by another admin Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:06, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Direct Textbook Tagging

You wrote "You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to..."

Please give me an example of 1 self published reference in the article that you just deleted, because I lost 1 hour to make damn sure, that all the references to things in that article were on notable resources and NOT self published.

Also, I have absolutely no connection to either "Hsetbsia" or any other account than the one I'm writing you from. And it is an insult for you to claim these things without, at least, checking some usage patterns for my account and whatever other you may suspect. We all make mistakes, but I expect you to do more then simply follow a mad users's complaints for a non existing issue. Slavicd (talk) 08:09, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Slavicd please read independent verifiable sources Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing him its management. Let's look at the first three sources, just for starters; the first is probably posted by the company, but doesn't support the claim in the text anyway, the second says according to a new survey from Direct Textbook. and quotes company staff at length, and so does the third. I could continue through the other refs, but basically you are telling us what the company wants to say about itself through press releases and interviews, not independent third party sources. In any case, if you disagree with Derant you should discuss the issue with them on their talk page, not edit war. Your view of your own work isn't likely to be neutral as you've shown. If you continue to edit war, I'll block you.

I haven't claimed you are operating multiple accounts, I'm asking because two single-purpose accounts promoting the same topic are, on past experience, likely to be linked. If you say that in this case they are not, I will, of course accept your assurance

When commenting on other editors, you are required to be WP:Civil

Whatever you think, Derant has gone by the book, whereas you have sought to create a battleground instead of talking. If you continue, you'll end up getting blocked.

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:53, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, when you say "first ref" I have no way o fchecking as there's not longer an article. Then you say "the first is probably posted..". Does probably grant a page deletion? All I remember were articles from a few news websites and thus notability criteria was passed, so I decided to improve the article.

On another note, keep in mind that your repeat threats of blocking my account will end in nothing else then my frustration at Wikipedia and one email to Jim Wales mentioning the above frustration. I will also mention that my few yet sincere donations to Wikipedia aren't likely to continue just because of a few admins that feel like their views are not contestable. Slavicd (talk) 09:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A mad user's complaint? When emailing Jimmy Wales, don't forget to mention that your few yet sincere donations to Wikipedia are nothing, but a paid gig. Derant (talk) 13:24, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Slavicd, articles from a few news websites doesn't satisfy our notability guidelines, as you claim, if the sites are just recycling press releases and other company promo. Furthermore, your article was just promoting the companies services; as far as we know from your text, the company doesn't have offices, employees, income or expenditure, which are more relevant to notability than any amount of "this is what we sell" Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:14, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Island School Page Deletion

Hi, I would like to ask why the page Island School was deleted. I left a talk page there and the talk page was deleted as well. The reason was “talk page of deleted page”. This is just an enquiry, and I have no intention of forcefully bringing the page back. Thanks. Oshawott 12 (talk) 08:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oshawott 12, I'll reply when I get time, very busy at present Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:55, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page first; talk pages are always deleted when the article is. You don't appear to have edited the talk page anyway, all the edits in the last four years were by bots, and you account isn't listed as a contributor even before then.

Oshawott 12 Despite its long existence, the article seems to have stayed under the radar despite poor to non-existent sourcing, a promotional tone, reading like a school prospectus rather than an encyclopaedia, with excessive detail abut the minutiae of the timetable. Part appears to have been a copyright violation of a non-public domain website. The school is probably notable, and I could create a heavily cleaned-up version as a draft for someone to improve. However, the article history is dominated by anons and apparently WP:COI editors, so i'm not optimistic Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:36, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I read your reply and thanks for replying. I would, for the sake of the Hong Kongers, prefer to have you make a cleaned-up version of the page, as deleting it makes no sense for such a well-known and historical school of Hong Kong. Many people use Wikipedia as a primary point of reference, so I would prefer that. However, maybe for the WP:COI and Anons part, maybe we could find out together by looking up the page? The page has to stay, but we can fix it. I’m quite positive, with the amount of editors on Wikipedia. Oshawott 12 (talk) 01:20, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oshawott 12, there's no such thing as "has to stay", but, as I said before, it is notable enough for an article that complies with our rules. I'll recreate as a cleaned-up, (hopefully) non-copyright violating draft, but as I said before, due to RL commitments it will have to wait a bit until I find time. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:24, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, OK then. Oshawott 12 (talk) 04:46, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Created new version without the spam and copyright violations, and without most of the unsourced text and excessive detail of the external affairs of the school Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:06, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed speedy deletion

As I think you are online, could you please consider the article Kaniz Almas Khan. It was deleted for G11 on September 5th, was salted (I think), but was recreated and is still grossly promotional. I nominated it again for speedy deletion this morning but the creator promptly removed my deletion tag, which I have since reinstated. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About Kaniz Almas Khan

Please tell me why you delete this article? All sources used in the article are very important sources, including national and international references. Such as BBC News, The Daily Star, New Age, The New Nation etc. Or explain to you why the advertisement appears. The quality of the article can be improved but not the removal solution. I think it has been done wrong, there is no doubt that the person in the article is very important. If there is a problem with the type of writing, then I should give time to improve.-Shahadat Hossain (talk) 06:32, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Jim	Talk	Contribs	Sandbox	Logs	Blocks	Deletions	Protections	Scripts	Bird talk	Commons