User talk:MER-C/archives/44
 | Scam Watch
Warning: There is an on-going scam marketing the creation, improvement, or protection of Wikipedia articles. See this scam warning for detailed information. If you've been scammed please send details to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org to help others who could be future victims of this scam. |
| Directory | |
|---|---|
| User space: Home | Talk (archives) | Sandboxes: General 1 · General 2 | Smart questions · Cluebat | |
| Software: Test account | Wiki.java | Servlets | |
| Links: WikiProject Spam · Spam blacklist: local · global · XLinkBot | Copyvios | Contributor copyright | |
Welcome to my talk page!
Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless there's a better place for them. Please read the following helpful hints before posting:
- Wikipedia is a volunteer curated encyclopedia. That means it is not a social networking site, a place for self-promotion, a marketing medium or a free web host. You are expected to be familiar with the goals of this project before you post here.
- Think. Use common sense. Read this before posting; failure to do so may result in your posts being ignored or mocked.
- If you wish to discuss your link additions, I advise you to be read our conflict of interest and spam policies before posting. These pages contain information about the appropriateness of link additions.
- I prefer to be contacted here (as opposed to email) where possible. You're much more likely to get a prompt response.
- I do not consider unblock or undeletion requests sent via email. Please refer to Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks to appeal your block. You may request undeletion here.
- Off-wiki evidence of undisclosed paid editing must not be posted here. These, and complex cases of paid editing will not be acted upon. In both cases, please email paid-en-wp
wikipedia dot org.
Did you misvote here? Just you linked a Commons vote on Thoreau as your reason to oppose Poe. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 12:31, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, I did. Thanks for letting me know. MER-C 13:14, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 |
 |
About Holborn Assets Draft Page
Hello, I noticed of recent that my account is being linked to another user's action on the Holborn Draft page as meatpuppetry, the user was blocked and you left a summary that linked to my account, the summary ended "... and meatpuppetry - see User:Epaomo". Please note that I do not in any way have affiliation or connection the other user. Yes I created the Draft page but left it to work on later as I know it doesn't fit in yet to Wikipedia Article Mainstream. I know the other editor nor did I ask him to edit the draft, Kindly make further investigation on this issue as I really want to prove I'm not in anyway a meatpuppet, I would also appreciate if my username is removed from the summary "...and meatpuppetry - see User:Epaomo". Thank You--Epaomo (talk) 14:14, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
- I have taken a closer look at your editing history and have decided to block you for the exact same reason. MER-C 14:25, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 |
Re-created articles
Hello. Rakesh K. Sarna is an identical re-creation by a different user of Rakesh Sarna which you drafted last month. Also, can you tell me if Draft:Anil Kumar Pandey is about the same person as the deleted Anil Pandey? Finally, it would be worth checking if Late Life: The Chien-Ming Wang Story (film) is in any way similar to the deleted Late Life: The Chien-Ming Wang Story. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 01:35, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- Blocked as a sockpuppet and deleted G5.
- Two completely different people.
- There are similarities between the two articles. Furthermore, Ubiquitouslarry has created two other promotional "articles": Quorum (software) and Equipboard. I wouldn't be surprised if they were also a spammer. MER-C 13:05, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello. What about Hims, Inc., is it about the same topic as Hims (company)? Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 00:13, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 |
Name
After writing this, I want to ask: what does your name mean? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:04, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
.jpg&diff=893169750&oldid=893146084){kind=link}
- I once had an interest in space exploration and in particular, Mars. I should get a username change, though - I expect to stick around for a lot longer. MER-C 19:09, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 |
Deleting the Adnuntius article based on criterion A7
I noticed that you deleted the Adnuntius article that existed based on the A7 criterion: No indication of importance.
The Adnuntius article was listed to fill the links that existed on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emediate
It seemed to me that if the Emediate page should exist, so should the Adnuntius page, as Adnuntius is now the new owners of Emediate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonemaster (talk • contribs) 15:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
- It isn't surprising that Wikipedia, as a volunteer service, is full of crappy articles that shouldn't exist which we haven't got around to deleting yet, and yes, Emediate is one of them. I have nominated for deletion. Do you have any connection with this company? MER-C 17:25, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
- I have a connection with Adnuntius. I work there. Tonemaster
_on_a_tree_trunk.jpg) |
_on_a_tree_trunk.jpg){kind=link}
Please see
This edit [1] by BLDM (talk · contribs). The history at Tether (cryptocurrency) (before the GS notice) and the discussion at the talk page might interest you as well. Smallbones(smalltalk) 15:05, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hmmm... clearly inappropriate but a problem I take on rarely. I'm not entirely sure what sanction(s) to issue - 48 hour block and/or indefinite topic ban? The problematic behavior is not limited to cryptocurrencies. I suggest asking someone who has more experience in dealing with battleground behavior - TonyBallioni perhaps. MER-C 16:02, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Hey MER-C, I would like to thank you for deleting Draft:Battle for Dream Island. Back in 23 November 2018, I thought about making that page. When I was putting it up in the Article Wizard, It sent to that page that was already created, so I had a head start. I expanded the draft. Way bigger. Way later that day, the draft was being destroyed. A user requested the draft to be deleted. Hell in a Bucket rejected the submission, CD (CommonsDelinker) removed the logo, and some user i forgot its name (it’s not a IP user) erased all my hard work, it hurt me real bad, but I just let it slide, because the page was getting destroyed. Till then, It finally got deleted. Then later a IP user recreated the draft, I saw on my watchlist, I didn’t even bother. I had figured it will get deleted again, it did, deleted. Recreated again, deleted, Something has to be done. Maybe prevent the page from being created? Do something you can. Thanks, HappyINC. HappyINC (talk) 16:19, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
- I have indeed protected it from recreation. MER-C 16:49, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Submission of draft Draft:Daniel Erickson
It looks like the account User:Neelsau which you blocked, has just submitted the draft you moved to draft space again without improvements via the IP 157.37.143.222 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Do you want to block the IP (it has only been 50 mins since the IP's edits)? Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 09:52, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
- I don't know if the IP is definitely connected, but it seems strange that they would only make two edits and those two edits to the draft (without actually improving it). Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 09:55, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
- Dynamic Indian IP, Reliance Jio. Probably not worth blocking, given how quickly IPs in that part of the world change hands, but it confirms that the draft is spam. MER-C 09:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg) |
ArbCom 2019 special circular
 |
Administrators must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 03:02, 4 May 2019 (UTC) Template:Z152
Category:Crimean Tatar heroes CFD discussion
MER-C, Thank you for helping to clear out the backlog in categories for deletion. You closed this discussion as delete a week ago but the category remains. I'm happy to tag it for deletion for you but, as the nominator, I didn't want to take action without your OK. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- It's been listed at the manual page for emptying before deletion (it was requested in the debate, I put it there just to be safe). MER-C 17:53, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks! RevelationDirect (talk) 12:32, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC) Template:Z83
 |
Notification on my talk page
Hi, can you please explain why you have posted the recent notification on my talk page (and logged my name on a list)? I have not edited *any* articles on those subject matters (to my memory; there is a small possibility I may have years ago and don't remember). I have only just recently posted on a talk page and did so because I saw a notice inviting comment to an RfC. I feel like I am being unfairly singled out. I had already seen the notice at the top of the talk page; your putting an additional notice on my talkpage was not necessary and frankly, somewhat intimidating. Do you do this with every new participant in a talk page on these subject areas? Oska (talk) 17:57, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- You are not being singled out. All of the other participants got the same notice, some not from me. The Bitcoin Cash/Bcash dispute is external, was imported into Wikipedia, is petty, is one of the reasons why the article has been protected and has been burning slowly on Wikipedia for the last year. While I appreciate the outside input and was unaware the RFC was advertised elsewhere, if you are going to substantially participate in this topic area you need to know the sanctions exist. I cannot assume you have read the notice on the talk page. MER-C 19:03, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- Are you telling me that every new contributor in this area, even if it's just on a talk page, is receiving this notice? If so, I see this as a practice hostile to participation. The notice being placed on one's personal talk page and a username recorded in a list, when the contributor has (so far) done nothing wrong, is intimidating, despite whatever wordings are included about 'not being singled out'. It very much feels like you are being singled out.
- Usually notices are used to serve as warnings when a contributor has started to step outside the lines. To use personally directed notices in advance of any bad behaviour feels wrong to me. We should assume good faith first until there are signs that that assumption was misplaced in the instance of a particular user. Oska (talk) 20:22, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- No. You got yours because you waded into the Bitcoin Cash/Bcash dispute. Most of the warnings have been handed out for creation of promotional articles or drafts i.e. the primary reason why the sanctions exist in the first place. There is a zero tolerance approach taken towards promotion, conflicts of interest, whitewashing and use of unreliable sources because literally billions of dollars have been lost in cryptocurrency scams. I don't want Wikipedia being used for securities fraud (especially pump and dump). MER-C 20:32, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- OK, I am quite dissatisfied with this answer. Firstly, suggesting that I 'waded' into a dispute. I did not wade into anything; I responded to an RfC on an article on which I had never previously edited or joined in discussion on the talk page. I made my response; the response was quite neutrally worded and, in my opinion, a sensible one. That would have been where things would have ended for me. However, I was then jumped on by the two editors who had previously responded by choosing the other provided RfC option to the one I chose. One alleged that I was engaging in 'blatant original research'. The other indulged in a lot of wikilawyering time-wasting objections, not dealing with the substance of my answer but trying to discount the substance by discounting the sources (despite my sources including references to original sources).
- Secondly, you appear to be lumping me in with people who have engaged in 'promotion, conflicts of interest, whitewashing and use of unreliable sources' and also people who have used wikipedia for securities fraud. If this is what you are doing or even insinuating then that is a very serious accusation and I am more than unimpressed that you are going there. Please clarify your position before I take this further. Oska (talk) 21:20, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- The implication in your latter paragraph was not my intention. I apologize. In hindsight, I have realised that I should not have issued the warning either. I'll retract it. MER-C 19:19, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for the apology and for retracting the warning. I'm happy to leave it here now. I actually got a bit upset from this affair and took a little time out from wikipedia to calm down. I've never been accused of pushing any agenda on wikipedia before and so getting the notice when I had just commented on a talk page (after seeing the RfC advertised) was a bit of a shock. Even though I've followed the bitcoin story quite closely for years now and have been a wikipedia editor for all that time I've never made edits to any articles in this area (and still haven't, although I might now on the discussed article). Anyway, have calmed down now and appreciate your mature response in re-evaluating the action you took. Oska (talk) 12:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- The implication in your latter paragraph was not my intention. I apologize. In hindsight, I have realised that I should not have issued the warning either. I'll retract it. MER-C 19:19, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
- No. You got yours because you waded into the Bitcoin Cash/Bcash dispute. Most of the warnings have been handed out for creation of promotional articles or drafts i.e. the primary reason why the sanctions exist in the first place. There is a zero tolerance approach taken towards promotion, conflicts of interest, whitewashing and use of unreliable sources because literally billions of dollars have been lost in cryptocurrency scams. I don't want Wikipedia being used for securities fraud (especially pump and dump). MER-C 20:32, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Hey, I screwed up and deleted Portal:Winter Paralympics when D-Batching the results of Portal:Winter (totally forgot that Special:Prefixindex would also pull unrelated things starting with Portal:Winter, not just subpages). I !voted in the Winter Paralympics discussion, so it probably shouldn't be deleted per me. Can you reverse your close, and I'll undelete the portal? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:49, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- Done. MER-C 08:36, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 09:05, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
.jpg) |
,_delta_del_Okavango,_Botsuana,_2018-07-31,_DD_11.jpg) |
account creation backlog
I didn't want to suggest this at the discussion because I have no idea whether this idea has already been proven hateful to the community, and I agree with you on 'pruning the bureaucracy.' But: is there any merit in the idea of a sort of 'pre-admin' level that would carry with it the expectation that a person who wants to be an admin show work in dealing with backlogs at places that don't require an admin but have significant backlog issues? Maybe not even an official "level" of bureaucracy, I don't know. Maybe it could be the kind of thing that RfA voters are encouraged to consider? It feels like a lot of people who want to be admins kind of try to clerk notice boards in an attempt to be visible, and that just doesn't seem all that useful. I'm really just thinking out loud. Feel free to ignore me if I'm being an idiot. --valereee (talk) 20:24, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
- There are already noticeboards with backlogs that can be tackled by non-admins that have slightly "special" clerk statuses, such as Wikipedia:Copyright problems, Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations, and some that admit experienced non-admin closures, such as Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. Lack of admin tools can be worked around by CSD G6 tagging. Is/should there be more of them? I don't know. Unbundling the tools is a perennial proposal. MER-C 20:40, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm a proponent of unbundling as much as possible, but I've found life is more peaceful when I don't stick my oar in lol --valereee (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Special Barnstar |
| I just wanted to thank you for your committed work on nominating featured pictures. You and Adam Cuerden look to be keeping the ball rolling there. Have a good one. Geoffroi (talk) 00:57, 16 May 2019 (UTC) |
- You're welcome. MER-C 20:07, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 |
Cheers and thanks
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
| For your work in multiple areas, especially posting lists of suspicious new articles at WP:COIN. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC) |
- And a sincere thank you to you as well for dealing with spammy shit more than I do. MER-C 16:11, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Kochartech redirected to Draft/Kochartech
Hi, MER-C, why did you redirected kochartech to draft folder. Let me know the reason and solution to publish this on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prabhsahni (talk • contribs)
- See WP:PAID, WP:NOTPROMO and WP:COI. I am not here to help you promote your employer - quite the opposite, actually. MER-C 12:45, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
- User blocked for sock/meatpuppetry (see Mahirb18). MER-C 12:55, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
--SamHolt6 (talk) 17:06, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Reinstating the article on Somdip Dey
Mer-C, recently you deleted an article with title, "Somdip Dey" because the article was created by a banned user. But the conetent of the article seemed relevant to artificial intelligence and computer science topic. The topic itself also seems notable. Shouldn't the article get the opportunity to remain on Wikipedia given the notability criteria? GeekDude92 (talk)
- No. It was paid-for, but undisclosed, advertising. MER-C 18:09, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Ok. I was not aware of that. All the best.GeekDude92 (talk)
CoinMarketCap
Hi mer-c, i want to write about crypto and blockchain becos it is what interests me. i'm not here to promote anybody.n i write what i find interesting ok? you can check CoinMarketCap on google.com, every trader, investor, enthusiast know CMC. I dont know your problem with the article. there are refernces there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Animunie marie (talk • contribs)
- Please use grammatically correct English. This is the English Wikipedia, you are expected to be competent in written English.
- You were directed to Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and were explicitly told that "Cryptocurrency enthusiast websites, social media and the company's own website are not reliable sources". Many cryptocurrency websites carry undisclosed advertorial content, reprinted press releases and/or do not exhibit critical thinking. Draft:CoinMarketCap only cited one reliable source (and 3 crypto ones). HYGH only cited crypto sources. By citing crypto sources, you are regurgitating blockchain/crypto hype. That is promotional and not allowed. MER-C 11:46, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
FPC suggestion
If you haven't yet gone through c:Category:Featured pictures by User:Poco a poco (617!!), I'm sure many of his great images would be fairly easy nominations here on WP. Diego Delso (Poco a poco) is easily the best and most prolific high-end photographer on Commons. Have a good day. Geoffroi (talk) 00:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- I mention this to you because I'm expecting to lose internet access within the next few days, and I might not get it back for a month or two. Geoffroi (talk) 00:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- I am aware of his photos, yes. However many of the architectural shots have lens distortion, slightly overdone high dynamic range imaging or miscellaneous issues (e.g. see right of File:Colina de las Cruces, Lituania, 2012-08-09, DD 12.JPG). It's not an automatic yes. MER-C 16:46, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- I should have known you'd be familiar with his works. As regards the issues you mention, I don't doubt that you can pick out his best work and get it passed here as easily as the nominations I've seen here by you usually do. Thanks again. Geoffroi (talk) 20:04, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- I am aware of his photos, yes. However many of the architectural shots have lens distortion, slightly overdone high dynamic range imaging or miscellaneous issues (e.g. see right of File:Colina de las Cruces, Lituania, 2012-08-09, DD 12.JPG). It's not an automatic yes. MER-C 16:46, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Draft:Aragon (project)
Hello,
I wanted to ask for further clarification on why the page was moved into Draft as per your revision of https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Aragon_(project)&oldid=897819712 ?
And also why I have been added to the Log of notifications?
I have disclosed my affiliation with the project on the user page as well as on the article Talk page.
The article should have a sufficient amount of reliable sources, very few self-sources and meet the notability and content policies.
I also don't understand and reject the notion of "blocked editor collaborating with covert advertising sockfarm" which is totally false, I have never done such a thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatu.karki (talk • contribs)
- I am referring to Stevey7788, who accepted your submission and was blocked for corruptly accepting undisclosed paid-for advertisements. You are also advised to read this, which states that "Any celebrity or other individual who promotes a virtual token or coin that is a security must disclose the nature, scope, and amount of compensation received in exchange for the promotion. A failure to disclose this information is a violation of the anti-touting provisions of the [US] federal securities laws." MER-C 14:39, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- @MER-C: Ok, thanks for the reply. But I nor the project has any relation to the mentioned user, including any payments to have the page accepted. Nor has there ever been any paid promotion used, celebrities or otherwise. Subject in case is an open source software project, and yes, it does have a token, but I don't see the relevance to the SEC article as it was in relation to this event. As I want to make sure that this is handled properly, what steps should there be taken to get the page back into the accepted status? Tatu.karki (talk) 11:04, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- Just resubmit (add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page) and wait. MER-C 11:05, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- @MER-C: Ok, thanks for the reply. But I nor the project has any relation to the mentioned user, including any payments to have the page accepted. Nor has there ever been any paid promotion used, celebrities or otherwise. Subject in case is an open source software project, and yes, it does have a token, but I don't see the relevance to the SEC article as it was in relation to this event. As I want to make sure that this is handled properly, what steps should there be taken to get the page back into the accepted status? Tatu.karki (talk) 11:04, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Kgayhart
Hello, I'd appreciate any additional comment you might have on Kgayhart's unblock request and statements. Thanks. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- The unblock request is reasonable to the extent it agrees with off-wiki information (search the username) confirming that we're dealing with undisclosed paid advocacy by a PR agency. However, therein lies the problem - why didn't they declare in the first place (as one should do with all paid advertorial content, irrespective of medium), and are they actually here to improve the encyclopedia? I'll leave those questions to you. MER-C 16:43, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
.jpg) |
Why?
Why was User:Stone cold Staffordshire blocked? All paid editing was declared. All rules were followed.Midlands FC fan (talk) 05:20, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- No they weren't. Disclosure is necessary but not sufficient. They were using Wikipedia to promote their clients and moving the spam into mainspace in violation of the conflict of interest rules.
- You're not a sockpuppet of that user, are you? MER-C 09:13, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
_male_feeding_Anja_Community_Reserve_3e.jpg) |
Suggested "userspace crap search"
Hi! I've found the spam-finding notes on your userpage really helpful, wanted to suggest another: "pay per click"/"pay-per-click". I've found a good number of old promotional pages that way recently, and it has fewer false positives than "search engine optimization" (plenty of users mention they do search engine optimization, only a few mention PPC). creffett (talk) 17:55, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- Added pay per click to Special:Abusefilter/354 which flags pages in real time. I don't have the time to look at these, but please also consider cost per click, cost per mille and similar advertising metrics. P.S. The SEO keyword doesn't just find content. MER-C 18:18, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, and good suggestions! Is there any way I can make use of that filter without having to dig through the full abuse filter log (and without having edit filter viewing privs)? I search by a specific list of filters to find likely spam/promo, but 354 is hidden, and so if I manually specify the it as one of the filters I get a warning about results being hidden (presumably so that I can't piece together the filter contents by looking at what it flags). creffett (talk) 18:53, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- You won't be able to see them because you are not an Wikipedia:Edit filter helper. You should be able to see the results at Special:Tags under "possible self-promotion in userspace". MER-C 17:06, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- Got it, I'll keep an eye on that tag. Thanks again! creffett (talk) 19:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- You won't be able to see them because you are not an Wikipedia:Edit filter helper. You should be able to see the results at Special:Tags under "possible self-promotion in userspace". MER-C 17:06, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, and good suggestions! Is there any way I can make use of that filter without having to dig through the full abuse filter log (and without having edit filter viewing privs)? I search by a specific list of filters to find likely spam/promo, but 354 is hidden, and so if I manually specify the it as one of the filters I get a warning about results being hidden (presumably so that I can't piece together the filter contents by looking at what it flags). creffett (talk) 18:53, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Detroit Trading Wikipedia Page // Redirect Question
Greetings:
I reviewed the edit history for the Detroit Trading Wikipedia page, which was initially approved earlier in the month. I see it was placed back into draft format for the following reason:
"MER-C moved page Detroit Trading to Draft:Detroit Trading over a redirect without leaving a redirect: Quarantine paid-for spam"
Could the example of the "redirect without leaving a redirect" be provided so that we can fix? And what would be an appropriate fix in this situation?
Thank you for your consideration of this request,
Matt Clayson 96.66.42.177 (talk) 16:43, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
- The reason for the move is "paid-for spam", which makes it anathema to the purpose of Wikipedia. What is your connection with Detroit Trading? MER-C 16:51, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your response.
I am Detroit Trading's general counsel, and draft much of our corporate communications.
What would not constitute "paid for" SPAM? For example, I used to work at HelloWorld and helped our marketing director, AlesyaO draft our Wiki page. It was accepted. I used the same format for the Detroit Trading page, it was initially approved and then denied.
Thanks!
Matt Clayson 96.66.42.177 (talk) 19:12, 30 May 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.66.42.177 (talk)
- (talk page stalker) To save you looking, that's referring to HelloWorld_Inc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) SmartSE (talk) 13:03, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
- Wikipedia contributors are volunteers. Our readers expect encyclopedic, reliable, neutral and independent coverage of our subject matter. Material written by the marketing department is unlikely to be any of those things. We are not interested in what a company has to say about itself but what others have to say about it. To not be "paid for spam", an article needs to be written by a volunteer who proves the topic is worthy of inclusion based on substantial coverage by reliable media outlets based only on merit (and not marketing material). You should also be aware of FTC guidelines on native advertising which requires more prominent disclosure than our Terms of Use. MER-C 13:56, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
MER-C - thank you for the response. Detroit Trading clients are large, sophisticated automotive brands. Our clients expect knowledgeable, innovative, responsive, attentive and value-added services of our design. Material written by either our marketing department or a *volunteer* and published on Wikipedia is unlikely to provide our clients with any of those things. We are not interested in securing new clients or sales via Wikipedia but rather want to provide additional insight into key milestones that we developed in the automotive digital marketing industry. To not be *approved* by one *volunteer editor* at Wikipedia doesn't affect or sales or marketing efforts in any way, rather it deprives those looking for key milestones in the automotive digital marketing world one less source of information. You should also be aware that a Wikipedia entry outlining key milestones applicable to the digital automotive marketing industry and recognized by reliable media outlets and trade publications is not "native advertising" as defined by the FTC in its Native Advertising Guidelines, which requires specific intent to promote a product, amongst other things.
Matt Clayson96.66.42.177 (talk) 16:00, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
- (by talk reader)
"it deprives those looking for...
We don't care and neither do you. You're a salesman making vague references to your potential customers. We happy few that write an encyclopedia for nothing but satisfaction do not welcome your efforts. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:12, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
_(14419490013).jpg) |
Stanleytux sock
Regarding Rexchuqa who you listed at Japanelemu – do you think they might be a WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Stanleytux sock? ☆ Bri (talk) 14:50, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- Don't know. I couldn't find any intersection. That said, I did find another sockpuppet. MER-C 14:59, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- Intersection: requested move & AfD vote (Stanleytux), request for undeletion (Rexchuqa) ☆ Bri (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- Found another sockpuppet. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Special:Undelete/Young Stunna and Special:Undelete/Draft:Young stunna leave no room for doubt. MER-C 19:02, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- Intersection: requested move & AfD vote (Stanleytux), request for undeletion (Rexchuqa) ☆ Bri (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
About a deleted article: Sheikh Abdulla Bin Mohamed Bin Butti Al Hamed
Hi how are you? a few days ago you deleted this article because it was uploaded by a user who did not have permission to do it. I want to clarify the situation: I work with Bin Butti Al Hamed, and some time ago we contacted a freelancer to make an English version of Bin Butti's article (Arabic version was established some time ago). The article was published and was three months online, it was even reviewed and (as I see now in the record) the reviewer thanked its publication. We never assumed that the editor would act illegally on Wikipedia, we always thought that the publication had been made transparently. I would like to ask you if the article could be online again; I read part of Wikipedia rules, I understand that, as an interested party, I can not make direct editions in the article, but propose them. We can do it? Thanks for your time.Myounes22 (talk) 16:29, 2 June 2019 (UTC)