User talk:Alexiusca

Welcome!

Hello, Alexiusca, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 03:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:We Day Vancouver Mainstage.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:We Day Vancouver Mainstage.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [1], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:

state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
add the relevant copyright tag.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ww2censor (talk) 05:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 10 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the We Day page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 17 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the We Day page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Me to We, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hedley. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Me to We

added a link pointing to Staples

We Day

added a link pointing to RBC

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Alexiusca. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Alexiusca. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have an undisclosed financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:

Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future. MER-C 10:18, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See Special:Permanentlink/947951524#Potentially_an_undisclosed_paid_editor_account. MER-C 10:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Usr4yw9X.png

The file File:Usr4yw9X.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused logo, spam image uploaded by WP:UPE account.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 00:01, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Not sure why or how I got identified as an UPE - there isn't strong explanation. The edits in question are ones I made 5+ years ago (and as far back as 10 years). As I recall, I specifically because the pages reeked of copy that seemed ripped straight off websites or promotional copy. I see that I appear to have been pulled in with what looks like accounts doing legitimate UPE, but I'm not connected to that at all (I've been making edits for over 15 years!). I see that I uploaded a logo that didn't quite meet wikipedia standards, but I'm not sure what else I did wrong here. FWIW I will happily refrain from editing these pages if it satisfies the admins, thank you for your consideration

Decline reason:

Please specifically answer the questions posed to you. Yamla (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

Hi Yamla, thank you for clarifying. To specifically address the questions: 1. I confirm I have read carefully and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements. 2. I am in no way being compensated for any edits, which go back to 2006 when I was a student. I do not have any affiliation with the subjects in question. 3. While I am absolutely not paid to do anything on Wikipedia, I am happy refrain from posting on the subjects in question. I would like to resume my contributions to Wikipedia on completely unrelated topics. Thanks again for your consideration.

Accept reason:

User agrees to not edit related to We Day charity and stick to topics outside of it. only (talk) 20:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain why, if you're not connected to the charity at all, almost every edit you've made is about that charity? If you are unblocked, what will you edit instead? only (talk) 23:52, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, only. Regarding the first question, most of my edits were made to those pages because it was one area I thought I could contribute to without needing deep domain expertise (I was in high school at the time of my first edits in 2006). At that time, I noticed that the charity's pages were written as if copied and pasted directly from their websites, so it was low hanging fruit to source claims and remove advertising-like language (you'll see most of my edits are of this nature). Every few years I tried to improve the page with third party sourcing, removing non-verified claims, and improving the format and organization of its pages, but it's beyond my knowledge and interest at this stage. Regarding the second question, I am planning to edit entries related to my field of study, biochemistry. I've been bookmarking a list of entries for various molecules and processes that could be brought into better compliance with the Wikipedia MoS and are not up to date with respect to more recent published journal articles. Thanks for your consideration. Alexiusca (talk) 15:20, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]