User talk:CyberTea1977

Welcome!

Hello, AndreKerr, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 01:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! AndreKerr, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:06, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of André Kërr

If this was the first article that you 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.

The page André Kërr has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DanCherek (talk) 01:32, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note what G4 clearly states: "It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version." The page is mostly different from what it was before, without extrapolating facts from the sources, and the sources provide notability. Its style is in line with other pages in the same category of Hinduism. There should not be persecution towards a page on a topic, but rather an openness for it to improve. It was mistakenly perceived as self-promotion due to the incorrect use of a nickname, which has already been clarified. Therefore, I don't see a reason to keep targeting this article. CyberTea1977 (talk) 16:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines, as you did at André Kërr.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. DanCherek (talk) 01:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The sources hold a notable status in Brazil. UOL, an important portal, stands out as one of them. ABAV, a non-profit organization, specializes in this particular subject, primarily within the Brazilian context. Lastly, WeMystic represents a domain of high authority in spiritual themes. In total, there are three excellent sources available. One of the sources, in fact, addresses the topic specifically, not just briefly mentioning it. It is not a personal website of the author; it is literally an non-profit organization that also references other notable individuals within the same line of work. There is a socio-cultural context that was overlooked during the voting process, known as the "complexo de vira-lata" (mongrel complex), as it was a Brazilian individual who decided to target the article's author, who has a humble background. Certainly, the article will be similar, but not identical, as it reflects the truth of the topic as cited in the sources. What makes more sense is to leave the article open for the community to make their changes and improvements. The votes were based on the allegations made by the individual in question and were simply accepted as facts without rational judgment, exhibiting a thoughtless herd mentality. CyberTea1977 (talk) 16:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have an issue with the way the AFD is closed, deletion review is thataway. DanCherek (talk) 16:08, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

CyberTea1977 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have been an editor on Wikipedia since 2009, and someone is falsely accusing me of advertising. This accusation is unfounded as I contribute to the platform completely voluntarily and without any financial gain. The recent deletion of the article was a mistake since it was not even an identical version, there is several differences. According to guidelines, you cannot speedy delete it. It's important to note that while I have used the name of the author in the past as username, I am not the author myself. It's akin to deleting an article about Keanu Reeves just because a fan used his name as a username. CyberTea1977 (talk) 02:02, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Hi CyberTea1977, sorry for the misunderstanding (but you can see why an account formerly named "AndreKerr" twice creating an article about someone named André Kërr, while ignoring messages about conflict of interest would seem suspect, right?). That being said, I stand by my deletion of the new version of André Kërr, because it was substantially similar to the one discussed and deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/André Kërr. No new sources were added and all of the text was copy-and-pasted with minor rewording. I've lifted my block, but please respect the consensus reached at the AFD, and understand that any future attempts should be created as a draft and go through Wikipedia:Articles for creation. DanCherek (talk) 02:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]