User talk:DanielTheDon
|
November 2018
[edit]This is a redirect because he doesn't merit an individual article, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meyhem Lauren, and your version had all the same problems that I've listed above, no independent third-party refs, no separate notability other than as a member of the band Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Sockpuppet investigation
[edit]
An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DanielTheDon, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
JesseRafe (talk) 19:06, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
November 2018
[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Action Bronson, you may be blocked from editing. JesseRafe (talk) 20:00, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Incorrect information?! it is everywhere else but on wikipedia that proves his real name. it isnt disruptive editing nor incorrect information. i was in the process of adding 4 separate links that prove what his real government name is not what someone had said on twitter now calm down and dont get offensive. DANIELTHEDON (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- He said it on Twitter, not "someone". Unless you have a source that says what he said about his own name is wrong, then do not change it again. This is your final warning. JesseRafe (talk) 20:10, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
twitter isnt a reliable source and people can change whatever they want about themselves. i added an article where he himself was accompanied by someone and he wrote that his name is wrote in the manner that i specified, there alot more articles, including his imprint VICE RECORDS where they write his name Arian Asllani and other websites such as the Rachel Ray Show, and Complex magazines. in conclusion my 10 links beat that 1 twitter link, please research a little more before starting an argument.
- You already had a final warning and instead of discussing on the talk page, you engaged in further intentional disruption and edit-warring. This isn't about "an argument", but your disruptive and anti-collaborative behavior, not to mention general lack of logic and understanding of the subject matter. Lots of people wrote his name Arian Asllani, that may be true, but that doesn't mean they are correct. Occam's Razor suggests the magnitude of people spelling his name wrong, led to the necessity of his declaration on how to spell it correctly. JesseRafe (talk) 20:56, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
There are many more independent articles that state how his name should be spelled or is spelled, third party sources. My point is that people can change the small things about themselves online, especially when it is someones social media, for example instead of Jesse people might spell it Jessie, because of preference or something alike. I personally do not care about his real name but sources and info that ive found prove it. I still dont understand the reasoning behind why you think his twitter page would be a reliable source, please tell me more about that.
- Which is why you were invited to discuss it on the article talk page or explore Wikipedia's rules and guidelines on your own. Both options other than edit-warring. Please note that even without the new template, you did receive a final warning about disruptive editing prior to the above comment and glut of questionable sources added to the article. Good day. JesseRafe (talk) 21:22, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
An extended welcome
[edit]Hi DanielTheDon. Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.
Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.
Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.
If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.
Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.
I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Ronz (talk) 00:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Speaker knockerz
[edit]
If this is the first article that you have 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.
A tag has been placed on Speaker knockerz requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Dom from Paris (talk) 08:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)