User talk:Didoes

Please be cautious

Your earlier edits seemed justified, but now you appear to be deleting sourced material. As far as I can tell, you are in violation of the guidelines. TimidGuy (talk) 15:07, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There does not need to be an active link for a source to be used in Wikipedia, as long as the source has been published and meets Wikipedia guidelines. Please restore some of the material you have deleted, such as all the material sourced to an article by Tim King in the Daily Telegraph. TimidGuy (talk) 15:16, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So much of this article is false and misleading and based on a lot of fake reporting. It is heavily biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Didoes (talk • contribs) 17:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chairman is wrong name. College was never sued by Oxford University. Tempest-Moggs never went back to Australia in 1996. College never went into liquidation. So much wrong information promoted here based on unreliable newspapers. Please present real evidence and not gossip or fake reporting. This would show integrity and professionalism.

April 2020

Hello, I'm MrClog. I noticed that in this edit to Warnborough College, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. MrClog (talk) 16:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Warnborough College. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. MrClog (talk) 16:27, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Warnborough College, you may be blocked from editing. In addition, do not add your own opinion to articles ("naive", "immature", etc.). MrClog (talk) 16:37, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Warnborough College. The source states: "However, within seven months the college had registered as a company in Ireland with offices in Cork and Brenden Tempest-Mogg and Malaysian national Kee Guan Ng (35) as its directors." Your edit replaced content that matched the source with content that did not. MrClog (talk) 16:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Didoes. MrClog (talk) 16:55, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month from certain pages (Warnborough College) for removing sourced info. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 17:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you return, please state what relationship you have, if any, with Warnborough College

You need to read WP:PAID and WP:COI. If you want to be unblocked I'd strongly suggest that you state your relationship. Doug Weller talk 17:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUKjTPPcOdQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUKjTPPcOdQ Didoes (talk) 14:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mandatory paid editing disclosure

Hello Didoes. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Didoes. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Didoes|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:11, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Well, you were warned above, but chose to ignore it. Therefore:

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 a 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.

~Anachronist (talk) 22:20, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]