User talk:Eslima5

August 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not replace pages with blank content, as you did with this edit to Good luck charm, as this is confusing to readers. The page's content has been restored for now. If there is a problem with the page, it should be edited or reverted to a previous version if possible; if you think the page should be removed entirely, see further information. Thank you. MsFionnuala (talk) 13:05, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Liquid_foundation

Hello Eslima5,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Liquid_foundation for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. Take a look at our suggestions for essential content in short articles to learn what should be included.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Toasty (talk) 15:09, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Eslima5. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 15:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial links as references

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:29, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:33, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited Good luck charm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charm (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 03:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

Hi there - I note an ad at Fiverr that appears to be by you. If it is, you may wish to review Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines, and you should probably disclose that you're a compensated article writer. There is an active debate right now about the best way to handle that, but you might check out Paid_editing_on_Wikipedia as a good general overview. Thank you. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 07:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dont care

who cares.

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:08, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Advice from an experienced COI

Hi Eslima. To be honest, WP:COI is a very long and confusing guideline. I would recommend WP:PSCOI or the even simpler draft essay here. There are some rather straightforward solutions to the problems you're having that I would like to share:

To avoid the frustrating experience with problematic articles, just use WP:AFC (articles for creation) to submit new articles for consideration. Your contributed articles will be reviewed by experienced and impartial editors who will provide up-front feedback, instead of after-the-fact deletions. This will improve your experience on Wikipedia.

To avoid an unhealthy relationship with your clients, where they are pressuring you to do spammy, one-sided or unethical edits, just tell them that you don't directly edit Wikipedia articles as suggested in most cases by WP:COI (use AfC, Talk pages, etc.). When clients realize they have to ASK for an edit to be implemented, they realize how embarrassing the request is.

You'll need to invest some time to do this well. You should charge more than $5. If you need any other help/advice, I'm around. User:King4057 15:24, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Advice from an experienced COI

Thanks thats good. It is really much better to be informed in the first place when something is wrong, than to let me work really hard on something and it get deleted.

Reliable sources

Hi! I just wanted to go over reliable sources with you a little since I see that you're fairly new here. First off, almost no paranormal website will be usable as a reliable source ever. The only exception would be if it's the personal website of a very, very notable paranormal expert (as in someone who has a Wikipedia article and has been quoted in multiple independent and reliable sources such as mainstream newspapers or TV shows). Even then it'd have to be an in-depth article and be completely by them. For example, let's say that George Noory had a website and posted about this. That could be considered a reliable source depending on how it was written/put out. If he went into depth on Grinning Man then it'd be usable. If it was just an offhanded remark, that's considered to be just a passing mention and not something that would show notability for GM. Sites like Urban Dictionary are never usable as reliable sources ever. Anyone can add and edit that site, so it's fairly easy for someone to say "The Grinning Man is made out of cheese and fairy dust, his tears cause cancer and he's the opposite of Chuck Norris." Now when it comes to sites such as ParanormalX and various blogs, those sites are almost always by average joes and random users, so they can't be used as reliable sources. They might call themselves experts, but nine times out of ten most of these sites are completely unusable. The reason is similar to why UD can't be used, because they're sites that anyone can put up on the internet and edit and because there's no way of knowing how their research was done.

Now as far as reliable sources go, places that could be considered reliable are things such as articles in the New York Times, Boston Post, or on notable TV shows or in books that are considered to be reliable. I've listed two encyclopedia books on the article, but be aware that those are often considered to be trivial at best. The thing with a lot of paranormal/extraterrestrial themed books is that they can often be written in a non-encyclopedic and non-neutral manner, being more of an opinion piece than something that could be used to show notability. That's why it's so darn hard for there to be articles about anything that's not uber mainstream. Even Slender Man doesn't have an article and he's been mentioned pretty frequently in a lot of places. (OK, so he's a fake UL, but the idea of notability is the same.)

As far as images go, I wanted to warn you about this as well. I've seen where that image has been posted on the internet, but not really in relation to the Grinning Man article. It also doesn't seem to fit the description of the GM, as the descriptions of him had been more of a man with darker skin and beadier eyes. Be very, VERY careful of including random images since if it doesn't match up with what the article says, it just comes across like it's a random image and makes the article seem less legit in the process. I actually recommend removing it from the article entirely. Hopefully all of this will help explain things a little more.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On a side note, I also wanted to add that the article comes across like something written more for a conspiracy site than an encyclopedia. I edited this down a lot, but you definitely need to be careful of coming across non-neutral. A good example of what an encyclopedic article about an urban legend should be like is the one for the Jersey Devil and I recommend using it as a resource. I also heavily recommend that you seek help finding sources through Wikipedia:WikiProject Paranormal, as improving articles on the paranormal and UFO type stuff is their thing. Other than that, I've recommended that this get transferred into your userspace if you're interested in continuing to work on the article. It's not notable enough at this point in time to warrant an article, but that doesn't mean that it will never be notable.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:29, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking

You can do all the blanking you want, but the diffs don't go away. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can tell all of your clients to come here and complain, but all of those articles will likely be deleted, including the one you didn't create. Good luck with your stocks. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bla

stop being annoying. i refunded them and informed them. its not my concern anymore. im not doing wikipedia anymore. not accepting orders anymore. so shut up.

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Sorry Ok Yes 341x417.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Sorry Ok Yes 341x417.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Theo polisme _:) 00:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeated image copyright violations and attempted "flickr-washing". If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:53, 22 August 2012 (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.

Agimat (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Charm

Alex Banayan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Blogger

Jennifer Jolly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Broadcaster

Laura Andon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to WWF

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:NJ Top Docs logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:NJ Top Docs logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Eulita Music Group Logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Eulita Music Group Logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:26, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alex Banayan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alex Banayan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Banayan (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Black Kite (talk) 19:18, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Haikaa Yamamoto pic.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Haikaa Yamamoto pic.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, BOT-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate your file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]