User talk:FCBlinder

If you need any help or you want to help me don't scruple to talk to me.--FCBlinder (talk) 22:22, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (February 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Arash Shakour, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please do not submit multiple copies of drafts. It does not increase the likelihood that one of them will be accepted into article space, and annoys the reviewers. It is likely to be seen as an effort to game the system, and may result in the drafts being nominated for deletion.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:FCBlinder/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:FCBlinder/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:27, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FCBlinder! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:27, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arash Shakour (February 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft reads like a directory entry, but Wikipedia is not a directory. This draft does not establish notability.

LinkedIn is not a reliable source.

This draft does not make a credible claim of significance. This draft would be subject to speedy deletion in article space. If this draft is resubmitted in its current form or a similar form, it should be nominated for deletion.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Arash Shakour and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Arash Shakour, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 16:09, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ismet Saz for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ismet Saz 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/Ismet Saz until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Dr. Coal^Message 16:03, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message but I think you will have to wait for the deletion discussion to close. You could add secondary sources to show the notability of the subject of the article.— Rod ^talk 13:49, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

Hello FCBlinder. 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very 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 extremely 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:FCBlinder. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=FCBlinder|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. GSS ^💬 03:03, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I admit this last article was part of a paid contribution, but I accepted it because I think it is achieving notability.--FCBlinder (talk) 01:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for disclosing your paid editing status. WP:PAID requires that you provide links to your profiles on all sites such as Upwork, Freelancer.com etc. where you "advertise, solicit or obtain paid Wikipedia-editing services" so please do so before making any further edit to fully comply with the policy. Thank you. GSS ^💬 07:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

okay but not all the pages i did are paid you seem delete all the pages i create or you'll do this, is this a professional? i don't accept all the pages because i know most of these are not achieving the notability just the pages i see it really could accept the notability i add. So don't worry i'm not one of these guys oh yeaaa i'll accept all pages and take alot of money no GSS it's not me, i create pages with paid in my empty time so when i find the person or the company achieve the notability i do it except they don't achieve the notability i tell them this person or the company isn't achieve the notability.--FCBlinder (talk) 07:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Link please? GSS ^💬 08:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

here is the link it's called Khamsat.1

and who you were hired by? GSS ^💬 08:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

someone form the site.--FCBlinder (talk) 08:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 09:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is evident to me that this wasn't your only paid article. You are also blocked for proxying on behalf of a blocked spammer (Revival932). MER-C 09:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]