User talk:Literarum fan

Welcome!

Hello, Literarum fan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 19:31, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Mehdi Ghasemi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Mehdi Ghasemi. Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 18:04, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mehdi Ghasemi (May 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Legacypac was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Read WP:AUTHOR

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:Mehdi Ghasemi 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:Mehdi Ghasemi, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Legacypac (talk) 19:56, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:06, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mehdi Ghasemi has been accepted

Mehdi Ghasemi, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 20:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thank you for accepting the submission; however, it seems that after your acceptance, it has been declined!!! Why is it so? While looking at several pages of this type created in Wikipedia, I see some of them do not have refernces or notes at all and are really poor in quality, but they have been accepted with no problem. However, my submission which follows your principles is rejected!!! So it would be kind of you to reconisder it. Being objective seems to be the Wikipedia's motto; however, it seems that subjectivity affects the decisions of some reviewers. All the best

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mehdi Ghasemi (May 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chrissymad was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Mehdi Ghasemi 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:Mehdi Ghasemi, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:01, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Literarum fan! 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! CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:01, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mehdi Ghasemi (May 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by L293D was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Mehdi Ghasemi 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:Mehdi Ghasemi, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:10, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Mehdi Ghasemi

Hello, Literarum fan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mehdi Ghasemi".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CoolSkittle (talk) 02:27, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019: Bookspam warning

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 websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website 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 page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you.

Note that this is not just about External links - please see WP:BOOKSPAM. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here, but as this account seems to be a single-purpose account for the purpose of inserting Medhi Ghasemi into Wikipedia, I am afraid that I will have to undo all of your edits about this person. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:41, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have an obvious conflict of interest, please don't write about yourself, your friends or relatives and read the guidance below:

When you write about a person, you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.
You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.
There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:35, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Democracy, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:57, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of threatening people, stop deleting their contributions emotionally. I introduced a couple of papers on postmodern democracy which is a new idea and a scholarly paper on a writer, but you deleted them, while in all your pages there are many links and paper introduction. Stop madness!

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:39, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I suppose a mistake has happened. As a scholar, I have always contributed positively in Wikipedia. I have introduced many appropriate materials for researchers' and scholars' studies and have always been happy. However, it is for a while that all my contributions are deleted, and this is not fair, since many pages on Wikipedia have almost the same papers and links. If you do not believe in my claim, I can bring you several examples. This makes me disappointed with deleting my contributions which are really helpful. I hope you understand my feelings and reconsider your decision

Decline reason:

This doesn't really address the reasons for your block, which is your blanking of the democracy article to post your grievances, and your adding what seems to be links to your own work. If you are aware of other researchers adding links to their own works on Wikipedia, please point out those examples(though do not out other editors). Others behaving inappropriately does not mean you can be permitted to do so. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 18:59, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

This is too bad that you think I have introduced my works. Wrong! No worries to block me at all. This way you deprive yourself from free services of others.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yunshui ^雲 _水 13:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.