User talk:Storm4077

Nomination of Red Fun Cells Records for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Red Fun Cells Records 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/Red Fun Cells Records 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. 23:25, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Storm4077/Red Fun Cells Records

A tag has been placed on User:Storm4077/Red Fun Cells Records requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Cabayi (talk) 09:02, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hans Ramzan (February 24)

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

WikiAviator (talk) 03:22, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Storm4077! 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! WikiAviator (talk) 03:22, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hans Ramzan (March 5)

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

Sulfurboy (talk) 05:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Promotion or Advertising

Hello, I'm J.Turner99. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. J.Turner99 (talk) 11:25, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Minor Edits and Wikipedia Policy

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Birmingham City University, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.

All of your reverted edits to existing pages on March 4, 2020 were marked incorrectly, please consider viewing Help:Minor edit for more guidance. Finally, please note it is against Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines to cite people who do not yet exist on Wikipedia. J.Turner99 (talk) 12:05, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Hans Ramzan has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hans Ramzan. Thanks! KartikeyaS (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020

Hello. Your recent edit to List of industrial designers appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. Alexf^(talk) 23:53, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

There are other people in the list who don't have a separate page... I think he's a notable figure in the industry (emerging from last year) Storm4077 (talk) 23:56, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hans Ramzan (May 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 RoySmith were: 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:Hans Ramzan 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:Hans Ramzan, 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.

-- RoySmith (talk) 22:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove maintenance templates without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Hans Ramzan, you may be blocked from editing. Theroadislong (talk) 20:24, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Hans Ramzan has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 20:25, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Could you tell me specifically why Hans Ramzan isn't a notable figure. Many design schools around the world are learning about him at the moment for one of the modules so it is important for students to learn about his background. Just because he is not on showbusiness, does not mean he is not a notable person. A lot of colleges/universities have been to London's design museum this year to see his work so I would not say he is not "notable" Wiki-design-pr-co (talk) 20:32, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

You bypassed the WP:AFC process and moved the draft into article space after it was declined, articles need to pass WP:GNG interviews and blogs are not reliable sources and the awards do not confer any notability because they are themselves not notable. Theroadislong (talk) 20:45, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

There are not just interviews and blogs, there are also sources from reputable names such as forbes (a popular online finance magazine), CNN (an American news station), BBC (a British TV network). Yes, there is a source which is an interview (I'm not sure where you got "blogs" from though) but not all. There is an entire module at university's denoted to Ramzan. I understand you may not be aware of his work, but there are millions of design students around the world that are. Not just for his awards, but his work in general has been internationally recognised Wiki-design-pr-co (talk) 20:51, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Notability is a very subjective topic. Not every person on Wikipedia is a showbiz personality. For example, do you know who Jony Ive is? He has a Wikipedia. Ramzan has been referred to in schools as "the next generations Jony Ive". Yes, you may not know of Ive's work, but he too is VERY popular in the industry Wiki-design-pr-co (talk) 20:54, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Paid editing?

Hello Storm4077. 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:Storm4077. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Storm4077|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. Theroadislong (talk) 20:52, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I can categorically say that I gain no financial benefit (or any promotional related benefit) for this topic. As aforementioned, I have a lot of information on Ramzan due to studying his work (as do many other people) Wiki-design-pr-co (talk) 20:57, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

I have spent a lot of time collating this information for all other student around the world to use, hence my adamancy and persistence Wiki-design-pr-co (talk) 20:58, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Your user signature includes "Wiki-design-pr-co" which does infer that you are editing Wikipedia in a promotional manner. Theroadislong (talk) 21:07, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Design Paris College... Please refrain from making assumptions. As mentioned, a lot of time was spent collating this information so I would appreciate if you could respect the relevance on the article. It may not be notable to you, but it is to others. Wikipedia is a place for EVERYONE to learn about topics, not just actors and actresses Wiki-design-pr-co (talk) 21:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

If you could remove the template message on top of the page, that would be great. As you said, there is no evidence based on your assumed message and therefore it is just opinion without backed up evidence Wiki-design-pr-co (talk) 21:14, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Hans Ramzan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hans Ramzan 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/Hans Ramzan 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.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   07:09, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

There is an entire module at university's denoted to Ramzan. I understand you may not be aware of his work, but there are millions of design students around the world that are. Not just for his awards, but his work in general has been internationally recognised. Wiki-design-par-col (talk) 07:22, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Notability is a very subjective topic. Not every person on Wikipedia is a showbiz personality. For example, do you know who Jony Ive is? He has a Wikipedia. Ramzan has been referred to in schools as "the next generations Jony Ive". Yes, you may not know of Ive's work, but he too is VERY popular in the industry Wiki-design-par-col (talk) 07:23, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

No, notability is not subjective on Wikipedia - please read WP:GNG for an introduction. Comparing other articles is never a way to demonstrate notability - have a look at this which may assist. The example you quote is the Chancellor of a very significant UK academic institution - not quite the same as your man, I would guess.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   12:33, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Jony Ive had a Wikipedia page long before he became Chancellor. And the RCA wouldn't be considered "notable" according to the guidelines on notability. Irregardless, the notability page states that the article must contain "significant coverage" from reliable sources, independent from the article subject itself. Could you tell me why CNN, BBC, Forbes magazine are not considered "reliable" or well known "independent sources"? I'm not sure if you are aware, but these sources are very prominent in both the UK and USA (if not worldwide). It seems to me that there is not enough evidence to warrant a deletion, rather than enough evidence to NOT warrant a deletion, would you agree with that statement? Storm4077 (talk) 16:51, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

The Forbes source [1] Doesn't mention Ramzan and the article doesn't seem to have any sources from the BBC or CNN?Theroadislong (talk) 18:24, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Your user signature

The signature that you have recently adopted does not appear to be compliant with current guidelines . Could you please amend it so that it is compliant and provides users with a reasonable facsimile of your user name. Thanks.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   12:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove an Articles for deletion notice or a comment from an AfD discussion, as you did at Hans Ramzan. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 09:22, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

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 ~~~~}}.  MER-C 15:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)