User talk:Webraizer
September 2021
[edit]Webraizer, you are invited to the Teahouse!
[edit]
|
Hi Webraizer! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 16 September 2021 (UTC) |
October 2021
[edit]
Hello Webraizer. 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.
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:Webraizer. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Webraizer|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. --- Possibly ☎ 04:53, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
- I am not a paid editor, I am in possession of information by virtue of my sphere of interest. Pointing out the actual owners of fossil resources in third countries shows the true state of affairs. Hiding this information means hiding the real state of affairs. Webraizer (talk) 20:10, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Blocked for sockpuppetry
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 10:43, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
The article Kubi mine has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Poorly referenced article by blocked sockpuppet
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:23, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Please refer to log comments. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:40, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Kubi gold mine for deletion
[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kubi gold mine 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.