User talk:Xandyxyz

Speedy deletion nomination of Pakistan Green Building Council

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Pakistan Green Building Council, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to 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 tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 79.123.70.227 (talk) 12:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of ScholarCon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ScholarCon 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/ScholarCon 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. Bilby (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Xandyxyz. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Please let us know if you have a conflict of interest or if you are being paid to edit article. Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:20, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you User:Lemongirl942. I'm a dental medical researcher with particular interest in dentistry. Majority of my edits are based on that. They have been very useful to the dental community out there and the general medical world. I also research on digital technology once is a while as can be seen in the "Help desk Software" article.

Yes, there are other edits I made. Majority of them are more of clean-up and maintenance. I've never engaged in vandalism, tag removal or any unruly behaviour. In fact, one of my recent articles was tagged for speedy deletion and was eventually deleted. I never contested it. I respect the opinion of every editor here.

But, I must admit that some of the clean-up edits are helps I rendered to friends who don't really know how to go about the wiki-editing process. You know how difficult wiki editing can be especially that of "Orphan Tag". I never get paid for them. Most of the edits are geared making the pages better. If this is considered conflict of interest, then I promise I won't engage in it any more. I'll continue to use my account for medical research and other digital-related research topics. Thanks.Xandyxyz (talk) 11:56, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Lemongirl942 (talk) 10:18, 5 May 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

My account is mainly for medical/digital research as seen in most of the articles posted. I've already explained to User:Lemongirl942 who reported me on Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. I cleared myself of all the connections with other accounts. User:Lemongirl942 actually apologized to me. But, I'm surprised to see this account blocked after that. Please I appeal for a re-opening of the account since most of my articles are currently serving as means of research in the dental medical world as well as the digital world. I've not committed any wiki offence to deserve this. Thanks Xandyxyz (talk) 19:29, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You haven't addressed the reason for your block, which is that you are a confirmed sockpuppet (or meatpuppet), see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Boskit190. You are welcome to post another unblock request if you specifically address those concerns. Yamla (talk) 19:42, 6 May 2016 (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.

You said, "I cleared myself of all the connections with other accounts". Actually, the discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Xandyxyz_.28undisclosed_paid_editing.29 confirmed your connection with the other accounts. --Yamla (talk) 19:45, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It all started with this lady User:Lemongirl942. I explained to her and she apologized only to revert back and report me for a block. I think something is fishy here. I don't have any connections with those other accounts. I only did minor clean-ups is a few of them. The two evidences she pointed out via freelancer platform are mere coincidences. I wasn't involved via this account. I've gone through the Sockpuppet investigation, still I don't understand how I got connected. Could you check all the research articles I published? There were all products of diligent research. Thanks. Xandyxyz (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Teeth whitening for children

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Teeth whitening for children, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 removed 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. Brianhe (talk) 23:04, 6 May 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

I admit I have connections with the following accounts: ;User accounts * Rosemaryujoh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) * Keke1970 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) * Donp123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) * Angelicum200 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) * Alabasunt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) But, they all belong to friends who are new to wikipedia. They asked me at one point or the other to help them make minor edits. I only made the articles better. I didn't not remove maintenance tags or use my account in any unruly way. I made these points clear to User:Lemongirl942 in the "Conflict of interest/Noticeboard" She responded at the end "Alright, no problem. I apologise if I have offended you." Every other account listed in the socks stuff are not connected to me. I don't know how they emerged. Concerning "Boskit190", I don't have a relation to him or her. The two evidence present by one of the editors via Freelancer are mere coincidence. I'm not involved. I only clean up the article ER24 Emergency Medical Services (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) some months back. I've explained this in the "Conflict of interest/Noticeboard". Again, the accounts involved in the socks suspicion including mine were not given room to respond to accusations. Everything happened in few minutes. We got blocked without hearing our own side of the story. I don't get it. Is that how issues are treated on wikipedia? In any case, I still appeal for unblock. I also want some of the medical researched articles to be re-instated. They have been here for months. If there are non-usable references, they can be removed. I don't know why such encyclopaedic/well researched articles should be removed. Many students have used it for their exams. I know some of them. What then is wikipedia for? Is it for writing company profiles and people's bio only? Is it not serving as a digital reference point for online researchers? I rest my case here. Please unblock my account. I didn't commit any serious wiki offence to deserve this. I'm appealing. I'm sorry if some editors found my account to be linked to others. ThanksXandyxyz (talk) 11:44, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The accounts you are connected with are involved in paid editing. We work to make a neutral site and undisclosed paid editing works against that goal. HighInBC 14:11, 7 May 2016 (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.