User talk:Anesiasaun

August 2020

Hello, I'm LuK3. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Daniel Algrant, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:35, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was reverting the edits at the same time as LuK3, but was a moment too slow. In addition to the lack of sources, the tone was unencyclopedic. Please read WP:NPOV and WP:BLP if you intend to contribute. Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:51C4:A213:DDE6:49FA (talk) 01:43, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Anesiasaun. 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 conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict/* Your thread has been archived */ of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 2601:188:180:B8E0:51C4:A213:DDE6:49FA (talk) 02:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anesiasaun, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Anesiasaun! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 23:13, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Daniel Algrant, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Swadge2 (talk) 23:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Anesiasaun! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Lost all editing progress, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have done my best to add credible references. Some of the facts cited do pre-date the internet. How can I move forward?

The text you are adding reads like a promotional piece, and despite the presence of some sources, much of the text is still uncited. Per WP:Verifiability, we require sources for everything, regardless of whether the "facts" pre-date the Internet. If you wanted to re-add some of the material that was properly sourced and not promotional, I'd suggest doing it in smaller edit blocks, so another editor doesn't have to revert a large edit that has a mix of properly and improperly sourced material. I'd also suggest reading this section to get a better idea of how to write with an impartial tone. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:12, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 23:06, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for promotional editing (after repeated warnings).

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 ~~~~}}.

El_C 23:21, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]