User talk:Antonio Vinzaretti

Welcome!

Hi Antonio Vinzaretti! I noticed your contributions to Fidobank and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 14:15, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mykola Udianskyi

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 Mykola Udianskyi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikolai Udianskyi. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it 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. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:56, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Advice on starting editing

Hello, Antonio. I have read your latest message on my talk page, in which you referred to the "rejection of result of [your] half-day work. I can in fact fully understand that it must be disheartening and annoying for a new editor who has put some work into finding out how to edit on Wikipedia, and creating a new article, only to see it thrown away, and I apologise for having been the instrument of that happening for you. However, we have to have standards for what is acceptable and what isn't, or Wikipedia would be no different from FaceBook or an internet forum or blog, and those standards would be meaningless if we didn't delete things which don't comply with them. My advice to new editors is that it is best to start by making small improvements to existing articles, rather than creating new articles. That way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't have the discouraging experience of repeatedly seeing hours of work deleted. Gradually, you will get to learn how Wikipedia works, and after a while you will know enough about what is acceptable to be able to write whole new articles without fear that they will be deleted. Over the years I have found that editors who start by making small changes to existing articles and work up from there have a far better chance of having a successful time here than those who jump right into creating new articles from the start. JBW (talk) 14:41, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey James, can you advice me on further case? Today I want create article about indian guy who was in epicenter of hacking scandal in 2020. But again possible G4 as I see!!! I check that isn't available name Kumar Gaurav, so to avoid Parenthetical disambiguation I choosed between Kumar Gaurav (computer programmer) or Kumar Gaurav (entrepreneur). But with (entrepreneur) was deleted in 2018! OMG. My main sources why I wanted to create article about guy is here and here. Rest bio I finding now. Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 16:26, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mykola Udianskyi

OK, I have managed to find time to check the articles sooner than I expected. Certainly your version of the article has more, and different, sources cited, and since lack of sourcing was the essential issue in the deletion discussion, there is a case for saying that the new one goes somewhere towards addressing the reason for the deletion. However, merely having a larger number of sources cited is not enough: 100 poor sources are worth less than one good one. Most of the sources you have cited, unfortunately, go nowhere towards establishing notability in Wikipedia's terms. There are pages which only make a passing mention of him, pages which mention him several times, but only in the course of covering aspects of his business activities, without giving significant coverage to Udianskyi himself, an interview with him, which is essentially a way for him to give information about himself, and therefore not a source independent of him, and so on. Then there's http://eehb.dspu.edu.ua/article/view/246904 which I can only assume is a mistake, as it doesn't seem to have anything to do with Udianskyi at all. The source which seems to give the most substantial coverage to him is https://forbes.ua/ru/profile/mikola-udyanskiy-475 but there are two reasons why that is unlikely to be enough. Firstly, consensus among Wikipedia editors with enough knowledge of Forbes to be able to make a meaningful assessment is that most content on Forbes is written with minimal editorial oversight, and is generally unreliable. (There are some exceptions, but I don't know enough about Forbes to be able to tell whether this is one of them.) Secondly, even if editors do regard that article as a good source, just one source is unlikely to be enough. If you want, I can restore the article, and inform both the editor who nominated it for speedy deletion this time and the editors who took part in the discussion last time. (I am absolutely not prepared to restore the article behind their backs, without letting them know.) However, I think the result of that would far more likely than not be that it would be taken to a second deletion discussion and deleted again; if so then it would be a waste of time for everyone, including you. I suppose a third possibility is to restore the article, and move it to draft space to give you a chance to find sources, but I think that too might be a waste of your time, and my advice is that you will be better off leaving it, and moving on to other kinds of editing where you are more likely to have success. Of course, since that is only advice, you are free to take it or not, but it is based on many years' experience of how deletion discussions tend to go. JBW (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I choose "If you want, I can restore the article, and inform both the editor who nominated it for speedy deletion this time", because the page can alive as a stub, no? May quality and number of sources need to be extended, but it's not a reason to delete for ever. It's all on my opinion - he is 59th in Forbes so passed notability. Might passed WP:SIRS too. So if class of article is stub - why u push me to remove my own work? I'd like to choose restore as a stub-class article & inform editors about our investigation. I appreciate it. Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 16:39, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"(There are some exceptions, but I don't know enough about Forbes to be able to tell whether this is one of them.) Secondly, even if editors do regard that article as a good source, just one source is unlikely to be enough." James, see WP:SIRS. I follow guidelines as I can. If Article is not A-Class, it's not a reason do judge me so strickly. I appreciate, keep in touch. Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 16:54, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey James, can you advice me on further case? Today I want create article about indian guy who was in epicenter of hacking scandal in 2020. But again possible G4 as I see!!! I check that isn't available name Kumar Gaurav, so to avoid Parenthetical disambiguation I choosed between Kumar Gaurav (computer programmer) or Kumar Gaurav (entrepreneur). But with (entrepreneur) was deleted in 2018! OMG. My main sources why I wanted to create article about guy is here and here. Rest bio I finding now. Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 15:46, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mykola Udianskyi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mykola Udianskyi 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/Mykola Udianskyi 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 until the discussion has finished.

JBW (talk) 14:20, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Molly Bloom (author), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Speaker. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bitget

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 Bitget requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bitget (2nd nomination). When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it 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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:47, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kumar Gaurav (entrepreneur) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kumar Gaurav (entrepreneur) 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/Kumar Gaurav (entrepreneur) 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 until the discussion has finished.

Dirubii Olchoglu (talk) 11:11, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As the author of the page I can agree on some sentences which you said on AfD. And I even removed unsourced content after you removed a few references. You know, it's hard to write the page from scratch so now it looks like WP:ONEEVENT, because this person was involved as a CEO of the company which was hacked in 2020. Probably page can be moved to draft to further improvement, where you can help to find more third-party significant coverage reliable sources. I appreciate you. Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 12:25, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Pavlo Tanasyuk for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pavlo Tanasyuk 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/Pavlo Tanasyuk 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 until the discussion has finished.

Dirubii Olchoglu (talk) 11:16, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your AfD. OK. It is hard to create page from scratch so now it looks like WP:ONEEVENT. I as the author of the page aprreciate your nomination to deletion. I won't lose my Article's progress so please vote Move to the Draftspace instead of Delete, thx. I hope you will help to improve Draft article and find more third-party significant coverage reliable sources. I appreciate you Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 12:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bitget (December 19)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bitget and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

Quantum^Realm (meow🦁 • pawtrack🐾) 07:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you explain please where issues is the article? Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 07:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Antonio Vinzaretti! Having an article draft 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! Quantum^Realm (meow🦁 • pawtrack🐾) 07:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bitget (December 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

This submission appears to be taken from https://www.marketing-interactive.com/sg-based-crypto-exchange-bitget-suspended-by-mas-over-false-advertising-of-army-coins. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

Draft:Bitget may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bitget (December 20)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by BuySomeApples was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: It doesn't seem like there have been any significant changes since the second deletion nomination two months ago.

BuySomeApples (talk) 05:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"any significant changes" means what? Can you clarify please? Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 06:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

331dot (talk) 08:47, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Useful to know! Thank you! Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 08:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning XDC

Hey Antonio, Hope you good? Th.nks for trying to make the article better. I think we misunderstand each other. Apart from syndicated news, Yahoo news is generally considered reliable. You can check WP:RSPSS.

Also the news article that you keep removing is a Yahoo Singapore news article. you can see it here. We should collaborate to make the article better, not get into an unnecessary editing war with irrelevant tags.

Thanks Ghostfishing (talk) 10:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I agree with you. Thank you for explaining to me WP:RSPSS. By the way, you wrote it not in encyclopedic style, but like promotional - "ready to entrprise" or similar words. Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 10:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you check, you'll see that I have modified it. I have really worked on the article and I think it is ready for mainspace. Also look through, and the tag you added is not really necessary at this point, I think. Also, do whatever you can to make the article better. Thanks Ghostfishing (talk) 10:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm AFK now so I will help you today later. Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 11:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

alright. Ghostfishing (talk) 22:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Masckarpone per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Masckarpone. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:17, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. What it means? Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 13:55, 22 December 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

learn my contribution. I am just a learner, why block lol Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 14:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. PhilKnight (talk) 15:24, 22 December 2023 (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.