User talk:Aziz979

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. [1] -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:12, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Firdaus Nagree

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 Firdaus Nagree, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. JamesG5 (talk) 07:48, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Aziz979, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:14, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to OS/2. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Begoon 13:11, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to HostPapa. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Begoon 13:14, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link, as you did at List of KDE applications. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Begoon 13:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Moe Zinkerbell

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 User:Moe Zinkerbell, 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, group, product, service, person, or point of view 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 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. @echo off 22:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandra Bokova moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Alexandra Bokova, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 18:13, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alexandra Bokova (January 20)

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

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Alexandra Bokova 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:Alexandra Bokova, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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.

QueerEcofeminist^{"cite! even if you fight"!!!} [they/them/their] 05:13, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Aziz979! 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! QueerEcofeminist^{"cite! even if you fight"!!!} [they/them/their] 05:13, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem on Ron Duprat

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://bcaglobal.org/board-of-directors, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 15:01, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Hello Aziz979. 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, and if it does not, 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:Aziz979. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Aziz979|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. GSS ^💬 17:17, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings @GSS:, for clarity I am not paid for my contributions on Wikipedia, I edit purely out of volunteerism and still learning on how to contribute on other places as well which I still have to find, might I ask where I can contribute so I become an exceptional editor such as yourself? Your help will be much appreciated. Aziz979 (talk) 11:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aziz979: I'd strongly advise you to re-read WP:PAID and refrain from removing the tags, as you are the creator. Praxidicae (talk) 19:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And now you're edit warring to restore blatantly fabricated information on a BLP. So I suggest you stop. Praxidicae (talk) 19:32, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae: Hello. You keep reverting all my edits on Isha Anand Sharma. All the sources I had added are reliable and mention her roles in all the Television shows why do you keep reverting? Aziz979 (talk) 19:39, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aziz979 Read WP:RS. Stop editing the article. If you think those are reliable sources, well, you clearly didn't read WP:RS. Praxidicae (talk) 19:40, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Isha Anand Sharma

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 Isha Anand Sharma 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/Isha Sharma. 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. Praxidicae (talk) 19:35, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. — Newslinger talk 13:15, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What and why?

First @GSS: and @Peradaxie: attack me and now this. Then Isha Anand Sharma gets deleted even after it was created 2 years ago then I get involved in some edit warring with Peradaxie through here. Isn't this supposed to be a free encyclopedia where everyone can contribute, How and why is my account blocked for socketpupetry @Newslinger:? What is going on? Aziz979 (talk) 05:34, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are key similarities between the version of the Isha Anand Sharma article that was created by ~~Abhishek4889~~ Lovedove2019 on 18 October 2018 and the version of the article that you recreated on 13 February 2020. — Newslinger talk 06:56, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify my previous statement, the 18 October 2018 version of the Isha Anand Sharma article was created by Lovedove2019, a confirmed sockpuppet of Abhishek4889. — Newslinger talk 21:35, 22 February 2020 (

@Newslinger: Key similarities? Are you talking about the current version of Isha Anand Sharma that Praxidicae had left when the page was deleted by User:Anthony Appleyard because there was a time Peradaxie kept making changes to the article (removing RS that are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force#Guidelines on sources) per this discussion on my talk page. Please send me your mail so I can send you the version I had created so you may compare the two versions in detail. Aziz979 (talk) 17:46, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need to send me the article. I reviewed the two versions one more time from my end and confirmed the similarities. Please see the guide to appealing blocks if you would like to make an unblock request. — Newslinger talk 21:29, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

Aziz979 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Requesting for admin to review as I have been blocked for an "apparent socketpupetry" for the recreation of Isha Anand Sharma and I have been told that the version I had created and the version created by the blocked user are the same by the admin who did the block. Reason as to why I had initially started working on the article is because the subject's notability status changed since its previous deletion discussion apart from that she is well-known here in Southern Asia and it also further needed an experienced editor to work on it. But before working on the article I had read Wikipedia:Recreation of previously deleted pages, so I really don't understand why I'm blocked for recreation of the article If it doesn't violate any Wikipedia policy.Aziz979 (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Looking through your edits, you're obviously a spammer. I don't think it even matters whether you're a sock puppet or not. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:44, 24 February 2020 (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.

Hello @NinjaRobotPirate:, My edits are spam?, so what am I really blocked for and why wasn't I given any warnings if my edits were "spam"? Aziz979 (talk) 08:26, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've revised the reason you've been blocked to be more comprehensive. You were blocked for undisclosed paid editing and sock puppetry. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, and then contact administrators by submitting an unblock request from your oldest account, Abhishek4889. — Newslinger talk 09:35, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aziz979, I've received your email and am responding here. I revoked your talk page access on 26 February to encourage you to appeal from the oldest account associated with your current account: Abhishek4889. If you do not have access to that account, you may submit an unblock request through the Unblock Ticket Request System. — Newslinger talk 11:05, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]