User talk:ContentBI

Hi ContentBI! 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 Mz7 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

13:30, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: ContentBI (April 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Barkeep49 were:

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.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:ContentBI 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:ContentBI, 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.

Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:11, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Filmhouse logo.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Filmhouse logo.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Filmhouse Cinemas (July 10)

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

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Filmhouse Cinemas instead.

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:Filmhouse Cinemas 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:Filmhouse Cinemas, 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.

SuperSwift (talk) 09:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Men 2: Another Mission moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Merry Men 2: Another Mission, 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. Celestina007 (talk) 22:22, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Filmhouse Cinemas concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Filmhouse Cinemas, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:26, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Filmhouse Cinemas

Hello, ContentBI. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Filmhouse Cinemas".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Bkissin (talk) 20:22, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:ContentBI concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:ContentBI, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Merry Men 2: Another Mission (February 8)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

As previously noted, information on Reception is needed.

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:Merry Men 2: Another Mission 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:Merry Men 2: Another Mission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:20, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:ContentBI

Hello, ContentBI. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "ContentBI".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tobi Kukoyi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tobi Kukoyi 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/Tobi Kukoyi 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. Celestina007 (talk) 22:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Tobi Kukoyi. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. First Warning Celestina007 (talk) 05:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Java Hurricane 06:07, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Tobi Kukoyi, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Celestina007 (talk) 06:46, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Hello ContentBI. 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 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. 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:ContentBI. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=ContentBI|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. GeneralNotability (talk) 23:29, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GeneralNotability Please, I AM NOT PAID for these edits. I just identified Aphrosidiac as a category that has hardly had an article from Nigeria, and just a mere search on Google showed the topic as a major player in Nigeria, and so, I decided to contribute an article. I am yet to understand why it seems as though I am paid. If the article violates policies, please feel free to take it down, because I am tired of responding to all these hoax aspersions! ContentBI (talk) 03:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ContentBI: Can you please explain how the images of the subjects you've written about are your own work yet you have no connection to them? Praxidicae (talk) 13:46, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae Thank you very much for your question! You're the first person to have the balls to ask a direct question and I wish it was on the AfD page you did! Well, here is the thing. Indeed, the images are not my images, and I sincerely apologize for that. In fact, it is easy to see that they are all Google images. I was just testing the image upload provisions and it proved to be the quickest option to use. I'm kind of very lazy at filling long forms, those kinds asked on the Commons. Like I said earlier, I understand what I did is an infringement, and was waiting to finish up my argument on AfD before correcting it. I didn't ever think it would insinuate that I am paid. Please, they are not my images! ContentBI (talk) 16:55, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So you are, after repeatedly being told that you were not to upload images as your own work that were not your own work, asking us to take you at your word that you are suddenly now being truthful? Praxidicae (talk) 16:59, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

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 ~~~~}}. MER-C 17:08, 8 July 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

I wasn't done explaining, I should be heard out fairly before being blocked. I had earlier informed @GeneralNotability and another colleague Harshsomething (I can't remember His ID), that I was waiting to finish up on AfD and then do a re-upload, even before @Praxidicae asked. It's not like @Praxidicae made some great discovery that I had not already owned up to, I just didn't know that it would be a question on my integrity, I would have followed due process, and when @Praxidicae says I have been previously warned, I'm surprised because I didn't get a warning on any images. They've been there since the article has been up, they're not new edits. You can do your checks. So, kindly unblock me, so that I can conclude carrying my cross. Thanks ContentBI (talk) 17:34, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Given that your last 50 edits have been related to Tobi Kukoyi, that your first edits were to an AfD, and your clearly promotional edits to Filmhouse cinemas, I can only assume you have an undeclared WP:COI, or are WP:PAID. To be unblocked you will need to show that you understand our policies on spam, promotion, and conflict of interest. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:30, 8 July 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.

Incorrect. You were warned on commons several times and in fact, you responded to them here. Where you were again told "do not upload it again" and yet you did, at high quality that cannot be found elsewhere on the internet. Where did you get this image from? Praxidicae (talk) 17:36, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae I DIDN'T ADD ANY IMAGES AFTER THE INSTRUCTION. Please do your checks well. The 3 pictures in that article had always been there before my chat with @GeneralNotability. Check!!!! ContentBI (talk) 17:43, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, don't yell at me because you failed to answer a simple question. Where did the image I linked to come from? "Google images" is not an acceptable answer. Provide the link. Praxidicae (talk) 17:44, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://i1.wp.com/newtelegraphng.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/kukoyi-300x153.png?resize=300%2C153&ssl=1

https://i2.wp.com/www.vanguardngr.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Nosa-Rex.jpg?fit=599%2C396&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200

https://i0.wp.com/media.premiumtimesng.com/wp-content/files/2020/05/Traditional-sex-therapist-Tobi-Kukoyi-e1588418919403.jpg?fit=750%2C643&ssl=1

https://scontent.flos5-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/104881216_3214413498618656_1725325377252277177_o.jpg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_eui2=AeHgUge4pS1fP6CQRSGhWrbQbA26uzebjNxsDbq7N5uM3Cf4e9uTGuSN_8CCRl2lr4sT1CKIKfYNpEgKah5WkJpp&_nc_ohc=4byMRz0BwakAX_bSo8e&_nc_ht=scontent.flos5-1.fna&_nc_tp=7&oh=06e1bec19767609c297027dcc4201e5e&oe=5F151C33

Also you were warned in December 2019 not to upload images as your own work if they were not. Here is a reminder]. Praxidicae (talk) 17:47, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

O really, So, we're going to go all the way to 2019, just because you're going to make a point, right? How am I sure rules didn't changed? Cause I've not been on this space for a while. ContentBI (talk) 18:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first one is not the same photo. It's a cropped lower quality version. And yes, I'm making a point that you have said multiple untruths. If you think that a policy changed in the span of a year just for fun, well maybe you lack the competence to edit as well. Praxidicae (talk) 17:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://i2.wp.com/www.vanguardngr.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Tobi-Kukoyi-e1587547913554.jpeg?w=750&ssl=1

Yeah! go ahead and shred me in pieces. I gave you the right to. If only you had any idea what my resume looks like as an Editor outside this space, I guess you'd be more respectful....my fault anyways. So, have fun. ContentBI (talk) 18:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are blocked in part because I found additional red flags not mentioned above, not to cut you off. MER-C 18:06, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please @MER-C it would be more beneficial that you showcase some balls like your colleague has done, and ask proper questions and let's clear the air, rather than act on assumptions and possibly punish me just because you're more experienced on Wikipedia. ContentBI (talk) 18:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User talk:CaptainEek Your claims are pointless, and this is why; When the warning for Tobi Kukoyi came up, it came with the provision that I can continue to edit while the discussion continues on AfD, there was no limit to the number of edits I was allowed to do, so telling me you counted 50 edits seems like you're looking for something to do to show your Boss you worked very hard. About my edits on Filmhouse Cinemas, there absolutely nothing I have added, that is currently stated in that article that is not verifiable, and the brand is very notable, so when you say 'promotional edits', I'm confused about what you mean. I guess ContentBI has been an important topic today for Wikipedia pro editors, and I'll leave you all to have fun in your games of assumption. The only editor I'll leave here with respect for is @Praxidicae who dared to ask me a question.

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).

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

Request reason:

I need to be unblocked to be able to edit my status to reflect whether or not I am a paid contributor to articles. I understand that I am being penalized for certain malpractices, which honestly came from a place of ill information. However, I have stated my issues on the appeal form and should be at least, responded to. Blocking me indefinitely without responding to my claims and concerns is outrightly unfair

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. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:38, 21 July 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.

Nomination of Filmhouse Cinemas for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Filmhouse Cinemas 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/Filmhouse Cinemas 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. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 03:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Merry Men 2: Another Mission

Hello, ContentBI. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Merry Men 2: Another Mission".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:47, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Filmhouse Cinemas

Hello, ContentBI. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Filmhouse Cinemas".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:03, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]