User talk:Efaublas

Welcome!

Hello, Efaublas, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 01:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Carlos Wallace (September 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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:Carlos Wallace and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Coin945 (talk) 05:29, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Carlos Wallace concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Carlos Wallace, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 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) 01:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Liz Faublas. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Your username suggests a conflict of interest in your creation of the article Liz Faublas. If you wish to create the article you can request it instead. ZarosFlok (talk) 23:33, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Liz Faublas for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Liz Faublas 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/Liz Faublas 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. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:19, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Efaublas. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, 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. Katie^talk 08:41, 10 July 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Not sure what the term implies, however there was no intent to deceive. I tried to submit a profile and was told there was a conflict because it was me entering the information. A friend I work with suggested they log in to submit it and tried to follow the guidelines for submission of a third party. There was no covert plan to try to subvert your procedure or mock your guidelines. It is difficult to navigate this website. My sole intention was to be linked to the website of the show I anchor every night Currents as well as the program I am producing on the network I have worked for for the past five years NET in order to help support our show using all available and reputable mediums. Nothing slick, nothing shady. I am a working professional and have no reason to be either.

Decline reason:

help support our show using all available and reputable mediums -- that's called "promotion", and Wikipedia is not the place you may do this. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 14:51, 10 July 2017 (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.