User talk:Ehsi18

Speedy deletion nomination of Albasco

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Albasco, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Albasco and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. De728631 (talk) 22:50, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Albasco, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
Cluebot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Albasco was changed by Ehsi18 (u) (t) deleting 61743 characters on 2010-04-17T23:28:39+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 23:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stub category

Can you please explain why you keep removing {{Germany-company-stub}} from the article you are working on. Categories are an integral part of improving articles on wikipedia. They allow other editors to find articles they might be interested in and help improve. All that template does is add the article to a category that says it is a German company and that it it is short and missing some important aspects that make it a viable article like sources. If the article is not improved someone might nominate it for deletion. I am just trying to keep the article and get it improved. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 12:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Albasco.com

I have nominated Albasco.com, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albasco.com. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 21:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Albasco.com. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 12:36, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue removing Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Albasco.com, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 21:33, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you remove Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Albasco.com, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 12:26, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to try one more time. Removing the AFD template from the top of the article will only accomplish getting you blocked. If you disagree with the deletion of the article, you need to go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albasco.com and explain why the article should not be deleted. If you remove the AFD template again I will report you and ask that you be temporarily blocked from editing. Please go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albasco.com and discuss this rather than removing the template. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 12:53, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing, for a period of 31 hours, for repeatedly removing AfD template despite warnings and blanking the AfD discussion page. None of that will stop the deletion discussion from taking place; if you do not think the page should be deleted you can explain your reasons at the deletion discussion. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. JohnCD (talk) 21:23, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albasco.com, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 11:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Albasco.com

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Albasco.com, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://wikibin.org/articles/albasco.com.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for spamming or advertising. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:38, 15 October 2010 (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).

Ehsi18 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i was trying to fix what had been prev deleted i am working on german companies working in the middle east

Decline reason:

Yes, that's the reason for your block- repeatedly recreating an article on a company that appears not to meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, and ignoring all warnings to stop. But since you don't indicate that you have a plan for editing differently, an unblock wouldn't be appropriate. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:11, 15 October 2010 (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.