User talk:IPlayNiceWithOthers

Welcome

Hello, IPlayNiceWithOthers, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of contents / Department directory

The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)
The Signpost, our newspaper

Need help?

Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

IPlayNiceWithOthers, good luck, and have fun. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:53, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to List of school shootings in the United States, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Thinker78 (talk) 03:01, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alex Ozols for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alex Ozols 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/Alex Ozols 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. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:39, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources, links to promotional sites

Hello IPlayNiceWithOthers, thank you for your efforts to improve Wikipedia articles and referencing. But commercial sites like houstonent.com or beaconplumbing.net with a strong focus on advertising are rarely usable as reliable sources (see WP:RS), and almost never suitable as external links (see WP:EL). With their strong self-interest to promote their own products and services such sites are deeply biased, and a lot of them publish unverifiable, exaggerated or simply false PR information. You should usually avoid to use such sites for encyclopedic information in favor of books, journals, news media and similar sources. YouTube is also not a reliable source, unless the channel is maintained by a verified news source or similarly reliable channel owner. I have reverted some of your recent edits introducing such links, but please feel free to re-insert the content itself with more reliable sources. I hope these tips are helpful, and the two linked pages contain a lot more useful information if you'd like to help with further sourcing improvements. Please feel free to ask me or post at WP:Teahouse if you have any further questions. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 01:25, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Beacon Plumbing for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beacon Plumbing 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/Beacon Plumbing 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. Ymblanter (talk) 15:22, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop hiding spam as minor edits

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you.

Hello, I'm J. M.. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. —J. M. (talk) 23:58, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Russell Hartstein

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 Russell Hartstein, 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. Mcampany (talk) 04:26, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Russell Hartstein for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Russell Hartstein 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/Russell Hartstein 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. Praxidicae (talk) 13:25, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

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 14:14, 5 January 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).

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

Request reason:

I'm really not sure how a person is supposed to learn about Wikipedia and making pages without appearing like they might be promotional in nature from time to time? As you can see in my profile, I have absolutely contributed benign elements to many pages, but I have been wanting to learn the ins and outs of creating Wiki pages for 2 years now. I've asked countless editors for advice and always offered to amend any pages I make, but no one replies with anything aside from hostility. How is a person to learn and improve without conversation? I get that Wiki is targeted by a lot of trolls, but how is anyone supposed to make a new page on any person or brand without it appearing promotional? I was literally reading Steve Guttenberg's page and noticed his relation with the behaviorist and thought it was a safe way to try and create a page. That portion of STeve's page has been active on Wiki for a long time, so I assumed it was safe and would flesh out the topic. Considering there are Wikis for every Tom, Dick, and Harry under the sun, I didn't think it would cause such an uproar. I didn't post the subject's logo, website, etc on the page, as I only discussed him. I don't mind being banned by Wiki at this point because it's a very toxic culture of people strong-arming users as opposed to helping them, but you all really need to figure something out with regards to blatant marketing and simply people trying to learn Wiki. I mean, if you simply look at the other dog trainers on your site you'll see there are many that don't have the coverage this person does, nor the connections to other Wiki page subjects. I just don't understand you all anymore. You ask for citations from 3rd party and objective sites, I give them. You ask for non-promotional writing, I think I give that.

Decline reason:

I see that promotional writing has been a problem for some time, and I see nothing here that shows you will not had promotional content. FWIW, Wikipedia:Identifying blatant advertising#Typical signs of blatant advertising, User:Deepfriedokra/promo, and WP:RS might be helpful. Oh, and WP:EL. Hope that helps. -- Deep fried okra 22:28, 7 January 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 Education Loan Finance for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Education Loan Finance 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/Education Loan Finance 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. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:09, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]