User talk:Jhurst59

Nomination of Neil Cornrich for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Neil Cornrich 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/Neil Cornrich 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. Go Phightins! 04:38, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Jhurst59. You have new messages at 331dot's talk page.
Message added 14:53, 3 September 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

331dot (talk) 14:53, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Jhurst59. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Mike Vrabel, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 20:50, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

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 ~~~~}}. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:52, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't done anything on Wikipedia in months. Why would I suddenly get blocked now? And on Easter Sunday? You guys have too much time on your hands. If you think that I am some threat to the integrity of Wiki, I'm not going to spend time appealing it. I would think there are countless other people out there who are actually abusing the website and creating real issues, whereas I have never done anything other than add facts that seemed to be relevant. Disagreeing with my (very) infrequent edits is one thing. Banning me for being some sort of problem account seems to be a whole other level of unnecessary. Have a nice day. Jhurst59 (talk) 15:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]