User talk:Legalife103

This is Legalife103's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Smilebox (Company) (August 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DGG 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:Smilebox (Company) 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:Smilebox (Company), 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.

DGG ( talk ) 08:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Legalife103! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DGG ( talk ) 08:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Smilebox (Company) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Smilebox (Company). Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 05:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Smilebox for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Smilebox 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/Smilebox 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. AllyD (talk) 07:45, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Hello Legalife103. 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 search-engine optimization.

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:Legalife103. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Legalife103|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. GSS ^💬 14:38, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GSS, Thank you for taking the time to review my edits! I can assure you that I am not directly/indirectly being compensated for my edits. I'm just trying to add some edits to my experience and trying to find topics that still don't have articles and I think they should and meet Wikipedia's guidelines. As for Smilebox entry, I researched the web a lot for sources, created it first as a draft, asked for guidance and review, researched for more neutral sources and then moved it to the articles space. I even found other entries with similar or even less content that are still live on Wiki. I hope I made it clear. Legalife103 (talk) 09:02, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Hello, Legalife103, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Zom.b.fan (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Storchy (talk) 20:19, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I can assure you I am not coordinating any edits. I know my limits, and if I need an assistance with areas I am not familiar with, for example to please editors who nominate for deletion articles which I contributed to, I ask for help. My goal is to get better at editing and improving articles to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines. While others are on the hunt to take down articles or try accusing other editors with false statements. Please disclose that you are trying to delete an article I contributed to, without any real grounds, and even so when I'm trying to improve the article according to YOUR suggestions, that still doesn't satisfy you. Legalife103 (talk) 21:02, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The contentor. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. Girth Summit _(blether) 15:25, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]