User talk:Maglove99

Retired

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

April 2022

Hello, I'm Isabelle Belato. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to List of teen magazines because they seemed 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. Isabelle ^🏳‍🌈 19:01, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you.--VViking_TalkEdits 19:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, Ok. I'm sorry. I didn't understand that those were deemed "inappropriate." I was just trying to link to the site so people knew what it was. Thank you for explaining. (My first edits.) Maglove99 (talk) 19:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Maglove99. 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:Maglove99. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Maglove99|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. MrOllie (talk) 19:38, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Socking or logging out to edit

Hello, Maglove99, 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. 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.--VViking_TalkEdits 21:03, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have multiple accounts. I have been told by two different people today though, one on Twitter and one on Facebook, neither of whom have any financial stake in the magazine nor are on the magazine's team, that they added "Sesi" to the list of teen magazines (no link included or anything) and it was DELETED. Why? 2601:5CC:100:75D0:8DDA:C504:A980:8D66 (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, I was not logged in when I left the first reply, so reposting: I do not have multiple accounts. I have been told by two different people today though, one on Twitter and one on Facebook, neither of whom have any financial stake in the magazine nor are on the magazine's team, that they added "Sesi" to the list of teen magazines (no link included or anything) and it was DELETED. Why? Maglove99 (talk) 01:35, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the same reason it was deleted when you added it: the lists you were trying to add it to were lists of things that have demonstrated notability via a preexisting Wikipedia article. Your magazine hasn't got one. Also, given previous postings from your IP block, it is fairly obvious that you do have another account: User:AndreaB1999, and you are evading a block that was placed on that account. MrOllie (talk) 01:38, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I forgot about that account b/c I tried to close it and don't use it and haven't used it in a few months. I opened another one yesterday and considered it my only one b/c I don't use the other one, as mentioned I tried to close it as best as you can close anything here. Just learned how to retire an account today, which is why I retired this one and will not ever use Wikipedia again. But, I did not make those other edits you deleted. I was not aware -- and apparently the other two ladies who attempted today -- that it had to be "notable enough" by whatever "standards" you use. I do not think this is fair at all, just to be clear. Maglove99 (talk) 02:02, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but if another account comes along and tries to add more references to this magazine, they're probably going to get a very chilly reception and trigger a sockpuppet investigation. MrOllie (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And just so you know, independent, Black-owned media is just as impactful and meaningful as "mainstream" or "notable" magazines, as you refer to them. Sesi is a teen magazine that has existed for 10 years. That is a FACT. Your list is just a list of teen magazines. Just because someone hasn't written a Wikipedia page about Sesi doesn't make it matter any less. Maglove99 (talk) 02:10, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it doesn't matter any less. It does mean that it doesn't go on the list of articles we have about teen magazines, though. MrOllie (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But why? Who decides what is "notable"? I was an avid reader of teen magazines as a teen in the '90s, and I have never heard of the majority of those magazines on the list. So, who decides what is "notable"? I'm just asking that Wikipedia perhaps reevaluate -- how diverse is your decision-making team on "notability"? That's all I'm saying. And, I'm done engaging in this back and forth now. Maglove99 (talk) 13:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The editors who participate at WP:AFD and WP:AFC apply the guideline on notability, which is primarily based on the quantity and quality of independent sources - ultimately notability in the publishing world is defined by your peers - if other publications are writing substantial articles about your magazine, it is notable (it has been noted by others). If they don't mention you (or mention you only in brief passing) then it isn't. MrOllie (talk) 14:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]