User talk:Mandotopo

Reliable sources

Very sorry, but I have had to again revert an edit you made to O. D. Kobo. Haaretz is considered a reliable source, Forbes "contributor" is not, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources for more. Edwardx (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I really appreciate your answer. I found it appropriate to remove the link from Haaretz because it is presented in the article in an inappropriate and disrespectful manner. I read that he is A respectable businessman. I would be happy if you find it appropriate to remove this link because it does not add to the encyclopedic entry. Again, greatly appreciate your attitude and your kind treatment. Thank you Mandotopo (talk) 07:04, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Throne Labs (April 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Zippybonzo was:

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Still a bit promotional.

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:Throne Labs 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:Throne Labs, 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

Zippybonzo | talk 12:37, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mandotopo! 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! Zippybonzo | talk 12:37, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

This is your only warning; if you insert a spam link to Wikipedia again, as you did at Green tea, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Zefr (talk) 18:52, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:רונ123 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/רונ123. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

--Blablubbs (talk) 12:45, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]