User talk:Marcorubiocali

Your submission at Articles for creation: George The Matchmaker (June 23)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Theroadislong (talk) 20:50, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Marcorubiocali! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 20:50, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:George The Matchmaker

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 Draft:George The Matchmaker, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. SamStrongTalks (talk) 21:14, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:George Cervantes

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 Draft:George Cervantes, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. VViking_TalkEdits 14:19, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Marcorubiocali. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:44, 30 June 2021 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Your submission at Articles for creation: George Cervantes (September 24)

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

Hitro talk 17:46, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: George Cervantes (September 24)

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

KylieTastic (talk) 19:08, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: George Cervantes (September 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:George Cervantes 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:George Cervantes, 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 10:52, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: George Cervantes (September 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:George Cervantes 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:George Cervantes, 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 17:20, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: George Cervantes (September 26)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Curbon7 was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Curbon7 (talk) 22:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

October 2021

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as at Wikipedia:Help desk, (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. David Biddulph (talk) 13:32, 15 October 2021 (UTC) Thank you! --Marcorubiocali (talk) 14:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC) Hello, Can you please check the citations I have added to the page. I was told the subject must be on different websites to show notability and he is in more than 4. (a few of them have his name on the title of the news article) Do I need to add more places to show notability? Thank you in advance! --Marcorubiocali (talk) 15:43, 15 October 2021 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:George_Cervantes Here is the page. --Marcorubiocali (talk) 15:44, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Draft:George Cervantes, you may be blocked from editing. Moving a draft into article space after it has been rejected, without discussion with the reviewers, is disruptive and may result in a topic-ban. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

George Cervantes moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, George Cervantes, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 11:54, 19 October 2021 (UTC) Hello, Thank you for taking time to review the article and I will continue to work until it will meet the standards for Wikipedia. Thank you again! --Marcorubiocali (talk) 12:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:George Cervantes has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:George Cervantes. Thanks! Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 11:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: George Cervantes (October 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:George Cervantes 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:George Cervantes, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 00:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Marcorubiocali. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:George Cervantes, 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. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: George Cervantes (October 20)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Timtrent was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This is a WP:ROTM person doing a job, and also a few other side elements

Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

How to create a new article that will be acceptable

I promised to address this on your talk page.

Instead of writing about, in this case, Cervantes, start in a different place. Research all the references you can find about him and then whittle them down to the ones that demonstrate notability. Before you do that read this essay, one of many that discuss the process of article writing, and take the process described within it to heart.

Know that many people can have references about them and still fail to be notable in a Wikipedia sense so know when to stand back and wait Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:59, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for explaing that to me. I read about the notability status in Wikipedia and you MUST demostrated that he individual has done something unique. Cervantes has lauchned and opened the first-ever matchmaking service that is exclusively for celebrities in Hollywood. That is a true fact and with the proper citations to back up those facts.

Isn't that enough? Do I need to find more resources around that topic?

Thank you! --Marcorubiocali (talk) 22:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

That was something unique and that was already made public on other publications. He is the owner of Celebrity Matchmakers, the matchmaking service for celebrities in Hollywood. Should I focus my attention on that?

Thank you for guidance and for helping me. I really mean it and it means a lot that you are explaining everything in detail.

Thank you again! --Marcorubiocali (talk) 22:04, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Matchmaking for celebrities is how we got the Habsburgs. Being the first one to launch a matchmaking service for Hollywood isn't significant; if anything it's a rerun of feudal Europe. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 22:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Unique is one thing, I am unique, as are you. But I am not notable in my uniqueness Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:10, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Should I focus my attention on all the recognition he is given by the local community due to his 10+ years of contributions to the local animal shelters in Los Angeles, Chicago, Harrisburg and many more locations? He has become well-known for helping local animal charities and that's why he gets online publications about him.

Thank you! --Marcorubiocali (talk) 22:15, 20 October 2021 (UTC) I will continue to work on the draft without publishing it. I will collect more information about him and continue to work on the draft as you adviced me to do. Thank you --Marcorubiocali (talk) 22:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

You should do as I suggested. Find all the references you can. Read the essay. Measure the references against the following yardstick:

"For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today."

Discard any that fail.

Then assess whether the subject of any article you write is notable in a wikipedia sense. If they are then write the article or draft Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me out. I will go ahead and do as you have explained here. --Marcorubiocali (talk) 22:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC) I can continue to work on the draft correct? --Marcorubiocali (talk) 22:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I suggest you start from scratch. That draft will not be considered further. Go to WP:AFC and use the article creation wizard, but only when ready to do so. Create a draft with a suffix like "2" and abandon the previous draft. Treat this as a 100% new project Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

However, before doing anything else, please note the section below, and engage with the process Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Got it! Thank you! I wil go ahead and do as you said. --Marcorubiocali (talk) 06:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

One point. You can call the draft Draft:George Cervantes. You don't need a suffix now. Your previous draft has been blown away because it was considered to be spam. So you can start over. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, some experienced editors would advise you to get Wikipedia experience doing something like copy-editing before you attempt the difficult task of writing a new article. And as long as all of your editing is about one person, you will be viewed as a single-purpose account. Single-purpose accounts are permitted, but many experienced editors pay little attention to them. So you should recognize that you are getting attention from User:Timtrent. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Robert has given you good advice.

Now, if Cervantes passes Wikipedia:Notability (people) it will be easy to prove it by using references that meet the tough description I posted earlier. That would be a great outcome.

What may surprise you is that being unable to prove it is also a good outcome. Why? Because it shows you that the work is not, certainly at present, worthwhile, and thus it saves your work and emotional annoyance. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 15:19, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for all the guidance. It really means a lot and I will take everything and apply it to my future draft. People dislike editors and that's because they are trying to cheat the system or do something wrong. I will create a page that will meet ALL the requirements. Thank you! --Marcorubiocali (talk) 20:49, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

As you have discovered, bands of entirely independent editors patrol Wikipedia carefully. We all started out knowing nothing. As we learn more we discover how little we know. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:07, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

That statement is 100% true. Have a great day and thank you for your guidance. --Marcorubiocali (talk) 21:19, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

A much better article, but I wish you had not moved it to mainspace. There it is vulnerable to a deletion process. The review process would have helped you a great deal.

Please take note of the banners at the head. The entries there are not only from me.

One reference is a press release, regurgitated by three sources. That just does not help your case Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 15:29, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. I have worked on the page for many hours. I hope it finally meets the standards you require and fulfills all the requirements that you need. --Marcorubiocali (talk) 15:33, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

I can see many hours of work. I have done all I am going to do to it by formatting it and flagging issues. I hope the work is sufficient, too Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 15:45, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you and I appreciate all your help. --Marcorubiocali (talk) 15:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:56, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a very hard place to write a new article in

You have done well to get as far as you have. The person you chose to wrote about, however decent and good a person he is in life, was always going to be very hard to write about here. But please do not get discouraged. I started out here by looking for information. When I failed to find it I decided to write it. My first attempts were terrible, but I never gave up. Wikipedia is also a harsh place. People tell it like it is, no sugar coating. It's a great training ground for survival in an office, for example! Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:38, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for everything no matter the outcome. Thanks again! --Marcorubiocali (talk) 21:50, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

My assessment of your current sources

1. We can't use https://www.thefreelibrary.com/George+The+Matchmaker+is+Helping+The+Animal+Shelters+&+You+Should+Too!-a0667572641 (Too sparse). Extremely short article, half of which is spent on Cervantes and half of which is spent on convincing people to volunteer.
2. https://www.newsbreak.com/news/2301170321112/george-the-matchmaker-is-helping-the-animal-shelters-you-should-too has been discussed and dismissed above. Newsbreak also has no editorial oversight and is unusable as a source on that basis alone.
3. We can't use http://globedia.com/celebrity-matchmaker-ayuda-animales-hogares (Unknown provenance). Who wrote this? Discussed and dismissed at AfD.
4. https://argonautnews.com/animal-advocate-2/ was discussed and dismissed at the AfD.
5. We can't use https://vocal.media/petlife/celebrity-matchmaker-is-helping-the-animal-shelters-in-la (Unknown provenance). Role byline; who wrote this?
6. https://www.dailyherald.com/submitted/20210705/george-the-matchmaker-is-helping-the-animal-shelters-amp-you-should-too has been discussed and dismissed above; the Free Library cite is explicitly a republication of this source. This source was discussed and dismissed at the AfD.
7. https://www.launchora.com/story/george-matchmaker-calls-out-o-r-matchmakers is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Interview. Discussed and dismissed at AfD.
8. We can't use https://vocal.media/humans/the-most-popular-influencers-in-peru-you-must-follow-them (too sparse). Listicle.
9. We can't use https://hollywoodmatchmakers.com/gossip-news-in-hollywood-george-the-matchmaker (unknown provenance). Who wrote this? Discussed and dismissed at AfD.
10. We can't use https://vocal.media/humans/the-top-3-celebrity-matchmakers-in-hollywood (Unknown provenance). Who wrote this?
11. https://bestlosangelesmatchmakers.com/news-celebrity-awarded-for-helping-local-shelters-in-los-angeles was discussed and dismissed at AfD.
12. https://wellbeingnews.co.uk/news/celebrity-matchmaker-is-helping-the-animal-shelters-in-la/ was discussed and dismissed above (Vocal PetLife). This source is plagiarised from the PetLife source.
13. We can't use https://voticle.com/a/articles/196377/celebrity-matchmaker-is-in-the-spotlight-for-a-good-cause (Unknown provenance). I can't find any instance of the article this one is apparently republishing nor anything else from its author. In addition, Voticle's entire setup means we can't use it (no editorial oversight).
14. https://veterinarian.news/animal-advocate-the-argonaut-newsweekly/ was discussed and dismissed above (Argonaut News).
15. I can't assess https://www.volunteer-work-overseas.com/work-overseas-news/george-the-matchmaker-is-helping-the-animal-shelters-you-should-too/ (Technical barrier). Firefox throws up "Secure connexion failed".
16. We can't use https://penzu.com/public/2d327f72 (No editorial oversight).
17. https://issuu.com/timespub/docs/argo092321-web/6 was discussed and dismissed above (This is the print version of the Argonaut article).
18. We can't use https://argonautnews.com/letters-445/ (No editorial oversight). Letters to the editor are not subject to the same rigor as news articles and even if they were, the letter in question is extremely short.
19. https://spotoncalifornia.com/greater-los-angeles/4298354/animal-advocate.html was discussed and dismissed above (Argonaut News).
20. We can't use https://patch.com/pennsylvania/harrisburg/ep/2221122 - and https://original.newsbreak.com/@jennifer-marshal-1588056/2295078040667-george-the-matchmaker-is-helping-animals-in-need (the article it's a repub of) is unusable (No editorial oversight).
21. We can't use https://weheartit.com/articles/359204618-nyc-news-matchmaker-receives-award (No editorial oversight). A search for specific strings in the article doesn't turn up a FOX story on him, so I can only assume the byline is bullshit.
22. https://original.newsbreak.com/@gia-the-nyc-reporter-1590337/2410037086758-matchmaker-receives-award-for-launching-animal-organization was discussed and dismissed above (We<3it). This source is plagiarised from We<3it.
23. https://datenewyorksingles.com/new-york-news-matchmaker-awarded-by-the-state-for-opening-animal-organization " " " " " ("). " " " " " ".
24. We can't use https://telescope.ac/we-love-nyc-news-matchmaker-awarded-for-opening-animal-shelter-in-nyc (Unknown provenance). Who wrote this?
25. https://www.trendiee.com/?p=5766 was discussed and dismissed above (We<3it). This source is plagiarised from We<3it.
26. https://vocal.media/petlife/celebrity-matchmaker-launches-the-cervantes-society-of-animals " " " " " ("). " " " " " ".
27. https://datemanhattansingles.com/matchmaker-awarded-for-opening-animal-shelter-in-manhattan " " " " " ("). " " " " " ".
28. https://en.calameo.com/books/006883830223a75254e39 was discussed and dismissed at the AfD.
29. We can't use https://www.lasopa.com/?p=1206728 (Unknown provenance). This is also an English-language article on a Spanish-language website. Labeled as gossip.
30. We can't use https://beverlyhillsmatchmakers.com/news-famous-matchmaker-to-bring-shelter-to-los-angeles (No editorial oversight).
31. We can't use https://app.ex.co/stories/sandram61/celebrity-gossip-matchmaker-launches-animal-rescue-center-in-nyc (No editorial oversight). Labeled as gossip.
32. We can't use https://www.wattpad.com/1146704223-famous-hollywood-matchmaker-to-open-pet-rescue (Unknown provenance). I can't find any news outlet named "HollywoodNewsToday".
33. We can't use https://movellas.com/blog/trending-in-hollywood-celebrity-matchmaker-is-in-the-spotlight/202110261443430228 (Unknown provenance). Once again, I can't find any news outlet named "CelebrityNewsLosAngeles".
34. The Booksie source is 404-compliant (it redirects to Booksie's homepage). Booksie wouldn't be an acceptable source anyways as it's a de facto vanity press.
35. We can't use https://www.penana.com/story/89257/celebrity-news-hollywood-s-favorite-matchmaker-is-at-it-again/issue/1 (Unknown provenance). Once again, I can't find any news outlet named "TrendingNewsLA".

My conclusion: Literally all of your sources are rubbish, and I am starting to think, given the sources above, that you are either complicit in trying to publicise this person or are so credulous that you cannot separate good sources from bad. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 21:24, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

I am church woker not an online advertiser. I work for the Church and have no clue how to promote a person online. Those are links the church volunteers have gathered for me in relation to Cervantes and his animal shelter in New York City. When you write - Who wrote this? How in the world can I know who wrote that? I have no clue who wrote. They are intereviews and online publications about Cervantes. Marcorubiocali (talk) 21:35, 3 November 2021 (UTC) How is this not acceptabale. This place is a local news channel in Santa Monica, California. How do I know? I live here. This is a local news channel who has been in the area for many years. https://argonautnews.com/animal-advocate-2/ Marcorubiocali (talk) 21:38, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

How is this not acceptable? The Daily Herald is Chicago's LARGEST online news paper. I lived in Chicago for over 10 years and this place has been there LONGER than that. This is the MOST REPUTABLE online news channel in Chicaco. Are you sure you know what you are talking about? https://www.dailyherald.com/search/?query=george%20cervantes Marcorubiocali (talk) 21:41, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

I am sure. Clearly you are, too. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 21:43, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

When you have absoultely nothing to say....the only thing you can do is attack me as a person. Bottom line is that those two news channels alone make him notable. The Argonaut News and The Daily Hearld are two HUGE news sources which are featuring Cervantes. Marcorubiocali (talk) 21:45, 3 November 2021 (UTC) You say that I am a marketer than prove it. YOU CAN'T. Bottom line is Cervantes was featured on the Argonaut News from Santa Monica and the Daily Herald in Chicago. Those 2 news sources are huge. Marcorubiocali (talk) 21:47, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm calling a spade a spade. You're citing most of the sources that Robert McClenon (talk · contribs) assessed and dismissed during the AfD discussion, the obvious implication being that you either are unwilling or unable to actually heed the advice of others, and he explicitly stated that Argonaut and Daily Herald were unusable sources. I'm inclined to believe him, given that those articles are less about him and merely use him as a prop. You've been repeatedly told what sources we need, what needs to happen, etc. You have rejected or looked for loopholes in any piece of advice given to you. This obstinance is not something I would expect from someone whose only interest in a given subject is anything less than a stalker-fan or a mercenary, and is in itself extremely problematic on a website that is built on cooperation and communication. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 21:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

How can the biggest news chanel in Santa Monica not be trustworthy? Why is the Daily Herald of Chicago not trustworthy? They are reputable and trsutworth news places. I am not a mercenary or whatever you are calling me. I am not a fan or a mercenary. I told you this 10 times. We go to the same church and and belong to the same volunteer group. Why those 2 news sources are not being considered towards his notability is not right. Those news channels are independent and have no association to Cervantes. Marcorubiocali (talk) 22:09, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Have you actually read those sources you cite? You keep harping on about how they're trustworthy outlets, but we do not assess a source wholly on what outlet publishes it. Even the Wall Street Journal and Seattle Times run articles we can't use as sources. While assessing the outlet is the first thing we do, once we verify that the outlet is otherwise usable (i.e. it has strong editorial oversight that fact-checks, discloses, and retracts), we then look at the text of the source itself to see if it satisfies all other prongs (i.e. in-depth non-routine coverage and not written or commissioned by or on the subject's behalf). In both the Argonaut and Daily Herald sources, Cervantes is little more than a mouthpiece for a pro-volunteering message, and they don't go into much depth on him specifically, making them worthless as sources about him. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 22:17, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

(Personal attack removed) Marcorubiocali (talk) 22:23, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Now who's the one pulling out personal attacks, hm? The long and short of it is that the sources provided are useless for notability. This has nothing to do with Cervantes', yours, my, Theroadislong's, or anyone else's race. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 22:28, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Marcorubiocali - I have two separate points. First, User:Jéské Couriano says correctly that I found the Daily Herald and Argonaut unusable as sources. I did not comment on whether they were reliable sources. I didn't assess their reliability and didn't say that they weren't trustworthy. I said that they weren't independent secondary sources. Second, you are in danger of getting blocked for personal attacks and for attempting to have a chilling effect on discussion. You have a right to complain to the news media, but you do not have the right to edit Wikipedia, only the privilege, and that can be withdrawn if necessary. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:45, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Jéské Couriano - I don't know if this editor is a mercenary. As to whether they are a fan of some sort, remember that "fan" is short for fanatic. I think that we, as reviewers, should leave them alone if they will leave us alone. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:45, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

I have said everything that I will say. I will share my opinions wiht media friends and see what they think about it. You can block me, but I already have the screen shots of the way he treated me not just today, but since day 1. (Personal attack removed) Marcorubiocali (talk) 06:15, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

November 2021

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Marcorubiocali. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 22:29, 3 November 2021 (UTC) He has been making smart and derogatory remarks since day one towards me.

AfC notification: Draft:George Cervantes has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:George Cervantes. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 22:48, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Marcorubiocali. Thank you. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 23:02, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

November 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for casting aspersions, pseudo-legal threats, abusive comments. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.  Black Kite (talk) 07:03, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I note the strong probability that you have been editing while logged out. This is block evasion, and will not help your case to be unblocked.

If you wish to edit again please be wise, read the guide and make your application. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 15:13, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:George Cervantes has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:George Cervantes. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:30, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Draft:George Cervantes

Draft:George Cervantes, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:George Cervantes and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:George Cervantes during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 15:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marcorubiocali. 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. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.  -- RoySmith (talk) 18:49, 10 December 2021 (UTC)