User talk:MarkLondon60

This is MarkLondon60'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: Renée Hoenderkamp (May 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 Lapablo was:

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 people). 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Only passing mentions of the subject and no significant coverage. Kindly add sources from reliable newspaper(s) that discuss the subject.

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:Renée Hoenderkamp 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:Renée Hoenderkamp, 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.

Lapablo (talk) 12:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MarkLondon60! 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! Lapablo (talk) 12:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Renée Hoenderkamp has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Renée Hoenderkamp. Thanks! Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the Advice

Thank you for the advice everyone. I think this Dr should have a Wikipedia page as even though I don’t know her personally she presents on TV and I listen to her on BBC radio and read her articles in OK Magazine Mail online and Express Newspaper and on ITV news. She has also written articles on Covid 19 and helped the NHS and advised people on BBC radio and articles in major UK newspapers.

I would say her articles in Ok magazine and her work on BBC radio London she is notable to have a Wikipedia page ～～～～

Jennifer Fitzpatrick moved to draftspace

Hi, I moved your draft in the draft namespace so that you can work on it a bit, as the article is now it cannot be in the main namespace. --Killarnee (T•1•2) 19:59, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Hello MarkLondon60. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Renée Hoenderkamp, 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

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:MarkLondon60. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=MarkLondon60|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. David Gerard (talk) 08:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am only going to make one statement. I did not have any financial connection to the subject or got paid for writing the page. If you want to delete the page which you have that’s ok MarkLondon60 (talk) 08:23, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MarkLondon60 can you please explain how you became the copyright holder of this image which was clearly uploaded by an alternate account of yours? Praxidicae (talk) 21:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One of the pages you wrote, Lydia Ansel, bears some surprising similarities to a previous version of that article, and that version was written by an undisclosed paid editor. Would you care to comment on why they're so similar if you're not being paid to edit? creffett (talk) 22:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lydia Ansel

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 Lydia Ansel, 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. Praxidicae (talk) 15:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jennifer Fitzpatrick

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 Jennifer Fitzpatrick, 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. Praxidicae (talk) 15:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove speedy deletion notices from pages you created yourself, as you did at Lydia Ansel, you may be blocked from editing. Praxidicae (talk) 15:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have just looked at all the articles I have created and the deletion notices have not been removed they are still in place so with respect I don’t understand what you mean. For the record I will not be creating or editing any articles now or in the future as it’s clear you don’t want any help or input from me. All the best MarkLondon60 (talk) 21:17, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jennifer Fitzpatrick for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jennifer Fitzpatrick 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/Jennifer Fitzpatrick 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. Praxidicae (talk) 12:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)The book was called Payback Season and it was turned into a script and a movies made. The movie Payback Season has its own Wikipedia page. Thank you for all the work you did on the page making it better and I feel it should be kept and hope your right. I might try and right a Wikipedia page about Dr Sara Kayat as I watch her on This Morning TV program. I am surprised she does not have a Wikipedia page already MarkLondon60 (talk) 21:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jenny Fitzpatrick

Hi, Mark. If you want to save the article, you need to vote to Keep it at the Deletion discussion page here. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure the article will be kept now. BTW, what book did she write? All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Renée Hoenderkamp for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Renée Hoenderkamp 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/Renée Hoenderkamp 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. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 12:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Thank you for all your help I appreciate it MarkLondon60 (talk) 20:21, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a mess. I tried to clarify it somewhat, but if you can find sources profiling her that state very clearly that she is a particularly prominent doctor, that would help a lot. The Campaigns section was partly just a repetition of other parts of the article and partly did not explain why these activities are of particular importance and did not cite independent sources that explain their importance. The article is much stronger without the section. I gave it a "Weak Keep" vote at the deletion discussion, but if you can find stronger, clearer references that actually say that she is "resident gp" for these TV shows, magazines, etc., other than her own website, that would help a lot. Also, you cannot vote twice. I suggest you change the second thing you wrote there to "Comment" instead of a second vote, or the reviewer might be annoyed with you. Also see MOS:OVERLINK, and when you link something, you should look at the link to make sure that it is the link you intended, as I had to fix or delete many bad links. -- Ssilvers (talk) 08:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all your help and work you did on the page it’s much appreciated. I also thank you for the advice MarkLondon60 (talk) 20:23, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Renée Hoenderkamp, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Doctor and The Doctor's Dilemma (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:45, 27 May 2020 (UTC) I have now googled what the block is for and will answer the questions that you guided me with. The block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia as I have not damaged any pages. The block is no longer necessary because I understand what you have been blocked me for, I will not continue to cause damage or disruption because as far as I am aware I did not do that and only created 2 articles. I will however make useful contributions if I can help other pages on Wikipedia. I will not personally be creating any pages myself as I don’t have the time and the pages I did create which took the very little spare time I have were deleted for no valid reason in my opinion. All the best with Wikipedia and I don’t hold any grudges, just have not done whet you accused me of that’s all. Mark x MarkLondon60 (talk) 03:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a suspected sock puppet of Chris M Pattinson (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this is a sock puppet account, and your original account is blocked, please also note that banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; and all edits made under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. creffett (talk) 23:47, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Chris Pattinson MarkLondon60 (talk) 02:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

MarkLondon60 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Who is Chris M Pattinson? You are welcome to delete the pages and block me but please don’t blame someone else. The only people you have hurt are the pages I created and they don’t deserve that so blame me as I created the pages and not some girl called Chris M Pattinson I feel sorry for you Wikipedia how you have acted MarkLondon60 (talk) 02:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 03:18, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

MarkLondon60 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Reasons below MarkLondon60 (talk) 03:54, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Come on. You're on the same IP range and create the same articles. You can't pull this "what is this 'sockpuppet' of which you speak?" NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I have not given a reason because I don’t understand why you have blocked me? I also have no idea what a Sockpuppet is? You also don’t need to unlock me I accept the block but I am not Chris M Pattinson and if that’s the reason for the block you are totally wrong. At least provide a honest true reason. I have no intention of creating anymore Wikipedia pages as I don’t have the time now but thought the people I created pages for should be on Wikipedia. Maybe you can create them. Have a nice day. You don’t need to unlock me but I suggest you get your facts correct in future Mark MarkLondon60 (talk) 03:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to add that I will help you with other Wikipedia pages if in the future you change your mind and unblock me as I think you provide some amazing information but I do sometimes see information on Wikipedia that is not accurate which I would be happy to help you correct. All the best I have nothing further to add to this conversation. MarkLondon60 (talk) 03:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC)I have only created 2 articles in my life of which I created on a new iPhone 11 Pro so please don’t use IP as an to block me. I am not the person you claim fact but as I no longer have any interest in creating a page on Wikipedia it’s not really open for discussion. Enjoy your weekend. I personally think you have been watching too many James Bond movies. Regards Mark MarkLondon60 (talk) 06:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC) Plus if you know so much about me why don’t you just pop to my home and see me? Hope to see you soon in person and please stop hiding behind a computer. Let’s meet in person? Mark MarkLondon60 (talk) 06:55, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]