Jump to content

User talk:MassimoGiordano1970

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, MassimoGiordano1970, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Massimo Giordano, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, visit the Teahouse, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 11:32, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked - possible impersonation

[edit]
This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because the username, MassimoGiordano1970, matches the name of a well-known, living person.

If you are the person represented by this username, please note that the practice of blocking such usernames is to protect you from being impersonated, not to discourage you from editing Wikipedia. You may choose to edit under a new username (see information below), but keep in mind that you are welcome to continue to edit under this username.

If you choose to keep your current username, please send an email to info-en@wikimedia.org including your real name and your Wikipedia username to receive instructions from our volunteer response team about account verification. Please do not send documentation without being requested to do so.

If you are not the person represented by this username, you are welcome to choose a new username (see below).

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

Please take a moment to either create a new account, or request a username change to this account.

  • To create a new account with a different username, simply log out of this account and then click here to make a new one.
  • If you prefer to change the username of this account, you may do so by adding the following text to the bottom of your user talk page (this page): {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.


Important items to note:

  • The new username that you choose must comply with Wikipedia's username policy.
  • The new username you choose cannot already be taken and used by another account. You can search here to see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns, "There is no global account for [username]", that means it is available.

Appeals: If your username is not in violation of Wikipedia's username policy, and if you believe that this block was incorrect or made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the following text to the bottom of your user talk page (this page): {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Thank you. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is this? Its me I am updating my profile because I know how to work onto those things. How you dare to erase all my work and block me. What is your real name? Shame on you!! MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You were blocked because, as the notice above says, no one on Wikipedia currently has any way of knowing if the person operating this account is indeed Masssimo Giordano. You can be unblocked through any one of the various methods explained in the notice.
When unblocked, you still should not edit any article about yourself or to which you have a personal connection; you have a conflict of interest related to such articles. AntiDionysius (talk) 00:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about man I am the only one that can do this I was there!!!! And there are all the proofs Jesus we are really at Stone Age MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to add the references tomorrow!!! Now what should I do to get back al the work done today!!! I am really mad MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Go through the steps outlined in the notice, above. Drmies (talk) 00:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I ve worked the intere day its 4.34 for me now this is madness MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:35, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is understandable to be frustrated when you find your account blocked. As the notice above says, though, ultimately this policy exists to protect public figures like you. If we didn't have it, someone could create an account with your name and pretend to be you, which would ultimately be bad. AntiDionysius (talk) 00:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can read the Wikipedia conflict of interest policy and then follow the instructions above on how to be unblocked. AntiDionysius (talk) 00:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But you the text you added isn't suitable for restoration. It was both not properly sourced, and in places very far from neutral. This is the whole reason we have the conflict of interest policy; even when people are trying to, they are almost never able to be neutral about themselves. The conflict of interest policy explains how you can request changes to your article. AntiDionysius (talk) 00:35, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is madness!! You erased my Picture!! How you dare??? Tell me your real name
as you know mine. To be fair!!! MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't delete the content you added, another user did that. AntiDionysius (talk) 00:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have explained to you how you can get this account unblocked and how you can work to get your article updated in a way that maintains its neutrality.
Is there anything else I can help you with? AntiDionysius (talk) 00:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes dont waste my time and give me your name and surname! If u r not a bloody AI! MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not going to do that. AntiDionysius (talk) 00:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its easy like that isnt it!? MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes.
Like I said, it's understandable to be frustrated in your position. If I were you I'd revisit it in the morning; the steps to get your account unblocked are quite simple, and then you can work with other editors to update the article. AntiDionysius (talk) 00:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The intere day!!! Frustrated is not the word. And I have NO time for this kids playground!! MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I want just someone that puts back what I have done thats all!!! MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It says that YOU erased it not another user MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AntiDionysius, I just ran the resume added here, and perhaps unsurprisingly it's flagged as AI-generated. MassimoGiordano, there is no way that such content will be acceptable here. We're not LinkedIn, I'm afraid. Drmies (talk) 00:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
LoL it is not AI IDIOT!! MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Fred I was inserting then puttin all the references needed I have toons of articles and overall there a website named operabase.com where you can verify all its has been written. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 10:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I blocked??

[edit]

What is this?? Why blocking me I have worked the interr day to clean up MY bio and this is the result?? How you dare? MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • See above, please. !!!!
The instructions in the big blue box above are quite clear about what you need to do to get unblocked. It's right at the top of the box, you must send an email. Follow the instructions to prove your identity and you will be unblocked. Or (because this is a "soft" block, not a "hard" block) create a new account.
Either way, you will not be permitted to make any substantive changes to the article about yourself. In the same way you don't own a newspaper article about you, you also don't own the Wikipedia article about you. You have no more right to modify the Wikipedia article you don't own than to modify a newspaper article you don't own.
People with a conflict of interest (as you do about yourself) should instead propose changes on the article's talk page. You can use Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard to do this, after you are able to edit again.
Also, the work you did is not gone. It's all still there in the article history, which you can see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Massimo_Giordano&action=history ~Anachronist (talk) 01:59, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for confirming your identity to WP:VRT. You are now unblocked.
Because you have a conflict of interest here, your edits to that article about you must be restricted to minor corrections to spelling, grammar, names, and dates, you may revert obvious vandalism, and you may add citations to sources that are independent of you. However, anything more substantive, you must propose on the article talk page. You may use Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard for this. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great I am very happy! Now can you please stop harassing me and put back my picture and as well the infos? You can see this same serie on my VERIFIED instagram on the New Years Eve. Thank you! MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 06:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where has the information been published in an independent source, where we can verify it? —C.Fred (talk) 10:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was adding the content then I would have added the references but if you carry on erasing me all I write I just wish we could talk about this in person. Thats all. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 10:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
operabase.com and all the newspapers and all the rest of info from the socials and so on. I mean are you for real?? MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 10:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Make sure to list the specific newspapers when you make your edit requests at Talk:Massimo Giordano. —C.Fred (talk) 10:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we are talking about the style OK I can agree that can be different MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 10:35, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And now I am waiting for my MY OWN picture to he approved MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 10:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that with the picture. Did you set your iPhone up on a tripod and take a timed selfie of yourself, or did someone else take the photo? —C.Fred (talk) 10:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have already sent the request to the commons no it is my phone and wife took it for me. I am the owner yes. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 10:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's reasonable to assume that your wife transferred the rights to the image to you. —C.Fred (talk) 10:52, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...although the description of the image will need edited to list her as the photographer, rather than you. —C.Fred (talk) 10:56, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
operabase.com its all possible to double check it all of it that I have written without even newspapers. NY Times etc MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 10:34, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have concerns about operabase, since it's editable by the subjects or their agents. It looks like, at best, it has the same limitations as IMDB. —C.Fred (talk) 10:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trust me its not so easy to edit it. Difference is that here you dont have to give your ID there yes. And all the other details. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 10:46, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What you're actually saying is that anyone can work on those resumes in that database. That makes it unacceptable. Various editors have asked you to work with secondary sources: please have a look at Secondary source. Drmies (talk) 14:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thank you. I will officially publish it on all my socials 24K on FB and 7K on Instagram all the problems you are giving me and forgotten 22 on X. I am really feedup of those insane discussions. I did this journey since 40 years and I need to proof to whom and what? This is dictatorship. 99% of what I have published can be easily find on newspapers and theater where I have performed. If you wanna change the reality is something different and I would prefer to talk in live about this and not with a boot or some person that has no idea. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 14:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for confirming the underlying issue: you edited the material there. That means it is a self-published source, so it can only be used for very limited sets of information.
One of the core principles of Wikipedia is verification. Material in an article should be able to be verified with independent secondary sources, like newspapers or books (and not autobiographies).
There have been some subjects of articles who tried to manipulate the information presented in the articles written about them, and that's why the rules are so harsh on all editors who are trying to edit articles about themselves. —C.Fred (talk) 11:00, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I dont need to edit anything there I have all traces of what I have done till I have started. Are you an AI?? MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 12:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In case you are human that I dubt it please help me to edit MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 12:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now you erased my picture and now you put it back as it was. Immediately. It has been approved. Thank you. As it was with the box and all the infos. Thank you. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 15:34, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Plus I am the one who performed all those shows if we want to start to change also the history of the singles we are really under dictators. Sorry. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 10:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yet more rules to be aware of

[edit]

You should be aware of a couple more things. I encourage you to read them, or at least the first part of each:

  • Wikipedia:Civility is a policy. A policy defines a rule under which we must all operate. Because we know you were upset about your edits being reverted and your account being blocked, it's understandable that emotions in the heat of the moment may cause you to violate this policy. That is in the past, you didn't know, and others who have been communicating here have been patient. Please abide by this policy in the future.
  • Wikipedia:Assume good faith is a guideline. A guideline defines "best practices". Every action on this account and in the article, every sentence written by other editors here on your talk page, have been done in good faith to help improve the encyclopedia. Your block was to protect you from possible impersonation. Your contributions were reverted because an encyclopedia does not benefit to have articles written by people with a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI are expected to propose changes on the article's talk page.

Repeated personal attacks (such as accusing an editor of being an AI) violates both the policy and the guideline described above, and may lead to your account being blocked again. Comment on content, not the contributor. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

really?? Wikipedia:Assume good faith REALLY?? Wikipedia:Civility REALLY!?? Is this what you applied to me? lets drop the matter. Thank you. Now your help would really much be appreciated. Please. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 16:50, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In your opinion should I follow the same setup of the Italian wikipedia as for Bio?? MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 17:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but as an administrator I felt it my responsibility to give you a gentle warning based on what I read on this page. The matter is dropped.
Good question. The short answer is "not exactly". I will explain.
Each Wikipedia is independent and operates under its own rules. The English Wikipedia has the most comprehensive rules, which are also enforced more strictly than other language Wikipedias. That is partly why the English Wikipedia is one of the world's most widely used resources: Even though anyone can edit, the edits are held to higher standards even though a lot of junk gets through (which isn't surprising with over 6 million articles and only a few hundred active editors). Certainly the English Wikipedia is probably the most strict about requiring reliable secondary sources and avoiding a conflict of interest, especially when it comes to biographies of living persons.
The Italian Wikipedia entry about you is full of things that would not be acceptable here. There are only three secondary sources cited (two from Opera Today and one from Il Sole 24 Ore. The article contains claims that may be true but are not substantiated with citations to reliable sources. Making unsourced assertions in a biography is absolutely not permitted on the English Wikipedia.
The Italian article includes a bibliography, which is good, but it isn't useful because they are not associated with any specific statements made in the article.
For verification purposes one could write statements in a way that avoids having Wikipedia state something as fact. Here is a fictional example: we could cite an interview with you to write "Giordano stated in an interview that he lived in London for 10 years" instead of making the assertion in Wikipedia's narrative voice "Giordano lived in London for 10 years." Why? Because an interview is a primary source (not coverage of you, it's you talking about yourself). We prefer secondary sources. See the short essay Wikipedia:Golden Rule to learn more about this distinction. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood so I did right I added directly the source that is the Theatre where I performed. Please have a look. Thank you. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 19:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I linked directly the web site of the Berliner Phil and La Scala with the posters that are in the archive MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 19:26, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please can you check? I guess this is perfect because its coming from the institution and not from operabase... MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 19:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize but I had to revert you again. Some of those edits were not a problem but the problematic ones could not be selectively reverted in the middle of a string of changes. You are not writing in a neutral fashion, which is why editors with a conflict of interest must propose changes on the article's talk page. Use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard for this.
If I have to, I can block you from editing the article while leaving you free to edit anything else on Wikipedia including the talk page. You really need to go to Talk:Massimo Giordano and propose changes there. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Witch one are not a problem? I am asking for help and you are behaving not correctly toward me. Please give me your name and surname and do not hide behind a nick name. I have enough of this. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 20:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We must write in a neutral tone. Using unsubstantiated puffery such as "acclaimed", "realized his potential" and so forth are not neutral. Citing YouTube is often not acceptable. You will get more help if you stop trying to change the article yourself and start proposing changes on the talk page.
My behavior toward you is as an administrator of Wikipedia whose job it is to preserve the stability of the Wikipedia project. Editing with a conflict of interest, as you are doing, does not improve the article.
Please try to avoid being blocked again. Use the talk page to propose changes. That is what other editors with a conflict of interest do. Why do you not? ~Anachronist (talk) 20:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have NO idea how to do it but ok gotcha your point I try to use a neutral tone. Not a problem. I need just this job to be done asap. Thank you. Tell me please how can I do this talk thing. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 21:00, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So write here before publishing correct?? and someone will possibly correct it? MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 21:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will say again: Go to Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Click on "I have a conflict of interest." This takes you through the steps to make a well formatted edit request on the article talk page Talk:Massimo Giordano. Not this talk page here, the talk page for the article about you.
Regarding ASAP: See Wikipedia:There is no deadline. Remember, this is not your article, you don't own it, and Wikipedia doesn't care what any article subject has to say about himself, only what reliable secondary sources say. Edit requests are answered when a volunteer can get to it, nobody is being paid to work on Wikipedia. Being blocked, or being repeatedly reverted, is not going to make things go faster. Using the talk page is the best way even if it is not fast. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I have got how to write. I have corrected it. Now should be all good. Please have a look. Thank you. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 21:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think now should be ok. Please let me know without erasing. Thank you. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 21:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And yes its much better this way you are right. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 21:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it works now correct? I understood the style/fashion required. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 21:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But now I have understood and yes it was not good. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are an idiot. There is nothing more to say. Just a poor idiot. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will report you. Go to hell and stay there. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't revert you. Someone else did.

I'm going to give you a final warning: If you make a substative change to the article again, I will block you from editing it. You must propose these changes on the talk page, as I have reminded you repeatedly.

What exactly is your problem with this? You have been given clear instructions.

I have business and family to attend to, so unfortunately right now I do not have time to check your changes. As you requested, I was not going to revert your changes until I checked them, but someone else reverted them.

For the last time, use the article talk page Talk:Massimo Giordano to propose changes. Once again, you may use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard to help you with this. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have family? Lol and who is this unlucky woman!!?? MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

[edit]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Drmies (talk) 22:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look at that last comment and try to tell me how that is in any way an appropriate thing to say, for an adult, to a volunteer on a website. (I'm not even going to address the sexism.) If we throw in the AI-assisted resume writing and promotional editing and all the other insults you have uttered at editors who tried to explain to you how this site works, and what seems to be a complete lack of interest on your part to learn anything about our policies and guidelines, then we are actually well past the point where a NOTHERE block is appropriate. If you continue to insult my colleagues, your access to this talk page will be revoked. Drmies (talk) 22:26, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

U did this before I got mad. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have nothing better to do?! MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Conversely, we have better things to do than to babysit the account of a user who flagrantly refuses to follow instructions. —C.Fred (talk) 22:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have followed all the guidelines and you did this on purpose. But you stay an idiot as I stated yesterday. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You never made an edit request at Talk:Massimo Giordano. Not one. —C.Fred (talk) 22:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this how you make money isnt it?! And you talk to me about Sexism? Lol MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The reference to sexism was made by Drmies, not C.Fred. When you see messages signed by different names, those are different people. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should give your real names! Instead of hiding behind a fake user to protect what since its all at the daylight?? MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was a perfect editing and this is just an abuse that you did. Just to use power sorry to abuse power. Anyway I am talking to the wall. Its a waste of time. I will find out who is in this and I will have it done. You are bandits thats all I can say. Bandits bandits bandits. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "I will find out who is in this and I will have it done." AntiDionysius (talk) 22:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean someone to pay and have it edited because you beheaved as BANDITS!!! Read how was it done and this IDIOT of Demies blocked me. Then of course zi go mad after working like crazy. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, if you pay to have someone edit it directly, those edits will be reverted. I'm going to add the article to my watchlist.
Paid editing isn't outright banned, but it is severely restricted and subject to stringent rules; that person would need, like you, to request edits while making their conflict of interest clear. If they behave the way you have, the edits won't get made at all. They would need to be civil and abide by policy. Have a nice evening. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:52, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where is written that I need to make a request? May be I am talking to the same person that has 3 different nick names. Thats all I can say. but I guess this us how u have fun isnt it?? MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:34, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I told you 22 hours ago. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And the fourth nick name yeahhh lets loose some time MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 22:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry it has come to this. Everyone has behaved with patience and civility toward you. Your block message, linking to instructions on how to appeal your block, was your chance to get it done while having access to this talk page. Too bad you messed up that chance.
If I feel inclined in the coming weeks, I will go through your edits closely and improve the article based on the sources you found. However, I have spent enough time trying to help you, getting only abuse in return.
You still have a chance to get unblocked. See the message below. Don't blow it this time. I'm happy to work with you on improving the article, but only if you suggest improvements on the talk page. You would have to agree to that condition if you are to be unblocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Stop hand
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 for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the posting of this notice.

Moving along

[edit]

Massimo, the basic rules are simple. Content has to be neutral and verified, and COI editors are discouraged from editing articles they're involved with directly. Thanks to the good work of User:C.Fred and User:Bbb23 the article, Massimo Giordano, actually looks pretty decent, but the sourcing remains a problem. So, "Massimo Giordano unterzeichnet"--that links is dead, it seems, and it looks like it was basically a press release on the record company website, placed on your own website, but I can't find anything for that title. The basic principle is that ALL the information needs to be sourced to secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Think music magazines and newspapers. If you can provide that material, great. You can propose that on the talk page via an edit request (see [Wikipedia:Edit requests]]) and someone will help you out. And please assume that we are not here (well, most of us are not here) to screw people over, but we do need to uphold our policies and guidelines.

Please look over this page and explain, in an unblock request, if you can live by this. And don't forget to log in. Drmies (talk) 15:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Drmies. And again sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MassimoGiordano1970 (talk • contribs)
I received your email. I'm glad to see you have your talk page access back. However, in your email you said "Please restore my block." I don't understand this. You are already blocked. Do you want your talk page access revoked again?
If instead you meant "please restore my access", I want you to appeal this block properly. So far, it seems you have failed to read any of the links given to you in the conversations above. You have repeatedly ignored advice, and you have been abusive to those giving you advice.
Prove that you can read at least one of the links given to you, like the one in your block message: Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. Follow the instructions there. It says exactly what you must do. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anachronist, I think they are confusing "talk page access restored" with "unblocked". I think I'm fine with an unblock. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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).

MassimoGiordano1970 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I realize that I was unnecessarily offensive and I would like to formally apologize, including to the Anachronist. I have reviewed the Wikipedia Guide to Appealing Blocks, and I hope that I am following the proper process with this request. No harm was intended and I am new to this, so I apologize if some of my explanations are unclear. I will adhere to the rules and the advice given to me. I kindly request that my access be restored. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:02, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

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 been blocked again. I followed as requested rules to the appeal. I hope this block will be reverted and I can be proficient and help to update this article. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 12:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 00:02, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are not blocked again, you have been blocked only once, and that block is still active. The only difference is that your talk page access here has been restored. Are you aware that you will not be permitted to edit the Massimo Giordano article if unblocked, and you must propose changes on the article's talk page? ~Anachronist (talk) 16:02, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, he was blocked twice, first for the username violation, and then "again" as NOTHERE. I think that's what he's referring to.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good evening, yes I understand. I won’t make any further edits to the page.Once I will be unblocked I will just propose the changes in the talk page of the article as I did yesterday with the Ny Times links. Thank you. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 16:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, are you saying that this edit is yours?
The article about you says you live in Italy. Is that still correct? ~Anachronist (talk) 16:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its not an edit you asked me about references as newspapers and I found those. NYT.
Yes in Italy. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 18:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In Italy? The message on Talk:Massimo Giordano from yesterday, about the NYT links, was written by an IP address located in the United Arab Emirates. Is there more than one person accessing this account?
And you say you wrote that message yesterday, which is an admission that you evaded your block. Can you understand why this doesn't instill confidence that you will abide by the rules here? A block applies to you as a person, not the account you operate.
The new block notice below doesn't change anything, it's just a notification that your block reason has been altered due to you creating multiple accounts and evading your block.
Therefore, your unblock appeal needs to address the block evasion and multiple accounts. User:Marikieu has been confirmed to be the same person. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there was someone who was supposed to help me, but instead caused multiple problems. This person claimed to know what they were doing, but unfortunately, that wasn’t the case. That's the short version of the story.
As for evading, I don't even know how I could be doing that, since I only learned what a 'talk page' was two days ago. Honestly, this is my first time understanding how Wikipedia works, and despite the challenges, I must say I really appreciate the way you all operate. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 19:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anachronist, I'm going to revoke TPA again: there is no point in continuing this. Drmies (talk) 20:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And btw I have already reported this issue to Drmies. I repeat my self I am here in good faith and I am sorry if this has been disrupted by some "random" behaviour. Again without wasting each other time if there is a possibility to work this out I am open to make amend if instead there is no possibility, I understand and I thank you. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 19:07, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I totally understand that you have to deal with a zillion of people and each of them with its own request and agenda. More then saying I am ready to follow what you asked I cannot do. You asked me to make no changes I will make no changes you asked me to propose the changes on the talk page of the article I will do that and I will wait for an administrator to make the change. Moreover I applied on the page of the conflict of interest and again I followed what you asked. Please just let me know if we can proceed or not and I will respect any decision you will take but dont keep me here waiting for something that will not happen. Thank you. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 19:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the explanation.
Every page on Wikipedia has a talk page. Your user account page User:MassimoGiordano1970 has this talk page we're using right now. Every article has a talk page, for the purpose of discussing improvements to the article.
When blocked, you cannot edit anything except your own talk page. You evaded the block by editing another page while not logged in.
It is fine for you to ask someone to help you, or even hire someone to help you. But that person must first declare that they have a conflict of interest due to helping you, and if being paid, must declare being a paid editor. Paid editing declaration is mandatory, it is part of the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, everyone agrees to this when creating an account, so there is a legal obligation to declare it.
If you get someone else to help you, be sure your helper is aware of this rule. Otherwise you will get more problems, as you have observed.
@Drmies: I would like to change the block to be restricted just to the Massimo Giordano article, but allow editing the talk page. Would that be OK? ~Anachronist (talk) 19:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Much more problems... MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 19:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MassimoGiordano, a couple of things. First, you were reblocked for violating WP:SOCK. Second, the block is a WP:CheckUser block, which means that only a CheckUser can unblock you, which at this point is unlikely to happen.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply][reply]
I don't know what else to do. If all 847 administrators handle situations this way every time, it will be practically impossible to manage, and it seems there's no willingness to resolve the issue.
Once again, if I can have access to Massimo Giordano's talk page, I would be happy to help in updating the page. However, if that's not possible, as Bbb23 has indicated, I thank you for your time and understanding. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 20:34, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

[edit]
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. 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.
Drmies (talk) 17:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Yesterday when you freed me it was all working perfectly. Then I have been blocked because someone I dont know ho said that I evaded the blocks. And blocked again :)) I dont know. I need just to be able to use the talk page of the article to help update the article. I dont need to edit. Someone else will evaluate it. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 18:29, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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).

MassimoGiordano1970 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I honestly dont know what else to say. If you want to free me I thank you. If you dont ok. I am here in good faith and just to help to update this page if its not possible I understand and I kindly ask you to stop this back and forward and to be direct in saying its not possible. Thank you. MassimoGiordano1970 (talk) 18:40, 2 October 2024 (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. Bbb23 (talk) 20:07, 2 October 2024 (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.

MassimoGiordano, a couple of things. First, you were reblocked for violating WP:SOCK. Second, the block is a WP:CheckUser block, which means that only a CheckUser can unblock you, which at this point is unlikely to happen.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have confirmed that you used two accounts, and that you have been lying to us about various things. At some point, it's too much. Drmies (talk) 23:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I stated above, I am willing to see your block reduced to cover only that article about you. But I am not a checkuser administrator, so I cannot modify your block. The only thing I can suggest at this point is to create another appeal, being fully open and honest about everything that you've done. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MassimoGiordano1970&oldid=1249063934"