User talk:Mickey109

Welcome!

Hello, Mickey109, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Rocky De La Fuente, 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, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

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, 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! Nat Gertler (talk) 14:35, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

October 2016

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Knowledgekid87. 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. JohnCD (talk) 16:36, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Por favor, no contribuya con textos en español a la Wikipedia en inglés. En cambio, sus contribuciones en español serán muy bienvenidas en la Wikipedia en español. Please do not contribute text in Spanish to English Wikipedia. Your contributions are more than welcome at the Spanish Wikipedia. JohnCD (talk) 16:36, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Rocky De La Fuente shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Nat Gertler (talk) 18:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky De La Fuente

I have reverted two changes you made to the article. Repeated use of the nickname "Rocky" is not in accordance with Wikipedia's style standard, and the image you uploaded has been deleted as a copyright violation. Wikipedia, and Wikimedia Commons, cannot host images copied from elsewhere unless they are available under a free license - see C:Commons:Licensing and the notices at C:User talk:Mickey109.

When your edits are reverted, you should not repeat them (see Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle and es:Wikipedia:Guerra de ediciones), but start a discussion on the article talk page and try to reach WP:Consensus with other users. JohnCD (talk) 20:33, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky is his legal Name is not a Nickname

He also appears in Most Ballots as "Rocky" Roque De La Fuente

All Legal Papers to Federal Court can not be sign with any Nickname is against federal Rules

so his Legal name is Rocky and has been know to many since the day he was born as "Rocky" in the USA and as "Roque" in spanish specking countries

His Father and his son also have the same Name "Rocky" for the son since 1983 and "Rocky for the father since 1945

The foto that Wikipedia uses make him look like a Mob boss..... and it appears that there is a great amount of effort to try to minimize his contributions to the USA election process

Please Unblock account and share best way to insert normal Pictures

Roberto

Warning

If you again revert the removal of your excessive addition of the nickname "Rocky", which is contrary to Wikipedia's style standards, you may be blocked from editing. Read es:Wikipedia:Guerra de ediciones.

If your use of the word "Manager" in this edit summary means that you are employed by De La Fuente, then:

You have a WP:Conflict of interest (Spanish es:Wikipedia:Conflicto de interés), and should read that page and the WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. You should not edit the article directly, but may make suggestions on the article talk page.
You are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use ("Paid contributions without disclosure" under section 4) to disclose your interest. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

JohnCD (talk) 22:36, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove content, templates, or other materials to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Rocky De La Fuente, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 19:47, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Mickey109 reported by User:NatGertler (Result: ). Thank you. Nat Gertler (talk) 23:39, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

October 2016

Your recent editing history at Rocky De La Fuente shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Nat Gertler (talk) 23:40, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Mickey109 (talk) 14:33, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

UnBlock

Mickey109 (talk) 14:48, 16 October 2016 (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).

Mickey109 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This account is block por unknown and/or other reason and por the purpose of advancing their candiade or other purpose and minimizing the competition There is a group of Hire Profecionals that continue to vandalize certain candidates in favor of others. Please explain what we need to do to get at the bottom of this unjust and unfair conclusion Please write to me via this forum or by e/mail (Redacted)

Decline reason:

This account was blocked for sockpuppetry, so no, the block is neither unjust nor unfair. —DoRD (talk) 15:08, 16 October 2016 (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.

As explained on your user page User:Mickey109, this account is blocked because it appears to be just a new account set up by someone whose account was already blocked, User:Judy P. Bush. For information on how you can ask to have the block reviewed and potentially, set aside, read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks.

Having said that, even if you were not to be blocked for the reason given, you were about to be blocked for edit-warring, for repeatedly reinserting your own edits over the edits of basically every other editor involved in the page. You have been warned of this repeatedly, and refused to heed those warning or to try to achieve consensus for your edits on the article's Talk page. Far from vandalizing, the other editors on the page (myself included) have been trying to keep the page to Wikipedia standards, and to keep you from adding apparent copyright violations and from deleting appropriate and sourced information. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:08, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you have repeatedly uploaded copyright images, claiming them as "own work"; and although in this edit summary you described yourself as "manager", presumably of the De La Fuente campaign, you have failed to declare your conflict of interest as required by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use ("Paid contributions without disclosure" under section 4). JohnCD (talk) 15:27, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Mickey109 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #16730 was submitted on Oct 16, 2016 15:52:17. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 15:52, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]