User talk:Natsecobserver

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

Kronos Advisory, LLC

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Kronos Advisory, LLC, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.kronosadvisory.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 10:09, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Nine Eleven Finding Answers Foundation, you may be blocked from editing. Please, especially when adding information regarding BLPs, do not engage in original research and in synthesis, both of which are deprecated per wp policy, and understand our use of primary sources. Many thanks. Epeefleche (talk) 22:20, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Nine Eleven Finding Answers Foundation, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Additionally, accusing other editors of being affiliated with the subject isn't going to get your goals accomplished. Discuss it on the article's talk page. Falcon8765 ^(TALK) 22:22, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Natsecobserver for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Falcon8765 ^(TALK) 22:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Baseless claim; see Wikipedia:Don't be quick to assume that someone is a sockpuppet.

Speedy deletion nomination of The Catalyst (Medical University of South Carolina)

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 The Catalyst (Medical University of South Carolina) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Michelle T. Hayes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michelle T. Hayes 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/Michelle T. Hayes until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. MikeWazowski (talk) 01:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Natsecobserver. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Hello. The articles that you have just created and edited, the current sock investigation, and other indicia that I cannot share online without violating privacy issues all suggest the possibility of a conflict of interest here. Please take note of the wp guidelines. Thank you. Epeefleche (talk) 03:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Catalyst (Medical University of South Carolina) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Catalyst (Medical University of South Carolina) 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/The Catalyst (Medical University of South Carolina) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Epeefleche (talk) 04:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Blocked for sock puppetry

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Natsecobserver. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that this block was in error, and would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 02:48, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Teddy Turner.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! avs5221^{(talk|contrib)} 06:22, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Teddy Turner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill O'Reilly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Teddy Turner concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Teddy Turner, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 18:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Teddy Turner

Hello Natsecobserver. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Teddy Turner".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Teddy Turner}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 20:01, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael S. Smith II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bloomberg. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:04, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kronos Advisory for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kronos Advisory 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/Kronos Advisory until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. SmartSE (talk) 20:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 20:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

COI and style on Michael S. Smith II

Hi there, I see you restored almost all of the information I had culled from the Michael Smith article for various reasons. It has since been re-deleted by another editor. Those edits were problematic for a variety of reasons. For a case-by-case basis please refer to my edit summaries in that article's edit history, but in general there were: aggrandizing to the subject -- even if something happened and even it was in the newspaper doesn't make it notable; trying to inherit notability from the perceived notability of the events or the news carriers, this is also peacocking and aggrandizing; the wrong tone in general, read like a news report. Wikipedia does not bother with impressing people saying "The New York Times reported that XYZ" -- that's contentless drivel. We write "XYZ" and then drop a ref to the NYT article as a source. Also, as a great part of your edits have been on this one subject, and given your username, it seems like you may have a conflict of interest in the subject or at least a non-neutral point of view. Please take that into consideration going forward. Cheers, JesseRafe (talk) 14:38, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Michael S. Smith II, you may be blocked from editing. JesseRafe (talk) 14:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Michael S. Smith II. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Please respond on one talk page, not all over the place. You have been given a clear explanation of the issue above. The additions your making to the Smith article are not appropriate content for an encyclopedia. Period. JesseRafe (talk) 16:12, 5 March 2017 (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:Natsecobserver reported by User:JesseRafe (Result: ). Thank you. JesseRafe (talk) 23:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Michael S. Smith II. You have been asked to discuss your disruptive and promotional edits and been warned multiple times and still you insist on only blanket reversions with no dialogue. This is edit warring and is blockable, especially as you have a clear COI with this article's subject and are pushing heavily promotional edits. JesseRafe (talk) 17:45, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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. SmartSE (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

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 why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Guy (Help!) 00:14, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]