User talk:Parvenu58

Welcome to my talkpage

Parvenu58, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Parvenu58! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Blaze The Wolf (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Julio Rumbaut (August 22)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I was about to say possibly notable for founding the notable channel but he has not founded WSCV as clear from the page. I am finding zero information on WSCV Channel 5. Seems like a clever trick. Also, WP:REFBOMB.

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:Julio Rumbaut 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:Julio Rumbaut, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 02:55, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cyril Mukalel Thomas (September 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Mikehawk10 were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:

He's doesn't appear to pass WP:BASIC, doesn't appear to pass WP:NAUTHOR, and clearly doesn't pass WP:NPOL. There are some issues throughout that need addressing with respect to sourcing. There's no source that describes him as an NFT concept designer, non-verified Linkedin pages should not be used as a reference, and the individual's stated name in the article ("Cyril Mukalel Thomas") doesn't appear to match any of the sources. This needs cleanup before it can be published.

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:Cyril Mukalel Thomas 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:Cyril Mukalel Thomas, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— Mikehawk10 (talk) 03:55, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Julio Rumbaut has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Julio Rumbaut. Thanks! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 15:40, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Julio Rumbaut (October 10)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:Julio Rumbaut 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:Julio Rumbaut, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Wingwatchers (talk) 04:43, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Usman sulaiman

Hello, Parvenu58,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Joseywales1961, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged Usman sulaiman for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Joseywales1961}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

JW 1961^Talk 18:47, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Julio Rumbaut has been accepted

Julio Rumbaut, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Wingwatchers (talk) 16:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sampson Davis (Doctor) has been accepted

Sampson Davis (Doctor), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Slywriter (talk) 14:42, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Kanaka Dasa does not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits a summary may be quite brief.

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Hemantha (talk) 03:57, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Cyril Mukalel Thomas

Hello, Parvenu58. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cyril Mukalel Thomas, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Cyril Mukalel Thomas

Hello, Parvenu58. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Cyril Mukalel Thomas".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:55, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet 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 account is not a sockpuppet, 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. Bilby (talk) 04:58, 18 April 2022 (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).

Parvenu58 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will say I was shocked to see this block. I've been editing and contributing to pages for over a year and anytime I receive a compensation for my editing, I declare on my user page. I'm sorry if I've violated any policy without me knowing and I'm ready to cooperate to make amends Parvenu58 (talk) 08:39, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have not addressed your violation of WP:SOCK. Yamla (talk) 11:04, 18 April 2022 (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.

Hi. Just to be clear, I'm aware that you have been disclosing some instances of paid editing. However, this block is for sockpuppetry due to the previous accounts you have used. - Bilby (talk) 08:42, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused as to what to do now Bilby. Please help me understand a way forward.Parvenu58 (talk) 09:12, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla please help me understand how I can solve this issue and put it all behind me. I'm seriously lost as to how to proceed. Thank you very much for your time. Parvenu58 (talk) 11:38, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your previous blocks were checkuser blocks, and as such I can't lift them. You would need to use your original account and request there, and you would be expected to refrain from editing before making the request. There is a guide at WP:SOCKBLOCK. - Bilby (talk) 12:02, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your response. What about the pages I created that you used a payment tag on. I always declare when I'm being paid to edit or contribute and I'll like you to reconsider. Parvenu58 (talk) 12:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I only flagged one, and that one you didn't disclose. - Bilby (talk) 00:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, you flagged two pages. One for Claude Lorin and the other for Sampson Davies.

I developed both pages and I wasn't paid to contribute by the individuals or any entity that represents them. I've been working on the pages for months myself as a way of contributing to the body of knowledge on Wikipedia. I declared my paid edits on my talk page for Julio Rumbaut and Cyril Mukalel.

It took months and long hours of research to develop those pages and I made sure they were all written from a Neutral Point of View. I'm taking the standard six months break from editing and while I'm doing that, I'm pleading with you to let me serve my ban with dignity and not bring the two projects I committed hours of my free time to into this mess I'm paying for.

Please, I beg of you. Parvenu58 (talk) 14:44, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it is clear that you have not disclosed all of your paid work. As I can't be sure as to which articles were paid and which were not, so I need to flag anything I am uncertain of. - Bilby (talk) 02:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For God sake, why won't I disclose all of my paid edit after passing through something similar to this in 2020. I didn't know about the standard six months then, I refrained from editing for over a year and had I known about the standard six months, I would have appealed my case again instead of creating Parvenu58.

Don't tear down every shred of dignity a person has because of a hunch. I worked on Claude Lorin's page since October last year and it took countless hours to finish the work. It took about six months of work. For goodness sake, I'll never and I repeat never spend half a year on a project while I'm getting paid and not disclose it when I know it could all go down the drain in a second just like now.

I honestly don't know what else you want me to do to make you believe me. I always believed Wikipedia is a loving community of collaborators who respect each other and value each other's creations and contributions.

Since you banned me for suck puppetry, I've been respectful and willing to make amends and I've done all the recommendation you gave me. I'm only pleading with you to afford me the same respect I've shown you since. See me as a human being first not a wiki offender. Parvenu58 (talk) 06:05, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I am not able to help you. - Bilby (talk) 10:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Cyril Mukalel Thomas

Hello, Parvenu58. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Cyril Mukalel Thomas".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]