User talk:Sundae1970

Welcome!

Hi Sundae1970! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Hello Sundae1970. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Hotel Equatorial, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Sundae1970. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Sundae1970|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Hotel Equatorial

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 Draft:Hotel Equatorial, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

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. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:55, 18 March 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).

Sundae1970 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi. I was blocked for sockpuppetry but this is untrue. The article was a collaborative work between user Yasmin NF and myself, Sundae1970. You will see that Yasmin NF is new while my account has been around for such a long time. Prior to this accusation, I did not know that sock puppet existed and folks have been known to be deceitful. The purpose of the collaboration was to get the article published quickly and Yasmin took over during my rest break. Knowing what I know now, I will no longer seek help from Yasmin and do the article on my own. I assure you all the actions taken were done in good faith and with no intent to be malicious. I understand the importance of Wikipedia's integrity and have been a supporter of it. Appreciate your time and consideration to unblock me so I can proceed with the article and continue being a contributor. Let me know if you need any correspondence between user Yasmin and me for proof Thank you.

Decline reason:

Per discussion below. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:25, 24 March 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.

Sundae1970 (talk) 04:31, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then what you were doing was meatpuppetry, which is also not permitted. If you were to be unblocked, it would be with the condition that you would not be permitted to do any editing about Hotel Equatorial or anyone or anything related to it. Do you have any other subjects not related to that which you would be interested in editing? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:33, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you enclosed your appeal in "nowiki" tags, which would have meant it never would show up. I fixed it so that it will. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have nothing to edit at this time. I was focused on Hotel Equatorial. I will inform my boss that I will not be able to handle this project anymore. Need to check something though, what if my boss decides to create Hotel Equatorial page or assigns it to someone without my knowledge? What happens then? Sundae1970 (talk) 07:29, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They will likely be blocked as a meatpuppet. Your organization needs to stop doing this. No editing Wikipedia, no way around that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you. Please help explain how other hotels get in? E.g. Hilton Hotels & Resorts, Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts, Shangri-La Hotels and Resorts, etc.Thank you Sundae1970 (talk) 07:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible to write an article on a business, but it should be done by someone unconnected with the business, because anyone working for or otherwise having a stake in the business will find it extremely difficult to write in a neutral, non-promotional manner.

You also have to go about it the right way:

First, you disclose your conflict of interest and paid-editing status from the outset, so you're fully transparent about it.
Second, you don't use multiple accounts, and if you're collaborating with another editor, you're open about it.
Third, you find multiple independent and reliable secondary sources that have provided significant coverage of the subject, and summarise what they have said. You don't add any 'spin' or embellishment to it, no matter how tempted you may be, or how much your boss may insist.
You put your draft through the AfC review process rather than attempting to publish it directly, and once published, you don't edit it but make edit requests via the article talk page. You also understand that it is not 'your' article in any sense; it can, and almost certainly will, be edited by others, and they may write things that you would rather not be included.

Apart maybe from the last point, you failed to do any of these, hence we are where we are.

Finally, you may like to read and show to your boss this: WP:BOSS.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]