User talk:Theochino

ADFE-Français du Monde

The article you wrote, ADFE-Français du Monde, is uncategorized. Please help improve it by adding it to one or more categories, so it may be associated with related articles. A stub marker or other template doesn't count - please put in an actual category in the article.Eli Falk 13:58, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ADFE-Français du Monde

ADFE-Français du Monde has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this organization or company might not yet be notable enough for an article. Please review Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations) for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the prod notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for consensus. NickelShoe (Talk) 04:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Green Card image shows name.

It looks like your intention was to obscure the last name, but it appears partially as bleed-through on the front-side image. Just letting you know.

Here is the link to the image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OriginalGreenCard.jpg#filehistory

108.7.10.26 (talk) 17:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Theo Chino

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Theo Chino, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 21:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved, instead of writing it yourself, as you did at Theo Chino. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 21:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theo_Chino&diff=prev&oldid=399588712 jsfouche ☽☾Talk 21:44, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Appealing Deletion of Theo Chino

Hello, I reviewed the deleted article. In my review of the deleted article, I see it to be an unsourced BLP about a NN politico. User:Gogo Dodo attempted a rescue, but was unsuccessful. You should know that the subject did not in my opinion meet notability requirements-- WP:GNG, WP:Bio, or WP:Politician. You should not feel bad about this. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is by no means a negation of your life for you to not meet notability requirements for an encyclopedia.

You should also know that an unsourced biography of a living person is deletable if it remains unsourced, as apparently it did.

I have left a note with the deleting admin. He can be reached at User talk:Courcelles. Discussion about undeletion should begin there. Failing that, I believe the current venue is WP:Refund. That would be the place to go. At no time would it be advisable to recreate the deleted article with an appeal for undeletion rather than encyclopedic content. That will only create further problems/misunderstandings. Hope this helps. Dloh cierekim 00:26, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Corinne Narassiguin

The article Corinne Narassiguin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails notability, both as per WP:GNG and as per WP:POLITICIAN.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Azurfrog (talk) 20:04, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sharon Barr

The article Sharon Barr has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Drewmutt (talk) 03:29, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Drewmutt Done Theochino (talk) 10:54, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. Justeditingtoday (talk) 19:02, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. JudgeRM (talk to me) 20:21, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is not an attack page, it's a behavior Theochino (talk) 20:23, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. JudgeRM (talk to me) 20:23, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for abuse of editing privileges, as you did at Fascist Wikipedian. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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 ~~~~}}. Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:23, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

UTRS appeal #17203 was submitted on Dec 27, 2016 21:59:13. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 21:59, 27 December 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).

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

Request reason:

There is nothing wrong with the entry and there was no attack. Just classifying a psychorigid behavior of certain Wikipedians Theochino (talk) 22:27, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The term "Fascist Wikipedian" does not occur anywhere in the source you cited, and it does not remotely support any such "psychorigid behavior" - and it doesn't mention admins at all. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:03, 27 December 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.

JudgeRM and Fabrictramp, there was no attack. The page merely describe some Wikipedia Admin behavior when confronted. They are those who ignore facts from notable people and refuses. It seems that in the psychiatric world, the behavior is labeled as intellectually psychorigid or Fascist Wikipedian - Now that behavior is well documented and deserve its place in the encyclopedia. So why I am blocked ? Are you taking it personally ? Theochino (talk) 22:25, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your conflict of interest at Bitcoin and Legality of bitcoin by country

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been undone. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. When having a conflict of interest, you are not supposed to edit the above articles. I found out that you do have a conflict of interest, as you are taking part in a related litigation. Moreover, your edit at Legality of bitcoin by country I reverted was not readable. If you want to make an edit to a Wikipedia article, you are supposed to write texts that are readable. If you cannot make such edits, you should not be surprised that your edits are reverted. Take this as a warning that what you are doing is against Wikipedia policies, and that your editing practices are disruptive. Ladislav Mecir (talk) 19:58, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ladislav Mecir Instead of going at me quoting me rules and policies, why don't you do something constructive and write it in a way that is neutral ? I could go in a starbucks or elsewhere and create another identity and rewrite the same thing; so let's be real. Be constructive and collaborative and rewrite the information correctly. I don't mind you making it better, however, I do mind your closemindeness on the issue and your refusal to improve the thing. Obviously you know more than I do about Wiki Editing etc .... but the idea of colaborativeness is to improve knowledge, not to suppress it. Theochino (talk) 20:09, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ladislav Mecir As posted on your user talk page, and since you are accusing me or WR:OCI. As stated, I believe that the pages deserve a good rewrite since the information is sometime wrong and/or outaded.

Hi, Theochino, you wrote: "you are accusing me or WR:OCI" - actually, WP:COI is not an "accusation" but a fact you confirmed. Once you are engaged in a trial related to the article subject, there is no doubt that you have an external relation to the subject. Moreover, it is not an "accusation", in the sense that there is nothing wrong about being in a COI. The only issue is that being in a COI, you are not supposed to edit the related article. I hope that this warning will help you to find out how to handle the situation. Ladislav Mecir (talk) 22:49, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ladislav Mecir I am not in a COI position; otherwise any subject matter would be a COI. Do you own bitcoins ? Then you too are in a COI position. Read the literature and then fix the page correctly instead of spreading misinformation. I am accusing of spreading misinformation.

Long explanation so we can sync up

I was looking at where you were so we can figure out how to make bitcoin better. You come from one area of the world with one perspective and I come from another with different perspective.

We are having a big difference of opinion and the first question to tackle is whether both our perspective is hurting each other.

Are your views and your translation into English hurting me personally?

The answer is clearly yes and this is what I will try to articulate below. I am being hurt because people who make the law have the wrong impression of what bitcoin is. Instead of making bitcoin great for all of us, I am spending time fighting all the misconceptions.

Are my views and my translation into English hurting you personally?

That is for you to educate me on how.

The difference between EU and US

What made me realize that we have a difference of appreciation is when you wrote: “are you […] instead of your "an article 78 was filed"” and the European in me kicked in.

This part of the law is called “Administrative Adjudication” and from what I see there on the Europa.eu, there is no Specialized court in the Czech Republic. https://e-justice.europa.eu/content_specialised_courts-19-cz-en.do?member=1 The whole concept might be foreign to you. As a French person, the process in New York, it was to me. In France, it’s the Executive that does the “Administrative Adjudication.” Please elaborate if I am wrong.

If you look at the video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj0Zzi3KxJc?t=57s at second 57, my lawyer explains that subtle difference between Europe and the US.

I came across this book “The Central European Judges Under the European Influence” https://books.google.com/books?id=weeHCgAAQBAJ and my attention was caught by this phrase: “How distrust into the judiciary and its competence translates into legislation.”

Then I started asking myself the question on whether to call it a Currency or a Commodity hurts you. https://www.thebalance.com/what-s-happening-with-bitcoin-in-the-czech-republic-3868012

Bitcoin is borderless

Bitcoin is borderless so we need come to an agreement that does not hurts both of us. Your belief is now hurting me, and hurting my business and to be frank, hurting bitcoiners around the world, including yourself.

How do I know that, because I wrote a paper with my mentor called : “The State of Cryptocurrencies, Their Issues and Policy Interactions” http://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/jitim/vol24/iss3/2 which mean that I did share your belief at one point in time. However, I continued to study and my belief evolved to the point that I can say to myself, “I was wrong.”

That doesn’t mean to say you were wrong when you took over the Bitcoin page, but today, you are wrong.

History behind my evolution from Currency to Commodity

The learning phrase

I rediscovered bitcoin in November 2013 and having being on both end of the payment processing business, I have developed an aversion to it. Reading all the magical things listed on the website and Wikipedia, I dove into it head first.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152032750513520 (First try)
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152032750293520 (First Employee)
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152032750278520 (Sales Goals)
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151800608433520 (First Job add on Craigslist.)
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152179463668520 (Store accepting Bitcoins.)
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152415011668520 (Trying to build a solar miner.)

You can see that I was quoting the information on the Wiki and the website. I am also a septic, I went to see friend of mine that are professionals, and one of them is Enrique Cosio-Pascal (you can find his resume here: http://www.publicdebtfinance.com/Ecpcvt.php) and said: “I discovered that thing called Bitcoin and want you to take a peak and tell me if I am crazy.” He came up with this document “The Functions of Money and Other Issues.” http://www.article78againstnydfs.com/docs/VariousDocs/TheFunctionsOfMoneyAndOtherIssues.pdf

The fight against the regulator

For much of the first half on 2014, I concentrated only on coding and nothing else and my salesman on finding opportunities and somehow someone asked him about the regulations to come and that is how I learned about the political aspect of it. What happened from there is well chronicled in this article: http://frenchly.us/french-robin-hood-bitcoin-new-york “The new ordinance has been praised by Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, two of Bitcoin’s biggest investors, but has been condemned by several “Bitcoiners” who are accusing Lawsky of killing the Bitcoin egg before it has the chance to grow.” On October 14, 2014, Cardozo Law School invited Benjamin Lawsky to present his regulation. I asked a question. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YEVBeCJIS4&t=46m20s http://www.cardozo.yu.edu/news/cardozo-law-tech-talk-looks-closer-bitcoin-regulation https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152474129478520 (How Lawsky saw me that day.)

You can hear him promise that he would do something for small businesses and we know it is not true.

The details

If you listen to my lawyer at minute 1:23 explain that the regulator did not have the right to regulate virtual currency: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj0Zzi3KxJc&t=1m23s

If I win, there will be no more Bitlicense in New York State. I can understand that you might have a hard time understanding how my case relates to you, but it does.

New York City is a very particular city; and people in New York like to show off. When New York City immigrant goes home, he likes to show off his money, his nice shoes, his car, etc … but in reality, what that person does not say about their life in New York City that is hell and that have to cut his veins just to survive.

In the process of showing off, they tell their family that their store accepts bitcoins, etc, etc …. The cousin/brother back home goes, my cousin in New York accept bitcoin, then I here, I need to show him that I am as intelligent has him and will start accepting bitcoin too.

The other people that make bitcoin possible are the tourists; and they come from back home with bitcoin and if they can use it in New York City, they will do the same home.

You can see that New York City is the key to bitcoin acceptance.

facts to explain bitcoin as a commodity

If you listen to my lawyer at minute 3:26, you can hear him explain that what bitcoin is irrelevant to my case, so I really don’t have a COI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj0Zzi3KxJc&t=3m26s

KPMG put out this paper about blockchain where they explain the various consensus mechanisms. https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/pdf/2016/06/kpmg-blockchain-consensus-mechanism.pdf

Figure 2 of the document allow me to finally codify what I felt all along.

File:KPMG Figure2.jpg

What define the line between Commodity on Currency in the virtual space is the type of distributed mechanism (whether is Permissioned or Permissionless) and the amount of people that have adopted it.

The type of distributed mechanism integrates with the idea of control or who decide whether it exist or not Bitcoin satisfy all (but one) of Commodity properties and none of the Currency one.

This argument was put foward by a student at Durham Univerity in the paper :"The Economics of Bitcoin" where he states (http://www.article78againstnydfs.com/docs/VariousDocs/231964435-The-Economics-of-Bitcoin.pdf)

"It finds that Bitcoin cannot be classified as money but remains a medium of exchange that the market may choose to adopt at a later stage."

This seems to be agreed by:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-17/bitcoin-is-officially-a-commodity-according-to-u-s-regulator
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/07/26/bitcoins-not-money-judge-rules-as-she-tosses-money-laundering-charge and you don't have to read what the news says but the actual decision here http://www.article78againstnydfs.com/docs/FloridaCase/FloridaCase.pdf

What I will agree is the following:

In the Real World, you first need to take a commodity until a central power give it a value and becomes a currency;
and in the Virtual World, you first start with a Virtual Currency until the central power send it free and it becomes a Virtual Commodity.

Yes ! Satochi went to create a Virtual Currency and it was until it set it free and too many people joined the network to be centralized, bitcoin became a Virtual Commodity.

explaining bitcoin to people

When I explain bitcoin to people, I do it simply.

They ask what bitcoin is and I rhetorically asked them to describe gold to me. Then they ask me where to get some and I tell them the same way than gold, at the market.

How do you explain bitcoin to people around you?

If you do like me, then you know it is a commodity and are doing a disservice to continue trying to make believe it is a currency. Since you have flag me as a COI, I would expect to either work with me and the fact to update the entry with the correct classification.

conclusion

I would like that we work together to fix the definition so it does hurts both of us. You are the admin of the wikipage and I have no interest in dealing with it but I feel that the information portrayed on that page is outdated and need to be fixed.

The words that are listed on the website hurts my advocacy of the bitcoin in my part of the world and I am asking that you fix it so it doesn’t hurt me. Is it something we can work together? I would prefer that we work together in cleaning all those pages ?

Happy New Year !

Theochino (talk) 10:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and Happy New Year 2017 to you. I do not doubt that you are honestly trying to improve the Wikipedia contents. However, I also see a lot of misconceptions in your approach. The major one being your wish to publish your original results here. According to Wikipedia policies, you simply cannot use a "scientific method" on your own trying to publish your results in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a place for the publication of your own results. As to the lawsuit you wanted to mention in the Legality of bitcoin by country article - I did it, although the result of it is highly uncertain. Ladislav Mecir (talk) 09:24, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ladislav Mecir Are you telling me that if we were in 1500's and according to Wikipedia policies, we can show you a satelite picture showing the earth is round, you could not write the earth is round because people believe the earth is flat ? Theochino (talk) 17:21, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ladislav Mecir What misconceptions do you see there ? There is no original results but appreciation and therefore I am questioning the neutrality of the article, and that is what I would like the articles to reflect. Theochino (talk) 17:21, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ladislav Mecir I posted various argument to show that it is a commodity (along with the sources) to show it is a commodity and you still go back to quote Wikipedia policies. Why not debunk my arguments based on the fact I put forward ? Theochino (talk) 17:21, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:KPMG Figure2.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:KPMG Figure2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:23, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:New York City Public Advocate election, 2019

Hello, Theochino. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, Draft:New York City Public Advocate election, 2019.

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 wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:15, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Third Party Transfer Program

Hello, Theochino

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Joel B. Lewis and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've proposed an article that you started, Third Party Transfer Program, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criteria and I believe that the article obviously and uncontroversially does not belong in an encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click the Publish changes button.

If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Joel B. Lewis}}. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. Thanks!

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

JBL (talk) 14:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have decided to delete based on ignorance. I said I wanted to talk to you on the phone like adults.

[redacted] You can see my twitter account: https://twitter.com/theochino/status/1276285890206318593?s=20

Theochino (talk) 23:11, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is certainly ignorance on display here; it is your ignorance of basic Wikipedian norms. It is not appropriate to call a stranger on the telephone to discuss something to do with Wikipedia (see WP:OUTING). Wikipedia operates on the principle of consensus (see WP:CONSENSUS), and articles should be written using reliable sources (see WP:RS) and from a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV). All these links are to policies and guidelines that govern behavior here; it is not possible to participate successfully in total ignorance of them. (Also they contain detailed explanations of what is meant by reliable source or consensus or neutral.)
I am not the only person telling you this. The last time you tried to add exactly the same material while ignoring objections, a user called C.Fred reverted you for exactly the same reason: the material you're adding is not usable as written, but constructive discussion (which would require you to listen to and take on board comments from others) could lead to something being included. (For context, C.Fred has been an administrator here since 2007 -- so he knows a thing or two about this place.)
If you would like feedback or assistance from someone who has not been involved in reverting you (for example, to help you understand what about your addition is problematic from the point of view of WP:NPOV), you can try asking at WP:Teahouse. --JBL (talk) 00:14, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have taken upon yourself to become the guardian of corruption by deleting data that is backed up by major periodicals and countless city halls meetings.

I don’t want more back and forth so I proposed we talk person to person on the phone. Hiding behind anonymity is cowardly. You can either fix the two paragraph or we going to have this endless back and forth and we will have to figure out the tag for saying that you are degassing. I don’t have the time to fight with you. Theochino (talk) 00:30, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are unwilling to edit according to Wikipedia guidelines and etiquette, there's not a lot we can do to help you. —C.Fred (talk) 00:33, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article in question is this one https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Homesteading_Assistance_Board

He keep saying that the source are no good. Theochino (talk) 00:36, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at what's on the talk page, he said the that the tone was unacceptable but that the sources might be useful. If you're going to try to build consensus, you need to discuss the matter constructively at the article's talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 01:04, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The specific section is here. --JBL (talk) 20:56, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Hi. Please review and make sure you strictly observe our policy on WP:OUTING. I cannot stress enough how key this is. Thanks in advance for your close attention. Regards, El_C 21:12, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Paperboy Love Prince

The article Paperboy Love Prince has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsuccessful political candidate. Does not meet notability requirements.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mccapra (talk) 10:18, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Social Democrats of America

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 Social Democrats of America 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 a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 04:00, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Social Democrats of America moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Social Democrats of America, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DGG ( talk ) 06:21, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Theochino (talk) 22:32, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Committee of Italians Abroad

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 Committee of Italians Abroad requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.campbelltown.sa.gov.au/migrantmonument/database/migrant-monument-committee-for-italians-abroad. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. WWGB (talk) 03:12, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Social Democrats of America

Hello, Theochino. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Social Democrats of America".

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. ✗plicit 02:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:SocDemsAmerica Logo.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SocDemsAmerica Logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:04, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am unable to post because block but the logo here: https://twitter.com/PaperboyPrince/status/1558989975399669761?s=20&t=ZnM6tsKf2__wgqN16m5_NA

--

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).

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

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 2001:470:1f07:150::/64 and 2001:470:88cd::/48. This is my personal IPv6 tunnel handed by HE.NET since Verizon doesn't provide IPv6. Theochino (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Yes, they're both blocked. Procedural decline since your account is not blocked. This seems to happen with some VPN situations, alas ... what's really a better idea is to go to WP:IPECPROXY and follow the directions there to request IP block exemption so this isn't an issue. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:39, 17 August 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.

Theochino (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2025 New York City Public Advocate election moved to draftspace

Thanks for creating 2025 New York City Public Advocate election. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability and it may be too soon for the subject to have it's own article.. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. echidnaLives - talk - edits 04:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I tough I did open it in draftspace. Theochino (talk) 05:12, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SocDemsAmerica Logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SocDemsAmerica Logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Social Democrats of America (January 2)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Social Democrats of America and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 04:55, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Theochino! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Devonian Wombat (talk) 04:55, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into New York County Democratic Committee. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 01:11, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New York City is composed of 5 borough that share a lot in common including 62 identical introduction pages that follow the same format, but that don't share the same historical path. Theochino (talk) 03:48, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2025 New York City Public Advocate election

Hello, Theochino. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2025 New York City Public Advocate election, 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) 19:01, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:2025 New York City Public Advocate election

Hello, Theochino. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2025 New York City Public Advocate election".

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. When 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!} 18:45, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SocDemsAmerica Logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SocDemsAmerica Logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:42, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]