Jump to content

User talk:Tonystargazer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]

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

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms our use and policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! GSS (talk|c|em) 03:37, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
Information icon

Hello Tonystargazer. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, 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:Tonystargazer. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Tonystargazer|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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. GSS (talk|c|em) 03:38, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much GSS for your message. I know the subject and therefore, I think it's COI and paid. I wasn't aware of that so I am declaring now. Tonystargazer (talk) 05:51, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for disclosing. Can you please provide links to all places, where you advertise your business e.g. your upwork profile etc. GSS (talk|c|em) 08:19, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What type of business? I do not advertise anywhere. My boss asked me to craete a page and I posted a job on upwork to get help. No one was willing to guide so I learned from tutorials. Also, why are you placing the banner again since I declared now after learning that rule? What type of cleaning are you referring to? I saw articles with paid banners and there's nothing on main page. I would appreciate if you help me understand the cleanup? Or should I ask at the Tea House? Tonystargazer (talk) 15:59, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In this case can you please unlock this job offer on upwork which is currently available for those who were invited. Thank you. GSS (talk|c|em) 04:14, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I deleted that job 2 days after posting and it was closed and archived and kinda dead. I'll see if I had time to ask upwork support. But why is this important? Were you the guy from India who was chatting with me on upwork? Also, when I click on this link it says it is for upwork users only. My boss used his account for upwork and I'm unable to view the job post I'll check from my boss's desktop. Is there any chat system on Wikipedia? or support kinda thing because I am unable to understand a few things. Thank youTonystargazer (talk) 14:56, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not the person you were chatting with on upwrok, and you need to stop playing games here. I have the screenshot of the job offer, and it was posted by Raoul Bhatt himself so, can you please disclose properly. GSS (talk|c|em) 17:22, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious? First you said to disclose which I did, despite not hiring anyone. Later, you are after me like I snatched your valuable goods. You have screenshots, you have an account on upwork and you are blaming me improperly. What do you want me to disclose? Should I call you, video chat or what? I had zero knowledge of these processes and I posted the job and explained the job in the post. On one hand you say it is private and invite only and then say you have the screenshot and link also. Sorry to say but I think you are playing games and getting personal. I followed Wikipedia rules and I thanked you for letting me know, I don't know why are you putting your nose in it like this.Tonystargazer (talk) 17:47, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me solve this issue above for this page Draft:Raoul Bhatt. I am new here and my time is valuable. I don't want troubles here.

We cannot expedite reviews. Praxidicae (talk) 17:52, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not about expediting review its about what's going here on this discussion. Please read and guide me because I am unable to understand this guy.

It's exactly about that - I am new here and my time is valuable - why is your time more valuable than that of the other 3000 drafts awaiting review? Praxidicae (talk) 18:02, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FYI I took the screenshot four hours after it was posted and at that time the job was publicly visible. I have shared the screenshot with an admin as I do normally, and they will be taking care of the matter soon. GSS (talk|c|em) 18:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank God there's an admin so I can get rid of you soon. I explained the job posting above and you are still failed to explain what do you want me to disclose further. Maybe your next question will be that disclose your bank account or driver's ID. I declared that on my talk as well as on draft page. I don't know what else need to be disclosed. And your question of Raoul posted himself is that I wrote on behalf of the subject because I thought that's a good way to explain. What else do you need. Also, disclose your username to the admin and here so I can tell them if you discussed that with me on upwork.Tonystargazer (talk) 18:07, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And Admin, if you can give me your email ID I cans end you a screenshot of my boss's profile and you can verify that it was not posted by Raoul Bhatt himself. So what he is saying is baseless. I can help you verify that. Tonystargazer (talk) 18:17, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Praxidicae, I am not asking you to review the page. I am sorry if you misunderstood. thanks anyway.Tonystargazer (talk) 18:10, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Raoul Bhatt (December 13)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AntiCompositeNumber was:
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). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Out of the 17 or so sources linked in this draft, exactly three discuss Raoul Bhatt directly. The Apple Podcasts link is self published, and is therefore not useful for determining notability. The Avenue Edmonton source is also not useful because it is an interview and is therefore not independent of the subject. The CBC piece is about Bhatt and is from a reliable, independent source, but it has no detail about him whatsoever. All the other sources are either press releases, about one of his companies, or don't even mention him at all. If you can find more reliable, independent sources that discuss Bhatt himself, you may resubmit. Otherwise, I do not believe he meets the notability guidelines at this time.
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.
AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 18:40, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Tonystargazer! Having an article 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! AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 18:40, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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 the submission 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 the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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, 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.
Tonystargazer (talk) 07:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve made some fixes and added more references for his recent film work. Can you please review and restore? Thanks

Your submission at Articles for creation: Raoul Bhatt (September 26)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by GSS was:
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.
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.
GSS (talk|c|em) 14:20, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Raoul Bhatt (November 10)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AngusWOOF 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 appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
This reads like a resume and has mostly self-promotional statements. Please provide external news sources that aren't coming from social media or press releases.
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.
AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:51, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Raoul Bhatt

[edit]

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:Raoul Bhatt, 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. Train of Knowledge🚆📚 Choo Choo🚂 Chugga Chugga🚉 06:57, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Raoul Bhatt (April 5)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dial911 was:
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:
Almost all sources have passing mentions of the subject and no significant coverage about him. More sources (number 5) like CBC are required where attention is significantly given to the subject.
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.
Dial911 (talk) 20:11, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

[edit]
Stop icon
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 for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  MER-C 18:05, 16 September 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, I don't understand why I'm being blocked, I would like to appeal this block, because my intentions are clear. I have no paid intention, or no relationship with the article owner. I would like to be unblocked because I have placed a lot of effort into this article and I want it to succeed so I can create more articles about influential persons if I am successful with this article. Tonystargazer (talk) 18:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please explain how you come to own the copyright to File:Raoul-Bhatt-Cinematographer.jpg which appears on a number of Bhatt's social media sites, while having no relationship to Bhatt at all. There may be an explanation but on initial investigation, this appears to be a contradiction. Yamla (talk) 18:41, 16 September 2020 (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.

On further investigation, something really fishy is going on here. Now you say you have no relationship and no paid intention. However, earlier, you said, "I know the subject and therefore, I think it's COI and paid." and you said, "My boss asked me to craete a page and I posted a job on upwork to get help. No one was willing to guide so I learned from tutorials." You need to reconcile these statements, too. --Yamla (talk) 18:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla Hello, think this where I'm confused. This photograph is widely used in media, I found it in a google image search. So I don't personally own the copyright to it, but it's a photo of this individual, so I didn't see an issue with using this photo, but I can remove it from the article if need be. The previous company I worked for, asked I start writing wikipedia articles about prominent people within my province in Canada. There are others in various industries, also topics I want to talk about in energy, new energy that I would like to write about as well. These are not paid, or in no way do I have relationship with these people. I'm just a community advocate and want to promote people that are making a difference. This is not a promotional article, as you see the media attention, its about a TV show being filming in this area, and this individual is the driving force behind all this. Please understand I'm doing the best I can, I believe whole heartlied that this is a good piece to have a wikipedia article about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonystargazer (talk • contribs)

This doesn't square with your claim that you explicitly own the copyright to that image. Were you attempting to mislead us with that claim? And your claim that this was all the previous company that you worked for, that doesn't square with your claim that you have no relationship. It sounds like you are now saying you very clearly have a relationship. Either way, this just makes matters more confusing. You'll need to be much more clear in your statements. Identify the specific company you worked for and clear up the multiple contradictions. And, frankly, there's no chance you are going to be unblocked to write about Raoul Bhatt, given the history here. --Yamla (talk) 19:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla The company was Avenue Magazine, which has since shut down. I'm not attempting to mislead at all, I've been honest and clear, and all the content is clear and cited from popular new sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonystargazer (talk • contribs)

You are free to request an unblock and another administrator will review it. I'm not buying it, though. The block looks entirely appropriate to me. --Yamla (talk) 19:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tonystargazer&oldid=1043819519"