User talk:Websolutions9

Recent edits to List of Nigerians

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your recent edits to List of Nigerians added the name of an apparently non-notable entity. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article to establish notability. If you wish to create such an article, please confirm that your subject is notable according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you! Qzd (talk) 15:16, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Qzd, thanks for leaving a note here. However, an inclusion like this is not forbidden. If a person in a list does not have a Wikipedia article about them, a citation (or link to another article) must be provided to: a) establish their membership in the list's group; and b) to establish their notability on either WP:BLP1E or WP:BIO1E. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 09:05, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

@Wikicology: I agree the template message could be a lot more helpful, but I didn't see a citation. Only X in the world is a big WP:REDFLAG. It needs reliable sources. Qzd (talk) 09:53, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, a reliable source is required but sometimes new editors need more detail explanation on why their edits are reverted since they are not familiar with Wikipedia guidelines and policies. They need to understand why a certain action is taking. In addition to this template, you can advice them to cite one or more reliable source(s) to support the inclusion and probably mentor them on how to create a decent article for the subject. Doing this will not only help the editor to understand how the encyclopedia works but also give them a sense of belonging. It will also motivate them to pick another topic to write about and before you know it, they will become a long-term and valuable contributor. Please accept my apology, if you think I had misinformed you in anyway. Cheers. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 10:15, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

No apology, I agree with your advice wholeheartedly. Thanks, Qzd (talk) 23:43, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm OluwaCurtis. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to List of Nigerian scientists and scholars because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. —OluwaCurtis »» (talk to me) 22:35, 23 December 2015 (UTC) Hello Oluwacurtis. I have re added the scholar and taken out the URL reference that might have appeared promotional and placed it in the reference section. Initially when I added the notable scholar without the reference URL, user QZD deleted it citing no reference. I'm sure you'll agree with me that a doctor who happens to be the only one in the world in his field and is a Nigerian is worthy of mention and inclusion in the list. Thanks. Websolutions9 (talk) 01:20, 24 December 2015 (UTC)Websolutions9

Hi Websolution! Merry Xmas to you. I understand how you feel about the remover of Olurotimi John Badero from the List of Nigerian scientists and scholars. From what I can see, Badero is likely to meet one or more of our criteria on WP:ACADEMIC. Will you consider to write an article for him? I will be glad to assist you in creating an article for him. I want you to do it yourself and I will guild you. See Wikipedia:Your first article, WP:RS (for what is considered reliable sources) also see WP:MOS. I started the article for you at User:Websolutions9/Olurotimi John Badero. You may continue from there and I will guild you. Thanks for your willingness to help Wikipedia. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 08:43, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Per WP:BRD, we do not edit-war after we're reverted but discuss our issues on the article's talk page. If you edit-war once more at List of African-American firsts, I am contacting an admin.--Tenebrae (talk) 15:10, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

You continued to edit-war at 15:43 after this warning. You're very close to breaking WP:3RR and having an admin block you from editing. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:54, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

List of African-American firsts

Please stop adding the same material again and again. It doesn't belong in the article.

First, the doctor is Nigerian, not African American.

Second, being a heart and kidney specialist is too obscure a "first" for the list.

If you have any questions, please start a discussion at Talk:List of African-American firsts. Thank you. 107.10.236.42 (talk) 15:42, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

January 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at List of African-American firsts. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. 107.10.236.42 (talk) 15:50, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

April 2016

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to List of Nigerians. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 07:29, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Hi, Websolutions. It seems that your only purpose here has been to promote Dr Olurotimi Badero by hook or by crook through the roughly forty edits you have made since you started editing in December 2015. You have added nothing else to the encyclopedia, and have made it obvious that you have a conflict of interest with regard to Dr Badero, whether you are in fact he or not. Please click on that link and read, and please stop spamming Dr Badero into articles or you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Bishonen | talk 16:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC).

Hello Bishonen

First of all let me clear the air and also put out a disclaimer that I am not the person in question and I think it's a bit absurd on your part for you to feel that way. I do understand the conflict of interest clause which I am not in violation of as I have bo relationship with the personality in question. However I am still surprised at the reaction from the Wikipedia community regarding this great doctor that has done a lot and has not even been mentioned in the Wikipedia. Is there a discrimination regarding this personality because of something? That is what I am trying to uncover. Wikipedia is a site for information that is helpful to the general community. If I am going about contributing to the site in the wrong way how come someone has not suggested ways for me to do it correctly? Does he deserve to be mentioned in Wikipedia? Why are we not focusing on the primary objective which is is the personality and the information I am trying to provide ? Is the informatio worthy of mention on Wikipedia? If it is, can you take this as a suggestion and consider if it should be mentiined since I am doing it incorrectly. I am a relatively new contributor that is open to correction but also believe in being educated about the right way to do something if it's being done the wrong way. The first time I put his name up as a contribution I was told there were no references. I put in the references then I am told it's not a sourced information. How come non one has looked at the information and the merits of it and guided me in the right way to make a meaningful contribution.? Thank you Websolutions9 (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

You seem to dislike the advice you have already received from many experienced users, which is to stop adding Dr Badero to articles and lists. Is it advice about how to promote him in a more acceptable way that you would like? That will not be forthcoming, as all promotion is unacceptable on Wikipedia, and there isn't a policy-compliant way of doing it. You say you're not Badero. All right. And you say you have no conflict of interest with regard to him; meaning you're not related to him, you're not his friend, or employed by him, or his student, or paid to write about him, or have any other external relationship with him. That's not all right because it's not credible. You say your "primary aim here is to improve the content on the site" (I'm quoting what you said on User talk:Theroadislong) and seemingly you expect me to believe that the only way, out of thousands of inviting possibilities, you have been able to think of to "improve" Wikipedia between December and April is to mention one specific individual wherever you see an opening for it. The longer this style of "improvement" goes on, the less credible it becomes. My suggestion to you, if you're sincere about wanting to improve Wikipedia and make meaningful contributions, is to branch out and edit other subjects that you have knowledge of. Bishonen | talk 19:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC).

To the contrary I do not dislike the advice given to me by some of the experienced users. I welcome all dvice but constructive advice You already have this pre conceived idea that I am promoting this individual which is unfortunate. He does not need to be promoted neither does he need me to promote him And certainly he has not hired me to do so. One user actually adviced me to start a page but I couldn't because I didn't know how to and no one from the "experienced" users will show me how to. I find the preconceived assumptions unfortunate and without any basis. I respect the forum and the users and think that we should all work together to improve the vision of the site and not attack other users. New users will in advertently go about contributions in wrong ways because they are new Obviously no Wikipedia user is paid to contribute It is a voluntary and noble thing to do. Those users should be encouraged and not attacked and should be pointed in the right direction. Wikipedia is not necessarily a site to promote an individual. It is a site to learn more information about topics so just for the record no one is trying to promote Dr Olutomi Badero. This will be my last comment on this topic as I am now convinced there is some form of discrimination going on which is really sad. Websolutions9 (talk) 19:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Username warning

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Websolutions9", may not comply with our username policy. Please note that you may not use a username that represents the name of a company, group, organization, product, or website. Examples of usernames that are not allowed include "XYZ Company", "MyWidgetsUSA.com", and "Foobar Museum of Art". However, you are invited to use a username that contains such a name if it identifies you personally, such as "Jack Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87".

Please also note that Wikipedia does not allow accounts to be shared by multiple people, and that you may not advocate for or promote any company, group, organization, product, or website, regardless of your username. Moreover, I recommend that you read our conflict of interest guideline. If you are a single individual and are willing to contribute to Wikipedia in an unbiased manner, please create a new account or request a change of username, by completing this form, that complies with our username policy. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. KGirlTrucker87 (talk) 00:31, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks KGirlYrucker87 for the suggestion. However my username does not violate the conflict of interest policy of Wikipedia because the name does not represent any person or group of persons neither does it represent an organization or company nor product. I do not advocate for any person or persons company or group of people organization product or website. Do you want to know how I chose my username? You can ask and I'll share that with you fairly easily. Websolutions9 (talk) 00:52, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

• KGirlTrucker87 is correct. I have blocked your account; please request a new username, following the procedure linked below. Drmies (talk) 03:40, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016

Your account has been blocked from editing Wikipedia with this username. This is because your username, Websolutions9, does not meet our username policy.

Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below) and continue editing.

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account. 

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

1. Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
2. At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
3. Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.

If you think that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Drmies (talk) 03:39, 19 April 2016 (UTC)