User talk:Derekfisherfl

Thank you for disclosing your paid editing status. As per WP:Paid, please provide links on your Wikipedia user page to all active accounts at websites where you advertise paid Wikipedia-editing services e.g. your Upwork account etc. Thank you. GSS (talk|c|em) 04:11, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't advertise, sorry.Derekfisherfl (talk) 00:24, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then how you were hired by "Follow your nose films" to create Mark Kendall (artist)? GSS (talk|c|em) 17:08, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

they were looking for new talents and I applied and was hired, Derekfisherfl (talk) 21:55, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where? can you please provide a link to that advert? GSS (talk|c|em) 10:03, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Derekfisherfl you have not yet answered my question. GSS (talk|c|em) 03:50, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I am sorry I missed it, I am afraid I do not have the means to do it, it wasnt public, it was a social media interaction. Derekfisherfl (talk) 04:56, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mark Kendall (September 2)[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 Vinegarymass911 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:

Needs more coverage in reliable sources

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mark Kendall and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Mark Kendall, 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.

Vinegarymass911 (talk) 04:54, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Derekfisherfl! 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! Vinegarymass911 (talk) 04:54, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

There is a difference between coverage of the subject and coverage of the film he produced. While the film may notable that does not mean he is notable. I would recommend not using sources about his movie or studio to prove his notability. Also using his own website is not considered neutral or reliable as a source, please use third party sources where possible.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 07:15, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vinegarymass911: okay but since he is the director and I his article has a work section wouldn't it be pertinent that I use the sources?. I get that I cannot use his official site, I am changing those links in the awards section. I agree with you about the separate coverage but If his work is notable it should have impact in his notability because he is literally the author of it meaning that if I write about him I am going to mention his work. Derekfisherfl (talk) 16:23, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I think that when he was granted Guggenheim Fellowship and Pew Fellowship make him notable from the artistic perception because these are granted to individuals that have demonstrated exceptional capacity for productive scholarship or exceptional creative ability in the arts. Not easy stuff. Derekfisherfl (talk) 16:46, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vinegarymass911: is it worth it to re review it? what are your thoughts?

Derekfisherfl (talk) 02:16, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mark Kendall (September 19)[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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Sources are mostly passing mentions and interviews none talk about the subject directly and in details, as required by GNG.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mark Kendall and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Mark Kendall, 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.

GSS (talk|c|em) 03:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Josher8a (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) 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 sock puppet, 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. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:56, 22 September 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

This is a mistake. I have no connection with Josher8a and I am not sure if he was editting mark kendall's page. I had to create a new draft. I do know who JamesRodir is but we do not use the same IP, how can I be unlinked from this sockpuppet investigation? Please tell me what can I do, I want to resume my account as soon as possible Derekfisherfl (talk) 02:05, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Behavioural and/or technical evidence strongly suggests that this account is a sockpuppet. Simple denial is not considered a sufficient reason to unblock the account. In order to be unblocked, you will need to convince the reviewing administrator that there is a better explanation for this apparent connection than the abuse of multiple accounts. Yunshui ^雲 _水 11:24, 24 September 2019 (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.