User talk:Kidohpatan

Welcome!

Hello, Kidohpatan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Grosvenor models, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! NellieBly (talk) 01:04, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Grosvenor models[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 Grosvenor models requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. NellieBly (talk) 01:04, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Grosvenor models[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, thank you for taking the time to create a page here. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you created yourself. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the deletion tag you removed from Grosvenor models. Please do not continue to remove the deletion tag, instead, if you disagree with the deletion, you can follow these steps:

Go to the page by clicking this link. Once there, select the button that says Click here to contest this speedy deletion.
This will take you to the talk page, where you can make your case by explaining why the page does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do. For further help about the deletion, you could contact the user who first placed the tag or a highly active user who is willingly to help with deletion. This message was left by a bot, so please do not contact the bot about the deletion. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 01:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

The article Grosvemor models has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. See WP:V. "Said to be" is not valid sourcing. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:37, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Grosvenor models[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 Grosvenor models, 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, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 19:51, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Grosvenor models[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, thank you for taking the time to create a page here. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you created yourself. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the deletion tag you removed from Grosvenor models. Please do not continue to remove the deletion tag, instead, if you disagree with the deletion, you can follow these steps:

Go to the page by clicking this link. Once there, select the button that says Click here to contest this speedy deletion.
This will take you to the talk page, where you can make your case by explaining why the page does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do. For further help about the deletion, you could contact the user who first placed the tag or a highly active user who is willingly to help with deletion. This message was left by a bot, so please do not contact the bot about the deletion. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:03, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Grosvenor models[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 Grosvenor models 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 an organization or company, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Toddst1 (talk) 20:20, 6 December 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am new and have made errors, I am learning so that I can be able to contribute in Wiki

Decline reason:

If you want to be unblocked you will need to give a clearer indication of how your future editing will differ from what you have done in the past. So far I see only outright spam. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:54, 7 December 2011 (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.

Are you going to stop posting articles about Grosvenor Models? NawlinWiki (talk) 21:02, 6 December 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

original unblock reason

Decline reason:

To be unblocked you will, as a very minimum, need to commit to stop creating articles about Grosvenor Models given the serious problems which have existed with the articles on this topic you have written. If you make further unblock requests, please explain the topics you'd like to work on and the reliable sources you'll use to support this editing. Nick-D (talk) 10:50, 8 December 2011 (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.

Hi JamesBWatson NawlinWiki I really do not know that I have created a spam..??? I am just trying to follow some examples of putting a stub for further expansion. I think I did not add certain inserts (don't know what its called) so as to indicate i was just writing about a stub. So please excuse me. I will try to make sure I write in my sandbox and make sure any article is really ready and all ends covered before posting. I believe there are many newbies like me and they probably make similar mistake. I really want to try to be precise and careful. Thank you guys.....

(Kidohpatan (talk) 03:53, 8 December 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have no problem with regards to that. As I reiterate I am really new to this (as you can see) and will try to improve. The only way is to make mistakes and learn from it. I see that I have to make a very strong effort in contributing to articles before listing. This I can assure you will be my first priority. Without a doubt I will endeavour to create great useful articles which will be apt for the Wikipedia site.WP:BITE (Kidohpatan (talk) 03:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Decline reason:

I still see no notice that you will stop creating an article about Grosonver models, which according to an earlier comment is a requirement for unblock. We admins all understand WP:BITE very well, thank you ... however, it is still our responsibility to protect the project, and "newbie" mistakes can be a challenge, as you can understand. It appears that one issue has been your astounding lack of communication when notified of a problem - rather than pay attention and communicate, you simply continued along your own path: this is a community, and communication is key - it took a block to get any form of communication out of you. Any future unblock request must address how you will move forward in a) creating articles, b) communicating with others, and c) actually improving your overall editing (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:00, 13 December 2011 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Don't really know what to say. Once again .... I have no problem with regards to not creating article Grosonver models. I am also very disturb by you guys as you seems not to understand that we newbies have a hard time coming to grips with certain criteria. Had no idea about the lack of communication as I did not know I had to reply in the first place to notice and also was trying to figure out what was the initial notice all about. I am glad I have learnt it though. Contributing good articles is about writing something in good faith. Not knowing that certain underlying criteria does not impede me from better contribution. Definitely, its been eye opener and without a doubt a better knowledge about Wikipedia will be a great help to a good article. Better research and content management maybe could help. Communication wise I have now touch on and have learnt how to communicate. Wikipedia is and will be an encyclopedia and towards that end I will deternmine myself. (Kidohpatan (talk) 12:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Decline reason:

This is a procedural decline only: you have been asked a number of questions, yet you are refusing to answer them. As per WP:GAB, you must convince the reviewing admins that you understand why you were blocked, and that the situations will not recur. You have been asked clearly about the types of articles and the nature of the sourcing you have. A future unblock request should respond to those questions (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:18, 18 December 2011 (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.

To be unblocked you're going to need to convincing the reviewing admin that you're actually here to edit productively. As I noted earlier, identifying the articles you wish to work on and the sources you will use to support this editing would be very helpful. The more detail you add on this the better. Nick-D (talk) 10:09, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

175.136.218.248 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

[[WP:Disruptive editing|Disruptive editing]]: / advertising

Blocking administrator: Toddst1 (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: Account is blocked directly, therefore this is the wrong template to use. Procedural decline. — Daniel Case (talk) 20:29, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]