User talk:Wikidocs

This is Wikidocs's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gregor Coleman (November 11)[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 KGirlTrucker81 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The Sun is not a good source.

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:Gregor Coleman and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 12:19, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Wikidocs, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 12:19, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gregor Coleman has been accepted[edit]

Gregor Coleman, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 13:01, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chris Percival (November 11)[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 Sulfurboy was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The sources aren't enough to establish notability. A large chunk of the sources is just about his company, and a person can't inherit notability from a company they are apart of. Beyond that, there is a slew of primary sources or routine PR stuff. The couple of articles that directly cover the subject are just local coverage from his hometown and two are interview, thus making them primary, not secondary. The top 100 list is about the only thing close to substantial, but being included in a list of 100 other people just isn't enough to establish notability.

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:Chris Percival and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 13:57, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chris Percival (November 11)[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 Sulfurboy was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Like I said, the top 100 list isn't enough for notability, especially considering the list is crowdsourced.

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:Chris Percival and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 14:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017[edit]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Draft:Chris Percival, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Please do not removed submission decline history on your draft page. Sulfurboy (talk) 14:28, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't, you have removed some edits which improved the article? Wikidocs (talk) 14:30, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chris Percival (November 11)[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 Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The awards are not notable.

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:Chris Percival and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 15:46, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Wikidocs. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article Draft:Chris Percival, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. Editing for the purpose of advertising or promotion is not permitted. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID). Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:44, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Chris Percival (Entrepreneur)[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 Chris Percival (Entrepreneur), 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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:36, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jigsaw Records[edit]

You cannot hijack an article and change what it is about...if the company is notable draft an article about it. Theroadislong (talk) 22:52, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jigsaw Records Ltd has trademark protection. The Seattle Company you are trying to replace it with does not. This is contrary to law. The subject has notability which has been approved in AfC. If you replace again I will report you for infringement of the trademark refered to in the article. Wikidocs (talk) 22:54, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) As Theroadislong points out, it is possible for Wikipedia articles to have the same name, and disambiguation is used in such cases to distinguish between the two subjects. So, if you feel that the record company deserves to have a Wikipedia article written about it, feel free to write a draft and submit it for inclusion via WP:AfC to. You can find some advice on writing Wikipedia articles in WP:YFA. If, however, you are connected to the company in anyway, please refer to WP:COI and WP:PSCOI for some general information on conflict of interest editing.

Finally, the last part of you post is something which might easily be percieved to be a legal threat of some kind made against another editor. Per WP:NLT, this is something which is explicitly not allowed under any circumstances, and is something which almost always leads to an immediate block by adminstrators. So, I strongly suggest you carefully reconsider what you posted and revise it accordingly as explained in WP:REDACT, and refrain from posting similar things in the future. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:12, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jigsaw Records. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:17, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

please[edit]

do not take over existing articles with content about an entirely different subject. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:39, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The thread is Jigsaw Records. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:30, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of Jigsaw Records (US company)[edit]

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Jigsaw Records (US company), which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the file. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:43, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, I didn't remove the tag. I was in the process of doing so, but Theroadislong removed it first. So, I posted the above notification template as a courtesy. If you still would like to pursue this matter, you will need to nominate the article for deletion via WP:AfD. As I posted at Talk:Jigsaw Records (UK company)#Article blanking, you should read up a bit on AfD to better familiarize yourself with how such discussions typically work, particularly WP:BEFORE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:51, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

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 ~~~~}}. Guy (Help!) 10:24, 22 November 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

The article created for Gregor Coleman was approved in AfC and moved by an editor independently. It is notable and I have NO connection with this individual or any of the edits I have made. Furthermore, a suggestion that the US 'Jigsaw Records' is notable over the UK one is frankly ridiculous. The UK entity has significant coverage on a broad range of primary and secondary sources. The US one does not and has very questionable notability, without any coverage at all on notable or reliable sources. Furthermore, all topics are factual and backed up with various, significant and reliable sources in accordance with WP guidelines - they should not have been deleted on this basis without a formal deletion discussion. Given this, and my lack of connection, I appeal my ban. Wikidocs (talk) 10:56, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Based on editing and CU data, this account is Likely to be a sock of User:Spike1965. Yunshui ^雲 _水 11:22, 22 November 2017 (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.