User talk:AustinTravis27
National varieties of English[edit]
Hello. In a recent edit to the page Paul Teller, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Wikipedialuva (talk) 08:35, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Nomination of Anthony Vaz (American investor) for deletion[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Vaz (American investor) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Oaktree b (talk) 13:34, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Paid editing[edit]
Hello AustinTravis27. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Anthony Vaz (American investor), gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.
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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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:AustinTravis27. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=AustinTravis27|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, do not edit further until you answer this message. Sam Kuru (talk) 13:42, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hey Sam. Hope you are doing well.I am not paid to edit or create any of the articles. AustinTravis27 (talk) 13:57, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
AfC notification: Draft:Aanal Kotak has a new comment[edit]
August 2023[edit]
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you recently created, Draft:Aanal Kotak (chef), may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it has been moved to where you can continue to work on it. Please consider using the Article Wizard or the Articles for Creation procedure. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read "Your first article". You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. – The Grid (talk) 18:56, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
The article Pixillion Image Converter has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Reads like an advertisement and the sources are non-notable.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pyraminxsolver (talk) 23:56, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
AustinTravis27 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
AustinTavis27 is the only account I operated. The allegations on me are totally false. I have never used any other accounts on wikipedia. I don't know any of the technical reasons that led to such sort of event. I had, have, always will contribute to the knowledge of people no matter what. I saw someone editing in my college and checked their account and started editing on wikipedia. But this sockpuppet allegation against me is totally false and has no base to it. I thought to return to wikipedia today but was surprised to see my account being blocked. Is it a crime to edit on wikipedia, to correct the information present on wikipedia? If it is wrong then please continue to block me. I won't edit on wikipedia ever again. Otherwise, unblock my account as it is totally false, untrue allegation levelled against me.AustinTravis27 (talk) 15:01, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 16:21, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
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.
AustinTravis27 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The sockpuppet investigations verified by the checkuser where because the following reasons: I lived in a college where I was a student as a hosteller. I saw someone editing in my college and saw his edits how he performed. I saw his username as ScholarlyScribe. I checked his User Contributions section and reviewed his summary of the edits. Then, I started editing on wikipedia similar to that account. I don't know that person personally. I am not a sockpuppet of the user who I am accused to be. I performed the edits similar to his. Probably that would be the technical reason that would have led me to the linkage to that account. The accusation against me of using multiple accounts is not true. Another reason is that the whole college has a similar I.P. Address. This could also be a potential reason which led to accusation doubt. Now my college is over and I have shifted to my native place. Now my I.P. address will never be the same again. Also, I will be more careful while performing any edits on wikipedia. I won't ever copy someone's edit summary in future. You can put a temporary ban on me but please don't put an indefinite ban on me. Please pardon me this time. I shall be very thanful to you.AustinTravis27 (talk) 11:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This explanation is not consistent with the technical evidence. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:59, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
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.
Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.