User talk:Wikiexpert1234567

Draft:Chris McGinn[edit]

Hi, please take note of this edit I did to the above article – per MOS:PUNCTREF, there should be no spaces between citations or between a full stop (or comma etc.) and a citation. Regards JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 16:23, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Sidharth Sogani[edit]

Hello, Wikiexpert1234567. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, Draft:Sidharth Sogani.

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:12, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 9)[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 Liance 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 organizations and companies). 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.

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 User:Wikiexpert1234567/sandbox 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 User:Wikiexpert1234567/sandbox, 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.

-Liance^{talk/contribs} 18:07, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wikiexpert1234567! 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! -Liance^{talk/contribs} 18:07, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wikiexpert1234567/sandbox[edit]

Hello, Wikiexpert1234567. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, User:Wikiexpert1234567/sandbox.

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:18, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of CREBACO Global[edit]

Hello Wikiexpert, I was unable to find sufficient coverage of CREBACO Global in reliable, independent sources. The cited sources are press releases from the company and one passing mention that cites them. I've therefore proposed the article for deletion, meaning that if no one objects the article may be deleted in a week. If you disagree with the rationale given or are otherwise opposed to its deletion, you are free to remove the proposed deletion tag from the article. The article may still be nominated for a deletion discussion later. If you have any questions about editing, come ask at the Teahouse. – Thjarkur (talk) 16:15, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this link to crebaco [1]. Do you have a WP:COI with this firm? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 12:58, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MER-C: and @David Gerard: suspicious looking contributions for this subject. Please have a look. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 13:05, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

notice[edit]

Please read this notice carefully.

You are receiving this notice because you recently edited one or more pages relating to blockchain or cryptocurrencies topics. You have not done anything wrong. We just want to alert you that "general" sanctions are authorized for certain types of edits to those pages.

A community decision has authorized the use of general sanctions for pages related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after the editor has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Jtbobwaysf (talk) 13:00, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of CREBACO Global[edit]

If this was the first article that you 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.

The page CREBACO Global has been deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. As the page met any of these strictly-defined criteria, it was deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been deleted are:

It appeared to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it did 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 331dot (talk) 13:05, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Users who are not admins cannot delete articles; I have done so. 331dot (talk) 13:06, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

Hello Wikiexpert1234567. The nature of your edits 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

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:Wikiexpert1234567. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Wikiexpert1234567|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. David Gerard (talk) 13:29, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 ~~~~}}. MER-C 17:03, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]