User talk:AZaMas

Welcome!

Hello, AZaMas, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:AZaMas, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:AZaMas

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 User:AZaMas, 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. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for decrease in protection

Hello! The page you were trying to edit is not protected, it simply does not exist. If you wish to create a new page, I suggest going through the WP:AfC process. —Ganesha811 (talk) 01:22, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maral Salmassi (June 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CanonNi was:

We're sorry, but we cannot accept blank submissions. If in fact you did include text within the article, but it isn't showing, please make sure that any extra text above your entry is removed, as it may be causing it to hide and not be shown to the reviewer.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Maral Salmassi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AZaMas! Having an article draft 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! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying for hours to submit this article and had included all the links. When I pressed submit it disappeared and another window appeared with an old rejected article with the same name from 2014. It seems there is a conflict which I cannot access. What can I do? Should I restart writing again? AZaMas (talk) 02:46, 13 June 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am new to Wikipedia and would like to submit an article about "Maral Salmassi." I wasn't aware that using Discog as a source was not permitted. My article was removed because it was considered too promotional. I would like to re-submit a corrected version. Currently I'm educating myself on Wikipedia guidelines and will make sure this does not happen again.AZaMas (talk) 14:55, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It is true that it is not absolutely forbidden to write about yourself, but highly discouraged means highly discouraged, and for good reason. I'm sure it happens, but I have never seen someone successfully write about themselves here in my many years here. It's very rare that someone is able to set aside everything they know about themselves and only write based on what others say about them. Are you the rare person who can do it? Possibly, but the odds are overwhelmingly against it. As it is now, you are blocked for promoting yourself and you won't be unblocked to, in the short term, write about yourself. This is not necessarily permanent, but we will want to see an edit history from you of edits in other areas, demonstrating your understanding of relevant Wikipedia policies. Otherwise, our experience based on many years and interactions with thousands of people is that allowing you to dive right back into editing about yourself is a waste of time for everyone(including the editor). Also understand that an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. Any information about you, good or bad, can be in an article about you as long as it appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. You can't lock the text to what you might prefer, or prevent others from editing it(as you could with social media). If you want to edit about topics other than yourself, please tell what those might be. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 18:38, 13 June 2024 (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.

What is your connection with Ms. Salmassi? 331dot (talk) 15:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am the artist. AZaMas (talk) 15:39, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please place new comments at the bottom; this may be easier to do if you click "edit" at the top and not "reply"; the reply feature is imperfect for several reasons and not useful in every situation.

So you are writing about yourself- this is highly discouraged, please read the autobiography policy. Is there anything you want to write about other than yourself? 331dot (talk) 15:43, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is discouraged but not forbidden. I thought the article could be acceptable if it only listed facts about my biography. I had someone write the text for me. I only set up the page and intend to add the references/ links. I was surprised to find out Discogs was a problem. Of course, I will disclose my relationship. I could create a draft for review, and I assure you I do not intend to promote myself or share falsehoods. I would of course disclose my relationship in the article as advised by Vanderwaalforces. AZaMas (talk) 17:38, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to add that I understand your concerns and agree. I wasn't wholly aware of your definition of neutrality. Considering the responsibility, commitment, and time it takes to be a good contributor, I wonder if I could fulfill this. As it seems wrong, I won't hire an editor and will try to find someone interested in this topic. Thanks for your time. AZaMas (talk) 19:40, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would you advise me to ask someone else who is already a Wikipedia editor to write the article? The person who wrote the text for me works for my label, so I suppose he is not considered unbiased according to Wikipedia standards.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AZaMas (talk • contribs)

See WP:COI. You could be notable but there are not enough RS to support your article. Unless you become super popular, there probably won’t be an article about you. Cheers, 48JCL TALK 20:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree; there are enough references, including Vice, Modzig, and Groove Magazin, all of which are relevant and neutral sources. Your argument is irrational since it would illogically define relevance by popularity by mainstream standards for underground music niches. AZaMas (talk) 20:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]