Jump to content

User talk:Breakfazt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]
Hello, Breakfazt!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips
  • Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
  • It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
  • If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
  • Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
  • When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
  • If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
  • Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Unnecessary citations

[edit]

You appear to be adding citations to text that is already properly cited, on a number of articles. This is called ref bombing. What do you think? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I am a new editor. I thought I was helping by providing more citations. But going forward, I will not add if there is already 2 or more. Breakfazt (talk) 05:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Dance Loud

[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 Dance Loud, 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. Fram (talk) 10:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: DJ Many (February 1)

[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 Jamiebuba 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 people). 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 after they have been resolved.
Jamiebuba (talk) 13:29, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Breakfazt! 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! Jamiebuba (talk) 13:29, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

[edit]
Information icon

Hello Breakfazt. 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are 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 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:Breakfazt. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Breakfazt|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) 15:34, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kuru Sorry I meant to respond to this, but then I didn't login for a long time and forgot about it. I have no association with any of the edits that I have done. I used Fastbraces (type of dental braces) for my son and when I noticed that the founder didn't have a page, decided to make one for him to improve Wikipedia. I do not know him personally and have never spoken to him. I have checked the criteria and Anthony. D. Viazis would qualify under WP:SCHOLAR due to over 1500+ citations and high H index. Could you please consider bringing the page live from the drafts? and I will request an unblock of my account. Breakfazt (talk) 05:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Anthony D. Viazis

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Breakfazt. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Anthony D. Viazis, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Anthony D. Viazis

[edit]

Hello, Breakfazt. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Anthony D. Viazis".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 19:10, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

[edit]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have a financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:

  • Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
  • State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
  • Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future.

Sam Kuru (talk) 13:14, 17 August 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).

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

Request reason:

"I intended to respond to KURU's request earlier, but I hadn't logged in for some time and it slipped my mind. Not answering the question doesn't imply that I was paid to create the page or have any COI. If this was the reason for my block, I have now addressed the question and clarified that I have no COI with any of my edits. Therefore, I respectfully request that my account be unblocked." Breakfazt (talk) 05:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The block isn't just for COI/PAID, it's for "advertising and promotion". Even if I believe you that you have no COI, from reviewing your contributions you haven't yet figure out how to keep promotion out of your contributions, and as such I don't think you yet have the knowledge and experience needed to create new articles as Wikipedia asks. I don't think you should be unblocked without agreement to refrain from creating new articles for a least a time. 331dot (talk) 06:40, 30 August 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Being informed that I've been blocked for posting advertising and promotional content still leaves me unclear about what exactly was flagged as advertising. I suspect that some of this might be related to citations being perceived as promotional by @KURU. My intention was to post factual information while consciously avoiding any promotional language, as I'm aware that it is not permitted. After reviewing my content, I'm still unsure which specific sentences were considered promotional, as they reflect verifiable facts about the subjects. For instance, how can one mention that someone has invented something or holds dozens of patents without it being seen as promotional?
I'm also uncertain why I wasn't given a warning before being outright banned. I don't believe my mistakes justify a ban. Are there any concerns with my other edits besides the page I attempted to create for Anthony Viazis?
Additionally, as a relatively new editor, I’m open to agreeing not to create new pages until I gain more experience, if that would be sufficient to have my ban lifted.

Decline reason:

Your deleted text included "Together, they form a dynamic and diverse entity. Fawn's classical training in live instrumentation blends seamlessly with Sanchez's expertise in electronic production and DJing. Praised by the Chicago Tribune and honed into a formidable live act through numerous performances since their inception in 2008, the duo fully realizes their combined capabilities". This text is clearly promotional. It isn't the only promotional text, but it is an example. I am reluctant to unblock you, because you don't seem to understand how promotional your text is. PhilKnight (talk) 18:26, 8 September 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.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Breakfazt&oldid=1244710757"