User talk:Brzoskajerzy

This is Brzoskajerzy'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: Brian Scott Fine Arts (June 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Alpha3031 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Social media, own websites and press releases are considered non-independent and do not count towards 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:Brian Scott Fine Arts 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 Draft:Brian Scott Fine Arts, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" 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.

Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:32, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Brzoskajerzy! 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! Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:32, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Ben Awad, from its old location at User:Brzoskajerzy/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. --TheImaCow (talk • contribs) 15:23, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ben Awad (July 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by GSS 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ben Awad 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 Draft:Ben Awad, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" 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.

GSS ^💬 15:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lobsters (social news website)

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 Lobsters (social news website) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Praxidicae (talk) 11:25, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Hello Brzoskajerzy. 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 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:Brzoskajerzy. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Brzoskajerzy|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. GSS ^💬 09:32, 29 July 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 12:19, 29 July 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

My account have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. In particular, it was alleged by @MER-C that I have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Based on the following suspicion formulated by @MER-C my account was blocked:

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. ... If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message.You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

In response to this suspicion I disclose some details about myself: The following is my request to be unblocked. * I do not work. The last time I was paid for any work was in early 2018. I receive a monthly income of about €300 from a flat that is rented out. My gratuitous contibutions to wikipedia have way more value to me and to the world than the money that I could possibly earn with writing paid-for articles. Today I decided to display the relevant handshake-icon on my talk page to make it clear to everyone. * I was an Everipedia editor in 2018 and 2019, apart from writing articles at Everipedia I was combating spam there(through downvoting). Please find my publications under my user name: https://everipedia.org/profile/giydqmbwgage One worth mentioning reason why I finally chose Wikipedia over Everipedia is the fomer's spam combating ability. N.B. Everipedia editors gain negligent amounts of IQ tokens for their contribution. Other than that I was never paid for anything that I ever wrote. *As with everipedia articles, my posts, and wikipedia contributions were always made with respect to matters that I'm interested in. The fact that I'm focused on emerging technologies, like Bitcoin and cryptocurrenciencies, partially explains why the articles created by myself where of somewhat low notability. The only reason why I dare provide these details about my personal interests is that they shed light on the authentic motivation behind my contributions. * My contributions to wikipedia sister projects (wiktionary and wikiquotes). This is somewhat relevant here. I contribute way more to wiktionary than to wikipedia. My point here is that my activity does not resemble that of spam accounts, which typically display patterns of more limited activity. For example, a wikipedia spamming account would not loose time on wiktionary. Yet, the user @MER-C wrote: "You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose." My contributions for your review: https://es.wiktionary.org/wiki/Especial:Contribuciones/Brzoskajerzy https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/Sp%C3%A9cial:Contributions/Brzoskajerzy https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Brzoskajerzy https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Brzoskajerzy My contributions to the French and Spanish wikipedias show my interests in human rights and migration: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sp%C3%A9cial:Contributions/Brzoskajerzy https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Contribuciones/Brzoskajerzy My contributions to the English wikipedia show a broad range of interests, including migration, human rights, and emerging technologies. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Contributions/Brzoskajerzy I hope that that all my contributions to wiki projects show that advertising or promotion are not my purposes. Finally, I researched the market of wikipedia article creators. From what I gathered upwork.com is the only freelance platform at which such writers publish their profiles. My profile there clearly shows that I was never paid for anything via Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/~016934d895964e81ff Now, let me point out some things about the articles that I created. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Benito_Zambrano With his recent film, "Intemperie", draws attention to the victims of violence and to the rights of children. Hence my minor edit) https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Quincy_Larson&redirect=no (Shows my interest in open source and emerging technologies) https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:Lorena_Gonzalez_Guerrero Lorena Gonzalez Guerrero and I live in the same city. As of 2020, she is the only politician of this municipality worthy of my attention and writing. One of the reasons why I got interested in her is her position on immigrant detention centres in Spain. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeCd7RLM3VU. If my account was not blocked I would not bore you with such details. Yet, they are important, because they show my true motivation behind creating the article. Guerrero herself is not in contact with me, we have never met or spoken to each other. What would I do if you unblocked me? I would definitely limit creating new articles from the category of emerging technologies as they tend to have somewhat less established significance. I now understand the mistake I made with the article about Lobsters and do not intend to make it again. Therefore the block is no longer necessary. If you unblock my account my future contributions to wikipedia will make it obvious that advertising and spam are not my purposes. Jerzy 10:32 am, 31 July 2020, Friday (1 month, 13 days ago) (UTC−4)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline: this ha been open for over a month and has not convinced anyone to unblock you. Consider condensing your thoughts for future unblock requests. That being said, I think that your editing pattern is very similar to the editing patterns of undisclosed paid editors, so I'm not sure how successful a future unblock request will be. only (talk) 00:09, 13 September 2020 (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.

@CaptainEek: Was my request to be unblocked noticed. Where could I track its status? I'm worried that it was left unnoticed as I was not assigned any number or status, nor was my requested time stamped like that of other users here: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Category:Requests_for_unblock Jerzy 13:26, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is done in public, on wiki, generally on this page, with regard to your request, so any updates or questions will be seen here. As a sidenote, you may find less volunteer administrators will be interested in reading the very long request that you have left here. This could potentially increase the amount of time that it takes your request to be reviewed. SQL ^{Query me!} 14:52, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure why you've pinged me. I do review unbloock reviews; I had come across the review, but decided I was not the best person to handle this, and thus I leave it to another admin. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 17:46, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@CaptainEek: For no other reason that you are an administator other than the one who blocked me. @SQL: I made it shorter. Jerzy 18:19, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Brian Scott Fine Arts

Hello, Brzoskajerzy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Brian Scott Fine Arts".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Ben Awad

Hello, Brzoskajerzy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ben Awad".

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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:59, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Lorena Gonzalez Guerrero

Hello, Brzoskajerzy. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lorena Gonzalez Guerrero, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:02, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Lorena Gonzalez Guerrero

Hello, Brzoskajerzy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Lorena Gonzalez Guerrero".

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. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:09, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]