User talk:CassierREDDDD

If you leave me a message I will generally respond here, unless you want me to reply elsewhere.

Archives

no archives yet (create)

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by .

Welcome!

Hello, CassierREDDDD, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! —Alalch E. 12:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a lawyer, you may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Law.—Alalch E. 12:53, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for this! I have registered as a participant.

I have a question however. I have been doing a bit of clean ups, adding references et all, and i have noticed quite a number of pages without media coverage, absolutely no sources/references attached. I have attempted finding for some, but also noticed some barely have reliable sources. Why have they not been deleted? I have noticed quite a bit that also seem to have been copied and pasted, those i have tagged with copyright infringements tag, but why have these not been deleted?

@Alalch E.:

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

CassierREDDDD (talk) 07:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your question above - over 6 million articles less than 450 users who can carry out the above required actions. Some of those 450 only deal with anti-vandalism work, some deal with page protections and unprotections some deal with unblock requests so out of that 450 there's only a limited number who deal with (the rather complicated) grounds of Copyright violations. Amortias (T)(C) 08:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what do i do? When i see pages with copyrights, i try to add the copyrights tag. Some of those pages, were basically copied and pasted. I have also seen a page that basically had nothing on the page. I also tried tagging it with deletion. But is this enough? Simply tagging? Some of the pages i try fixing, should simply be deleted. Some of the ones i tag also, barely get the attention it deserves. I dont know if i should continue, or simply give up on it to be honest. @Amortias CassierREDDDD (talk) 08:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you can fix them (or try to ) great, if you cant then the tags will alert editors who specifically deal with those types of issue to them and they can be actioned as swiftly as they can get to them. I've had a quick look (just now) and can only spot 3 pages for deletion due to copyright violations and 8 specific edits that need deleting. I cant clear down these right now but it is something I do look at and work through the lists, could you give an example of one of the pages that's clearly copyright violation from somewhere and I can check the tags shortly. Amortias (T)(C) 09:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice!

These two i tagged. I could be wrong but would be helpful if you could check. So next time, i know if i'm to continue the same way, or look for something different

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Whoopee!_(comics)

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Lille_Comics_Festival

@Amortias CassierREDDDD (talk) 09:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think due to my profession, i am more inclined to taking copyright violations more seriously than the usual person. CassierREDDDD (talk) 09:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So this is where it gets complicated.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Whoopee!_(comics)

The content that was copyright violation (potentially) was added to wikipedia on 2009-03-23 at 18:52:37, the external webpage didnt exist until early 2023 so this would be a case of the external Website copying from Wikipedia (without attribution)

The same goes for https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Lille_Comics_Festival, text on wikipedia created in 2007 external website 2020. Amortias (T)(C) 09:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for that. I would try and pay more attention to that.

What about pages like this?

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Estadio_Internacional

Right to tag to be deleted? Barely any information online.

@Amortias CassierREDDDD (talk) 09:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So the page has been around for so long it might struggle with being speedily deleted (but its not an area i'm familiar with so that's an opinion not a policy). Id have probably tagged it for AFD which is where theres a discussion held about it rather than it being down to the voice of a sole administrator. Either works though as if it gets declined for speedy it can be taken to AFD. Amortias (T)(C) 10:08, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All has been noted. Thank you so much for all your help!

@Amortias CassierREDDDD (talk) 10:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Hello CassierREDDDD. 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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:CassierREDDDD. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=CassierREDDDD|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 ^💬 08:46, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @GSS, thank you for this. I do not understand where the idea for paid editing comes from. I was about to ask which of my edits gave that impression and then i checked my log and saw the ones you reverted. However, my contributions to Andrew Gray is purely because its legal (although not completely) in nature. I had earlier checked WikiProjects (of which i am a participant), saw some pages up for deletion and decided to check wider. Saw this page, saw he is a lawyer, and saw there was needed clean up and categories to be added. I am also a Lawyer, although not based in the UK, but i believe i am still well versed on general Law.

Correct me if i am wrong but the page does need more categories. The categories i added, i believe are valid. The issue with Nuffield Health i believe can be categorized under the Anti-Discrimination Law, Human Rights Category as well. Which was why i added them. I also removed a reference that does not directly mention the subject. Can all these be classified as vandalism? As you would see in my earlier topic in my talk page, i am relatively new, and i welcome assistance and clarifications. If my edits were wrong, please tell me. If the reason why you reverted it is because you believed i was paid, then also let me know. CassierREDDDD (talk) 09:24, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Nuel Jr per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nuel Jr. 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 for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 15:27, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]