User talk:Constobie

This is Constobie'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: Susan Modupe Garland (April 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 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 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 User:Blurviewstudios/sandbox/Susan Modupe Garland 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:Blurviewstudios/sandbox/Susan Modupe Garland, 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.

-Liance^{talk/contribs} 19:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Garlandinitiative! 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} 19:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Garlandinitiative. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Majavah ^(t/c) 08:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

Hello Garlandinitiative. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Susan Modupe Garland, 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, and if it does not, 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:Garlandinitiative. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Garlandinitiative|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. Majavah ^(t/c) 09:11, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Username policy: change required

Please visit Special:GlobalRenameRequest to rename your account.

Please choose a username which belongs to you. Use something without "Garland" in it, this is against the username policies. This will be your new account name.

In the reason for request, write "requested (account belongs to individual, not a group)".

Then click "request name change".

--Gryllida (talk) 10:10, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Susan Modupe Garland (April 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 Theroadislong 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:Susan Modupe Garland 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:Susan Modupe Garland, 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 10:34, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames which give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy or request a change of username.

You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. Additionally, if your contributions to Wikipedia form all or part of work for which you are, or expect to be, paid, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text

{{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}

at the bottom of your talk page. Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names.

Thank you. — Newslinger talk 11:11, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Requested username:

constobie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Your reason here Garlandinitiative (talk) 11:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Renamed so unblocked. You will be expected to refrain from further promotion of Susan Garland. Yamla (talk) 13:01, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We spoke earlier today in the IRC live help channel. I had to leave but said that I would leave a message for you here. There are several problems - the username has been resolved, but as Garland's manager you are expected (and required by the Terms of Use) to disclose that you are a paid editor. See WP:PAID. That said, Draft:Susan Modupe Garland does not cite any reliable sources that cover Garland in any appreciable detail. The draft's content is arguably promotional and, worse, doesn't even appear to be factually correct. I strongly suggest you give up this project and avoid editing on topics where you have a conflict of interest. Huon (talk) 19:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Huon. You've been warned multiple times. I will block you indefinitely if you do not follow this guidance. --Yamla (talk) 13:15, 14 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 ~~~~}}.

Block Appeal

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).

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

Request reason:

Apologies, I have thoroughly gone through and understood the Wikipedia Policy. I will edit the article to not appear as a promotional contentConstobie (talk) 20:19, 31 May 2020 (UTC) Constobie (talk) 18:29, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you as you have not addressed the reasons for your block. You will not be unblocked to edit about any subject with which you have an outside relationship. Please read and heed WP:PAID and WP:COI Please list all accounts you have used or those you have collaborated with outside of Wikipedia. Please list all subjects you have been paid to edit about. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 21:57, 31 May 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.

You aren't going to be unblocked to write about Susan Garland. If you wish to write about something else entirely, tell us what you'll write about instead. --Yamla (talk) 20:18, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You'll also need to address your violation of WP:SOCK, with multiple accounts (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Blurviewstudios/Archive). In general, we wouldn't normally unblock people so blatantly unwilling to follow our policies for at least six months, so you have a high bar to reach to account for your abusive actions. --Yamla (talk) 20:20, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SOCK As Manager (I stated when renaming username at Special:GlobalRenameRequest from GarlandInitiative to Constobie) of Susan Garland, one of my responsibilities is to make my client visible. I put wrote content and employed the services of freelancers to upload on Wikipedia one after the other PallaviSingh197021, Blurviewstudios, Obieokoye, Mai Hayat, Modupe3245 and others failed in uploading the content of my client. These has triggered suspicious socketpuppetry. Again going through Wikipedia Policies, I observed they failed in two areas; declaring as 'Affiliation' at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and inability to cite reliable sources. I apologise once again and I plead to be permitted to write about my client (Susan Garland) in a non-promotional format or seek the services of a Freelancer and advise they declare 'Affiliation' to avoid Conflict of Interest. I will also contact Wikipedia:IRC help disclaimer to advice and assist. I am deeply sorry for violating these rules and causing others to too. I appreciate you for your time to look into this. I am looking forward to hearing from you. Thank You. Constobie (talk) 12:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PAID

This user, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they have been paid by Susan Garland for their contributions to Wikipedia.

I have gone through history of replies. I should have stated this earlier. This is an oversight. Apologies.I will respond to the WP:SOCK in another talk. Thanks for your understanding.Constobie (talk) 21:27, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SOCK

As Manager (I stated when renaming username at Special:GlobalRenameRequest from GarlandInitiative to Constobie) of Susan Garland, one of my responsibilities is to make my client visible. I put wrote content and employed the services of freelancers to upload on Wikipedia one after the other PallaviSingh197021, Blurviewstudios, Obieokoye, Mai Hayat, Modupe3245 and others failed in uploading the content of my client. These has triggered suspicious socketpuppetry. Again going through Wikipedia Policies, I observed they failed in two areas; declaring as 'Affiliation' at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and inability to cite reliable sources. I apologise once again and I plead to be permitted to write about my client (Susan Garland) in a non-promotional format or seek the services of a Freelancer and advise they declare 'Affiliation' to avoid Conflict of Interest. I will also contact Wikipedia:IRC help disclaimer to advice and assist. I am deeply sorry for violating these rules and causing others to too. I appreciate you for your time to look into this. I am looking forward to hearing from you. Thank You. Constobie (talk) 21:46, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a clear case of WP:IDHT. Revoking talk page access. --Yamla (talk) 13:03, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.