User talk:Dentking07

Interested in Global Conferences

Welcome and a note

Hi Dentking07, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I noticed that you created Talk:South East Asian Mathematical Society and Talk:International Reynard Society with information about not being able to find sources, or that you are planning to create the article soon. Can I ask that you please do not create talk pages for non-existent articles. They will only end up being deleted under the G8 criteria for speedy deletion. If you want to leave a reminder of what you have searched for, or what you plan on doing, then you can do that on your user page or your sandbox. Let me know on my talk page if you have any questions or need any help. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:56, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Kenes Group

added links pointing to Events and Conferences

OMICS Group Inc

added links pointing to Events and Conferences

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of OMICS Group Inc for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article OMICS Group Inc is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OMICS Group Inc until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 13:39, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kenes Group for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kenes Group is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenes Group until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of IEEE conferences

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 IEEE conferences 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 an organization or company, but it 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 removed 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. SmartSE (talk) 13:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is very difficult to create the new articles as experienced editors are merging, so I am going to keep IEEE conferences in main page, as parent article is available. It may not be informative to scientific /academic community. Dentking07 (talk) 14:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Scholarscentral, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. SmartSE (talk) 20:32, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 23:34, 4 November 2015 (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).

Dentking07 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Blocking is not acceptable based on 1 or 2 conflict edits out of hundreds of edits- Please un block

Decline reason:

I'm declining this request. The sockpuppet investigation was clear, and attempting to close an AfD under one name after taking a side under another name is far more than "one or two similar edits". —David Eppstein (talk) 06:45, 5 November 2015 (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.

Dear Bbb23 , SmartSE, David Eppstein, Randykitty, C.Fred and JBL Please unblock my account, blocking based on one or two similar edits is not justified. I have never done edits against other editors interest. Dentking07 (talk) 06:27, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear team

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).

Dentking07 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Blocking is not acceptable based on 1 or 2 conflict edits out of hundreds of edits- Please un block, I request the evidence should be published here OR permit me to create new account and use it for editing OR shall i contact my colleague to do edits which are under discussion.

Decline reason:

Not addressing reasons for blocking and threatening further evasion. Peridon (talk) 11:39, 5 November 2015 (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.

Because of the theat in your unblock request above, I have revoked your Talk page access. You may appeal through WP:UTRS.--Bbb23 (talk) 08:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]