User talk:Fatima.Innovative

This is Fatima.Innovative'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: Charles Bethea has been accepted

Charles Bethea, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Cabrils (talk) 00:26, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:CobbleStone Software

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 Draft:CobbleStone Software, 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. GPL93 (talk) 16:03, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bobby Saadian moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Bobby Saadian, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Celestina007 (talk) 16:42, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bobby Saadian (August 13)

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

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.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

mostly primary sources by affiliated organisations.

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:Bobby Saadian 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:Bobby Saadian, 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

– robertsky (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fatima.Innovative! 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! – robertsky (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Byron D. Williamson (August 21)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

The notable topic here could be Worthy Publishing. Coverage of the publisher or of books it published is not in-depth about Williamson, so counts very little or not at all towards notability. Brief articles like this are not in-depth either, though that one is about Williamson.

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:Byron D. Williamson 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:Byron D. Williamson, 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

— Bilorv (talk) 10:42, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:A-TEEM

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 Draft:A-TEEM, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.horiba.com/en_en/products/scientific/molecular-and-microanalysis/fluorescencespectrometers/a-teem/. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. Eostrix (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 10:01, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:A-TEEM

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:A-TEEM, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Pahunkat (talk) 12:38, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

Hello Fatima.Innovative. 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 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:Fatima.Innovative. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Fatima.Innovative|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. Pahunkat (talk) 12:48, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Draft:A-TEEM Fluorescence Spectroscopy, you may be blocked from editing. JBW (talk) 14:05, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice on editing

Almost all of us, when we start editing Wikipedia, know little or nothing about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, so nobody can be blamed for starting out doing things that are contrary to policies and guidelines that they don't know about. (Obviously, continuing to do the same things after being told about the relevant policies and guidelines is a different matter.) My advice to new editors is that it is best to start by making small improvements to existing articles, rather than creating new articles. That way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't have the discouraging experience of repeatedly seeing hours of work deleted. Gradually, you will get to learn how Wikipedia works, and after a while you will know enough about what is acceptable to be able to write whole new articles without fear that they will be deleted. Over the years I have found that editors who start by making small changes to existing articles and work up from there have a far better chance of having a successful time here than those who jump right into creating new articles from the start. JBW (talk) 14:53, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fatima.Innovative. 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:50, 9 September 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

I would like to request that my account be unblocked. I am sincerely apologetic for the reasons which have blocked me out from Wikipedia. I understand the why this action occurred and would like to have another chance. I will do more research on the policies and how I can further improve on editing and later when I am aware and proficient hopefully I can publish pages. Please take my request into consideration and unblock my account so I can learn more through Wikipedia. I assure that no irrelevant edits, or editing that will harm the Wikipedia platform will be done. I hope my request will get approved.Fatima.Innovative (talk) 18:06, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are blocked for using multiple accounts, but do not address this in your request. You also need to address conflict of interest and paid editing, if relevant. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 20:04, 10 September 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

I would like to request that my account be unblocked. I am sincerely apologetic for the reasons which have blocked me out from Wikipedia. I understand why this action occurred and would like to have another chance. I will do more research on the policies and how I can further improve on editing and later when I am aware and proficient hopefully I can publish pages. I would like to also apologize for using promotional verbiage in my editing which may have caused conflict of interest, however, I can guarantee that I have not been paid to make any of the edits. My main purpose is to contribute to the goals of Wikipedia Please take my request into consideration and unblock my account so I can learn more through Wikipedia. I assure you that no irrelevant edits or editing that will harm the Wikipedia platform will be done. I hope my request will get approved Fatima.Innovative (talk) 20:27, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This still does not address your use of multiple accounts, which now raises the question that perhaps you lack sufficient competence to follow the directions we are giving you. You'll need to address both of these points in any future unblock request. Yamla (talk) 10:39, 11 September 2021 (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.

I've placed this at the bottom for proper discussion flow(top to bottom). 331dot (talk) 20:54, 10 September 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

The reason why I wasn't addressing the use of multiple accounts is that I have only one account, I am not using any other account on Wikipedia, I do realize that I am being suspected of using multiple accounts but I can guarantee that it is not me. Please accept my request for unblocking as I genuinely did not intentionally violate the rules of Wikipedia. I will refrain from any edits that do not comply with the standards. I am not using multiple accounts. I didn't even know that there was a second account associated with me. Please approve my request. I will be highly greateful Fatima.Innovative (talk) 18:18, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It seems fairly clear to me that you have a) either operated multiple accounts or coordinated with others, and b) that you have used Wikipedia for advertising. The page you wrote about Cobblestone software, which appears to be partially paraphrased from the company website (admins: [1]) is just one example of that. Until and unless you start being transparent about both of those things, we can not unblock you. I am declining your request. --Blablubbs (talk) 08:51, 15 September 2021 (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.

Nomination of Charles Bethea for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charles Bethea 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/Charles Bethea until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

— Mhawk10 (talk) 23:01, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bobby Saadian

Hello, Fatima.Innovative. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bobby Saadian, 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) 18:01, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Byron D. Williamson

Hello, Fatima.Innovative. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Byron D. Williamson, 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) 11:03, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Bobby Saadian

Hello, Fatima.Innovative. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Bobby Saadian".

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! Celestina007 (talk) 17:14, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]