User talk:LeviMentis

Welcome!

Hello, LeviMentis, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Jörn J. Follmer, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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 have any questions, ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! CUPIDICAE💕 19:17, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jörn J. Follmer

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 Jörn J. Follmer, 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. CUPIDICAE💕 19:17, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Deb. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.

You appear to have a close connection to the subject on Wikipedia that raises concerns about a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged.

Anyone with a conflict of interest must avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing articles related to you, your family or colleagues, your organization or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
and you must always:
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

Note that 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. Even if you are not being paid, you are expected to disclose any close connection with the subject of the article, using the connected contributor template.

For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you.

Articles should not be written in the form of a CV. Deb (talk) 19:21, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:SIMdesign per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SIMdesign. 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 ~~~~}}. Girth Summit _(blether) 22:57, 23 February 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hey there! This morning I received an email that my account has been blocked because I am supposed to be a new account from SIMdesign. I am not. I googled SIMdesign. It is an advertising agency in Germany. I am neither an advertising agency nor interested in advertising anyone. I also didn't know that there was already an article about Honorary Consul Jörn Follmer. I am currently interested in various people in German politics; both state politicians and local politicians and also consuls. Now I'm being punished for doing something that violates the basic rules of Wikipedia, that I have not done. I have been contributing to Wikipedia since 2020 and would like to continue doing so. The article about Jörn Follmer should have been my first one in English; normally I write in German. But I'm interested in working in both languages. Therefore, I ask for the activation of my account. Is there anything I can do to prove that I am not SIMdesign? Thank you very much! LeviMentis (talk) 14:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Well, first let me say you are right about one thing, although not one that really makes a difference: You are not a sock of SIMDesign ... because the investigation found that SIMDesign was really a sock of someone else. So you're a sock of that person, and the checkuser confirmed the relationship.

And then you tell us that normally you edit in German. So, I figure, if this guy is legit, I should find his account on dewiki, and see that he has been editing in good standing over there and maybe this is all just some horrible mistake.

I went over there, and guess what I found? "Dieses Konto ist gesperrt" Thank you at least for helping me learn the German word for "blocked" ... I'll remember that one. And then there's this: "Erstellung von Benutzerkonten gesperrt, E-Mail-Versand gesperrt, darf eigene Diskussionsseite nicht bearbeiten" I had to go to Google Translate to confirm my suspicions about what all this means, but I was right: you've been blocked over there, blocked indefinitely and blocked extra hard. And further down I see something like "Sockenpuppenmissbrauch" ... I don't think I need to look that one up, and it's next to a URL which seems like a checkuser page over there which points to ... a master account with the exact same name as the one you've been found to be a sock of over here (Dr. R.Friedrich, if you're keeping score at home). So, danke schön for your help in confirming that this block was good, and that you are verboten from editing the English Wikipedia if I have anything to say about it for any length of time. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:50, 27 February 2022 (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.