Jump to content

User talk:Liah78

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Speedy deletion nomination of Spectrum confectionery ltd[edit]

Hello Liah78,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Spectrum confectionery ltd for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

BrigadierG (talk) 00:42, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Liah78/sandbox[edit]

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 User:Liah78/sandbox, 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. Air on White (talk) 19:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Air on White, Hope you are doing well.
It's in my sandbox... I have dumped the data for now. I can remove it if you like? However, it was my understanding that a sandbox is a personal space where we can practice whatever we like. Is that not the case here?
Thank you Liah78 (talk) 19:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liah, you have wide freedom to use your sandbox, especially having already been established as a contributor to Wikipedia. However, promotion is still not permitted anywhere. I would have tagged it with G11 even if it was created by the most experienced administrators on this site. Air on White (talk) 20:09, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Air on White thank you for your reply. I do understand your point and yes, I would have tagged G11 on such content, however, I would have done it if the article was in public domain like Draft space or a live page. I believe, you could have assumed good faith and asked me to remove the promotional content (Which I, already, have), since it is my sandbox.
Regardless, I would be grateful, if you could go through it once more, and see if G11 is applied. I would also be grateful if you could remove the tag. Although its my sandbox, however, I would like to extend the courtesy and good faith.
P.S. if you have any point of improvemt for me, I am more than willing to learn. Thank you. Liah78 (talk) 20:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
G11 along with the rest of the general criteria apply to every page on Wikipedia besides explicit exceptions defined with each individual criterion (WP:GCSD). The tagging was independent of my assumption of faith: regardless of whether it is good or bad faith, promotion is not allowed on Wikipedia. Outside limited cases like user talk pages, new creations of promotional articles are deleted instead of blanked. I will blank the page and remove the CSD tag. Thank you, Air on White (talk) 20:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Liah78 (talk) 20:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024[edit]

Stop icon You have used sources that are either clearly noted as paid placement, unmarked press releases or marketing content, or blatant fake content farms which house unmarked SEO placement. One of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. These sources step far beyond those policies. Please carefully evaluate your references in the future, and ensure that you are in compliance with our mandatory paid editing disclosures. Sam Kuru (talk) 23:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Kuru. I will be careful in reference evaluation. Thanks. Liah78 (talk) 01:07, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Same problem seems to be recurring, Liah. Sam Kuru (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It won't from now onwards. I apologize for the previous mistakes. Thank you for pointing them out. Liah78 (talk) 17:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Greg Gunter for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Greg Gunter 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/Greg Gunter 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 until the discussion has finished.

Broc (talk) 11:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fernando Felice (July 5)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe 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 after they have been resolved.
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 23:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Liah78! Having an article draft 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! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 23:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tracy Pun Palandjian (July 6)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe 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 after they have been resolved.
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 22:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jose Escalante Rincon (July 8)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic 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 after they have been resolved.
KylieTastic (talk) 20:04, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024[edit]

Information icon

Hello Liah78. 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:Liah78. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Liah78|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. MrOllie (talk) 18:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no undisclosed financial stake with anyone of my edits. If I may for which edit/s are you refering to? Liah78 (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of them. You've been creating a lot of promotional biographies based on scant and questionable sources. MrOllie (talk) 18:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have tried my best to keep the content non-promotional, as per Wikipedia policies and guidlines. Maybe there is an issue in my understanding of the policies and guidlines, for which I would welcome any and all critisim. If you could correct me in any regard, It will be highly appriciated.
Thank you. Liah78 (talk) 18:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would recommend that you send all article creations through the drafting / WP:AFC process going forward. MrOllie (talk) 19:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. No problem. I will do it from now on.
Also, I noticed that you have reverted my edit from the Patrick Treacy's page. I checked each and every book was authored by him, so why it's removal won't be considered as vandalism? or perhaps a better question would be why it shouldn't be on the page? Kindly correct me if I am wrong, but citations for the books of a notable subject is not a must. If it is a must then the remaining two has to be deleted as well. I might have missed something, Kindly guide me in this regrad as well. Thank you. Liah78 (talk) 19:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The edit in question had a sensible edit summary (removing books published through a vanity press) and was clearly not vandalism. Vandalism has a specific definition on Wikipedia: WP:VAND. It is not synonymous with edits you happen to disagree with. MrOllie (talk) 19:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
O... ok. Thank you. I will look into it.
Thanks again. Liah78 (talk) 19:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Liah78&oldid=1233566133"