User talk:Starmanwaiting

December 2021

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Delvin. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Declangi (talk) 02:46, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Garrett Kelly (July 5)

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

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.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Garrett Kelly 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:Garrett Kelly, 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 the next 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.

bonadea contributions talk 20:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Starmanwaiting! 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! bonadea contributions talk 20:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Garrett Kelly

Hello, Starmanwaiting. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Garrett Kelly, 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) 11:02, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Garrett Kelly

Hello, Starmanwaiting. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Garrett Kelly".

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! Hey man im josh (talk) 13:58, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Garrett Kelly for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Garrett Kelly 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/Garrett Kelly 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.

SlightlyToastedCheesecake (talk) 04:37, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Garrett Kelly

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 Garrett Kelly 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 a real person or group of people that 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 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. CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:54, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Starmanwaiting. 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, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} 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 Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 19:23, 1 December 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am in no way (financially or otherwise) affiliated with this subject, and do not benefit personally from this action.

Decline reason:

Whether affiliated or not, all of your edits to Wikipedia have been to promote this one individual, and that will need to be addressed in order for an unblock to be considered. Aoidh (talk) 20:37, 1 December 2023 (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.

Starmanwaiting (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is the source you used for the information in the "Early life" and "Personal life" sections of the deleted article?-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:09, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Newspaper article (I am in the process of getting a digital copy from the publisher. If required, this section can be removed until digital copy is available.) Starmanwaiting (talk) 20:18, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AoidhThat's fair enough I guess. I do plan on writing on other people in the future as soon as I gather enough material to warrant posting. Starmanwaiting (talk) 20:44, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, can I just say, I AM new to Wikipedia, but I have read the FAQs etc, and one that sticks in my memory is the Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers section. I'm new, I'm trying to learn how things are done here, I set up an account, had a little play about to get a feel for the layout etc, and then I spent months gathering as much information as I possibly could on the subject before posting. If I'm wrong, tell me how, hell, edit it yourself and say why so I know where I went wrong, but to ban me literally a day into my first proper attempt at posting? That's how a platform loses users! Starmanwaiting (talk) 23:48, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even back in December 2021 with your very first edit, you were promoting Kelly.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, when I first signed up, I played around with the site a little to get a feel for it. I had always planned for my first post to be on this subject. My experience as a reader of this platform has always been that it's a 'fix it as you go' platform, so my thinking then was write a draft and edit it as I got more information. I then decided to go away and gather everything I needed before coming back. To your use of the word 'promote' - I simply wrote what I know, and linked to where I could for references. If it came across as 'PR heavy' in my writing, my bad, that's my background, so I guess it's hard to shake sometimes when writing neutral. Starmanwaiting (talk) 00:36, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]