User talk:Verabo

Greetings, Verabo, and welcome to Wikipedia's deletion process! Thank you for your contributions. As a newcomer, it may be helpful for you to read Wikipedia's deletion policy, and the pages describing the articles for deletion process, proposed deletion, and speedy deletion. Remember that deletion debates are not votes, and reasons matter, especially reasons relating to the central content policies of verifiability, neutral point of view, no original research, and what Wikipedia is not, and to the consensual community guidelines for biographies, corporations, music, and fiction. Also remember that deletion is not always the answer to a bad article. Feel free to drop me a line at my talk page if you have any questions. Again, welcome! HM Wilburt (talk) 15:17, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive behavior

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at the AfD. Your behavior of accusations, assumptions and uncivility have disrupted the AfD to a point that the nominator felt the need to request an SPI. The result of the SPI is that your accusations are untrue.

Please strike through or edit your false claims.
Please strike through or edit your 2nd Delete vote. You can only vote once.
Keep civil from now on.

HM Wilburt (talk) 21:12, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive behaviour. It appears you are purposefully harassing other editors. Wikipedia aims to provide a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing other users, as you did on the AfD, potentially compromises that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing. HM Wilburt (talk) 09:25, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Personal account

Your edits at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vincent van Ommen claim that you are representing a group of people. Is one person in control of this account or is this a joint account of these different people? Please clarify. --Randykitty (talk) 13:33, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Randykitty, thank you for your message. Me, Vera is in control of this account. I work for a production company and the people mentioned are all part of the months long investigation. We also organised investigations on IMDB and Wikipedia and general media and press companies, technical companies. That is why I mention on behalf of all involved in the investigation and I am the spokesperson and control the profile to discuss all findings. Thank you and keep up the good work! Verabo (talk) 14:10, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In which case you should definitively read up WP:COI. 107.190.33.254 (talk) 14:13, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but that is not relevant here. None of the people in the investigation team are either personally or professionally involved with subject. I am in control of the account. I just used the term "on behalf of" to thank everyone involved in this extensive investigtion. Thank you Verabo (talk) 14:20, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And also WP:PAID. What is the role of the production company in all this? What is their interest inhaving "investigations" on IMDb and WP? --Randykitty (talk) 14:23, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This definitely looks like COI. How can you not be personally involved if you and this supposed "team" are doing months long of investigations. How can it be months long if the AfD was only 14 days and you created your account 1 day after the AfD? Now i'm thinking this spa account was created to dodge warnings and backlash from another main account Verabo may be using. Please explain your self. HM Wilburt (talk) 14:25, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing. I just mention it to show I have a passion for and a connection to the filmworld. The projects I work on have nothing do do with people but with locations and the other people in the investigation have nothing to do with me professionally, and neither with the subject. All are people with various backgrounds and a passion for the filmworld an like to keep the entertainment world healthy. Interest started with the unmaskings in the media. Subject became notorious person of interest. I started to pay interest to the case and things evolved from there. I contacted some friends for the technical aspect, others knew more about investigation on wikipedia itself, etc. All involved that helped us, including the people from imdb and wikipedia also have nothing to do with subject. Just a shared passion for the arts and information about the people in it.Verabo (talk) 14:44, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"unmaskings in the media": perhaps you can provide links to this? --Randykitty (talk) 14:52, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The whole deletion nomination on the Dutch article was about that and the nominator also provided examples in his initial nomination here. Further in the discussion many other examples are mentioned. Let's not repeat the whole discussions here Verabo (talk) 15:01, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can read the nominator's reason for the AfD naming that same "unmasking in the media" as reason for deletion[1]. A day later Verabo is created and quotes it again. The link they provide is a site from 2010. You say you work for a production company and have connections in the filmworld and you got help from IMDB and Wikipedia itself to do these investigations. So you are related to film. Who exactly helped you on Wikipedia? HM Wilburt (talk) 15:07, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have a passion for entertainment and art and right now about everyone in, or with an interest for the industry is talking about Vincent van Ommen. It starts with a "look at this" and it ends with more and more people paying attention. I have come across many people who where all stunned by what was found. All put in effort in their own way, based on their findings and opinions. I have no idea who some of them are, do you know all editors on all sites?

But this is getting very redundant. Everything has already been discussed very extensively. So I will leave it at this.

Everyone reading this should also check the history of user HM Wilburt of the past years and the essence of the discussion was that all projects were low budget amateur shorts and that subject was not relevant in generalVerabo (talk) 15:25, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking request for SPA account for harassment

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. SimonRichter1337 (talk) 14:09, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jonas Smulders

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 Jonas Smulders 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 person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event 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. --Nahal^(T) 09:43, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jonas Smulders

The article Jonas Smulders has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Randykitty (talk) 10:41, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]