User talk:Viii007

Username

Hi, I saw that you have been welcoming some new users, which is great. However, I am less sure about your username, as I doubt that seeing 'Virgininfatuation' welcoming them to Wikipedia will inspire people to stay. However, that is simply my opinion. Thanks, Matty.007 18:11, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Unless, of course, you live in the Virgin Islands, or a similar place. Matty.007 18:18, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

LOL, Yes i live in one of a similar place to Virgin Islands. Is there any issue with my Username or its just your opinion? --VI-007 (talk) 18:47, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

No, if that's where you live, I think that it is fine. Thanks, Matty.007 18:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Perfect Thanks Matty. --VI-007 (talk) 18:55, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Out of interest, is there any reason the word 'infatuation' features in the name? Thanks, Matty.007 19:07, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

It was to show attraction. Thanks for asking Matt. --VI-007 (talk) 19:21, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Your username has some rather unfortunate connotations, namely an infatuation with virgins. Such a username could be seen as "intended to provoke an emotional reaction", which would be a violation of our username policy. To avoid such misunderstandings it may be best to request a name change. Huon (talk) 03:07, 12 September 2013 (UTC) --39.55.159.230 (talk) 13:08, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. Wikipedia:Changing_username/Simple#virgininfatuation_.E2.86.92_Vii007. Thanks --VI-007 (talk) 08:31, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! While this probably seems a ridiculous issue to you, it's better to avoid such issues than to accidentally creep out other users. Huon (talk) 18:55, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello Guys, My Username has been changed to User_talk:Viii007, i hope everything is fine now. Thanks 007 (talk) 21:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Help needed for adding citation and reliable sources

Hi Virgininfatuation, Thanks for the heads-up on the proposed deletion of our entry on professor Cathrine Hasse. We are newcomers here so if you have some tips on how to add reliable sources and citation to the page that would be much appreciated. Already checked Wiki's own pages on the subject, but still not sure which sources we can add for this particular biography. Thanks! --TechnuCate (talk) 14:20, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Virgininfatuation, Am I at the right place? I left the above message on your TalkPage (I think?), but I got the below message from you: "Hello, TechnuCate. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Cathrine Hasse, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Cathrine Hasse to be deleted, please add a reference to the article. If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page." Where can I communicate with you? Thanks :-) --TechnuCate (talk) 14:24, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello Tehcnucate, you are at the right place. I didn't reply to your question because someone has already explained everything on your talk page: here User_talk:TechnuCate. Furthermore, i have fixed some of the general issues on your page. All what you need to do is add her publications,and external references from reputable source to add notability to her page. As par Wikipedia:PROF Criteria 1 i think this page does has a few notable researches, though its better to increase notability by adding more references. Feel free to leave messages here,i'll be more than happy to help you out. --VI-007 (talk) 17:11, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Clarification on a ref improve tag

Hi Virgininfatuation, thanks for the suggestion to improve the entry for DRI Capital by adding better citations. I worked really hard to make the citations very robust and would love to hear suggestions on how to improve things. Can you do me a favour and let me know which facts or statements in particular you feel require improved referencing? Hankstmpr (talk) 02:01, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Virgininfatuation

Can I ask if it is helpful to Wiki users like yourself to make random deletion threats? An offer of assistance could be closer to the real ethos of Wikipedia. This kind of action is without doubt doing much to damage the reputation of Wikipedia, and excluding quality contributions. I have learnt much more from the people on Wiki than I will ever will reading it's content. 86.171.148.90 (talk) 09:45, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Article you are talking about does not cite even a single notable reference all of the references are from PR Resources and Company Listings. Please read Wikipedia:Notability for notability guidelines. Threats on Wikipedia are not allowed, i never threaten anyone here, if you think i did please cite that message here and ping Wikipedia administrators to look in to the matter. Thanks. --VI-007 (talk) 17:07, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Mekan Amanow

Hi. I've changed your tag as it isn't nonsense, It's in what is probably Turkmen (well, it looks like Turkish but isn't - and they use the word Türkmen in there). It looks like a non-notable bio, but until we find someone who can translate it, we won't know. A tip: when you find something like this, drop a few words into Google Translate, and if that doesn't work try Search. Look at what comes up, and you'll often get a clue to the language. Peridon (talk) 21:15, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Much for suggestion and advice,will follow. Thanks --VI-007 (talk) 21:45, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletes

Hi Viii007. I see you are doing some good work on nominating new articles for speedy deletion, but juystr wanted to give some friendy advice as you seem to be fairly new to wikipedia. Sometimes it is best to keep an eye on a new article and see if it develops, rather than nominating it immediately. We don't want to scare off new editors who are keen to develop articles and contribute to the project. Best wishes Flat Out let's discuss it 09:11, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks for your kind friendly advice. You are correct I am editing from a new account but I am not new to Wikipedia, I was an active wikipedian back in 2009-2010 and unfortunately i had to quit due to job and other responsibilities;Now i do not remember my old user id and password, i didn;t have email id listed on my account either. I just have no idea how to recover still trying to remember. Thanks for your advice once again. Thanks. 007 (talk) 20:13, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

You have been blocked indefinitely for your abuse of multiple accounts as confirmed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Viii007. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:51, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Your future participation at Articles for creation

Crossposted to here and here.
Please read Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#Please watch for the following editors in about a month (or likely archived as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/2013 4#Please watch for the following editors in about a month or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/2013 5#Please watch for the following editors in about a month) (diff) and re-familarize yourself with all Wikipedia content policies and guidelines as well as steps 1-3 in Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions before approving or decling articles in Wikipedia:Articles for creation. I strongly recommend that you go even further and not accept or decline articles in AFC at all until you have re-established your reputation as an editor who knows and follows the rules and customs of Wikipedia, particularly those surrounding content and user behavior.

Please note that this is a personal request and I do not speak for the other editors at the WikiProject. However, in light of your recent history, I believe most active reviewers would endorse these recommendations. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:51, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello @Davidwr:I will create a new account and this time will use only one account. Will this be okay? Or someone will again block me for no good? If you see my contributions on wikipedia i don't think i did something bad to wikipedia, everything was good except one action. Thanks. --39.55.159.230 (talk) 13:08, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

You are blocked for good cause on all known accounts (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Viii007 and its archive for details). As shown on User talk:Khalibali you already know how to appeal a block and you already know that unless that privilege has also been revoked, you can log in and edit your talk page.

I think all of the blocks are "indefinite" which means they can only be lifted on appeal. It is against the rules to edit under another account or even as a non-logged in user for the duration of the block. Given the past history it is extremely unlikely any administrator will lift any block before 1 year from now. If I were an administrator, if your bad editing (specifically, editing under multiple accounts illegitimately) stretched more than 12 months, I would not even consider lifting the block until either 2 years had gone by or the length of the block had exceeded the length of the bad editing, whichever came first. Even then I wouldn't necessarily lift the block, but at least I would take the time to examine the totality of the past and at-the-time-of-the-request-present circumstances.

Given the long history of problems and repeating the same bad behavior, here is my advice:

Walk away from editing Wikipedia for at least a year, preferably longer. Find something else to do. Let the desire to edit fade. Once you haven't cared much about editing Wikipedia for at least several months and it's been at least a year from now, if you can make a sincere, well thought out apology, do so on one of the accounts. If you can't, then keep waiting. Once you make the apology, wait at least a few more months before you even think about asking for your block to be lifted. Once it is lifted, do not edit under multiple accounts without first tying the two accounts together very clearly on their respective user pages, do not deliberately edit without logging in, and if by some chance you do edit without logging in, either undo the edit completely or put a note on your user page taking responsibility for the edit.

By the way, before it was discovered that you had a previous history of sock-puppetry, your block was going to be only a month for one account with an indefinite block on all of the rest (indefinite blocking of all but one account is standard for sock-puppetry cases, and a 1-month block would have been appropriate for a first-offense in your case). It was under those circumstances that I was hopeful that you could soon return as an editor in good standing and posted the message above.

In any case, I'm not an administrator, so even if I wanted to override the decision of those who discussed your sock-puppetry that resulted in your indefinite block, I do not have the technical means to do so. Just to be clear though, I support the results of the sockpuppet investigation.

Again, I strongly encourage you to find something else to do with your time, and I strongly discourage you from appealing any of your blocks until a reasonable period of time has passed (no less than 1 year) and you have had a sincere change of attitude and are committed to upholding the goals of the project and obeying is rules.

Oh, and separately from all of the above: If and when you are allowed back, do not become involved in "decision-making" projects like AFC until you are very familiar with the policies and guidelines related to that area of work AND you have edited enough after being unblocked that it's clear to everyone that you are an editor who is editing with the interests of the project in mind. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Slight amendment: It appears your first actual block was less than 2 months ago. Given that, if I were an admin, I might consider lifting the ban after only a few months, but I would first check your complete history on all known accounts to determine the duration of unacceptable behavior and use that as the basis for any "minimum time" before I would give any further consideration for an unblock. I'm telling you this because YOU know when you were first warned for bad behavior, and you would be wise to not appeal until your block as been in effect at least as long as the time from your first inappropriate edit until the final block was put in place. If that time was less than 6 months, you would be wise to wait twice as long. If it was 6 months to year, you would be wise to wait at least a year. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I have notified the administrator implemented the block. He may or may not have anything further to say on this issue. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, your best option now is to pursue the standard offer option, Wikipedia:Standard offer. This means you can't keep editing for a while or you'll just keep getting blocked again. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:32, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Pakistan User Group

Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan
	Hi Viii007! We are currently in the process of establishing a User Group for Pakistani Wikimedians with the following objectives; act as a hub for Pakistani editors working across the Wikimedia projects, act as a voice and representative for the Pakistani Wikimedian community, organize meet-ups, establish a Wikimedia Pakistan Chapter, acquire funding for various on-wiki and off-wiki activities including photo competitions, workshops and other public outreach events, and collaborate with the wider Wikimedia community. As an approved User Group, we will be recognised by the Wikimedia Foundation and officially supported by the Wikimedia movement. If you reside in Pakistan or actively work on Pakistan-related topics and can help in functional activities of the Pakistani User Group, please join the official planning group mailing list. For more details about the proposed user group, please visit the official page at http://pk.wikimedia.org. Together we can promote free knowledge in Pakistan!

You are receiving this message because you are a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan. This message was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 17:20, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments - Pakistan

Hi Viii007!

Wiki Loves Monuments, the world's largest photography competition, will be taking place in Pakistan this September. The competition is all about capturing the cultural monuments and heritage sites of Pakistan and uploading these images on Commons to create an online repository which will be freely available to all.

Start taking photos of the sites enlisted here and upload them in September to be eligible for national and international prizes.

Email: contact@wikilovesmonuments.pk
Official website: wikilovesmonuments.pk
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/WikiLovesMonumentsPK

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Pakistan

Pakistani Cultural Heritage - Edit Drive

Hi Viii007!

Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan is organizing an edit drive for Pakistani Wikipedians on Pakistani Cultural Heritage throughout the month of July.
Top three contributors will be given a gift pack containing Wikipedia merchandise.

You can read the event details here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
You are receiving this message as a member of WikiProject Pakistan