Four edits do not a wikipedian make. What have been your previous usernames? - Roxy, the dog. wooF 16:43, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi there! Could you please clear something up for me - do you have other accounts on Wikipedia? Alexbrn ( talk) 08:53, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
"I am hired to ensure my clients are treated fairly on here"<- This is kind of what puzzles me. From your edit history you have been hired once by one single client, but you're writing as though this isn't the case. Whatever, you've been absolutely clear there is no WP:SOCKing going on -- my thanks to you for clearing that up. Alexbrn ( talk) 11:22, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Essayist1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Roxy, the dog. wooF 08:37, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Essayist1
Thanks for your message, really hoping you might be able to help as I have been trying to contact Domdeparis who installed the undisclosed paid editing tag but he hasn't been active on Wikipedia for quite a while now, so I wasn't sure how else to proceed after hitting that dead end.
Domdeparis first brought it to my attention that I shouldn't make any edits on the page of a company I have a connection with which I'm afraid I was completely unaware of until I received his message. The edits I made were to some out of date information on the page - updating the logo and the website URL, and adding in the manufacture of watches alongside clocks as far as I can recall. I'm afraid I'm a complete newcomer to editing on Wikipedia and didn't realise this would be classed as a conflict of interest - I thought it was correcting inaccurate information! - but I'm very sorry for not fully researching the correct procedure. He also advised I created a profile fully NG808 ( talk) 08:43, 3 July 2019 (UTC)explaining my connection to the company which I've now done.
Please can I ask what is the correct way to go about removing the undisclosed paid editing tag seeing as any editing by myself has been disclosed and there is nothing on the page that can't be proved to be factual?
Thank you very much Amy - NG808
Hi, I see you're having problems getting the AfD to list. Did you add this to the top of the article and save: {{subst:afdx|3rd}}? Or did you do it some other way? SarahSV (talk) 15:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Bbb23. I wonder whether RexxS is around; he can work magic with templates. RexxS, Essayist is here representing Alis Rowe, who would like her BLP to be deleted. It has been nominated twice already, and we're having difficulty getting the AfD set up.
Essayist has followed the instructions at
WP:AFDHOWTO. He added {{subst:afdx|3rd}}
to the top of the article, saved, then created the nomination using the red link. However, the template did not create the deletion page properly, and when he added the link to
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 July 17, it produced a garbled version of his new nom and at least one of the older ones. Can you figure out how to set up AfD3?
SarahSV
(talk) 16:42, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
RexxS, sorry, cancel that. MPS1992 has done it. SarahSV (talk) 16:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
You need to read wp:or and wp:v. Your clients telling you something is not admissible as a source. Slatersteven ( talk) 14:22, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Essayist1! You created a thread called Archival by
Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by
Muninnbot, both
automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
Hi Essayist1! You created a thread called Archival by
Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by
Muninnbot, both
automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
97198 ( talk) 00:43, 19 October 2019 (UTC)Hello, Essayist1!
Having an article 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!
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 17:44, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
|
As per WP:Paid, please provide links on your Wikipedia user page to all active accounts at websites where you advertise paid Wikipedia-editing services e.g. your Upwork account etc. Thank you. GSS 💬 17:48, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
This account has been
blocked indefinitely as a
sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is
allowed, but using them for
illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban
may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by first reading the
guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.
Yunshui
雲
水 10:04, 24 October 2019 (UTC) |
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Sanders (gastroenterologist) 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/David Sanders (gastroenterologist) 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. Alexbrn ( talk) 10:27, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Essayist1 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
User:IMZahidIqbal is not the sockpuppet master. I am the sockpuppet master. /info/en/?search=User:James_Lawrie If you unblock me I will declaire all my other accounts and only use this one Essayist1 ( talk) 10:58, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Unfortunately, with the long history of deceptive editing and flat out lying when asked about your prior experience, it's not possible to really negotiate any kind of conditions here. I am sure your clients will be able to afford ethical representation. Kuru (talk) 11:57, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
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.
Essayist1 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Ok it's your call. I used to make more money from undisclosed paid editing, but as my knowledge and skills have increased so has my respect for the platform. I did lie when asked about my previous accounts, if I had told the truth I would have been blocked anyway. I wanted to change my ways, come in out of the cold, operate with transparency and mediate between the worlds of business and Wikipedia, even if that meant earning less. As far as I know I am the only ethical paid editor in the UK. When clients come to me they aren't aware that there are ethical ways to solved their Wikipedia problems. In my marketing materials and client communications I always stress the improtance of ethical Wikipedia engagement. Does that make me a hypocrite? Sure it does, but people change as they grow and my approach to the platform has changed in recent months. You can keep the block if you like, but being tough on disclosed paid editors isn't going to solve your COI problem, it will merely displace it. Essayist1 ( talk) 12:22, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Continuing to blatantly evade your ban is nowhere near "come in out of the cold, operate with transparency". Until your original account is unbanned, you are not welcome here. Yamla ( talk) 13:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
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.