User talk:EBY3221

Please comment on Talk:Billy Crystal

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Billy Crystal. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:M. T. Carney

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:M. T. Carney. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Michael Jackson

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Michael Jackson. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Brad Walker (sports medicine) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Brad Walker (sports medicine), a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:GOLDSTAR MORTGAGE.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:GOLDSTAR MORTGAGE.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nick⁠—⁠Contact/Contribs 18:43, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Nikola Tesla

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Nikola Tesla. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 20 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:GOLDSTAR MORTGAGE.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:GOLDSTAR MORTGAGE.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Brad Walker (sports medicine)

Hello, EBY3221. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Brad Walker".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:Brad Walker (sports medicine)}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 19:34, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Greg Roskopf has been accepted

Greg Roskopf, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

EBY (talk) 13:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve OMID Foundations

Hi, I'm Whalestate. EBY3221, thanks for creating OMID Foundations!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. no other article links to this page

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Whalestate (talk) 22:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an automated message, all I wrote of the massage was < no other article links to this page > <------ isn't an automated message, I just wrote it :) Whalestate (talk) 22:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Whalestate, this is a non-automated message thanking you for the patrol and letting you know I x-linked with the documentary that features the charity and some of its clients. EBY (talk) 23:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Prince Aimone, Duke of Aosta

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Prince Aimone, Duke of Aosta. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

Information icon This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Brianhe (talk) 23:46, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ken Sunshine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ron Brown. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Debtconsolidation.com for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Debtconsolidation.com 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/Debtconsolidation.com until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. SmartSE (talk) 16:18, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I have also included Dan Wesley and CreditLoan.com in this AFD as there are similar notability problems. In case you missed my ping, I've also commented at the conflict of interest noticeboard and would appreciate a response. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 20:52, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SmartSE Thank you for the note. I appreciate you ensuring that I know what you've done there.

As I have had on my page for a very long time, I am a strong proponent of the "do not care so much" approach to editing Wikipedia. As such, I'm waiting until I am in exactly that state of mind. We have time. Wikipedia has no deadlines, unlike our real worlds. Here we are all volunteers and we only need give what we can spare.

This is why I responded to your speedy deletion but nothing else. I will read and respond if/when I find that rational sensibility that will serve us all. - EBY — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.77.120 (talk) 21:08, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So be it but from the problems I've found it's abundantly clear that you are an undisclosed paid editor in controvention of the terms of use. If you want to carry on editing you need to disclose which articles you were paid to write. Continuing to deny it will not do you any favours. SmartSE (talk) 11:54, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Resuelve Tu Deuda

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 Resuelve Tu Deuda 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 an organization or company, but it does not 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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. SmartSE (talk) 17:30, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Guy (Help!) 08:52, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of EReleases

The article EReleases has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable company that doesn't meet WP:CORP

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SmartSE (talk) 20:02, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cameron Herold

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 Cameron Herold, 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, product, group, service or person 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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:46, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Brad Walker (stretch coach)

The article Brad Walker (stretch coach) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article has a single independent source that mentions the subject, does not sustain WP:BIO

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Brianhe (talk) 15:44, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Creditloanlogo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Creditloanlogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:EReleases Logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:EReleases Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:22, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Place2Belogo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Place2Belogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cameron Herold for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cameron Herold 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/Cameron Herold until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. TomStar81 (Talk) 12:48, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sam Carpenter (businessman)

The article Sam Carpenter (businessman) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

promotional article of probably non-notable person by banned paid editor

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 17:37, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kashmir Family Aid

The article Kashmir Family Aid has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

promotional article about non0notable organization by banned undisclosed page editor. The refs are press releases; the CNN one is not to CNN, but CNNi, user contributed content. .

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 17:39, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

01:35:10, 22 July 2015 review of submission by Adamritter


I just did the tutorial on how to make a page and I think I have done most of it correctly! Please let me know what else I need to do.

Adamritter (talk) 01:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user has been blocked.--Elvey(t•c) 17:04, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Identifying your undisclosed paid advocacy editing (UPAE)

Edits that introduce undisclosed paid advocacy are illegal in the USA. Keeping the content you contributed, given how obvious it now is that it's largely if not entirely the result of UPAE would be aiding and abetting. So unless you can identify, article by article, what is paid and what isn't, we will need to err on the side of caution and delete most of it. Jimbo himself has said that "FTC 16 CFR Part 255 is relevant" to showing that "PAE (Paid Advocacy Editing) is flat out illegal." --Elvey(t•c) 17:04, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, there is a silver lining to be sought. If we can flag articles you created that are encyclopedic but are the result of UPAE so that the advocacy is adequately disclosed, we would be able to keep them without ourselves running afoul of FTC 16 CFR Part 255. --Elvey(t•c) 17:06, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A thought is for the list of those for whom you act as a paid advocate on your user page with a clear statement to that effect, and the deployment of {{Connected contributor}} with a fully populated set of parameters on the talk page of relevant articles. This has been used well by others. This is somewhat hard to achieve since I see a pink note at the head of the edit window saying you have been indeffd. Elvey may have thoughts on this. Fiddle Faddle 17:14, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good advice. Yes, he can edit this page, I think; that's the norm and I see no indication that access to his own talk page was blocked. He could ask others to do the edit, or could ask to be unblocked for the sole purpose of deployment of {{Connected contributor}} with a fully populated set of parameters on the talk page of relevant articles he'd created. I'd support such a request. I haven't been sufficiently impressed with the users' touted contributions (on the first one I looked at, a TEDx speaker was misrepresented as a TED speaker) to do a bunch of work to save it myself.--Elvey(t•c) 17:43, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Elvey: Given a good list, wikiliked to the articles worked in, and an agreed use of the CC template, something easy to do, I think there is a request page for bored AWB folk who can do amazing things with repetitive tasks on multiple articles. This need not be arduous. Fiddle Faddle 17:49, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is EBY3221. I believe I am able to respond on my talk page without violating the ban. I do not know what "UPAE" is and you didn't provide a link. I can't tell if you are threatening me or asking for cooperation. I've been an editor here for a very, very long time but this is new to me. [ (comment by User:EBY3221, logged out, 17:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)][reply]


Hi. Yes, you can respond here, but you need to log in before doing so. Happy to respond in turn: UPAE is defined in the topic header! (Come on! Plus, google and our local search function are your friend! ) I don't mean to threaten or sound threatening. Rather, I'm trying to offer constructive advice - I'd be very upset if years of my work, which I'm proud of, was being deleted en masse - it's from a place of empathy that I offer constructive advice. Unfortunately, neither the law nor our policies allow UPAE, even if there's a 'chinese wall'. I'm hoping you'll be less upset if you understand better why some of your work is being removed, and are less upset as a result. If you want to continue to contribute to wikipedia, can you please read this in its entirety? this too? I think they'll help you understand what we mean when we write "endorsement," "promotional," and "advocacy". --Elvey(t•c) 20:21, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


I did have a COI with articles that I wrote that were absolutely people I came into contact with in my sphere (which is NOT PR in any way but writing) outside Wikipedia starting around last December, 2014. I wrote their articles using a "chinese wall" (meaning they had no input, it was what I found on the Internet). I went fanboy in my new real life position, but didn't write about non-notable people and did not, to my knowledge write promotional articles. Since I've nominated a fair number of those for deletion I thought I knew the difference. Every article that I may have had with a COI was deleted indiscriminately with every article that was non-COI, like charities and people who caught my interest and didn't have a page or was just me doing the Wikipedia work I have done for so long.
The new job position and open revelation of my Wikipedia work happened at that point. But I've been editing Wikipedia for 7-8 years and my history shows my ethics as one of the standard volunteers. From my war with the [[Kathy Ireland}} PR team to my constant struggles with the followers of Sun Myung Moon to the hundred of comments I've made helping new editors with articles.
I'm not being either stubborn or disingenuous. I will cooperate though as you may imagine, the personal attacks and assumptions combine to a position a profound frustration. I felt like someone who had earned a certain amount of respect here. My mistakes combined a witch hunt attitude have created a fair amount of antipathy.
***But moving on. Let me re-iterate that I do NOT know what UPAE is . But from I was asked if I could re-write the "Lace Wig" article because it was basically a stub. Those requests come all the time, but this one came through a friend of a friend and came with an offer of dinner (we never had it). That could be considered compensation. That was a few hours research. There's a marketer name Mike Long, maybe last year, someone told me it violated WP:BLP because it was basically a hate piece. I worked on that. My edits of Ken Sunshine (which seem to have started all this) came about because I read the same articles you all did and saw his page was very PR-ish - but the COI folks already scanned through those. There were a lot of requests and recommendations made to me over the years that didn't seem notable or I wasn't interested in and I kept those in a "To Do" list on my page.
You can scan through the rest. Please do. My first major edit at Wikipedia was Mary Pope Osbourne after my child became enamored of her books. It's more than 10,000 articles. All of it good work I am proud of. I hope sense is restored to this witch hunt, soon. 2601:243:1:1F28:3CD5:8905:4137:1E39 (talk) 17:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC) (Note: this is User EBY3221, logged out.)[reply]
I have only joined this conversation to offer advice in the case of proven undisclosed paid advocacy editing, which is abbreviated to UPAE. I am impartial here. The mechanism I have suggested will turn UPAE into disclosed paid advocacy editing. I make no comment on whether you have performed either or not, because I do not know. Fiddle Faddle 19:07, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Elvey: - Cameron Herold's Tedx talk was called a "TED Talk" in Forbes Education v Entrepreneurship. It was an honest mistake, those happen. What doesn't impress you may impress someone else. That's the nature of a crowd-sourced encyclopedia. There is a steward of the article for the wife of Bono who has been working tirelessly to make that article featured for years. She came to the teahouse looking for help ages ago so I ended up working on the article a bit. I didn't see the attraction, but we help. On the other hand, Cameron Herold gave a talk that was featured on the front page of TED's website for months and was notable, like Mike Rowe and his vocational education advocacy, for bringing something to the worldwide conversation about standardized education - which, considering the impact of Wikipedia on education - seems underserved in articles here. I know that one article has nothing to do with another, so I state this as a simple example: Brandon Hardesty, who honed being a YouTube star at a grocery store has a "B class" article. Herold, who had over 1.3million views (TEdX Talk by Cameron Herold) doesn't. There is a notability disparity at Wikipedia between entertainers and the rest of the world and the bar does seem to get raised even higher for certain sectors. I'm stating opinion, not asking for consensus.
In any event, I have read up on UPAE, and it doesn't apply to me. 1) I am not editing the Wikipedia for pay (on a contract or as part of their salaried duties) and 2) nor editing the Wikipedia at the behest of someone else (a boss or client). I have disclosed the two articles that I edited on request. I have never edited other Wikipedia articles for anything more than to add information, clarity, or neutrality. I have had a COI on some of the articles I created and I am putting together a statement.
As to my other edits, from Montel Williams to Dave Scott (Triathlete) and Cory Doctorow all were just doing the work of being a long-time volunteer, jumping to whatever article. Every new submission I looked at, I commented or approved on merit, and I often helped clean up. Every WP:3O I worked was my honest 2 cents. For a while, I tried to steward Sun Myung Moon and Kathy Ireland against what appeared to be impassioned POV editors. I don't know what else to say; since there is no way to prove a negative, I will continue to consider my side of things, work on my statement, and let you all do what you will.EBY (talk) 01:28, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the explanations. I can't find 'em: Where have you disclosed the two articles that you edited on request? Just so we're clear: Did you read this in its entirety? This too? Please say, something like 'I read both of them in their entirety' if that's the case. I hear you say, 'I have had a COI on some of the articles I created and I am putting together a statement.' and look forward to seeing it. --Elvey(t•c) 02:36, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Elvey: I stuck a couple of asterisks in front of the paragraph in question. EBY (talk) 02:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please make the disclosures on your user page, where the ToS say disclosures should be. (This is your User Talk page.)--Elvey(t•c) 03:31, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Elvey - do you have a recommendation for how a blocked person should do that? Without being accused of say... sock puppetry? EBY (talk) 15:26, 5 September 2015 (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).

EBY3221 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, I'm EBY 3221. I was blocked by User:JzG for being a promotional account, which I'm not. I am not a paid editor, and User:SmartSE initiated research to see if I was attached to "gotwikipedia" (I'm not) and to see if I am a sock puppet (I'm not) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Tzufun#Clerk.2C_CheckUser.2C_and.2For_patrolling_admin_comments). I am a long, long time Wikipedia volunteer and (I am self-revealing) a high-school teacher. I also do some part-time editing work - especially for folks who self-publish their books. In the last few months, I became too close with some of the subjects I was creating articles for. My admiration and relationship with THOSE writers led me into a Conflict of Interest which I see now but did not at the time. Because I wasn't a "professional" Wikipedia person, I somehow thought I could maintain my neutrality using a Chinese Wall. I was wrong, and my results have been accused of advocacy, which in some way it may have been in the sense that I am a strong proponent of all forms (especially vocational) of education but my advocacy was NOT paid or bought. And I didn't see the joking offers for dinner in gratitude (never taken up on) or the little emails asking for updates or offering pictures as crossing the line though I absolutely should have especially in Wikipedia's current environment. (Asking subjects for pictures has been a long habit but altogether my actions demonstrate that I fell down a slippery slope after years of holding the line. Some of the people I knew quickly were using me. I told myself Wikipedia was getting something good and useful out of it too, but the truth is my compass broke. If I know the subject, even tangentially, the best way to deal with changes is on the Talk Page. Every article (except, strangely, Nina Ansary) that I've written or helped since beginning my editing work in Dec 2014- whether it was just my generic interest, charities I've run across, or whether I'd heard of them through my job - has been deleted. I've been under fire, User:Brianhe listed me on a page of 'Good editors gone bad' - it was hard to see hard work gone andthe whole thing has been a disappointing experience. But it was my own part in this that most embarrassing and most frustrating. Part of me isn't sure whether I would edit again but I still believe in Wikipedia's higher purpose - which is why I self-identified my profession. So I would like, at some point - and being excruciatingly careful - to have the chance to volunteer again. And to have access to my own user page to put up an appropriate COI notice. A note: My real name has, unfortunately been put out there (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=676234132) can that be undone, please? Thank you. Edited to add - it looks like I added my name to a picture I uploaded 7 or 8 years ago (which I obviously want to remove) and that the editor who out it out their archived the page. Also edited to add that the key reason, reading the COIN (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_87#EBY3221a0) discussion about the concerns that I was a paid editor seem to have more to do with me seemingly making edits with non-applicable spam refs (which I would like to defend, my non-deleted history is full of adding sites as needed to pages (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simon_Wiesenthal&diff=prev&oldid=665195760) (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ellie_Mae&diff=prev&oldid=663534974)) and that I contacted people asking if there were flickr pictures with the right license that could be used)(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Finding_images_tutorial#Ask_for_permission) if there was a Wikipedia article about them. (quick not, an editor claimed I "admitted to being a paid editor" - I didn't. The editor stated "...just a paid editor" about me and I replied "I'm NOT 'just a paid editor'. Ridiculous, but that's what went down.) The block was for being a "spam/advertising only account" which, if you look at my history, just isn't borne out by the facts. I've worked the 3O and new article for creation backlog for ages and have always randomly cleaned up BLP's (it's been my thing).EBY (talk) 16:12, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

After more than a month, not a single administrator agreed to unblock you. Max Semenik (talk) 20:07, 7 October 2015 (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.

Could you read both WP:TLDR and WP:CHUNK and consider why no one's even commented on your unblock request in a month? Thanks. Daniel Case (talk) 05:15, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Case - Know both those essays but reading never bothered me. It was a long gig as a volunteer here and that deserved at least for me to say my piece; so I said my piece. That's all I can do in this situation. EBY (talk) 20:27, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:CEGWorldwide.png

Thank you for uploading File:CEGWorldwide.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:56, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:CEGWorldwide.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CEGWorldwide.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 17:54, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed at DRN

You are receiving this message because you are signed up as a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. We have a number of pending requests which need a volunteer to address them. Unless you are an inexperienced volunteer who is currently just watching DRN to learn our processes, please take a case. If you do not see yourself taking cases in the foreseeable future, please remove yourself from the volunteer list so that we can have a better idea of the size of our pool of volunteers; if you do see yourself taking cases, please watchlist the DRN page and keep an eye out to see if there are cases which are ready for a volunteer. We have recently had to refuse a number of cases because they were listed for days with no volunteer willing to take them, despite there being almost 150 volunteers listed on the volunteer page. Regards, TransporterMan (talk · contribs) (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:MikeLong.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:MikeLong.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:20, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DRN help needed and volunteer roll call

You are receiving this message because you have listed yourself on the list of volunteers at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteering#List of the DRN volunteers.

First, assistance is needed at DRN. We have recently closed a number of cases without any services being provided for lack of a volunteer willing to take the case. There are at least three cases awaiting a volunteer at this moment. Please consider taking one.

Second, this is a volunteer roll call. If you remain interested in helping at DRN and are willing to actively do so by taking at least one case (and seeing it through) or helping with administrative matters at least once per calendar month, please add your name to this roll call list. Individuals currently on the principal volunteer list who do not add their name on the roll call list will be removed from the principal volunteer list after June 30, 2016 unless the DRN Coordinator chooses to retain their name for the best interest of DRN or the encyclopedia. Individuals whose names are removed after June 30, 2016, should feel free to re-add their names to the principal volunteer list, but are respectfully requested not to do so unless they are willing to take part at DRN at least one time per month as noted above. No one is going to be monitoring to see if you live up to that commitment, but we respectfully ask that you either live up to it or remove your name from the principal volunteer list.

Best regards, TransporterMan (talk · contribs) (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:NinaCC.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:NinaCC.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, BOT-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate your file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Perry Marshall for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Perry Marshall 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/Perry Marshall 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.

Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 16:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]