User talk:Iexeru

Speedy renaming of category

Hi, please comment at WP:CFDS on whether you agree to renaming Category:Puzzles publisher to Category:Puzzle manufacturers. If you agree on that page, we can do it quickly; otherwise, it would require a full discussion at WP:CFD. – Fayenatic London 22:45, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! [1] – Fayenatic London 19:21, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of WOWCube for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article WOWCube 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/WOWCube 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. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:31, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Information icon Hello, Iexeru. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page WOWCube, 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 or competitors;
  • propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} 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 WP:Spam);
  • 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. Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:25, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

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).

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

Request reason:

I read the rules Wikipedia:Sock puppetry, and understood the reason for the block. I will no longer participate in the discussion and voting ″Articles_for_deletion". I will ask my colleagues not to participate in this discussion. We took it too emotionally, and all the office staff rushed to defend our position. This was a mistake. Thank you, I understood the mistake and I will not repeat it. Iexeru (talk) 01:48, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This addresses one part of the concern, your blatant abuse of WP:SOCK. However, it doesn't address the other part of the concern, your promotional editing. Frankly, you aren't going to be unblocked without declaring your conflict of interest and agreeing to refrain from all direct and indirect edits on all subject areas for which you have a conflict. At the least, that would include WOWCube and Ilya V. Osipov, but may involve almost everything else you've written about. You'd have to tell us what you are interested in writing about instead. Yamla (talk) 11:09, 14 December 2019 (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.

So all the votes in the AfD were office staff? what about User:Apristen, WOWCube office staff?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:49, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don’t know this account. I have more than 5 thousand followers on Facebook, and 30 thousand on Instagram. I regularly publish project news on Social Networks, probably this is one of our followers. In addition, our project has a contractors in Russia and Hong Kong, I do not control the personnel of the contractors, and I am not familiar with the majority personally. Our Office accounts are Vatono, Iexeru and R1200GSA. We realized that we can’t vote; our behavior is like a WP:Duck. Please remove the ban from me, I will not participate in the vote. Thanks.Iexeru (talk) 02:13, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but I don't believe you. Apristen is likely a sock based on what you said. Your intention with Wikipedia has always been (for years) to promote your product or Osipov. We are not here to promote products; we are here to build a neutral encyclopedia. In any case, I am not an administrator. An admin will review your request shortly and they will decide if you should be unblocked. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:16, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect. I do not understand the reasons for your mistrust. I write that I will not vote. I really won’t. Thanks. Iexeru (talk) 02:31, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
When you sockpuppet, and also meatpuppet in this case, you lose the trust of editors. Simple as that. You also waste the time of other editors in tracking it down. Your editing is largely all about promotion. I am just expressing my personal view; an administrator will decide if you should be unblocked. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:34, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, many thanks for your contribution to Wikipedia. I really love Wikipedia and I think that it is arranged fantastically. If you do not think it is possible to unblock my account, please set a deadline for blocking. Infinity is too much. thanks Iexeru (talk) 02:37, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I received your email. You do not need to email me. I am just a regular user. Only an administrator can block or unblock your account. If you read the guide to requesting unblocks it seems like it is unlikely. But read the guide.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:59, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I will read the guide. Iexeru (talk) 04:04, 14 December 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Please unlock my account, I carefully studied the rules Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#How_to_disclose_a_COI And other rules. On "talk" pages I will make a disclosure of my interest in WOWCube and Ilya V. Osipov. Also I will not edit these pages and I will not take part in voting AfD. Violations were made earlier due to a lack of understanding of the essence of the rules and their details. I will do my best to not violate the rules of Wikipedia in the future. Thanks. ±Anna Pr (talk) 21:54, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I cannot and will not unblock you. If this were simply a matter of an overzealous user getting carried away and socking, I'd consider tendering the standard offer. This is clearly not the case. The sheer magnitude of your efforts to create sockpuppets and recruit meatpuppets places your malfeasance at least an order of magnitude above that. Then there is the canvassing and the mass emailing. Using socks destroys the ability of community members to assume good faith or trust the socking user in its most naïve and silliest of instances. As I say, this rises far above that. Simply accepting a topic ban and moving on as if nothing had happened is not acceptable. Per Yamla, you would also need to read and heed WP:COI and WP:PAID-- hypothetically. As Yama says, it looks like the entirety of your editing here has been undeclared paid editing and/or WP:COI. You do not understand our mistrust? It is because you have created said mistrust though your misuse of Wikipedia to further your own interests. Please, for the sake of thoroughness, describe what constructive, not WP:COI edits you might make. Having said all that, please read the WP:GAB for more options in requesting unblock.-- Deepfriedokra

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.

  • Reviewing admin may wish to review this in context of my !vote and associated comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WOWCube which preceded this unblock request. I make no judgement as to whether unblock should or should not occur, but this may help the admin determine context. While I have been sent an email by this account it has been junked and I have not and will not be replying or communicating off wiki (which is my standard approach). Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:04, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your time. I looked at the history of your edits, and votes. And I saw that you adhere to an objective and impartial position. As I said, I do not urge you to support us, I just wanted to draw your attention. Thanks.±Anna Pr (talk) 22:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hearst Shkulev Digital for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hearst Shkulev Digital 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/Hearst Shkulev Digital 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.

Oliver Virk (talk) 11:45, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]