User talk:Andersonenvy
Please do not use this site for advertising or self-promotion. Thank you. - Lucky 6.9 03:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Jason Robards III
A tag has been placed on Jason Robards III 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 or group of people, 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Cindamuse (talk) 23:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I reverted your change to this article-
"Zenith" is an alternative name for the company officially known as "Zenit", hence the inclusion of the Zenit link under its primary name. Hope this helps clear up the situation. All the best, Ubcule (talk) 20:43, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
The article Earthscore has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- no evidence of notability
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be
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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:44, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:The-Beauty-Institute-Logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:50, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
The Beauty Institute
]
Speedy deletion nomination of The Beauty Institute
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read
the guide to writing your first article.to help you create articles.You may want to consider using the Article Wizard
A tag has been placed on The Beauty Institute 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 company, corporation or organization, but it 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. Largoplazo (talk) 23:10, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of LawTrades
Hello Andersonenvy,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
Vexations (talk) 11:55, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
August 2018
Hello, Andersonenvy. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. I'm sorry, but
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects must meet
If you want to try again, please use the
You may find this tool useful: Google custom search Don't feel discouraged. My first attempts at creating articles were deleted too.
- There is more information at Wikipedia:Community portal. There is help available at THE TEAHOUSE. Cheers, and happy editing. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:43, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
January 2020
Your addition to St. John's Lodge (New York) has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 15:40, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 11
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dave Kaplan (music executive), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Dave Stewart and Varsity Blues (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:33, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
August 2020
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. MER-C 11:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)- You are also blocked for Draft:Dave Kaplan (music executive). MER-C 11:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)]
Requesting to be unblocked
Andersonenvy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Did not pay for editing content
Decline reason:
You've been engaging in
]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.
@MER-C:
I believe that I was blocked because I posted an SEO question on Reddit, Fiverr, and Upwork regarding the Dave Kaplan article. I am friends with Dave Kaplan's son, and he mentioned that his dad's page wasn't showing up on Google Search.
I know a little about Wikipedia and SEO, so I looked into it. At first, I began by adding backlinks to his article and expanding related articles. But then, I decided to look into the source code of the article, and, I found this code in the <head> of the article, which blocks search engines from indexing a web page, so I assumed that was the reason:
<meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow"/>
I couldn't figure out how to remove it within Wikipedia documentation. I tried to add "{ { INDEX } }" to the article (perhaps foolishly) but it didn't remove the meta code. I thought maybe I could "ping" GoogleBot or use Google Search Console somehow. Usually when I'm stuck with a question like this, I use Upwork or Reddit to ask the answers. It's a good way to get free advice if it's just a simple question. When I asked on these forums, I was told that the reason the code was there, is because the article was less than 90 days old. So, I simply closed those forums. That was the answer.
Shortly thereafter, however, my account was blocked and the Dave Kaplan article was removed.
Please note, that I did not use those websites to pay anyone to edit the article (or pay to edit any articles). I never have. I only wanted help to answer a general SEO question, out of my own curiosity, about how Wikipedia works in relation to Google Search. In addition, I was never paid by anyone to edit the article. Quite frankly, I am not that good at Wikipedia to ever be paid for it. I know a lot about music, photography, and film, and, I find editing Wikipedia to be a nice distraction from the turbulent times the world is in, so I like to spend a lot of spare time editing articles and hopefully making Wikipedia better, within the topics that I know about. My Wikipedia account is old, editing content since 2010, and has only ever been used for this purpose.
I apologize if I've broken the rules of Wikipedia by my actions. I most definitely did not ask anyone to edit content for money, or ever ask for money to edit content myself. However, I do admit that I asked a general SEO question on a website that does allow paid work. (I've also mistakenly used copyrighted text from a website, but I did try to fix it when I saw the mistake). So, I certainly understand the problem, and I have definitely learned my lesson, not to do that again. I apologize. If you remove the block on my account, I won't break the rules again, and I will only use Wikipedia to improve content that's within my own areas of expertise.
Thank you for your consideration.
Andersonenvy (talk) 04:22, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Sock puppetry (update to unblock request)
Andersonenvy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Sock puppetry mistakenly used to create new account
Decline reason:
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.
Please notice that I only opened the new account StereoSites after this account was blocked. I didn't know that was against the rules. I was not trying to be subversive in any way, I thought you can open a new account and keep using Wikipedia again.
I researched and learned that you can put in an unblock request, so, I decided to try that here, and then close that new account StereoSites if this account was reinstated.
Again, I apologize for breaking so many rules, if you unblock my account, I assure you that I will not break the rules again.
If you don't unblock my account, I understand your decision. However, I would still request that you please allow me permissions to help reinstate the Dave Kaplan article. It is my own fault that it was removed by my naive mistakes.
If permitted, I will gladly go through the Dave Kaplan article to remove any unintentional promotional tone, or anything that may be construed as advertorial, so that an appropriate admin may consider reinstating that article.
Thanks again for your time and consideration.
Andersonenvy (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
- Andersonenvy, would you be willing to accept a standard offer to step away from English Wikipedia for six months as a precondition to being unblocked? signed, Rosguill talk 22:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)]
Reply to precondition
@MER-C: @NinjaRobotPirate: @Rosguill:
Dear Rosguill, Yes I am willing to accept a standard offer to step away from English Wikipedia for six months as a precondition to being unblocked. Thank you for the offer.
signed, Andersonenvy (talk) 00:05, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- @MER-C: @Rosguill: @NinjaRobotPirate:
- Dear Rosguill, on October 7th 2020, I accepted the standard offer to step away from English Wikipedia for 6 months. Is it possible that I can now be unblocked? Thank you.
- signed, Andersonenvy (talk) Andersonenvy (talk) 03:04, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- The general process for requesting a standard offer unblock is to file a regular unblock request after waiting the suggested time, so you should go ahead and do that now. I don't remember the details of your case and am probably not going to be able to find time to review it personally. signed, Rosguill talk 03:30, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Andersonenvy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Accepted offer six months to step away from Wikipedia, learned not to use Wikipedia for SEO backlink reasons and also learned what sockpuppet means and won't do any of those actions again Andersonenvy (talk) 02:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 12:00, 10 June 2023 (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.
Pinging GSS
@GSS: Dear GSS, I forgot to ping you in my statements above. The Dave_Kaplan_(music_executive) article was moved to draft on August 2nd, 2020, due to some mistakes I made while editing. Please take a look at my talk page above, and consider reinstating that article. It was removed because of my own mistakes and lack of experience on Wikipedia. I've accepted a 6 month standard offer to step away from Wikipedia, but, please let me know if I can somehow help fix that article, by removing any unintentional promotional tone, so that an appropriate admin may consider reinstating that article on AFC. I'd like to learn Wikipedia better and help out if possible. Thank you.
signed, Andersonenvy (talk) 19:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Could you please clarify the following?
- What do you plan to do on Wikipedia if you are unblocked?
- Do you still intend to edit for pay or any other compensation? If so, what rules do you understand you will be required to follow when doing this?
- Do you agree to edit using only this account? Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:30, 25 May 2023 (UTC)