User talk:Cece GFI

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Blogs, Linkedin.com and YouTube are not generally reliable sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Korty eo and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 12:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cece GFI! Having an article draft 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! Theroadislong (talk) 12:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Vanderwaalforces was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Please, take a look at

WP:TOOSOON

.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Yinka draft and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:58, 1 November 2023 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 102.215.15.119. Place any further information here. Cece GFI (talk) 11:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed p2p proxy. See Template:Blocked p2p proxy for more details. Yamla (talk) 12:00, 2 November 2023 (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.

Hello Cece GFI. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Cece GFI. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Cece GFI|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. 331dot (talk) 09:43, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331 dot. No I am not receiving any compensation for the article or editing the draft. I have whatsoever no contact with the person whom I have written about neither anyone related to the person. In the case that I am ever paid to edit an article in the future, I will disclose it as advised by Wikipedia guidelines. Thank you. Cece GFI (talk) 09:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Olayinka Ashogbon, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its

grading scheme

to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation

if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation

.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So happy to have my first Wikipedia article accepted. I will be making ,ore contributions now that I am conversant with the guidelines Cece GFI (talk) 20:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I had taken over the major contribution of this article when I joined Wikipedia and was informed that it was a stub account that needed work. I'm sorry I didn't reach to you sooner but at the time you were deemed as blocked and I couldn't raise a conversation on your talk page. As i began working on it, I made some mistakes along the way and the prevalent issue was the UPE tag; no matter how I explained it, it fell to deaf ears, and now despite my efforts because I feel its unfair for him to suffer because I'm the overzealous contributor, it has been nominated for deletion. the UPE tag comes from just one editor in particular, who claims that at the genesis of the article itself you were a possible UPE, which I think he believes that any other contribution post that is an automatic UPE/COI. I would love your take or advice on this. This is all so humiliating and embarrassing. I'm pretty sure he'll say me reaching out to you is canvassing and meat puppeting but you are the original author. Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 12:54, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It IS canvassing, and the UPE tag actually referred to Cece GFI, not you, but you never bothered to ask about that. As Cece GFI was using an open proxy right from the start of their editing career (on that account, anyway) it seems very likely that account was being operated by someone who had used a previous account and gotten blocked, and was block evading by using the proxy. Once caught, that account went dormant. I doubt you'll see an answer here from them. Fred Zepelin (talk) 23:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm this is interesting, as the tag always happened after my edit, I had just assumed it was directed at me.... my bad. I kept looking at your reason for the tag and your questions directed at me when trying to decipher if I'm a UPE that I never thought to ask about the history prior to me becoming a contributor. Thank you so much Fred for the new perspective and insight, I will note same for future endeavours.

Additionally, it wasn't my intention to Canvass and I noticed this editor has as well created and contributed to new articles post the above subject-matter article, didn't know they were dormant. That being said I'll go through WP:CANVASS again to get fully antiquated with the concept.

Thank you for your concern and attention to this matter.

Kind regards, Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 06:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Fred. I appreciate your contributions. However, Cece GFi has been my first and only account on Wikipedia. Yinka Ash was the first article I ever edited. My IP keeps getting blocked for reasons unbeknownst to me. However, I do not appreciate the assumptions made about my integrity as a Wikipedia editor Cece GFI (talk) 12:26, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anoghena Okoyomoh. I appreciate you reaching out. Over the duration of your contributions to the Yinka article, I felt you were taking a direction that was not necessarily in line with Wikipedia's guidelines which I did not appreciate. I however chose to watch what you do without raising concerns. I am not surprised that the article has been nominated for deletion, so what do you suggest moving forward? Cece GFI (talk) 12:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cece GFI,

I'm going to vote "keep" in the deletion discussion and state why the article should not be punished because of me. And then I am going to quit, I would have greatly appreciated your concerns had you raised it, but I understand you not doing so, if you experienced what I experienced you probably just chose to wash your hands of it and move on, that's where I am at right now. I read your other articles they were good. But I'm resigned, I'm out of my depth and I can't keep convincing persons who don't wanna listen it's too exhausting. And I'm tired of being called a fraud; I started this battle because I wanted to prove that I am not what they say I am; but even I have my limit.

The weird thing was, the final edited version was really good, the one that other parties had edited and made better, I failed, it's life, sometimes you fight and sometimes you quit, so I'll see the deletion process through and then I'll leave.

oh and sorry for messing up your original work and about your IP being blocked, that must be far more annoying than what I'm facing.

Kind regards, Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Cece GFI. I see you have now written three informative biographies of women. If you intend to continue along this lines, you might be interested in becoming a member of WikiProject Women in Red where we are trying to improve coverage of women on Wikipedia. You can sign up under "New registrations" on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 12:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yinka Ash 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/Yinka Ash 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.

scope_creep^Talk 05:22, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.

Hello, Cece GFI. It has been over six months since you last edited the

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:06, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cece GFI. Thank you for your work on

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Broc}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Broc (talk) 19:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe were:

This submission is not adequately supported by

reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid

when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Korty eo and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on H art The Band 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 real person or group of people that 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. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:36, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to H art The Band. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]