User talk:DownEastLaw

Deletion discussion about Infinity Q

Hello DownEastLaw, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Infinity Q, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Infinity Q.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Shushugah}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

February 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "DownEastLaw", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it seems to be the name of an organization. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing the form at Special:GlobalRenameRequest, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 10:15, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not aware of any organization with this name. DownEastLaw (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

There is a "Downeast Law Associates" but your statement here satisifies my concern. Thanks for your answer. 331dot (talk) 10:32, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, DownEastLaw. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Emmanuel Lemelson, 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, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} 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 Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• 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. Grayfell (talk) 09:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello Grayfell (talk)

I have no external relationship with the people, places, or things I have written about. Also, I don't have any employer, client, or affiliation with respect to any contribution to WP. I do not receive or expect to receive compensation for any of the work I have done. Lastly, I have not edited for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything on WP. DownEastLaw (talk) 10:27, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Bishonen | tålk 13:41, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Page blocks

You are indefinitely page-blocked from Emmanuel Lemelson for persistent battleground and tendentious editing. You are also indefinitely page-blocked from Talk:Emmanuel Lemelson for bludgeoning, with repeated misrepresentations of User:Smalljim's statement that he is far too involved to take any admin actions wrt Emmanuel Lemelson and cherry-picked misreadings of WP:INVOLVED (notably in this talkpage section). Also for using the talkpage for harassment of Smalljim, coming to a head here, where you propose he may be personally or professionally connected to Lemelson, presumably in retaliation for Smalljim having added you yourself as well as other tendentious SPAs to the same template. (Note, Smalljim has made 88,546 edits to Wikipedia, with a miniscule proportion of them devoted to Lemelson, and was already an active and established admin years before the Lemelson article was created in 2013.) If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 10:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC).