User talk:Yucksy
Yucksy, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]
|
Hi Yucksy! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 21 April 2021 (UTC) |
Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:ZIZO Technologies[edit]
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 Draft:ZIZO Technologies, 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, group, product, service, person, or point of view 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 "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. SpencerT•C 23:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
May 2021[edit]
Hello Yucksy. 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 very 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 extremely 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:Yucksy. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Yucksy|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. --- Possibly (talk) 18:45, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Yucksy, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Yucksy|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. GSS 💬 19:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Daxhton (talk) 17:42, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
May 2021[edit]
 | This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 23:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC) |
Yucksy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Why wasn't I given a proper explanation, as I did not violate any Wikipedia policy nor did I do any kind of edit warring, a Wikipedia page was being vandalized by the contributors in it, and attacking me for edit warring, instead of looking into that, I am blocked here. That is unjustified.
Decline reason:
You are blocked for violating WP:SOCK but don't address that in your unblock request. Yamla (talk) 16:45, 31 May 2021 (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.
Yucksy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Addressing sockpuppetry. How can I possibly be that? I don't know why I'm being blamed for sockpuppetry. I have been here for only a month, my editing skills does need a lot of work but that doesn't mean that it's sockpuppetry. Again, it is unjustified.
Decline reason:
If we unblocked every suspected sock because they said they weren't one, what would be the point of having a rule against it? What you think doesn't matter, I'm sorry to say. If you can find a way other than saying "I'm not a sock" to convince us that you're not one, well, go to it (hint: this usually involves a lot of technical evidence that you may not be able to get). — Daniel Case (talk) 05:14, 13 September 2021 (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.