User talk:Jamesmaharrison

Problems with upload of File:Majid Jafar Crescent Petrolium Image.pdf[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Majid Jafar Crescent Petrolium Image.pdf. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:06, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Majid Jafar Crescent Petrolium Image.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Majid Jafar Crescent Petrolium Image.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Majid Jafar Chatham house.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Majid Jafar Chatham house.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:10, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

I noticed your submission in Articles for creation, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Majid Jafar. Thanks! It will be reviewed by a volunteer soon.

Before it can be added to Wikipedia, your submission should have references. All articles on Wikipedia should have inline, numbered references after facts, showing the 'reliable source' (a newspaper, book, etc.) where the information can be checked, so that all information is verifiable.

Here's a video tutorial - hit play, then right-click for "full screen".

Here's an example of how to add references:

Chzz is 98 years old.<ref> "The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref>

He likes tea.<ref> Smith, John. "[http://foonews.com/Article42 Interview with Chzz]", Foo News, 1 April 2010. Retrieved 2011-05-22. </ref>

== References ==

That makes the references automatically display as small numbers^[1] which will link to the details in the section titled == References == at the end. You can see that example in action here.

Please add references to your submission, which will be reviewed as soon as possible. See also, Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. If you need any help, just put {{helpme}} at the end of this page, followed by a question.

Best, ChzzBot IV (talk) 19:47, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Majid Jafar. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. The article still contains many external links in the article text which isn't allowed by the policy of Wikipedia. mabdul 10:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Majid Jafar, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. mabdul 16:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Majid Jafar Image.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Majid Jafar Image.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. mabdul 15:58, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

help with validation of image[edit]

hi i have now sent an email to [email protected] asking for some help here and also some help from user Mabdul about this. its a really simple thing i am sure but i want to get is sorted. what code do i need to pu withteh photo to make sure that it remains on the page? some help would be much appreciated as the links that have been given to me are not so clear!

In addition, i have also saught permission from both the subject and the publisher for the use of this image and it has been said that they are all comfortable with it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.49.31.27 (talk) 15:04, 3 November 2011 (UTC) --Jamesmaharrison (talk) 15:08, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Majid Jafar Chatham House 1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Majid Jafar Chatham House 1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. mabdul 10:50, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:37, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan tag[edit]

I've explained the use of it on my talkpage. A redirect and a bunch of people's talkpages and internal records does not remove its 'orphan' status. At this point, while I am still assuming good faith on your part regarding this removal my assumption is wearing thin. Do not remove it again, please. Syrthiss (talk) 16:47, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Shimon Cohen Headshot.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Shimon Cohen Headshot.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 09:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ink company logo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ink company logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016[edit]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Application Risk Management, from its old location at User:Jamesmaharrison/sandbox/Application Risk Management. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. /wiae /tlk 14:33, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Application Risk Management (March 3)[edit]

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment they left was:

The draft also lacks references discussing the subject and is written like an advertisement in parts. References should be from reliable, independent (third-party) sources that discuss the subject in significant detail. Thanks,

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Application Risk Management and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

/wiae /tlk 14:34, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Jamesmaharrison, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! /wiae /tlk 14:34, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Rupert Lee-Browne[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 Rupert Lee-Browne, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Jamesmaharrison. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. Editing for the purpose of advertising or promotion is not permitted. 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, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
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 must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rupert Lee Browne[edit]

Hello,

Am I still able to amend and write this page in the right format?

Thanks Jamesmaharrison (talk) 21:36, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You could work on it as draft but it is temporarily protected form being re-created in article space. Beeblebrox (talk) 09:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Beeblebrox - ill do that - then I presume I can submit it for publication - I also want to do Julies restaurant, the previous owner and few others - I love doing this stuff!

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Rupert Lee-Browne[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 Wikipedia:Rupert Lee-Browne, 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. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:08, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Rupert Lee-Browne[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 Wikipedia:Rupert Lee-Browne, 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. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 12:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of CaxtonFX[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 CaxtonFX 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 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. Daiyusha (talk) 17:50, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest[edit]

Hi Jamesmaharrison, thanks for your new article about Caxton FX and your edits about one of its founders. Beeblebrox left a message regarding a possible conflict of interest. I do agree with him that there are strong indications of conflicted editing. A response would be much appreciated. I shall also move the Caxton article to draft because a) it does not conform to wikipedia standards as it is written, b) it does not have sufficient sources and c) to allow for independent oversight re. the potential conflict. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 09:35, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Caxton FX moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Caxton FX, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 09:35, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jamesmaharrison, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

_pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 10:40, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jake Brockman

I am not sure why you keep deleting all my posts and now have questioned my authenticity - as you will see I have responded to your accusations! In addition, it is hard to learn how to do this better if you do not ever give me the chance to amend the pages so "you" are happy with them? Is there a way we can work together to help me write pages in a way that are not immediately deleted by you? I want to learn how it's done and have been following the guidelines but for some reason you still delete them. As the expert I - and from what I can see on your profile others too - am asking for your help and guidance and not just a link to an article that I have read and then delete my content regardless - please provide helpful feedback for me and others. I really look forward to hearing from you. Jamesmaharrison (talk) 15:03, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your statement in the investigation about sockpuppetry I have opened. An administrator will review behavioural and technical evidence, such as non-public IP logs, to make a determination on the use of multiple accounts.

The more concerning question, which you have not responded to yet and which has been raised by several people, is if you are connected or received payment from the subject - directly or indirectly. There is an overwhelming case to be made from public sources that you act in a capacity of social media or marketing manager for Caxton. If this is a case, you are in direct violation of Wikipedia's terms and conditions. I am not going to publicly post the evidence - however - a public search for combinations of your username, the company name Caxton and approximations of a clear name derived from the username lead very quickly to a marketing agency, one of its directors and a twitter account of that person, from which posts about Caxton have been made. Other sources connect this marketing agency and Caxton. Your claims of being a "learner" are not credible, if you are, I will certainly not assist commercial editing efforts. Previous pages have rightly been deleted. Not by me, btw, but by volunteer administrators of Wikipedia after reviewing various sources. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 15:22, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the clarification - yes I work for a marketing agency that has a relationship with Caxton so I will stop immediately trying to get this published. It was an honest oversight as having read the rules I didn't realize that if you have an association with the company or subject you are not allowed to write something - even if it is objective. I thought it was the Objectivity that was key? Please don't take this the wrong way and I don't want to sound like an argumentative arse, I am honestly looking for guidance to feedback, but if we don't start the page and open it up for others to edit and amend - how is a page supposed to appear? is Caxton allowed to write their own? Other pages I have written I have done in my spare time and with no association but was just looking to get this started? do you have any thoughts on this? thank in advance fro you help

Thanks for this. Paid editing does not per-se exclude you from participating in Wikipedia. Your are correct in your assumption that one of the reasons why those policies are in place is to ensure that articles are written from a neutral point of view. If you have a conflict - even if you are not editing an article as part of a direct client assignment or pitch or whatever - you may be subconsciously biased. Hence the disclosure requirement. You are welcome to edit in accordance with policy if you follow the disclosure process (see WP:PAID) and clearly state on your user page and on the article's talk page that you have a conflict and what your relationship is. You may suggest new articles via AfC (which is where the Caxton article is now). You may suggest changes to be made to existing main space articles by posting the suggested change on their talk pages. Do not edit the article about Lee-Browne directly.

This aside, the Wikipedia community is very active in certain areas. Finance is one of them. I would normally expect unrelated editors to create articles about people and companies if they are noteworthy. This may be my humble opinions, however in all the installments of the Caxton article I have not seen any indication of notability. They may be notable, however, this needs to be supported by WP:SOURCES. I refer to WP:ORGCRIT as "checklist" for notability. In a nutshell, mere existence of a company is not sufficient. Media coverage that is in the form of "business as usual coverage" is not sufficient (e.g. company is FCA registered - that's a given; company launches new product - all companies launch new products from time to time; interview with CEO - not neutral/PR; news about investment rounds - investments are a given; executives talking about topical points - again a given as part of their job and probably elaborate PR). What ORGCRIT looks for is essentially significant and sustained independent editorial coverage in notable sources. For example, an FT editor analysing their annual report. Editorial in the Guardian that discusses the company in a boarder context (though more than a mention in passing as part of a list of companies), etc. Republished press-releases are insufficient.

If you want to get this article over the line, add more editorial coverage that goes beyond PR and business-as-usual, make sure every statement is supported by independent coverage and show it. Remove puffery (being the first regulated under a new regulation is puffery. That's not a noteworthy achievement, it just means they submitted their paperwork at the right time and correctly).

Given the scope of the editing and in light of your partial disclosure, I will bring the Lee-Browne and Caxton articles to the attention of the conflict of interest noticeboard for community input. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 08:02, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you.

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Rupert Lee-Browne[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:Rupert Lee-Browne, 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. creffett (talk) 03:11, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Caxton FX[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:Caxton FX, 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. creffett (talk) 03:12, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help un block me[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Hello I have been blocked and had my account suspended by @Sir Sputnik in 2019 but I have not logged in to my account for several years. Also I have often commentated on leaders in the Fintech and natural resources space. Please can I have my ban lifted as I want to start adding to pages again as I feel I have a lot to add. Also I feel there has been a mistake as I have no link to the page I am being accused of

Decline reason:

This does not address your abuse of multiple accounts. Yamla (talk) 14:57, 5 February 2024 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

User:Yamla As mentioned earlier I was blocked on my account so I wanted to see if I could register under a different email to see if that was blocked and there was something up with the page - alas I also fell foul by complete accident of the multiple user rules - I am sorry I didn't know this - I am just trying to use the knowledge I have built up commentating on the fintech space to add to some of the pages in existence and also raise awareness of other key issues and regulations.

Decline reason:

Duplicate request. Only one open request is needed. 331dot (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2024 (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.

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

Jamesmaharrison (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Jamesmaharrison". The reason given for Jamesmaharrison's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts: Please see: w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jamesmaharrison".

Blocking administrator: ‪Sir Sputnik‬ (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: Duplicate request, you are not autoblocked. 331dot (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am just trying to log in from home - i wanted to see if i could log in under a different account or if i had been blocked for no apparent reason - i was trying to use another account and that was blocked. please up block me

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).

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

Request reason:

I wanted to go in and start adding some content for some fintech stuff - you can look me up f you want and i have been working int eh UK fintech space for the last 5 years at some high profile businesses - all I want to do is add some detail to so some pages that i have insights into. In addition io have been adding content on and off to Wikipedia for the last 12 years

Decline reason:

It's clear that you have a conflict of interest with "fintech" so you need to tell us how your future edits will align with policy as well as if there are other topics you want to edit about. 331dot (talk) 16:51, 5 February 2024 (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.

331dot thanks for getting back to me - To answer your question, I wanted to add information on a number of the open banking and neo bank solutions as well as the global regulatory bodies. I am often asked for information about the regulators and different types of licences companies can apply for. Also it is important for the public to be aware that some of the best known providers have a more complex regulatory framework that should be more within the public domain!

Some of the information on the Wiki pages is unclear and I would like to add to help clear it up as best i can. I also want to comment on some of the related banking technology pages and how the technology is evolving using the citations and well with in the Wikipedia policy. I don't have any conflict of interest.[[WP:COI|conflict of interest]

There are also a number of amazing people beyond Finance - I have recently spoken to who have done great things in the philanthropic space that I believe people should know about.

Finally I am also keen to update and increase my own status on Wikipedia as I don't like that I have been labelled in this way and would be really grateful is you can help and provide some tips and guidance on how to improve my current status. I love Wikipedia and have been a huge supporter and advocate over the last decade and want to do more as I have some time to do so. Jamesmaharrison (talk) 09:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may make a new unblock request for someone else to review. You said above you "have been working int eh UK fintech space for the last 5 years at some high profile businesses" so you absolutely have a conflict of interest in your field. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

talk I would have thought that having the experience in the industry makes me more insightful - sorry to be a pain but can you explain how that gives me a conflict of interest. Surely Wikipedia wants people who know what they are talking about adding content rather than people who are adding incorrect info . Similar to yourself, you are an expert in moderating the site - and clearly have been doing so very well for several years - I don't see that as a conflict of interest when dealing with issues? I would be very happy to work with you to ensure that you see no conflicts - I am trying to be as transparent as possible - Perhaps with your direction this can be the last time this sort of issues arises for me? I am asking for your help Jamesmaharrison (talk) 10:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot, Can we have a discussion to see how i can get this all back up and running - i am keen to get more involved

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

further to the conversations above I have been though all the Wikipedia guidelines and advice pages and can now understand why I was initially blocked - especially for trying to use multiple log in accounts - however this was not done to navigate around the system but more to understand if it was a technical issue. I realise this was a huge red flag now.

Also I have been clear in the above conversation about the contributions and how I want to add - this is not just about the knowledge I have but also as I want to be able to add more varied contributions.

I am happy to work with someone and take any additional advice but also keen to try and move forward. I have made the request to work with people above but with no response. Please can you un block me. I look forward to resolving this and moving forward Jamesmaharrison (talk) 08:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=further to the conversations above I have been though all the Wikipedia guidelines and advice pages and can now understand why I was initially blocked - especially for trying to use multiple log in accounts  - however this was not done to navigate around the system but more to understand if it was a technical issue. I realise this was a huge red flag now.

Also I have been clear in the above conversation about the contributions and how I want to add - this is not just about the knowledge I have but also as I want to be able to add more varied contributions. 

I am happy to work with someone and take any additional advice but also keen to try and move forward. I have made the request to work with people above but with no response.  Please can you un block me. I look forward to resolving this and moving forward  [[User:Jamesmaharrison|Jamesmaharrison]] ([[User talk:Jamesmaharrison#top|talk]]) 08:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=further to the conversations above I have been though all the Wikipedia guidelines and advice pages and can now understand why I was initially blocked - especially for trying to use multiple log in accounts  - however this was not done to navigate around the system but more to understand if it was a technical issue. I realise this was a huge red flag now.

Also I have been clear in the above conversation about the contributions and how I want to add - this is not just about the knowledge I have but also as I want to be able to add more varied contributions. 

I am happy to work with someone and take any additional advice but also keen to try and move forward. I have made the request to work with people above but with no response.  Please can you un block me. I look forward to resolving this and moving forward  [[User:Jamesmaharrison|Jamesmaharrison]] ([[User talk:Jamesmaharrison#top|talk]]) 08:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=further to the conversations above I have been though all the Wikipedia guidelines and advice pages and can now understand why I was initially blocked - especially for trying to use multiple log in accounts  - however this was not done to navigate around the system but more to understand if it was a technical issue. I realise this was a huge red flag now.

Also I have been clear in the above conversation about the contributions and how I want to add - this is not just about the knowledge I have but also as I want to be able to add more varied contributions. 

I am happy to work with someone and take any additional advice but also keen to try and move forward. I have made the request to work with people above but with no response.  Please can you un block me. I look forward to resolving this and moving forward  [[User:Jamesmaharrison|Jamesmaharrison]] ([[User talk:Jamesmaharrison#top|talk]]) 08:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Unblock discussion[edit]

Please describe what edits you would make unrelated to Fintech or any other WP:conflict of interest. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:23, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will be contributing to pages relating to History and Cricket and UK sports. Jamesmaharrison (talk) 08:59, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will ask the blocking admin. @Sir Sputnik:, OK to unblock?. We'll {{checkuser needed}} to confirm no recent socking. User agrees to avoid finance and edit about History and Cricket and UK sports. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence of recent block evasion seen. --Blablubbs (talk) 13:06, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll pass. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:30, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean? am I unblocked? Jamesmaharrison (talk) 08:42, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HI There, I still seem to be blocked despite the above? I am keen to update and contribute to a few pages regarding cricket and the history of the game etc.... As well as related charities - all as mentioned above. Can you please unblock my page as i am aware of all the requirements now needed to operate within the Wikipedia regulations. Jamesmaharrison (talk) 10:13, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sir Sputnik Please see the conversation above. Please can you unblock me so that I can start contributing again - i am keen to get back to this and also understand the parameters for doing so. I am also very keen to run stuff past you to make sure it is all OK? thank you in advance Jamesmaharrison (talk) 10:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HI There - i still seem to be blocked? is there anything i can do to expedite this? Jamesmaharrison (talk) 09:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock reviewed |1=Hello despite a number of conversations with different admins my account is still blocked. The original block was put in place by @Sir Sputnik. As you will see in the above conversations I am well aware of the parameters to make contributions despite my previous error that got me blocked. I have been clear on what I am doing and it would be great to get my account un blocked so i can continue to Contribute in the right way! I look forward to a speedy resolution Jamesmaharrison (talk) 10:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help un block me[edit]

It would be great to get my account unblocked a it seems that I am not getting any response right now - can you help or shed some light on the delay (talk) Jamesmaharrison (talk) 11:10, 4 March 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

Please can I get my account unblocked - see conversations above on my page and I am now very clear on how I was tagged - I have read all the documents and just want to start contributing again. I have tried to reach out to the admin @sirsputnik several times but not had any response. I have asked for help and offered to have all my contributions reviewed in advance but still no response - please can I get this fixed? Many thanks Jamesmaharrison

Decline reason:

Please only make one unblock request at a time. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:48, 5 March 2024 (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.

Regarding your email, so long as you have access to this page please keep your unblock requests public. I have provided the feedback Deepfriedokra was asking for elsewhere. Procedural issues like the one above notwithstanding, I will, as a general rule, not evaluate requests to lift blocks that I have placed myself, given that one of the main purposes of that process is to allow for review by a different administrator. Finally, given that you are still proposing to write about subjects where you have a clear conflict of interest, I don't realistically see you being unblocked any time soon. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk) thank you for you response. However i am not trying to write about anything that i have been blocked for, I have been clear and open about what I want to contribute to - philanthropy, sports, history and setting up a page for my grand father.

In addition in wrote to you direct as I have posted several times asking for help and direction with no response - how am i able to expedite this? Jamesmaharrison (talk) 10:28, 13 March 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

despite numerous attempts over the last month I am still blocked as an editor / contributor. This is very frustrating as I want to add some content and comments and also submit a page up about my grandfather who was a leading administrator and charitable benefactor in the cricket world, Business and supporting POWs after WW2. I have been specific about my potential content posts, I have reached out to (talk) via this page and directly - only to be ignored or offered no guidance as to how to resolve this. I have now written a letter to the Wikimedia and the Foundation asking for some guidelines. I am aware that I indirectly and without intent broke some of the Wiki regulations especially with regard to logging in - but have explained this. I am also now well versed in working within the guidelines. however the Admin in question does not want to know or help! Is there a way I can get this resolved. In addition, it seems that that I am not the only one to be impacted by anonymous bullies hid behind the admin label - see here for jhttps://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia/comments/zcudop/why_are_so_many_wikipedia_admins_bullies/?rdt=62731ust one example. There seem to be lots of chat conversations about this. I look forward to getting a better understanding of the process and a speedy resolution Jamesmaharrison (talk) 11:00, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You will not be unblocked to edit about your grandfather. Your unblock request does not make it clear what else you plan to edit about. Calling admins anonymous bullies also does you no favors. Star Mississippi 02:13, 23 April 2024 (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.

If you want to get unblocked, you're going about it in exactly the wrong way. First, you'll have a very hard time finding an administrator who will allow you to create a page about a family member under these circumstances. You're far more likely to get another chance from an admin if you agree *not* to do that. You announce that you're suddenly fluent in guidelines, but the paragraph right before is a good indication that you're *not* well-versed about WP:COI.

You're asking for an unblock, which requires an admin to trust you. Instead, you throw out insults. Sir Sputnik was very clear about the problem in your last declined unblock request, yet you seem to have completely ignored the substance of what he told you both in terms of policy and that someone else would have to review the request. And then you threw out a link to a Reddit page from a year ago in which a handful of people made unsubstantiated accusations about Wikipedia admins. Your actions are simply making it less likely any admin will trust you.

If you're actually frustrated you can't post, then you'd best be served by acting in a manner that is more likely to result in you posting again. Acknowledge that you won't attempt to create a page about a family member. Indicate what edits you like to make that serve the interest of making a quality encyclopedia, not your personal ones. Strikethrough the insults targeting admins and refrain from making more. Many people have gotten second or third chances for actions far worse than anything you did, but at some point, they all had to make the case that they would be a net positive for the encyclopedia. If you actually do that, you'll find admins are quite willing to give chances, sometimes to a fault.

If you continue to make tenuous unblock requests, the most likely result is that someone removes your talk page access. This would not be beneficial for you because once you can only make WP:UTRS requests and not be able to participate extensively in discussion, the chances of you ever being unblocked go down. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 10:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]