User talk:Manager1393

This is Manager1393's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 10)[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 Gusfriend was:

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

YouTube is not a reliable source.

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 User:Manager1393/sandbox 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.

Gusfriend (talk) 00:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Manager1393! 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! Gusfriend (talk) 00:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Corrections[edit]

Hi Gusfriend,

Thank you for advising me. I have removed all YouTube sources. Please let me know if I need to make any other changes.

Thank you! Patti Manager1393 (talk) 02:23, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ashley Nicole Moss (September 10)[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 DoubleGrazing was:

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The 'Early life' and 'Personal life' sections are entirely unreferenced. And Twitter and FB are not 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:Ashley Nicole Moss 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed[edit]

Hello-

Corrections have been made.

Thank you- Patti Manager1393 (talk) 08:11, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ashley Nicole Moss (December 9)[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 S0091 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:

What she has written or said cannot be used to establish notability as it is not independent. Need in-depth coverage about Moss. Please also see WP:NJOURNALIST.

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:Ashley Nicole Moss 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.

S0091 (talk) 16:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ashley Nicole Moss (January 25)[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 BuySomeApples 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.

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:Ashley Nicole Moss 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.

BuySomeApples (talk) 23:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ashley Nicole Moss (February 13)[edit]

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

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.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

draft has been edited by an intern, Wikipedia considers interns to be paid editors, please make the required disclosure.

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:Ashley Nicole Moss 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) 17:50, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing[edit]

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:Manager1393, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Manager1393|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 18:08, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023[edit]

You still have not adequately responded or taken action to the inquiry regarding your appearance as an undisclosed paid editor. If you make any additional edits without complying, you may be blocked from editing. 331dot (talk) 18:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Star Mississsippi- My name is JP- I'm Ashley Nicoles Manager... I have had my interns and volunteers trying to create a page for my client and you have been giving them all a difficult time...and now you have blocked the page. This is not for Advertising, Promotion or any other profit gaining. She is a legitimate Sports Journalist/Broadcaster that has been ranked with Forbes 30 under 30. You can find her all over Google and other internet platforms.

I don't know why you are discriminating against my client... but I demand to speak to someone in charge- Manager1393 (talk) 23:41, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We are not "discriminating against your client" and there is no one in charge as we're all volunteers. Your "interns" were told what they needed to do to be in compliance. You did none of these. If she is notable, someone who is not connected will write an article. Undeclared paid editing is against the rules of this project. Star Mississippi 23:47, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No need for air quotes- they ARE interns and volunteers such as yourself- they are not connected to her. You have now blocked her page so No ONE can edit. I know for a fact there is someone the oversees you... I have dealt with WP many times with clients. Manager1393 (talk) 23:54, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your facts are incorrect, the project is run by volunteers and there is no upper tier of editors overseeing complaints. You violated the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and were correctly blocked. If you have dealt with Wikipedia on behalf of your clients "many times", then it's surprising you weren't blocked sooner. You can appeal your block using the instructions in the block template, but I guarantee that the appeal will be denied if your intent is to continue to ignore our policies regarding paid editing, promotion, multiple accounts, and editing with a conflict of interest.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:03, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is absolutely discrimination- I have never had this issue before with having any other clients pages created and accepted... all written by interns. Manager1393 (talk) 23:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Which ones?-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your facts are incorrect, the project is run by volunteers and there is no upper tier of editors overseeing complaints. You violated the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and were correctly blocked. If you have dealt with Wikipedia on behalf of your clients "many times", then it's surprising you weren't blocked sooner. You can appeal your block using the instructions in the block template, but I guarantee that the appeal will be denied if your intent is to continue to ignore our policies regarding paid editing, promotion, multiple accounts, and editing with a conflict of interest.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:03, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

e/c

we have not blocked her page. You are not allowed to edit, that is all. Anyone uninvolved is welcome to. And no, it's not discrimination not does anyone oversee me. You're sharing an account, which is also in violation of our guidelines, and are admitting to editing under different accounts. NOne of that is helping you. Star Mississippi 00:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

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 ~~~~}}. Star Mississippi 23:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Ashley Nicole Moss[edit]

Hello, Manager1393. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ashley Nicole Moss, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

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. FireflyBot (talk) 18:02, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Ashley Nicole Moss[edit]

Hello, Manager1393. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ashley Nicole Moss".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, 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!} 17:17, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]