User talk:Mdavis1210

December 2019[edit]

Hello, I'm CASSIOPEIA. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Remodelista—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 15:34, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Remodelista, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 15:50, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Julie Carlson (January 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 Robert McClenon 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:

This draft reads like a social media profile, but Wikipedia is not a social medium. This draft does not establish biographical notability.

The photograph of Carlson is duplicated.

See WP:Markup for how to mark section headings. Section headings are delimited by equal signs (=), which are used to construct the table of contents of a page.

Please edit this draft as specified before resubmitting. You may ask for advice about formatting at the Teahouse.

Links to other articles would facilitate evaluation of notability.

If the web site Remodelista is considered to satisfy web notability, a separate draft can be submitted for it.

Carlson may or may not be notable, but this draft does not establish notability without improvement.

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:Julie Carlson and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Julie Carlson, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 16:38, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mdavis1210! Having an article 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 16:38, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please review again as Julie Carlson is founder of Remodelista and Gardenista as well mentioned throughout both published pages Mdavis1210 (talk) 16:44, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Julie Carlson[edit]

Just a heads-up - if you are going to ignore the comments of the reviewer and attempt to publish the article in this state, it will be put up for deletion quickly (probably by me). There are insufficient sources to demonstrate her notability. And you can't use references to Wikipedia itself at all, because we are crowd-sourced and thus not a reliable source. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Julie Carlson (January 4)[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 MurielMary 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Julie Carlson and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Julie Carlson, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

MurielMary (talk) 09:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Julie Carlson has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Julie Carlson. Thanks! MurielMary (talk) 09:09, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Julie Carlson[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 Julie Carlson 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. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:06, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to follow the Wikipedia policies and processes for a deletion request - I've now reinstated the speedy deletion tag three times to the Julie Carlson article because you have removed it. As stated clearly on the tag, the creator of an article cannot remove the speedy deletion tag, only comment on it. Leave it there and an administrator will decide on whether the article should be deleted. MurielMary (talk) 07:28, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Julie Carlson (January 7)[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 MurielMary was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Julie Carlson instead.

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:Julie Carlson and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Julie Carlson, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

MurielMary (talk) 07:57, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove an Articles for deletion notice or a comment from an AfD discussion, as you did at Julie Carlson. Praxidicae (talk) 11:01, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mdavis1210. 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

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, and if it does not, 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:Mdavis1210. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Mdavis1210|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. Praxidicae (talk) 11:03, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdavis1210: let me reiterate my last two warnings. 1.) You are participating in vandalism by repeatedly removing a deletion tag which explicitly states not to remove 2.) I'm not sure how the last warning can be any more clear but let me highlight the important part: Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Praxidicae (talk) 11:11, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. N.J.A. | talk 11:14, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note @Mdavis1210: Please be advised that if you edit any page other than a talk page, including the page Julie Carlson without first satisfactorily addressing the concerns raised on this talk page, then you will be blocked without further warning. Please engage in dialogue, disclose any conflict and paid editing, N.J.A. | talk 11:21, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. N.J.A. | talk 12:08, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note Indefinite block due to breach of restriction during block and ip socking, N.J.A. | talk 12:11, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just another note, this editor appears to be unwilling or incapable of communicating. They've now socked twice via IP and now an account. Praxidicae (talk) 14:20, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Julie Carlson[edit]

Hello, Mdavis1210. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Julie Carlson".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 08:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]