User talk:Akbansel

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Akbansel, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Puraka Masks, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at the our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Loksmythe (talk) 15:54, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Puraka Masks[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:Puraka Masks, 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. Loksmythe (talk) 15:54, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Puraka Masks (August 8)[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 Loksmythe 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 organizations and companies). 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.

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:Puraka Masks 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:Puraka Masks, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" 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.

Loksmythe (talk) 15:54, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Akbansel! 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! Loksmythe (talk) 15:54, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Deb. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.
Hello, Akbansel. 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 conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.Deb (talk) 17:51, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional additions[edit]

As it has become apparent that your account will be used solely for unconstructive editing, you have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest it by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} to this page.

Kuru (talk) 04:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|I've been a contributor to Wikipedia for more than four years. My edits have consisted of fixing typos and grammar, removing innactive URLs, as well as contributions intended to increase the depth of existing articles. As an example of my contributions which have been purely without affiliation with any external sites, I most recently contributed toward the discussion on the Iraq War. Your characterization of my account as being used "solely" for unconstructive editing is unfair. With regards to the submissions which could be seen to have a connection with personal endeavors, I respectfully maintain that those contributions were made in an objective a way as possible to avoid violating conflict of interest rules. When my article on Puraka Masks was deleted a couple of years ago, I felt the article was objective and fair, but I nonetheless decided it wasn't worth it to contest the deletion. In this case, I believe my submission, which included KYG.Trade as one of three sources cited, was a constructive edit to an evolving topic, and despite a connection to one of the organizations cited, I feel the citation was non-promotional and contributed to the topic in a meaningful way.}} Akbansel (talk) 04:36, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

kyg.trade: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C Cross-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Local - COIBot-XWiki - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • Live link: http://spam.kyg.trade

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).

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

Request reason:

I've been a contributor to Wikipedia for more than four years. My edits have consisted of fixing typos and grammar, removing innactive URLs, as well as contributions intended to increase the depth of existing articles. As an example of my contributions which have been purely without affiliation with any external sites, I most recently contributed toward the discussion on the Iraq War. Your characterization of my account as being used "solely" for unconstructive editing is unfair. With regards to the submissions which could be seen to have a connection with personal endeavors, I respectfully maintain that those contributions were made in an objective a way as possible to avoid violating conflict of interest rules. When my article on Puraka Masks was deleted a couple of years ago, I felt the article was objective and fair, but I nonetheless decided it wasn't worth it to contest the deletion. In this case, I believe my submission which triggered the block, which included KYG.Trade as one of three sources cited, was a constructive edit to an evolving topic, and despite a connection to one of the organizations cited, I feel the citation was non-promotional and contributed to the topic in a meaningful way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akbansel (talk • contribs) 06:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You touch on a conflict of interest but do not discuss paid editing in this request, cited in the block log as a reason for the block. You will need to review those policies and tell us how your future contributions will be consistent with them, and describe any topics unrelated to any conflict of interest you have that you might edit about. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 07:03, 12 June 2022 (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.

I agree with the decline of your appeal. Your statement "those contributions were made in an objective a way as possible to avoid violating conflict of interest rules" shows a profound misunderstanding of the WP:COI policy. It's not your contributions which have a coi, it's you, and you should not be editing on topics where you have a conflict. You seem unable to choose reliable, verifiable, independent sources when it comes to these topics. Cabayi (talk) 07:51, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

I may have been unclear in my original appeal. I've never engaged in editing for hire or otherwise taken money for any of my edits. The reason I didn't specifically respond to that implication before was I felt that particular reason was implied but not explicitly stated, and to be honest I was sort of offended by it, so I chose not to give it the dignity of a response. However since it was referenced during my appeal review, I feel obliged to respond unambiguously that I've never engaged in that sort of behavior.

I've reviewed the COI policy that Cabayi pointed out and I realize I made a mistake by not disclosing the fact that I've cited material created by organizations that I work with in the past. I will make sure to disclose any affiliation with subjects I edited or OR citations on any future edits. At the risk of belaboring the point, I want to reiterate that I've never been paid to make an edit, or made an edit for any sort of financial gain whatsoever. I hope you'll again consider my appeal to have my account reinstated.

Update - I'm editing to respond to 331dot's request that I describe any topics unrelated to any conflict of interest I have that I might edit about. There are lots of topics I'm interested in that I have no COI on. I described some of them in my original appeal, but tbh my second appeal stems from wanting to be able to provide meaningful edits and updates to random articles of interest when they need editing, whether it's for typos, clarification, or suggested updates based on the TOS. I hope that you'll consider my appeal and enable me to participate in the ongoing Wikipedia project once again.

Thank you.

Accept reason:

I'm inclined to accept this request in light of the editors' contributions outside COI topics. Please note that any further improper behavior around COI issues or promotional language will result in a reblock, and you are advised to stay away from anything that you have a COI with entirely. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 02:11, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]