User talk:Copycat77

April 2022
Hello Copycat77. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Copycat77. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. 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. 331dot (talk) 10:33, 5 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi,I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. I only wish this page to be deleted but I have no idea how to do it, it is too complicated. 2001:7D0:855C:9200:BC25:3279:3A4D:C461 (talk) 10:36, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Make sure you are logged in before posting. If you are paid for your representation, that counts as paid editing.  If you are not paid, it is still a conflict of interest.
 * The only personal information in the article is the date of birth, which is cited to a publicly available source. Your options here are:
 * Have the source remove the date of birth from there first, then we can do so as it would no longer be publicly available
 * argue that this person does not meet the definition of a notable person and have the entire article deleted. That may be hard if they play for a national sports team, but it may work there is not sufficient coverage of them in independent reliable sources.
 * If you need assistance in following the instructions at Articles for Deletion, I would be willing to assist if that is the path you wish to take. 331dot (talk) 10:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, I would like to argue that this person does not meet the definition of a notable person and have the entire article deleted. That may be hard if they play for a national sports team, but it may work there is not sufficient coverage of them in independent reliable sources.


 * And yes I would like assistance in following the instructions please. Copycat77 (talk) 10:48, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Copycat77. I’ve asked about this at WT:WOSO to see if any of the members of that WikiProject can help sort things out. They should be able do an assessment of Läänmäe Wikipedia notability or lack thereof. Please be a little patient and give one of them a chance to respond. If Läänmäe is clearly not Wikipedia notable, one of them will most likely nominate the article for deletion. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:57, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * (ec) Keep in mind that your argument cannot be "they don't want their date of birth here", because in general the wishes of an article subject are not relevant as long as the information in the article is publicly available(private, non-public personal information can and should be removed); any argument about the presence of an article on Wikipedia must be based in Wikipedia policy. Please review the definition of a notable person carefully. I will shortly create the proper discussion forum for you to make your request.  Once I create it, you may then post a statement explaining your reasoning.  You should also state that you represent this person.  I will do this within a few minutes. 331dot (talk) 11:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you! I will be waiting for a solution. Copycat77 (talk) 11:01, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll actually give what did a chance first, as those editors may know more than I do. 331dot (talk) 11:02, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Okay, let’s wait and see Copycat77 (talk) 11:04, 5 April 2022 (UTC)