User talk:D.mircoselliro

Thanks for contributing to the article Fabio Cavalli ‎. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that material must be verifiable and attributed to reliable sources. You have recently used citations which copied, or mirrored, material from Wikipedia. This leads to a circular reference and is not acceptable. Most mirrors are clearly labeled as such, but some are in violation of our license and do not provide the correct attribution. Please help by adding alternate sources to the article you edited! If you need any help or clarification, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at New contributors' help page, or just ask me. Thank you. Kuru  (talk)  16:59, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Luca Patanè
Hello. Thank you for creating articles for Wikipedia.

An article you recently created, Luca Patanè, is orphaned, that means no other articles link to it. Although it can still be found by searching Wikipedia, it is preferable that it can be reachable by links from related pages. Therefore, it is helpful to add links form other suitable pages with similar or related information. You may use the find link tool to do so.

I've tagged the article in question with. If you have added a category to it, you may remove the tag. If you have any questions, you may ask on my talk page, at the Teahouse or help desk. Happy editing! —AE ( talk  •  contributions ) 14:31, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Are you a paid editor with a conflict of interest?
Hello D.mircoselliro. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that 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:D.mircoselliro. 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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:13, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Gimme5
Hello D.mircoselliro,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Gimme5 for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Arthistorian1977 (talk) 17:54, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Andrea Silvestri for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrea Silvestri is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Andrea Silvestri until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  scope_creep Talk  07:34, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

January 2021
You may be blocked from editing without further warning if you make any further edits without responding to the inquiry you received regarding undisclosed paid editing. Blablubbs | talk 00:01, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts&#32;per the evidence presented at Sockpuppet investigations/D.mircoselliro. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. 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:. -- RoySmith (talk) 04:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)