User talk:Dholbach82

March 2023
Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Larsen trap, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 06:08, 22 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi,
 * https://www.animalaid.org.uk/larsen-traps/
 * https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/wildlife-guides/bird-a-z/magpie/legal-magpie-control-methods/
 * Here are the links Dholbach82 (talk) 06:10, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, reference 6, 7 and dead links. and 8 is useless and should be removed. Dholbach82 (talk) 06:14, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
 * and reference 5 is silly. Dholbach82 (talk) 06:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Materialscientist (talk) 06:29, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Prime Mechanics, you may be blocked from editing. Materialscientist (talk) 08:16, 23 March 2023 (UTC)



Hello, Dholbach82. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. The page Prime Mechanics has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

This article needs to be rewritten from scratch from reliable, third party sources unconnected to the subject. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not an outlet for promotion, advocacy, or advertising.

Information on content and common pitfalls to avoid can be located here and here, however be aware that this is not an exhaustive list. Pages can sometimes avoid these pitfalls and still be seen as an ad copy or unambiguously promotional, particularly if the editor appears to be a paid editor or has some other conflict of interest. Please review these policies, including the FAQ page on organizations to determine if this applies to you.

Common mistakes or beliefs about promotional editing center on the assumption that promotional editing only applies to promotion for commercial gain. Some tags or G11 nominations are met with confusion by creators, particularly if they spend much time reading or creating corporate documents, mission/vision statements, or similar copy for their organization. The frequent exposure to promotional tone may make it difficult to notice non-neutral phrases or styles, as the editor has grown accustomed to seeing it as everyday writing or speech. This can be difficult, but not impossible, to unlearn.

Another common assumption is that the prohibition against promotional editing applies only to businesses or organizations. Anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc. and CV/resumé's are by their nature promotional.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources that are  unconnected with the subject and providing verifiable information. '''That generally means someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. ''' Please see this page on citing sources and Common sourcing mistakes (notability). This page has templates you can use in citing your sources. Place the template at the bottom of the page, and references cited in the text will appear there. New article creation can be difficult, but the Article Wizard can help you. The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems. You can also ask for help at the TEAHOUSE and on IRC chat. The Wikipedia Adventure is a useful tutorial.

New article creation can be difficult and frustrating. Sometimes it is better to first gain experience by fixing and helping maintain existing articles. Community portal/Opentask contains links to things that badly need doing, if you are so inclined. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:28, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:28, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at American Contrarian. Miner Editor (talk) 10:34, 23 March 2023 (UTC)


 * block from what? my own articles editing's?
 * Wikipedia have some of the worst ideas of democracy ever it seems? Doesn't it make more sense if the editing and tempering and lies of edit inputs should be blocked on external pages, not his own?
 * Or is this too confusing to wiki-overlords? Dholbach82 (talk) 10:38, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Prime Mechanics moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Prime Mechanics, is not suitable as written to remain published. An article needs more information and citations from reliable, independent sources to remain in the mainspace. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline, has suitable content and thus is ready for mainspace, click the button atop the article. Silikonz 💬 20:59, 22 March 2023 (UTC)


 * who are you and why the heck you removed my page. It's my own article and I am the author. You have no citation and I provided one and not you. Dholbach82 (talk) 21:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Prime Mechanics (March 22)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

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:Prime Mechanics 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Prime_Mechanics Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KylieTastic&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Prime_Mechanics reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 21:42, 22 March 2023 (UTC)


 * so I have to pay $50 for a experience wiki person to publish my article in 5seconds, that's the path I need to take it seems. Lame. 70.26.99.137 (talk) 21:52, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Prime Mechanics (March 23)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CNMall41 was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

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:Prime Mechanics 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Prime_Mechanics Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:CNMall41&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Prime_Mechanics reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CNMall41 (talk) 06:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Prime Mechanics


A tag has been placed on Prime Mechanics, 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 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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Dholbach82. 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, clients, 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 Conflict of interest);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see 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 Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of American Contrarian


A tag has been placed on American Contrarian, 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 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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:03, 23 March 2023 (UTC)


 * hurry up and delete it. Check test 2 version and see if Wikipedia overlords like it. Dholbach82 (talk) 09:36, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Global Soap Opera


A tag has been placed on Global Soap Opera, 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 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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Please
stop moving pages to article space before they are ready. Please let the WP:AFC reviewers review them. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:48, 23 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Why review? you guys give no information how to heck publish stuff here? links and cite are next to awful. The main question is Amazon is not not reliable? If amazon is not reliable how is wiki more reliable than amazon? Dholbach82 (talk) 09:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * No. By nature Amazon is promotional. And your difficulties and lack of understanding are why you should use WP:AfC for new article creation. There are links above to the help desk and the Teahouse where you can seek help/advice. Please see my deletion notice where I talk about requirements for an article. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:56, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I see Prime Mechanics was moved to draft space and you moved it back. Please don't move anything else to article space. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Prime mechanic is obsolete now. Don't care. The main argument is promotion vs just a plain reference. Dholbach82 (talk) 10:01, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If I may interject, I posted earlier on this page (see 'Managing a conflict of interest' above) a message querying any conflict of interest (COI) you may have, in particular with regards to the books described in your drafts, or their author. Please respond to that query now. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes. I was wondering about that. And that lst bit, moved to article space after I asked you not to move anything else to article space is just disruptive. And and a personal attack and not WP:assuming good faith. And possible raising a competence issue. You have been told how to seek guidance. Please do so. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:17, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * why do I have to give references and citation and other 1000 pages have no such thing? Let me just create my page and move on without any reference or citation because clearly amazon is too much of a promotion for you guys? Dholbach82 (talk) 10:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * You may not realise it, but you are pretty close to getting sanctioned and having your drafts deleted. Please start working with the system, and not against it.
 * As your very next step, you should describe your relationship with these books and/or their author.
 * And please stop creating nonsensical articles, or spammy user pages for non-existent users.
 * Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:35, 23 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Just because there are (at least) unreferenced articles plus  articles containing insufficient citations, which ought to not be the case is not an excuse to introduce to intoroduce more problematic articles. Oh and while I am here, no, Wikipedia is not a particularely reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:40, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Wait of terse minute!!
 * Prime mechanic was beautifully done, and worked on. I reference it and cited it! I wrote who the author was and every single source of information possible, with hyperlinks and sections and so forth. Nothing was promotional, only indepth review on the book subject. I was flag because the reference was overall was aka Amazon aka promotion. What else can I source if that was technically the only legit source? Dholbach82 (talk) 10:47, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I would be very happy to explain to you the various problems with your drafts, as well as more generally the core concepts of notability, verifiability and reliable sources, but first you must answer the COI question which you keep avoiding. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * How is it coi? Can not authors or a person write a page on himself or herself or their own creation? Dholbach82 (talk) 10:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * in a neutral setting? Dholbach82 (talk) 10:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Is that your way of saying you are the author of these books? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:59, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Nevermind.
 * It seems I wont able to publish my own articles, in any capacity. This awful.
 * probably wont be back. I'll get someone else to do it for me. Dholbach82 (talk) 11:07, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * As you wish.
 * If you are unable to answer a simple question, after several attempts, then clearly the chances of collaboration are rather limited.
 * My final attempt at advising: if you "get someone else to do it", they will still have to meet the same notability etc. requirements.
 * Have a nice day. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:12, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Writing about oneself and one's work is the very definition of conflict of interest. Please feel free to ask for a WP:deletion review. Perhaps they will undelete the thing. --  Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:01, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Getting someone else to do it for you is WP:sock puppetry. But do as you will, however ill-advised. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia vs Amazon


A tag has been placed on Wikipedia vs Amazon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not 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.

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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia reliable or credible


A tag has been placed on Wikipedia reliable or credible requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not 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.

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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:37, 23 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is neither, of course. Yet so many people want to write about themselves here. It boggles the mind, no? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:05, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is only as reliable as the sources of its content. That's why "all content must be cited from reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and have a reputation for fact checking."
 * -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Instead of wasting your time on crap like the above, why don't you follow instructions for seeking help, which have been presented many times on your talk page. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)