User talk:Entertainment1991

Speedy deletion nomination of Dreko Bandz


A tag has been placed on Dreko Bandz, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. JamesG5 (talk) 00:09, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jamel Warren


A tag has been placed on Jamel Warren, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. JamesG5 (talk) 00:09, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lucas Coly


A tag has been placed on Lucas Coly 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 person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event 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. JamesG5 (talk) 00:10, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Corey Campbell


A tag has been placed on Corey Campbell, 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. JamesG5 (talk) 00:11, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Zion Walder


A tag has been placed on Zion Walder 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 person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event 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. JamesG5 (talk) 00:12, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Promotion & COI policies
Please see the Wikipedia rules on conflict of interest at WP:COI and promotional posting at WP:PROMO. You've posted multiple related articles about unremarkable people, all with no sources, giving the appearance of promotional edits. JamesG5 (talk) 00:15, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Guidelines for articles, especially bios of living persons
WP:COI issues noted above aside, Wikipedia is generally not terribly friendly to partial pages being put up in the main space. If you need time to build a page, you should create the page in the user draft space and complete it before you move it to the main section of the site, or better yet if it's a first article consider using the Articles for Creation system where experienced editors can help out. Additionally, any bio of a living person MUST include proper references from valid third party sources, see WP:REF. Please note that things like their social media pages do not count. Posting stub bios with no references will get even valid bios removed. JamesG5 (talk) 00:19, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Your edits on Next Management
I have reverted your edits on Next Management. They're unsourced, promotional, and reflective of original research. You must source all edits, especially if removing maintenance templates. JamesG5 (talk) 00:23, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Corey Campbell
Hello, Entertainment1991

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username JamesG5 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Corey Campbell, should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Corey Campbell.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

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

JamesG5 (talk) 03:55, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

You are stalking me and this article is valid and fully cited Entertainment1991 (talk) 03:58, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Since I was the one who nomed the article for deletion last time, I automatically got notice in my watchlist that it was recreated. It's not stalking, it's just how Wikipedia works.  I'm also not the one who deleted any of your stuff, I nominated it and an admin reviewed it.  In this case I put it up for a consensus discussion.  See WP:REF again, of the cites you used only Paper Mag (Desnudos sort of) was really valid.  And to the point of WP:GNG(the general notability guideline) you need far more 3rd party sourcing to show relevance.  Also, you're clearly engaging in promotional and coi editing but did not disclose as the notes above show.  Regardless, the dispostion of the article will be left to review & the admins. JamesG5 (talk) 04:04, 29 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Entertainment1991, what you just did on that editor's user page, don't do that again. Drmies (talk) 04:01, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Or you can just ignore kind warning and get blocked....HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 04:03, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * User:HickoryOughtShirt?4, what do you think? I don't see that all their creations were for the same agency or whatever, so I think that we're not dealing with a COI editor, like User:JamesG5 thinks (and with some reason) but just an enthusiast. Entertainment, you're blocked for 31 hours for unacceptable behavior. Use that time wisely and a. learn what the policies are for sourcing, b. clear your head and stop thinking that they're out to get you, and c. when you come back write better articles on more clearly notable people. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 04:09, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Drmies FWIW when the initial cluster were posted plus the additions to NEXT, and given that there were mentions of connections between a couple not part of next it seemed like WP:DUCK to me. Combined with any lack of sourcing... I could be wrong, it happens, but the articles were not proper regardless. JamesG5 (talk) 04:12, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I can 100% see where can get a COI vibe from, and you could be right. Reviewing the deleted articles,  is more likely on the nose but the systematic way they edited (four days, 10 edits) is suspicious as well. However, they aren't connected from the same agency so I am leaning more towards AGF here until proven otherwise. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 04:17, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry I am brand new to Wikipedia and didn’t know how else to express myself. When I visited Next Management’s Wikipedia, it was after I had got done binge reading the history of the world’s top modeling agencies. I realized that Next Management’s Wikipedia was inaccurate, clearly self promotion and unsourced.

This is why I edited the Model side and I did not know how to create pages for notable talent. I seen enough material wrong with the Wikipedia page to satisfy the 10 edit requirements before creating my own articles.

At the top of Next Management’s page it had a warning to please help. That is all that I have done. By checking Wikipedia it should be noted that he runs a Wikipedia for a model related site. I think there is a COI in his flagging of my page. In his revision to my edits on Next Management’s wiki, they were factual. Though Next Management’s Wikipedia may not have wanted to state it, Wikipedia is about facts. Not cover ups. Next Management originally had 3 founders, Faith Kates and the Brunel brothers according to Business Insider and multiple reputable sources. Joel didn’t come into play until later.

Because of the reputation of the Brunel brothers, someone in the modeling industry conveniently decided to rewrite history. The correct thing for James to have done was to have researched why I made the changes I made and seen they were all good faith.

I have learned in a short time the rules of Wikipedia and promise if given the time, I will fix any issues. I only will write about notable people as I have started to do. I’m hoping that I am allowed to make correct changes and that anything related to models be challenged by someone other than someone who has a COI against me. Not that he is out to get me but he ran a model Wiki. For all I know he could have been or could be a Next Management related figure. Entertainment1991 (talk) 13:38, 30 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Just to clarify here, Model Insider has been closed for several years now, and it was not any sort of agency, management firm, or commercial site. It was basically a Facebook type site for aspiring models & photographers where anyone could sign up.  The wiki there didn't have listings for people at all, it was just info on things like industry terms.  It's also closed.  My issue with your edits was that you were, and continue, to post unsourced material, often in poorly written English, and about non-notable people (see WP:GNG).  You provided zero sourcing/references (see WP:REF for any of your edits on NEXT.  You created several short articles on people, with no sourcing as required by WP:BLP.  Given that you put out a huge volume at once it looked suspiciously like promotion.  I was reaching out to you here with guidelines so you could see the issues and ask anyone, me included, for help. JamesG5 (talk) 15:25, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

I did not correctly @ you. I hope this works. Please take into consideration what I have written. Again I did not know I was warned until after. I did not intentionally set off to violate any rules. I just want my opportunity to learn how to be the best Wikipedia editor I can be and I’m learning fast. It is discouraging when I see another user, according to searches of his name, spend more time nominating pages for deletion than by welcoming new Wikipedia editors and explaining to them the rules. I almost wanted to give up. It appears he is seeking to one day become an administrator. I watched you have compassion and understanding that I am new and not of bad character. Unlike James I have not had 12 years of experience. Not even 12 days. I am glad you are an administrator and I will do my best to make you proud Entertainment1991 (talk) 13:46, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Hickory and Drmies, I apologize for taking James nomination personal. Please just inquire why he isn’t spending this time fixing Next Management’s Wikipedia page. There are plenty of issues there. He seems to be interested in focusing on me. The bio of Next is inaccurate. The sources are real COI. But here he is focused on me.

I am learning but I am discouraged and thinking about quitting. How can I learn when someone who has 12 years of experience suggests that my writings are in “poor English “. I am an English teacher actually. Entertainment1991 (talk) 16:14, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User:JamesG5 may be offensive or unwelcome. In general, it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing others' userpages without their permission. Instead, please bring the matter to their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. Please refer to Wikipedia:User page for more information on User page etiquette. Thank you. Adam9007 (talk) 04:00, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 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:. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 04:03, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

HickoryOughtShirt?4 I still am unsure how to use the talk page correctly but yes to confirm it was in good faith. I will update with more references and sources today if given the chance to.

James says that my article is written in poor English. I just simply pointed out that I felt attacked by someone who has 12 years of experience on Wikipedia. That is like a Senior in highschool versus a preschooler. I have learned a lot through you and drmies guidance.

I pointed out a possible motive in which I still do believe exists from the user James. Notice how the scrutiny remains on me and I just justified my edit of Next Management’s origins. He should dedicate his time on that page and check the sources etc.

What I tried to do was create a more historical and transparent Wikipedia page for Next Management and I am neutral. If Someone was to write, that Facebook was founded by Mark Zuckerberg, I would edit to include the other founders and cite the sources. Someone close to Facebook may attack me from that point but the facts remain, it was founded by a number of people.

If someone then dedicates their time to reverting my edits without checking the reasons why combined with the fact that their bio suggests a deep affiliation with the modeling industry, I am inclined to believe that a conflict of interest could exist.