User talk:Kayla Perkins

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Kayla Perkins


A tag has been placed on User:Kayla Perkins requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://www.kaylaperkins.com/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. --TheImaCow (talk) 20:30, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Suppressed edits
Hi, Kayla Perkins, I have unfortunately had to suppress some of your edits because they reveal too much personally identifiable information about you. We have a policy of protecting editors' safety by hiding such information if they share it. I'm really sorry about having to suppress your edits, and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add the information. For some useful information on privacy and safety, you can take a look at Guidance for younger editors and On privacy, confidentiality and discretion. Thanks, and sorry for messing about with your pages! KevinL ( aka L235 · t · c) 21:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC) KevinL ( aka L235 · t · c) 21:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi Kayla. This specifically concerns some contact information you provided and not the rest of your message. KevinL ( aka L235 · t · c) 21:23, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Kevin, would someone tell me how do you help someone when THEY HAVE ZERO CLUE on how to use your platform??? Please? Because frankly, it makes no sense when you cannot help someone when they are FRUSTRATED.

Please explain that to me.

Peter

Conflict of interest
Hello, Kayla Perkins. 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 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. – Athaenara ✉  21:43, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Dear, Kevin,

I'm really frustrated sir.

The EMPLOYER for me, Peter B. is WEBPARITY.NET a company I OWN in WA State and you can look up. The client is Kayla Perkins. The affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which I expect to RECEIVE IS ZERO! I'm doing her work PRO BONO! What more could you ask for as they are facing HARD TIMES. Now, if you have a PROBLEM with me DONATING MY DAMN TIME to helping a FRIEND, then the PROBLEM is with you and your team NOT ME! I VOLUNTEER because I DO NOT NEED MONEY! I give of myself and my abilities for people that NEED THEM because I GIVE A DAMN. DO YOU?

Any problems, contact me via here and let's discuss what PRO BONO means.

Peter B

UPDATE:

I was GIVEN access to this account by Kayla's mom. She has ZERO clue how to do all this and I logged in with her permission. I wasn't aware that I COULD NOT help her because she CANNOT and has been begging me for help. Why is this such a problem with regards to helping a fellow HUMAN BEING? OMG! I read all the info that another user placed with many bullets and what I got from all that was:

1) You don't LIKE people helping people 2) You don't like people copying material from a WEBSITE a person creates for another person FOR FREE 3) You don't like that I gave COPYRIGHT CREDIT to Chris Whickers the photographer for the HEADSHOT 4) You don't like people giving their account info to HELP THEM BECAUSE THEY TRUST THAT PERSON 5) You don't like pretty much anything 6) You don't offer ANY kind of CUSTOMER SERVICE and only CUT and PASTE answers because you're COMPLETELY INCAPABLE of customer service 7) You don't like .... oh I don't know, EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!

That pretty much sums it up. I've been on this planet longer than you've been alive and I understand CUSTOMER SERVICE. I don't hand my customers a PIECE of PAPER with BULLETS I offer them face-to-face or speak to them directly to assist them when they've started something new.

Possibly you may want to rethink your customer service protocols and simply "SPEAK" vice CUT and PASTE, you'll find EFFECTIVE communication works FAR, FAR better than CUTTING and pasting. What you're doing is what my mom would call: A COP OUT! <-- LOOK IT UP!

Athaenara,

Let me ask you something. Isn't having pages for Actors, Celebs, and other FAMOUS people in-fact, PROMOTING and PUBLICIZING THEM? If that is the case, then you need to start removing ALL famous people from your site because that's PROMOTION and PUBLICIZING the last time I checked.

So, what you're also saying is, I cannot HELP Kayla or Michelle her mom, with how to do this because I have a FREE professional VOLUNTEER PRO BONO relationship with them? Really?

What Universe are you from where you cannot help people?

Peter

For a REFERENCE, I found this article:

https://www.quora.com/Do-celebrities-visit-their-own-Wikipedia-pages

I copied a section for reference here for you

Do famous people edit their own Wikipedia pages? Fame is a pretty wide topic, and there are levels from locally known through well-known to famous or celebrity.

In my experience there are a few types:

The ones familar with Wikipedia usually do not edit their own articles but either ask fellow editors to do it or put info on the talk page, and let others use it or not; non-significant edits are okay and they’re regularly done.

The opposite is the type which is not familar with Wikipedia (and the internet content creation and crowd work) at all. The ones who are famous but not overly rich and very busy often try to contact Wikipedia by email or phone and try to find someone to send their data to get it into Wikipedia. The other half pays someone to do it, or more often there are already people who work with their PRItalic text. A few “notable” people try to edit Wikipedia by themselves while being unfamiliar with the process, and they usually get very unfriendly and harsh responses and they leave; this effect is even stronger when someone over-estimates his/her own importance.

There are few very-well-known people who make edits under not associated pseudonyms, and sometimes have hard time when editors request the source. There were some cases when the person wrote to the internal permission checking email to confirm [OTRS] but requested to stay anonymous.

But, generally, editing your own articles [or the companies you are related to] is advised against.

– User:Kayla_Perkins talk  22:19, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Blocked
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion. 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:. – Athaenara ✉  21:43, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * [Note to other admins: see also Kayla Perkins (talk) on Commons.]  – Athaenara  ✉  21:55, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Multiple issues here:
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia about notable topics; mere existence does not entitle a person/thing to an article on Wikipedia. A subject is notable if it has received significant coverage from multiple reliable and independent sources. In the case of actors, there are more refined notability criteria to be met in order to merit an article.
 * Sources considered reliable have an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. Independent sources have no connection to the subject. Sources must be both reliable and independent to establish a subject as notable. This heavily favours mainstream media sources: major news organizations, academic press, mainstream publishers of books and magazines. Unacceptable sources include self-published sources such as social media, blogs, and press releases. Primary sources such as a subject's own website can provide basic facts and figures, but cannot on their own establish notability. Without adequate reliable, third-party coverage, an article about this person will not be accepted.
 * You cannot post copyrighted material on Wikipedia - even if you are the copyright holder, or have the copyright holder's permission - unless the material has been released for use by the verified copyright owner into the public domain or under a license compatible with Wikipedia. These licenses allow anyone — not just Wikipedia — to share, distribute, transmit, and adapt your work, free of charge and in perpetuity, provided that you are attributed as the author. Also, because some derivative works may be commercial, we cannot accept materials that are licensed only for educational use or even for general non-commercial use. Releasing the material is both permanent and irrevocable.
 * As you have professional involvement with the person you are writing about, you have a conflict of interest (COI). COI editors are not prohibited from contributing, but are highly discouraged to do so, due to the inherent difficulty of writing from the required neutral point of view. Please note that writing with the intention to promote and publicize anything or anyone is strictly prohibited. In addition, if you are being paid directly or indirectly to write about a subject on Wikipedia, then you must disclose this information per Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing policy.
 * If an article about this individual is accepted at some point, please be aware that you will have no right of ownership or editorial control over its contents. Any Wikipedia editor can edit any article at any time; you cannot insist that it remain at a version that you prefer. We assume good faith of all editors unless proven otherwise. With the exception of clear-cut vandalism or libel, disagreements over content are discussed on the article talk page, where a process of civil discussion and compromise is followed to arrive at consensus.
 * It appears that multiple people have had access to this account. If so, then this was always a violation of Wikipedia's username policy. Only one person - the same person - can have access to an account for its entire lifetime. This is because every edit made by a Wikipedia account must be attributable to the same real-life person. Sharing access to an account is grounds for an immediate block.
 * --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:26, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

new to this site trying to set it up
We are new to this site and it won’t let me add anything from a phone so I gave my website hostess Peter that runs my website permission to add my stuff for me cause he has a computer and I don’t and can you please help Peter out with getting my site up please Thanks Kayla Perkins Kayla Perkins (talk) 22:49, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Greetings. I strongly advise you to carefully read the various pages on Wikipedia policies and guidelines which Drm310 has provided above.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social media platform, and it isn't here to provide you with a "site".  --Finngall talk  22:59, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I see most Actors all have a page set up so why it ok for them but not ok to provide info about me history to others? Thanks Kayla Kayla Perkins (talk) 23:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Actors don't have "pages", there are articles on actors written by editors not affiliated with the actor that summarise what independent reliable sources say about that actor. Lavalizard101 (talk) 23:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * From the above it appears you are not listening. ARTICLES ARE WRITTEN BY EDITORS INDEPENDENT OF THE SUBJECT OF THE ARTICLE (in this case someone who has no connection to the actor/model) plus it appears you are confusing article space with userspace. Lavalizard101 (talk) 23:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)