User talk:Parker153

Nomination of EnergyX for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article EnergyX 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/EnergyX 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 until the discussion has finished.  scope_creep Talk  02:42, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
Hello Parker153. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to SKES, 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 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 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:Parker153. 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. BusterD (talk) 14:30, 20 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I am not paid for my edits. I, however, agree the suggested deletion of the article SKES, for the same following reason suggested by the proposal:
 * No indication of being notable. Fails WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:ORGIND. Refs are routine business and unrelated sources. 153 (talk) 12:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

As previously advised, your edits, such as the edit you made to EnergyX DY-Building, give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Parker153, and the template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. BusterD (talk) 14:31, 20 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I am neither directly nor indirectly being compensated for my edits. All of my edits are completely compliant of Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. No conflict of interest (COI) exist in my edits. Parker153 (talk) 12:37, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

You still have not adequately responded or taken action to the inquiry regarding your appearance as an undisclosed paid editor. If you make any additional edits without complying, you may be blocked from editing. BusterD (talk) 14:34, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

As previously advised, your edits, such as the edit you made to EnergyX, give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Parker153, and the template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. BusterD (talk) 14:36, 20 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Same here, I am neither directly nor indirectly being compensated for my edits. All of my edits are completely compliant of Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. No conflict of interest (COI) exist in my edits. Parker153 (talk) 12:37, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of EnergyX DY-Building for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article EnergyX DY-Building 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/EnergyX DY-Building 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 until the discussion has finished. BusterD (talk) 14:47, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of SKES


The article SKES has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "No indication of being notable. Fails WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:ORGIND. Refs are routine business and unrelated sources."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  scope_creep Talk  15:53, 20 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I agree to this deletion, and have no other opinion. 153 (talk) 12:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)