User talk:Treianlatri

A page you started (Daniel Wallock) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Daniel Wallock, Treianlatri!

Wikipedia editor Robertgombos just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Nice refs!"

To reply, leave a comment on Robertgombos's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Robertgombos (talk) 18:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you. --Treianlatri (talk) 20:03, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Kathleen Quigly
Hey, I'm a little confused as to why you tagged Kathleen Quigly as needing refimprove? All the paragraphs are cited, primarily from the Dictionary of Irish Biography? Thanks, Smirkybec (talk) 21:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for asking. The article is entirely referenced from a single source except for the last paragraph. It will be better if the source is accessible online or if you could improve it with more sources. Regards, --Treianlatri (talk) 21:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I think you are misunderstanding what that maintenance tag means, it is for articles that are not sourced or referenced which this is. You can argue it could be improved with more citations, including online ones, but that is a different matter. Smirkybec (talk) 21:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Daniel Wallock for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel Wallock 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/Daniel Wallock 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) 17:41, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Harvest Exchange for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Harvest Exchange 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/Harvest Exchange 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) 18:11, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

August 2019
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. 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:. MER-C 15:29, 9 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Were you connected to, or were paid for the other articles you created (Blueground, Harvest Exchange, Daniel Wallock)? MER-C 15:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I was paid for Blueground only. I was not aware of the paid disclosure policy at that time. I was not paid for Harvest Exchange or Daniel Wallock. Treianlatri (talk) 18:01, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Draft:Anjana_Reddy looks very much like paid-editing to me. You're claiming otherwise? OhNo itsJamie Talk 19:00, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * No, you are right. Please, see my disclosure. Treianlatri (talk) 21:42, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * could you please re-consider your block? I promise you won't find my edits as advertising. Treianlatri (talk) 16:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Your clients hired you create articles about themselves, which is promotional irrespective of content. Wikipedia readers expect reliable, independent, encyclopedic information. Native advertising and sponsored content are none of those things. MER-C 17:24, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I got your point but there are many noteworthy topics for which no pages have been created yet. Please, understand that Paid editing is permissible in Wikipedia. There are many individuals who meet the notability criteria but either do not familiar with the Wikipedia or don't have time or expertise to request an article on them. This is why I put COI disclosure to make sure it goes through a review. If you think the page I created doesn't meet the notability criteria or a blatant advertising then I will be happy to nominate it for AFD myself, if I am unblocked. Treianlatri (talk) 20:02, 14 August 2019 (UTC)


 * for how long? I have been waiting since 2 September 2019! Treianlatri (talk) 05:06, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Blueground


The article Blueground has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Paid promotional spam article. No evidence of notability, just a REFBOMB of churnalism. WP:BEFORE shows only similar promotional churnalism. Should have been speedied at the time."

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. David Gerard (talk) 10:59, 19 July 2021 (UTC)