User talk:Vyanchevaarco

April 2024
Hello Vyanchevaarco. The nature of your edits 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:Vyanchevaarco. 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. 331dot (talk) 09:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Deepfriedokra. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Business Park Sofia have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:01, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Vyanchevaarco, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hey there,
 * I needed to update the page of Business Park Sofia, but I've never done it before and I had to revise it a lot of times. This led to the removal of the page and I'd really need your help with the restoration of it.
 * Thank you so much! Vyanchevaarco (talk) 17:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * That's been deleted as WP:SPAM.. You've not addressed your relationship to Tefterche, who created the same content in a draft. Thanks. &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:15, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not the place for promotional content or updates thanks. &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:BOSS &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:17, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * thank you for getting back to me so fast!tefterche is my second account, I was hoping I'll get the chance to fix the article with it, because it's important.
 * I want to just clarify I never wanted it to sounds like a promotion, but the information in the article was old and since 2018 there are been lots of developments. Do you think there is a way to resolve the deletion problem?
 * I'd be very grateful if you can do it and I don't mind fixing the info with even just some little tweaks, like the correct number of buildings (15 to this date)
 * Thank you again so much for your support and collaboration! Vyanchevaarco (talk) 18:18, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, not doing your job for you &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Please follow the instructions at WP:ALTACC for declaring the connection. &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey, there.
 * I think we have some miss communication. I'm not asking you to do my job for me.
 * I'm asking for help.
 * If you could return the page in the old condition (2018) that would be great.
 * If not - let me know what steps I need to make to retreave it. If this is not something you'd like to do - please point me to someone else that will be willing to help.
 * Thank you Vyanchevaarco (talk) 19:46, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no. Please feel free to request restoration by the deleting admin, The whole thing was spamacious and unsupported by sourcing to show it met WP:CORP. The only hope would be to rebuild the thing from scratch via WP:AFC.   Subjects of articles must meet inclusion requirements such as NCORP with reliable sources which are unconnected with the subject and which provide verifiable information. Someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. " All content must be cited from reliable, independent sources with a reputation for fact checking." The deleted article was sourced only to the subject's website. Thanks, &#45;-  Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you.
 * This was truly helpful.
 * I understand the matter much better now and tomorrow morning I'll resubmit.
 * Is there even a slight chance the old article from 2018 to be restored?
 * Thanks for all your help Vyanchevaarco (talk) 20:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

And, Seraphimblade would tell you no. You should take a look at the conflict of interest requirements. Specifically, paid editors should not be directly or creating articles about COI subjects in mainspace, but should instead have their proposed creations or edits reviewed by editors without a COI. For creation of a new article, you could do that by creating a draft and requesting review by articles for creation. But do mind what Deepfriedokra told you above&mdash;an article should primarily be based on material independent of its subject; that is, not press releases, interviews, material written by the organization or its affiliates, and so on. If there is not a substantial amount of material like that available about this subject, it is not appropriate to have an article about it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:18, 8 April 2024 (UTC)


 * thank you.the article from 2018 has not been submitted by me though.
 * Does this make it suitable for re-actication? Vyanchevaarco (talk) 20:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * No, I do not restore advertisements. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm confused.
 * The article from 2018 is far from advertising?
 * And again - it was not submitted by me. Why would you consider information about the space advertisement its been there for years Vyanchevaarco (talk) 20:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The answer was "no", and will remain no regardless of whether you repeat the request. You may either write a draft, or not. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)