Ashlynnrobertson361

Michael Weist (talent manager) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Michael Weist (talent manager), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. JK (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

JK I disagree with your position here. He was interviewed by The Los Angeles Times, AOL, People, Time, and other top sources; The fact that he was interviewed at all may indicate his notability, especially as separate from the TanaCon event. There are over 40 sources showing this. There are even multiple pages that mention him. For example, he has client with wiki articles, such as Bryce Hall (internet personality) that have far less information. How exactly is this not meeting notability guidelines? How would you otherwise edit that? Please advise. Ashlynnrobertson361

August 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion, as you did at Michael Weist (talent manager). 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:08, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Michael Weist (talent manager)

A tag has been placed on Michael Weist (talent manager) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

WP:G11, gaming and long term abuse by editors pushing to publish the article

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

{{unblock|I have been working on this article in reference for many years and have been targeted with little to no support or assistance. This article was deleted without even a discussion. I am requesting the unblocking of my account as well as proper discussion of the article.}

{{unblock|reason=I have been working on this article in reference for many years and have been targeted with little to no support or assistance. This article was deleted without even a discussion. I am requesting the unblocking of my account as well as proper discussion of the article. ~~~~}}

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ashlynnrobertson361 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have been working on this article in reference for many years and have been targeted with little to no support or assistance. This article was deleted without even a discussion. I am requesting the unblocking of my account as well as proper discussion of the article.

Decline reason:

For five years you've been draining Wikipedia's most precious resource, editor time, in repeated submissions of Draft:Michael Weist, Draft:Michael Weist III, Draft:Michael Weist (talent manager), at Michael Weist & Michael Weist (talent manager) and ignoring the conflict of interest issues which your original username User:Weist.michael flagged up. You're clearly not here to help build an encyclopedia, just to try and promote Weist. Cabayi (talk) 06:24, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

It also looks like you used a sockpuppet, Homie123456790 (talk · contribs), in your efforts. Cabayi (talk) 06:35, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ashlynnrobertson361. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ST47 (talk) 00:15, 5 December 2020 (UTC)