Ckanopueme

Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.pmrehab.com/doctors.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.pmrehab.com/doctors.htm, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), versions 1.3 or later then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! – Toon^(talk) 21:42, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA

A tag has been placed on Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 17:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

January 2009

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion. Thank you. Ironholds (talk) 18:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself, as you did with Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Ironholds (talk) 18:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA

The article Segun Toyin Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. — Fly by Night (talk) 20:24, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Segun Toyin Dawodu for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Segun Toyin Dawodu 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Segun Toyin Dawodu until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. — Fly by Night (talk) 22:09, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Seguntdawodu1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Seguntdawodu1.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 09:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Seguntdawodu2.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Seguntdawodu2.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 09:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category Alumni of The Dickson Poon School of Law

A tag has been placed on Category Alumni of The Dickson Poon School of Law requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Clearly created in error (G2 or G6)

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. DannyS712 (talk) 08:13, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Problem with your custom signature

You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. A change to Wikipedia's software has made your current custom signature incompatible with the software.

The problem: Your preferences are set to interpret your custom signature as wikitext. However, your current custom signature does not contain any wikitext.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, or you can fix your signature.

Solution 1: Reset your signature to the default:

1. Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
2. Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
3. Remove anything in the Signature: text box. (It might already be empty.)
4. Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page. (The red "Restore all default settings" button will reset all of your preference settings, not just the signature.)

Solution 2: Fix your custom signature:

1. Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
2. Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
3. Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page.

More information about custom signatures is available at Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing how everyone sees your signature. If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures. 19:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 6 § Category:Alumni by university or college in the United Kingdom

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 6 § Category:Alumni by university or college in the United Kingdom on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 17:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Segun Toyin Dawodu for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Segun Toyin Dawodu 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Segun Toyin Dawodu (2nd nomination) 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.

Uhooep (talk) 15:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

This issue was extensively discussed in the past and reference should be made to the discussion in 2009. The individual qualified as one of the earliest bloggers as far back as 1997 when he started the first blog on Nigeria's sociopolitical issues ie Dawodu.com. A lot of the articles on Wikipedia have references to this website on issues of Nigeria's sociopolitical discussions because it is the pioneer website. Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 10:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Further review of past discussions showed that the same concern expressed by you was addressed in 2009 over period of time. Noticed also that connection to Oxford was removed by you without any basis. I see elements of bias here. Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 15:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I have looked at university of Oxford webpages and alumni webpages and came to this website:-

https://www.phc.ox.ac.uk/team/segun-dawodu

So, I am surprised that as part of your actions, you deleted every statement saying his connection to Oxford University. . This has again shown your bias on deleting a specific part of the article and then asking for deletion.

This portion of the article will be corrected by reinstating the Oxford I formation based on what I have.

The article is about a pioneer blogger especially on socio-economic, political and historical perspectives of Nigeria since 1997 with that website become a very I portant resource and reference cited by many articles in Wikipedia. Those issues were raised in 2009 and the right conclusion made. Kindly make defence to previous discussions in 2009 as you were not a member of the Wikipedia editorial team in 2009.

Thanks. Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 14:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Uhooep, going through the sub, I noticed that you made deletions that were uncalled for and then messed up the references by deleting some and making others to reference the wrong part of the stub.

I will take this as an action from you based on bias and malice and will urge to go back and correct the references that you have mismatched as this will be additional work for those of us who worked on the stub for years ever before you became an editor.

I hope others will take note and that this attitude of malice and bias should never be tolerated on this platform. Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 22:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Please do not make personal attacks against other editors or question their motivations. Assume good faith. Attacking other editors is a quick way to find yourself blocked on this platform. It's especially strange since in the DRV, you accuse other editors that they are making personal comments about you and here you are, doing much worse. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jclemens (talk) 02:05, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

July 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  – robertsky (talk) 12:53, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. My replies were in response to personal attacks on me. It takes two to tango and the block should be removed. Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 13:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

And the diffs for those personal attacks? – robertsky (talk) 13:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Thanks. My replies were in response to personal attacks on me. It takes two to tango and the block should be removed. :The other editors refused to focus on issues being discussed but opted to threaten me. This is an attempt to prevent me from partaking on the discussion of deletion of an article and i think this is unfair Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 13:37, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This indicates you think your actions were appropriate. They weren't. Yamla (talk) 13:44, 22 July 2024 (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.

again, what are the personal attacks made on you? If you are accusing others, where are the diffs of these attacks? And two wrongs don't make one right. If others are making personal attacks on you, request them to stop or have someone intervene for you. – robertsky (talk) 13:41, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Beyond that, with eighteen commments from Ckanopueme beyond their opening statement, totaling an astonishing three thousand words, and responding to every single Endorse voter before the block, they cannot credibly claim that they haven't already had vast scope for fighting their corner. Ravenswing 15:53, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Fair but there is news to respond to erroneous comments especially when the core issue of notability has been swept under the rug Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 16:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

"news" = needs Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 16:47, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I think you might have confused two different processes. I will try to explain clearly.

First, there was a deletion discussion at Articles for Deletion (AfD). That is this page here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Segun Toyin Dawodu (2nd nomination). On that page, editors discussed notability and other core issues. When a deletion discussion is currently running, you can offer new sources and explain why something is notable. Once it has closed, that is the end of the discussion. Here, you can see, everyone looked at the article and explained why they believed the article should be deleted. Everyone believed that the article should be deleted, and so the discussion was closed and the article was deleted like everyone agreed.

Now, you have done a deletion review at Deletion Reviews (DRV). That is this page: Wikipedia:Deletion review#Segun Toyin Dawodu. At a deletion review, the only thing being discussed is whether the editor who closed the review understood the consensus. So if all the editors at AfD said 'delete', and the closer said 'everyone said keep', that would be a mistake and then a deletion review would be able to change that decision. But here all the editors said 'delete', and the closer said 'everyone said delete', so we can see the closer was correct: the consensus was to delete the article. Everyone agreed. That is the only thing people can look at in DRV. That is the only thing they can talk about. Nothing matters except one question: Did the closer accurately state the consensus? That is why everyone is endorsing the close, because the closer said everyone decided to delete it, and that's exactly what they did say.

I hope that helps you understand why notability is not being talked about now. We have moved past the point where you can try to show notability. These talks about notability can only happen at a deletion discussion (AfD), not after the discussion has finished (DRV). I know this is probably very disappointing and frustrating, but that is the situation now.

Please take some time to look after yourself and relax. I hope you feel better very soon. StartGrammarTime (talk) 18:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

The AfD was not properly and adequately notified to me and this allowed few to deliberate on it without option to hear from the author of the article. That lacks due process.

What I did was to provide the proper context to reconsider the situation.

It is obvious that Wikipedia does things differently from the real world and that is sad.

As stated in some of my postings, I am not worried about the article being reinstated but rather about how the process was implemented.

The subject of the article is not aware of my efforts and I doubt if he will be bothered as he is prominent on many platforms including the top medical article platform in the world and another top platform in the world for rehabilitation medicine along with his blog.

For me, I am not bothered especially now that I am aware of how Wikipedia is managed. No system survives for long if managed this way and one can only wait and see. As a journalist I plan on writing an article about this experience of how due process is managed within Wikipedia

Thanks. Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 18:55, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

You were, in fact, properly notified of the AfD. That notification is sitting right here on your talk page, uptopic, for all to see. You made four responses to the notification right here, all well before the AfD was closed. That you failed to click on the link to exercise your privilege of taking part in that discussion is on you. It's not even that you don't know how the process works, because the article went through a prior AfD in which you contributed. Ravenswing 22:51, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Probably that was an error on my part that I replied to UHooep instead of the group. It is not as if o do this every year. The last time this happened was in 2009.

As stated previously, it is not a big deal as the subject of the article has presence in notability at much higher and professional level while ironically, there are at least 50 articles in Wikipedia that references his website Dawodu.com because it has information that were first available on that site globally. This was how I got interested in the website as a journalist as it became a primary source for a lot of historical information about Nigeria.

So every time people read articles referencing his website, his notability will be noted. I have been advised to let the show of bias and prejudice be as that defines Wikipedia. I have a feeling that this is not new and sooner or later others will speak up. Nothing of this nature can be hidden forever.

I will ask others if it is worth restarting the page with updated information.

Thanks for engaging. Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 23:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

The article subbject will be set up in future through collaboration with other editors Ck Anopueme Ckanopueme (talk) 18:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Topic ban

Per this ANI thread, you are now indefinitely topic-banned from any edits involving Segun Toyin Dawodu, broadly construed. This may be appealed to the administrators' noticeboard after 12 months, and once every 6 months after. Please let me know if you have any questions about your restrictions here. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:39, 31 July 2024 (UTC)