Factcheckerab, you are invited to the Teahouse!

edit
 

Hi Factcheckerab! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cullen328 (talk).

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Welcome!

edit

Hello, Factcheckerab, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are related to the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! ThatMontrealIP (talk) 07:18, 17 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

edit

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied text from Chris Jericho to Floyd Creatchman (your addition has since been removed). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. If you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:01, 17 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Conflict of interest editing

edit

  Hello, Factcheckerab. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

  • avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
  • propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
  • disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
  • avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
  • do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 05:19, 18 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

May 2020

edit
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
Drmies (talk) 15:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
 
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).

Factcheckerab (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

There is no valid reason for me to be blocked. I only posted true facts with references. I never posted any vandalism or any false information. There was user Melcous that was harassing the page by continuously removing facts that are accurate and have been referenced. This user had no reason to keep removing true information after it was referenced, Melcous kept issuing a personal attack against the page for no reason. If what is written is sourced and has references, then why is it ok for it to be continuously deleted by Melcous? They should be so interested in other pages as much, since many other pages do not even have references for each thing written, it is obviously a personal attack by Melcous on the pageFactcheckerab (talk) 16:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Decline reason:

None of this addresses the reason for your block. Yamla (talk) 16:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)Reply


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.

What is the “abuse”? Factcheckerab (talk) 18:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)Reply