Francisco Fredeye
Welcome!
editHi, Francisco Fredeye. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or . — Lauritz Thomsen (talk) 19:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Garden State Initiative for deletion
editA discussion is taking place as to whether the article Garden State Initiative 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/Garden State Initiative 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. DGG ( talk ) 06:19, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
editHello, Francisco Fredeye
Thank you for creating William Isaias Dassum.
User:Doomsdayer520, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thank you for this new article. Note that the section on the Human Rights Committee ruling needs citations.
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
.
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 13:31, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
January 2020
editHello Francisco Fredeye. 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.
Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, 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:Francisco Fredeye. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Francisco Fredeye|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}
. 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. Praxidicae (talk) 17:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of The Isaias Group
editIf this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on The Isaias Group, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
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. Praxidicae (talk) 17:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of The Isaias Group for deletion
editA discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Isaias Group 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/The Isaias Group 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. Praxidicae (talk) 01:47, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
January 2020
edit As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Francisco Fredeye, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Francisco Fredeye|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}
. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Praxidicae (talk) 13:33, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry chief, but I wasn't even aware that people actually got paid to edit Wikipedia. Wish I was, but sorry, that is not the case. Unless you have evidence, please stop the accusations. I really don't appreciate it. Thanks!!! --Francisco Fredeye (talk) 18:41, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Monty Bennett shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --206.16.23.21 (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
editBlocked as a sockpuppet
edit{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. ~TNT (she/her • talk) 21:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)