Yinonk

Yinonk, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Yinonk! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Benzband (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 01:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Nation-E, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sionk (talk) 12:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ruth Fine

The article Ruth Fine has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:ACADEMIC

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fiddle Faddle 10:55, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Ruth Fine for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ruth Fine 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/Ruth Fine 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 notice from the top of the article. Fiddle Faddle 11:15, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Please explain, why? Yinonk (talk) 11:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

My view is that she fails WP:ACADEMIC. You may take a different view. If so then the deletion discussion is the place to express that view while continuing to enhance the article. Fiddle Faddle 11:27, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I've added some new links. I think they show the notability of Prof. Ruth Fine in the field of Latinamerican literature research, and in Cervantes' work in particular. She has a worldwide reputation. Yinonk (talk) 11:34, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

And I don't quite understand: who is "the nominator", is that you, Timtrent? And where exactly can I reply and explain, in the talk page or in the project page? Thanks. Yinonk (talk) 12:57, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

The deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruth Fine is the place to argue in favour of the article being kept. Your argument will be successful if you can show how the person meets WP:ACADEMIC, a document I commend to you. Not only must the person meet those standards, the article must demonstrate that the person meets those standards. I am the nominator in that I have nominated the page for discussion. I have not looked at the article to see what you have put in. I will by and by. Fiddle Faddle 17:32, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nation-E, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages BMS and Saft (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:48, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bob Theil

added links pointing to Debut, Michael Chapman, Folk and Richard Thompson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited EarlySense, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heartbeat. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo Nation-E.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo Nation-E.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Yinonk. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Avner Halperin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Startup. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Push Foundation

The article Push Foundation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Two very weak sources containing mostly quotations of direct speech by the foundation's organiser. Ghits are few and are only fuund raising sites and social media. Fails WP:ORG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:48, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, will try to improve the article and find more sources. Yinonk (talk) 16:39, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

WP:PAID

On EN WP we require disclosed of paid editing. Wondering if you can do this for us. Thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:32, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Sure. How? Yinonk (talk) 14:36, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

You need to list:

(1) All the articles you were paid for in any form

(2) Who paid for the articles in question

(3) What companies and intermediaries were used during those transactions

Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:40, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I have no problem to comply. But why did you block me?? Yinonk (talk) 14:41, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

We take WP:TOU issues seriously here on EN WP. You have been blocked until you comply with the TOU.

Also you need to explain your relationship with this account User:Mollybloomin Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:43, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

1. So I should write in the talk page of every article I wrote and paid for? Also mention it in my user page?

2. I don't have any relationship with that user! I don't know who he is, just know he wrote a stub about Yoni Assia that was about to be removed. I was hired by Assia to improve it and so I did. Don't know anything about him. Yinonk (talk) 14:54, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

You can put disclosure on your talk page. Have started to tag the articles in question. Seems like Assia hired a number of folks than. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:01, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

As far as I know He just hired me after the poor writing Mollybloomin has done. How exactly should I disclose in my talk page? What else should I do? Yinonk (talk) 15:09, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Do you know which company the Mollybloomin account is from? If you could email it to me that would be great.

Basically you need to comply fully with WP:PAID Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:12, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I honestly don't know anything about him or who he is, and certainly don't collaborate with him in any form, as you wrote here [1]. Please don't make me appear as a sock, I would never do that! And please, Ruth Fine, Bob Theil and Tal Nitzán were not written in payment! Yinonk (talk) 15:27, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I specifically said "Not a sock themselves" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:32, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

But you wrote that I collaborate with him. It's not true! So can you please unblock me so I could update my user page? As far as I understand my only bad was that I didn't mentioned my payment editing. I will gladly fix that, if you let me. Yinonk (talk) 15:38, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

You can add release to this page. I also think you are able to edit your user page aswell. ::::::::::::::I have clarified the statementhereDoc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:00, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Doc James,Thanks for that! I cannot edit my own user page, I tried. Yinonk (talk) 16:08, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Done, Doc James. Yinonk (talk) 18:26, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Further issues

• So here a AfC written by the subject themselves was declined[2]. You then took their work and placed it here live without attribution.[3] which is in breach of the "by" of the CCBYSA license.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:38, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

He hired me to rewrite his own article, didn't know I was doing something wrong. Yinonk (talk) 15:43, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for TOU violations. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:38, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Have restricted you ability to edit until the above is dealt with. Apologies. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:41, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Doc James, can you please unblock me? Yinonk (talk) 06:23, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

You have still not fully followed WP:PAID Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:26, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

You keep telling me that, but what else is missing? why don't you state exactly what is required so I could comply. Thanks! Yinonk (talk) 06:29, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Here it is again You need to list: (1) All the articles you were paid for in any form (2) Who paid for the articles in question (3) What companies and intermediaries were used during those transactions Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:45, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Here, User:Doc James, made that list on Sunday:[4] Yinonk (talk) 06:52, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

But not this one OurCrowd? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:00, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

No, they just asked me to edit, to insert a simple text, I'm not asking for payment in cases like that. Also, again, Ruth Fine, Bob Theil and Tal Nitzán was not written for money! Please take off the template you added there, it's not right. Yinonk (talk) 07:08, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

What is your relationship to these subjects? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:54, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Ruth Fine was my professor in the Hebrew university in Jerusalem; Bob Theil visited in Israel, He is a great artist, don't know him and never met him; Tal Nitzán is a very good friend and colleague. Yinonk (talk) 08:05, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Doc James, you'r about to delete Bob Theil. As long as I'm blocked I can't defend the article and find more sources. I have a good source in Hebrew, please unblock me so I could at least try. Yinonk (talk) 11:40, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Okay thanks have adjusted the tags on the articles. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:25, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Doc James, can you please unblock me? Yinonk (talk) 03:37, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Bob Theil for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bob Theil 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/Bob Theil 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 notice from the top of the article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Doc James, this article is not a paid article. Yinonk (talk) 15:56, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

The only reference is to a blog. There is no evidence of notability thus why it is up for deletion. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:59, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

You also placed this notice: "This article may have been created or substantially edited in return for undisclosed payments." Yinonk (talk) 16:01, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Paid editing disclosure

Can go below here Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:09, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

The following articles was written in payment

• Nation-E - paid by the company.
• Eli Somer - paid by Somer.
• European Society for Trauma and Dissociation - paid by Eli Somer.
• Andrea Bruno - paid by TLV2016.
• Push Foundation - paid by the organization.
• YRF Darca - paid by the organization.
• Avner Halperin - paid by Halperin.
• Joseph Hodara - paid by Hodara.
• Rimon Winery - paid by the winery.
• Isaac Berzin - (edit) paid by Berzin.
• EarlySense - (edit) paid by the company.
• Daniel Jammer minor edit - paid by Nation-E.
• Magic Software Enterprises - (edit) paid by the company.
• Alvarion - (edit) paid by the company.
• YRF Darca - (edit) paid by the organization.
• User:Yinonk/subpage - paid by the company.
• User:Yinonk/sandbox - paid by the company.

The following articles was not written in payment

• Ruth Fine
• Bob Theil
• Tal Nitzán

Edits:

• Maladaptive daydreaming ‎
• Better Place
• John Cale ‎
• Buteyko method ‎
• Konstantin Buteyko
• Castle of Rivoli
• Château de Lichtenberg
• Roni Bornstein
• OurCrowd

Yinonk (talk) 16:24, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I do see you disclosed somewhat better here[5] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:36, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Heb-Wiki is asking to disclose the paid articles for some years now. I didn't know it was required on En-Wiki As well. Look, I'm just a guy, I edit books, and sometimes writing in Wiki, now and then for payment, usually not. Please don't make me a criminal. It feels bad. Yinonk (talk) 07:43, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

No one is saying there is anything criminal here. I realize that you are doing this for a living. You work is commercial in nature. It is just against the WP:TOU that apply on all WMF websites which is the issue.

Here is another promotional article:

• Rimon Winery about a winery

Your first interactions on EN WP were with another undisclosed paid editors specifically User:FoCuSandLeArN

Many of us want a Wikipedia that is independent from the subjects in question. This is a noble project that should be built on altruism. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:52, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

True, added the winery to the list. But why would you entangled me with other users whom I don't have anything with? Yinonk (talk) 07:58, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

BTW, most of my work in Wiki, En and Heb, is voluntary! Yinonk (talk) 08:13, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Unblocking

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).

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

---

Request reason:

User:Doc James blocked me because I didn't disclose the fact that some of my edits in En Wiki is commercial. I have no problem to do that, I have full discloser in Heb Wiki for years now:[6], I didn't know I have the same obligation here too. And so I did everything he asked me to do, here:[7]. and here:[8]. But he still would not unblock me, without any obvious reason and with no explanation. Hope you can help. Thanks. Yinonk (talk) 13:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Based on a review of your editing here and the discussions below, I do not see how unblocking you is in Wikipedia's best interests. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:25, 1 September 2017 (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.

User has not disclosed the intermediaries they used nor have they disclosed all the articles they were paid to edit. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Doc James, first of all, I'm not "they", I have a name, Yinon. Second, there are no "intermediaries". Third, as far as I can remember there are no other articles I wrote in En Wiki. Again, I have no problem to disclose, but I wrote and edited articles voluntarily as well. Yinonk (talk) 14:57, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

And Isaac Berzin?

And EarlySense

And Aaron Frenkel

And Magic Software Enterprises

Alvarion

Above you say OurCrowd asked you to add text. Now you run a Wikipedia editing business yet for this company you are doing pro bono work?

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I edited Isaac Berzin and EarlySense for payment, but I didn't created them. Do you want me to add them to the list? even though It's not my article? Will do. I didn't get paid for editing Aaron Frenkel. They asked for my help and so I helped. Yinonk (talk) 15:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

So this is the issue. You have NOT listed all the work you are doing on WP for pay. Also non of the articles are "yours", these are WP articles an no single person "owns" them. At this point I am inclined to leave the block in place for 1 year. If after a year issues have not occurred on Hebrew WP than you can apply for an unblock here. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:21, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Doc James, please have a look at my user page. I don't have "a Wikipedia editing business", I'm a literary editor, I edit books. I sometimes help people to write in Wiki, sometimes I ask money for that, in most cases not. I now and then write articles that interesting me, most of them in Hebrew, and sometimes people hire me to write articles. You can have a look again in my Hebrew user page, most of my work there is voluntary. Yinonk (talk) 15:29, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Why are so eager to block me? It doesn't make any sense. I have nothing to hide, I will disclose everything. I would like to appeal to another admin please. Yinonk (talk) 05:42, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Yinonk - you are required to disclose any paid editing, be it page creation updating a page, requesting a page be deleted or even making a request on a talkpage that someone else updates it. Anything you are compensated for needs disclosure.

You will need to convince us that you have sufficient understanding of the policies on paid editing conflict of interest and neutrality before an unblock request is likely to be considered. If you can't explain how you plan to edit within these policies then your unblock request is unlikely to be considered by any administrator. Amortias (T)(C) 09:53, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Yinonk only disclosed a bit once they were blocked. Even than they did not disclose fully and left a bunch of stuff out. Due to there hesitance to fully disclose I am uninclined to see them unblocked.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:29, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Amortias. I'll make a full list by tomorrow. Plus, I understand the policy - I have fully disclose everything in my Heb. user page for years now:[9].Yinonk (talk) 17:29, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

• I do not think that Yinonk should be unblocked. Even for people who focus only on content, the content Yinonk has written is promotional - it does not summarize and share knowledge (our mission), but is rather about promoting people and organizations - a completely different goal and kind of writing. In addition Yinonk has violated the PAID policy, spirit and letter, and has only yielded bit by bit here as they have been pushed. They have been hiding this entire time (it is especially damning that they say they have disclosed at the Isreali WP this whole time). They have also violated COPYVIO, which for somebody who says they are a literary editor, shows clear disdain for Wikipedia. Jytdog (talk) 04:32, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

I completed the list, here[10]. Don't think I've left anything out - if I did I will add it to the list. As I said, I have nothing to hide.

Look, if you'l decide to keep blocking me I will not argue anymore, but I have to say It's so unfair, I just didn't know I was obligated to disclose, that's all. I'm not a sock-puppet, even so User:Doc James maybe still think I am. If I've violated COPYVIO I'm sorry, it was a mistake, I don't think it makes me a criminal that should be thrown to the dogs.

Another small thing, just for the courtesy, please stop referring to me in plural. It's offensive.

Hope you can review it again. Thanks. Yinonk (talk) 08:17, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

I use "they" as I do not make assumptions regarding peoples gender. If you have a preferred pronoun I will be happy to use it. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:10, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

When you keep saying "but I have disclosed at hebrew WP" it just shoots to hell any good faith that you didn't know that you need to disclose. And the direct editing while not disclosing makes it many times worse.

You are like someone who dumps garbage in a national park, and takes money for doing that. And yes you have been trying to keep that activity secret. Is that behavior you want us to admire? Quite the opposite. Jytdog (talk) 16:43, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Jytdog, you got it wrong. I have no problem to disclose here just like in Heb. Wiki. I just didn't know.

Look, a few years ago I was approach by an Israeli admin. He asked me to full disclose the artiacles I wrote for money. I complied immediately. Did he blocked me? No. Did he tried to insult me by using words like "garbage"? No. He understood I wasn't aware of these roles, and that was it.

BTW, you'r deleting articles I wrote, good articles, like Bob Theil, which I wrote after I saw him in a gig in Tel Aviv, while I'm still blocked and can't defend it in the deleting process. I don't think It's right. Yinonk (talk) 05:43, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

I am not deleting anything, and I do not believe you.

I went and looked at your Talk page at Hebrew WP, and you have been reminded there multiple times since 2014 about the Terms of Use, which cover all WMF projects. How stupid do you think we are?

And in any case, again - you edit like a marketing person, not like someone communicating knowledge; you violated copyright; and you have been hiding and violating the Terms of Use for 3 years now. I am not writing here further. Jytdog (talk) 05:47, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Jytdog, maybe you'r not stupid, but you'r defiantly a liar yourself (or can't read Hebrew). You went too far. Yinonk (talk) 05:59, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

There is nothing ambiguous here. I actually try to work with paid editors to help them understand what they should do, but I do not tolerate bullshitting. If you had played this straight after you were caught out, you would not be where you are now. This is your hole. Jytdog (talk) 06:07, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

• Comment I know Yinnok from the Hebrew wiki. To the best of my knowledge he is in good standing there, and has been complying with PAID requirements for hewiki since the resolution was passed in hewiki a few years back and he was approached by an admin. His talk page on hewiki is not full of warnings, but rather polite requests and clarification. There is sarcastic admonishment that he did not upload a picture for a paid bio (meeting licensing reqs on pictures... argh) - which he responded to by uploading a picture. I truly believe he was not aware of the rules here (which also changed during his tenure). If he was attempting to hide, doing so with a hewiki profile that screams paid is not really the way to do so.Icewhiz (talk) 04:26, 10 August 2017 (UTC) Final note - he did not approach me. I saw this after the Rimon Winery AFD. I would also be someone highly unlikely to be approached by him - my last and main engagement with him was in a BLP content dispute (who is mired in a controversy, Yinonk's editing had some merit, and he was approached by the LP after a suggestion to the LP after the LP himself attempting to make vast changes as an editor that would work in accordance to policy).Icewhiz (talk) 04:35, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

I didn't say "full of warnings" I said "reminded multiple times" and this is accurate. People had to tell him originally and follow up two times. That is three reminders of what he should be doing anyway. And he disclosed how many times here? None. Jytdog (talk) 04:42, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Hewiki is a diifferent environment, much less editors. A large proportion of active editors there know that if they see Yinnok there is a chance it is paid. So he gets asked. Many of the things he was asked by user:Hanay were edited before the hewiki policy change in 2014, so this is not quite a reminder but rather housekeeping on older pre policy edits (which he marked as well). To my knowledge he has been compliant on hewiki and is in good standing. I think it is very likely he was not aware of the changes here.Icewhiz (talk) 04:57, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

You are making the case against him now, not for him. So he regularly edits directly, without disclosing, at heWP too. Looking at the talk page there he was asked in March 2014, again twice in May 2015. They disclose a list of paid articles there; nothing here. Jytdog (talk) 08:32, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

No - he was asked in 2017 about old articles that pre-dated (2013) the Hebrew policy in 2014, and some of these were marked. He is in good standing and regularly edits - marking all new paid articles on hewiki. Old articles (pre-2014 when the hewiki policy was passed) - were also marked.Icewhiz (talk) 10:34, 10 August 2017 (UTC) (He was also asked in 2015 to add a paid template (which was added around then), Asked in 2015 to add a photo to a paid article (as he had access to the subject).Icewhiz (talk) 10:54, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Addendum - you can see a list of known paid editors in hewiki here - List of paid editors and articles on hewiki. They are all regularly policed and their contributions reviewed (which leads to talk page questions - which you see on Yinonk's page in hewiki). Yinonk is declared since the policy passed in May 2014 (he was notified immediately following the decision, as he was known also before the decision), and is in good standing AFAIK.Icewhiz (talk) 10:50, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Hm, ok thanks for clarifying all that. Makes his behavior in enWP all the more blatantly bad faith, as I said above. Jytdog (talk) 17:23, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

And none of this is even getting into the disdain for the mission as well as content policies and guidelines that Yinonk has displayed even as they have flouted PAID. The blatantly promotional content, the bareURLs, the copyvio. Yinonk appears to be here to dump promotional crap into WP, quick and dirty to make a buck, and WP:NOTHERE to build an encyclopedia. He says he is a literary editor in RL; there is no way somebody who does that can edit this badly if they gave a rat's ass. That - along with bullshit dancing around the issue instead of playing it straight -- is why I keep replying here. Jytdog (talk) 17:29, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't see how so - he's been editing sporadically (dating back to 2012) in enwiki before the PAID policy change in 2015 (? or thereabout) - he was probably just not aware of the policy here, and his initial response here might have not been fully precise. To my knowledge he's a self-employed literary and linguistic editor that mainly works on non-wiki editing and publishing (I believe this is his website - <redacted>- but also does some paid editing and some non-paid editing in hewiki and enwiki (which is to my impression a small fraction of his work). If he was attempting to do "paid editing by stealth" - doing so under a real name, with clear labeling on hewiki and off-wiki really is not how one would do that if he was aware of the policy and attempting to circumvent it. I have seen positive contributions from him. But I'm backing off - said more than my 2 cents. I'm hoping Hanay will chime in here.Icewhiz (talk) 17:39, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

I have emailed you. Jytdog (talk) 10:37, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Rimon Winery for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rimon Winery 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/Rimon Winery 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 notice from the top of the article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of European Society for Trauma and Dissociation

The article European Society for Trauma and Dissociation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No independent reliable sources concerning this org have been offered to establish notability. See WP:42

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:11, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Copy and pasting

We run "copy and paste" detection software on new edits. One of your edits appear to be infringing on someone else's copyright. See also Wikipedia:Copy-paste. We at Wikipedia usually require paraphrasing. If you own the copyright to this material please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials to grant license. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:55, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=EarlySense&type=revision&diff=668095686&oldid=668090606

from

http://journals.lww.com/ccmjournal/Citation/2014/08000/The_Return_on_Investment_of_Implementing_a.13.aspx

• User:Doc James, I took care of this one. What does the editor need to do to comply? I see they listed the articles they got paid for (they say); is there more you want them to do? Drmies (talk) 04:36, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Getting this user to properly disclose was difficult. That I needed to look through their edit history and stipulate all the articles they wrote for pay rather than them voluntarily disclosing is concerning. Add these to the copyright issues and the promotional wording that was used and IMO if this user is to return to editing they should be restricted from editing in the main space for pay. Ie they can post requests to the talk page as is best practice for paid editors. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:European Society for Trauma and Dissociation.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:European Society for Trauma and Dissociation.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:21, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Trying to hire someone to remove tags

Someone is trying to hire people to remove tags about paid editing from articles you have created. Hum Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:55, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

What are you implying? You think it's me?? Your'e so clever. Now everybody knows what is your real reason for blocking me. Gee, Doc, wouldn't want to be one of you patients. Yinonk (talk) 18:19, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Unblock me?

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).

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

---

Request reason:

It's been nearly a year now. I've disclosed everything. Thanks

Decline reason:

It's not just a time-served thing. The amount of effort required to get you to properly disclose your paid editing was a big waste of free volunteers' time (you know, those who selflessly donate many hours of their time to help develop this free educational resource without any thoughts of personal enrichment). You have not addressed that evasive approach here, you have not explained what you would do if unblocked, and you have not convinced me that unblocking you would be to the benefit of the English Wikipedia. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:18, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Oh, and looking back on this again, your snide personal attack on Doc James just above this section, does not inspire me to give you the benefit of any doubt - I think any further unblock request would need to include, at a very minimum, a convincing apology for that. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:01, 27 June 2018 (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.

Orphaned non-free image File:Rimon Winery Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rimon Winery Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:35, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Joseph Hodara for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Hodara 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/Joseph Hodara 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.

BD2412 T 02:52, 18 August 2024 (UTC)