User talk:Elijahwordpress

Thanks for your contributions to Tom Harb. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. —Alalch E. 17:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Elijahwordpress. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Tom Harb, 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, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} 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 Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• 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. —Alalch E. 00:56, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please do not repeat non-constructive edits such as removing the maintenance tag, and undoing the InternetArchiveBot. —Alalch E. 00:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, "appearances" sections like these are not acceptable. That does not belong in an encyclopedia.—Alalch E. 01:07, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alalch, Thank you for your help so far as you can see I’m very new to this. Pleasee do me a favour and remove/add anything needed to complete this page and if you need any infromation on the topic I will contribute. Elijahwordpress (talk) 01:17, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The goal of the page is not promotion, I do not get paid for this its only on proffesional basis.

Please do remove anything that’s not allowed or premited by wikipedia or is violating the platforms policy.

Thank you once again Elijahwordpress (talk) 01:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Editing "on a professional basis" as you say is highly indicative of a conflict of interest. In the context of Wikipedia you do not have to be paid for there to exist a conflict of interest. One could be writing about a person they know, such as a friend, or about their boss even if not told to do so at work, and that is still a conflict of interest. Someone having a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgment about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith. So what do you mean by saying "on a professional basis"? Does it have to do with your job or activism or similar? Are you connected to the American Middle East Coalition for Democracy, World Council of the Cedars Revolution, International Lebanese Committee for UN Security Council Resolution 1559, or the American Maronite Union?

Another thing: Do you agree that the page be moved back to the drafting area, so it can be published as an article when it's ready? I had already converted it to a draft and you moved it back to article space, but I am not sure if you really knew what you were doing. —Alalch E. 01:41, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing we can put it back to draft, also what do I do in so stated Conflict Of Interested Do I have to disclose that and where? Elijahwordpress (talk) 01:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also if possible please disclose the conflict of interest statment for me thank you Elijahwordpress (talk) 01:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the third point WP:DISCLOSE ("3. If you want to note the COI on your user page, you can use the {{UserboxCOI}} template: ..."). "Your user page" is this page: User:Elijahwordpress (you can create it). I will do it for you if you do not do so, no worries. —Alalch E. 01:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would highly appriciate that, Thank you. Elijahwordpress (talk) 02:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

not clear what makes them notable?

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tom Harb and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 14:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Elijahwordpress! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 14:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Asilvering was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tom Harb and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

asilvering (talk) 01:45, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by BuySomeApples was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tom Harb and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

BuySomeApples (talk) 18:18, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

... but the sources are not WP:SECONDARY sources to a sufficient degree. They are either primary sources or closer to being a primary source than a secondary source. None of the sources seem to be independent of the subject. Therefore, the sources which you have provided thus far do not provide a basis on which to conclude that the subject of the draft is a biography of a notable individual. Sincerely —Alalch E. 21:51, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by S0091 was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Many of the sources are not independent and/or not reliable (press releases, wikis, institutions affiliated with him, interviews/his comments). Others are brief mentions.

S0091 (talk) 15:26, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tom Harb 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/Tom Harb 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 17:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising, as you did at Tom Harb. You were advised many times that the article was not ready, yet you persisted in moving it. You are being disruptive. Simply declaring your COI doesn't allow that, and if you continue you'll be blocked. Star Mississippi 02:14, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Tom Harb.

Once an AfD discussion is initiated, the article should not be moved. Doing so is considered disruptive much like moving the draft mainspace after several declines and a rejection was disruptive. Continuing this behaviour will result in your account being blocked. Your remedy to prevent deletion is participating in the deletion discussion (WP:Articles for deletion/Tom Harb) to convince editors the article warrants inclusion based on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. S0091 (talk) 21:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Star Mississippi so they are aware. This editor just moved the article back to draft thus the second final warning. S0091 (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @S0091

Did what I was inclined to two days ago.

@Elijahwordpress if you wish to be unblocked, you will need to make it clear to the reviewing admin what you're going to edit about as you will not be unblocked to edit about Harb. Star Mississippi 21:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}.  Star Mississippi 21:44, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]