User talk:Feingoldstudio

Welcome!

Hello, Feingoldstudio, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Raymond J. Learsy, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Halestock (talk) 16:08, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Raymond J. Learsy[edit]

A tag has been placed on Raymond J. Learsy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Halestock (talk) 16:08, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your question[edit]

There is nothing to stop you creating the page again. If you want to use material from elsewhere, it is not enough to assert that you have permission; you must take the appropriate release steps - note that release to Wikipedia is more than just permission to reproduce: as it says on every edit page "You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL" which means roughly that you agree that anyone else can copy them, modify them, and use them for any purpose. If you yourself own the copyright, see WP:Donating copyrighted materials; if someone else does, see WP:Requesting copyright permission. It may be simpler to write the article in your own words, making sure to avoid a promotional tone or peacock terms. Other useful things for you to read:

WP:Notability, a requirement to have a Wikipedia article, which is not a matter of opinion but needs to be demonstrated by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Myspace, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, books etc, and affiliated ones, and press releases. More detail at WP:Notability (people). Citing independent references to establish notability is the best way to avoid the article being deleted again.
WP:Your First Article
If you are Mr Learsy, or are editing at his request or on his behalf, WP:Conflict of interest and WP:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:36, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017[edit]

Hello, Feingoldstudio. 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 COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies.

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:37, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019[edit]

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In that reason, you must:

Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block. To do so, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason for thinking that the block was an error, and publish the page. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:00, 27 November 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

From the Wikipedia:Username policy: "Usernames which represent the subject of a biographical article are not considered promotional." This username represents the individual Ken Feingold, alone. Edits to make factual corrections to biographical matter were attempted to be made. No promotional materials whatsoever have been introduced.

Decline reason:

As per below. Yamla (talk) 13:13, 1 December 2019 (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.

The passage of the username policy you refer to references stage/pen names, not business names. Your username suggests you are the account for a studio and not a person. It might be okay as a username if you are Ken Feingold. If you are, you will need to verify your identity with Wikipedia by following the instructions written at WP:REALNAME. 331dot (talk) 08:48, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: (OTRS comment): Identity confirmed. Given nature of spamublock, I will not overturn and leave to your judgement on how to proceed. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:56, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That should address the username issue, you just now need to make a new unblock request addressing your edits; I would suggest reviewing the autobiography policy first. 331dot (talk) 19:47, 7 December 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

I was not aware of the autobiography policy. From now on I will only make suggestions for edits via this talk page. I do understand now that, even when the intention is to make factual corrections, the editors do not want the subject of the article to correct their own page, and I will not do so in the future. I am requesting to be unblocked as a courtesy, 1. because the original reasons for being blocked were incorrect, i.e., I am not a business nor doing promotion or advertising, and 2. I intend to make useful contributions other than editing my own page.Feingoldstudio (talk) 12:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 13:49, 24 December 2019 (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.

@331dot, HickoryOughtShirt?4, and Yamla: ^ --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 16:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What do you intend to contribute about? 331dot (talk) 17:14, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot:I do not have anything specific in mind right now. I state that as an intention. I would like the opportunity to be able to make useful contributions if I have any ideas about future new pages to be proposed, and I am also interested in helping out with some of the tasks listed on the Community portal. I do understand now that Wikipedia has clear contribution policies and guidelines which have evolved since the early days of Wikipedia, and I will definitely RTFM before making any new contributions.Feingoldstudio (talk) 18:49, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ken, you've really only edited about yourself for the past decade since you started editing. You're assuring us you'll stop directly editing w/re: yourself and other subjects with which you may have a conflict of interest and instead post edit requests to article talk pages, as explained at Wikipedia:Edit requests? --valereee (talk) 14:06, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Valerie, yes, I am assuring you of that. -Ken Feingoldstudio (talk)