User talk:LMB2239

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  RickinBaltimore (talk) 01:37, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Dan DeBono (SEAL) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. reddogsix (talk) 01:40, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and the subject does not meet WP:NPOLITICIAN. You are obliged to resolve disputes on Wikipedia w/o such bullying as you have used. Good luck on that. Further information in the messages that follows, Wikipedia is not a SOAPBOX.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:28, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

PS. As subject does not meet inclusion criteria, the best you can hope for is a redirect to the article about the relevant election. Once you withdraw your legal threat, you can attempt to use WP:AfC to try to build a non promotional article. Subject is non notable as a SEAL. That's just part of your trying to boost your subject. A better choice would be Dan DeBono (politician). --Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:39, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello, LMB2239. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. I'm sorry, but  Dan DeBono (SEAL) has been deleted as meeting WP:CSD#G11. "This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to conform with Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION." These must be rewritten from scratch from "reliable, third party sources unconnected to the subject." See WP:RS.

Wikipedia:Identifying blatant advertising#Typical signs of blatant advertising contains information about content to avoid. For more information on content that may be perceived as promotional, click User:Dlohcierekim/promo. These are just rough guides. Pages can avoid all those pitfalls and still be glaringly obvious ad copy. Sometimes pages meeting WP:CSD#G11 give the appearance of an editor violating Wikipedia:Conflict of interest or WP:PAID. Please read and heed them if they apply to you.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and providing verifiable information. That generally means someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. Please see Wikipedia:Citing sources . Template:cite has templates you can use in citing your sources. Place the template {{references}} at the bottom of the page, and references cited in the text will appear there.

If you want to try again, please use the Article Wizard or articles for creation to guide you through the creation process. The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems.

You may find this tool useful: Google custom search Don't feel discouraged. My first attempts at creating articles were deleted too.

There is more information at Wikipedia:Community portal. There is help available at THE TEAHOUSE. Cheers, and happy editing. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:28, 3 May 2018 (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).

LMB2239 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

To those whom I have seemed to be offending, I sincerely apologize. I did not intend for the previous comments to be legal threats, just a simple explanation of why this person was important with the hope that even if it was not understood why they were important, the page would not be deleted. It has come to my attention that I was wrong and I do sincerely apologize. I hope that my account will be unblocked and I will reform the page Dan DeBono (SEAL) to comply with Wikipedia standards. The page's existence is imminent to the electoral system as it allows voters to be well versed in the backgrounds of candidates they can possibly vote for. I ask that you find it in your heart, and put it on your screen (little computer joke there), to unblock me.

Decline reason:

Nonsense. Your I will explore legal action was a direct and unambiguous legal threat. No reasonable person would interpret your threat as explanation of why this person was important. Ever. Max Semenik (talk) 21:49, 3 May 2018 (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.

You will need to unequivocally state that you are not pursuing and will not pursue legal action. You will also need to indicate that you have read and understand the relevant notability guideline, WP:NPOLITICIAN- which indicates that merely seeking a political office does not merit a person an article. Wikipedia is not a guide to political candidates(though such websites exist); people with articles must meet notability guidelines (WP:BIO) in some way to merit an article. Others discuss this point with you above. 331dot (talk) 17:58, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

O ho! What you mean is it is essential that you use Wikipedia to promote the subject. You will need to run a new article through WP:AfC and let it be reviewed there. You will need significant coverage from WP:reliable sources unconnected with the subject and with a reputation for fact checking. You will need to write in a neutral, non promotional manner, w/o grandiosity or puffery. You need to read and heed WP:PAID and WP:COI-- disclose any connection with the subject. What 331dot said. Please bear in mind that Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a stump.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

I will not be pursuing legal action. I understand that wikipedia is not a platform for candidates. I do, however, believe that a voter has the right to information about a person they are electing to office. The suppression of such information does not allow for voters to have the opportunity to exercise their constitutional right responsibly. I will NOT portray the people I write about in a biased manner. The subjects and people of whom I write on will be objective and serve as information centers worthy of a wikipedia page and not as a mere campaign stump. I do ask that you unblock me and next time, hopefully there will not be a next time, I would prefer that we use the talk aspect of wikipedia to resolve such things.LMB2239 (talk) 21:50, 3 May 2018 (UTC)LMB2239Reply

user:maxsem: I have stated that I will not be pursuing legal action and have apologized. I think it is incredibly rude for you to say that my request was nonsense. I understand that my actions were wrong but wikipedia is supposed to be a source of information (an online encyclopedia) not a censored outlet for people like yourself to exert power over others.

Statements like that won't help your case to be unblocked. This is not about censorship or power, but about notability as I describe above. The simple fact is that if the only claim to notability is running for public office, the person does not merit an article. If they win the election, then they would, but not before. If you disagree with the notability criteria, you could work to change it, but you have to be unblocked first. Stating that you will not pursue legal action is a start, but you will need to indicate that you understand the notability criteria. 331dot (talk) 23:15, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

As the article had previously stated - before being deleted - the subject is in public office and is now running for a different public office. He currently serves and thus has met the criteria needed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by LMB2239 (talk • contribs)

Which public office does he hold? I can view the deleted article, and I'm not seeing such information there. 331dot (talk) 23:40, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I'll just make one point here. You say "I do, however, believe that a voter has the right to information about a person they are electing to office." I agree 100%. However, that does not mean that Wikipedia has any obligation to facilitate it - Wikipedia is not an electoral service medium, but an encyclopedia, and it does not exist for the purpose of providing voter information. Would you expect every website in the world to provide you with a venue to write about election candidates, and would you consider it "suppression" or "censorship" if, say, Gardenology.org refused to do it? Wikipedia is no different. Yes, Wikipedia is a source of information - but that is true of pretty much all websites. But no website is intended to be a source of all information. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:09, 4 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Actually, I'll just add a personal example. I'm active in local politics and we've just had a local election in my part of the world yesterday. Part of my volunteer work is getting candidate information to voters - about the candidate I support, so very much not from a neutral POV. But even from a neutral POV, that candidate does not come close to Wikipedia's notability requirements (and even the candidate's party leader doesn't). Did I complain about suppression and censorship? No, because I know that Wikipedia is not here for my electioneering purposes. Instead, I used appropriate electioneering platforms and respected Wikipedia for what it is. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:16, 4 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

LMB2239 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

Please unblock me.

Accept reason:

Since you have withdrawn your threat of legal action, and since that was the sole reason given for the block, I have unblocked your account. Note that this unblock provides no comment on the notability and promotional issues examined above, and if you persist in using Wikipedia inappropriately there is no prejudice against re-blocking your account for other reasons. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:50, 4 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

I will be creatintg a new page for a candidate. I have read the criterion for creating a page of such a candidate and will have the information supported by non-biased third parties. If there is an issue, please use this talk page to discuss instead of "requesting for speedy deletion" or blocking me as a userLMB2239 (talk) 20:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)LMB2239Reply

You can certainly request what you state, but all other Wikipedia users will not necessarily see this and even if they do you cannot compel people to comply. And it was not just bias that was the issue, but the fact that merely being a candidate explicitly does not meet WP:NPOLITICIAN. Unless the person you are writing about is notable in some other way unrelated to seeking public office, the article would be at risk of deletion by any valid process. 331dot (talk) 20:32, 11 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I recently moved an article you created to Draft:Dan DeBono (Candidate). My edit summary when conducting the move was as follows; Moving to draft pending outcome of subject's election campaign. Per WP:NPOLITICIAN, candidates are not considered notable until they have won their respective elections. Subject also has no other claims to WP:NOTE notability.--SamHolt6 (talk) 20:50, 11 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

A quick glance at the ref's-- and you'll need to make them inline using template:cite-- shows a lot from the subjects campaign page. They don't help with meeting notability requirements. W/O clicking the link, the Newsweek probably does. You need lots of coverage in news outlets, the more global the reach the better. Local media will probably just offer "routine coverage" that probably won't help. Please see WP:NPOL for more information about politician notability. Hope that helps.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:57, 11 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Tyler Ford Bialek Memorial Foundation, Inc. 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 Tyler Ford Bialek Memorial Foundation, Inc. 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. cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 14:53, 20 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on The Tyler Ford Bialek Memorial Foundation, Inc. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Atlantic306 (talk) 15:16, 20 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello, LMB2239. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dan DeBono".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CptViraj (Talk) 09:05, 4 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello, LMB2239,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Fiachra10003 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Dan DeBono (politician) should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan DeBono (politician) .

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Fiachra10003}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Fiachra10003 (talk) 14:50, 23 July 2019 (UTC)Reply