User talk:DesertDana

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello, DesertDana! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! — Masum Ibn Musa  Conversation 03:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masum Ibn Musa, thank you for the welcome message and the helpful advice! I appreciate it. I will consider joining a WikiProject and/or being adopted. Thanks for the encouragement.DesertDana (talk) 20:36, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Nomination of David Fox (lawyer) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Fox (lawyer) 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/David Fox (lawyer) 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. -- Dane talk 21:28, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar

A new editor on the right path
You've done a great job re-settling in! I know you're not "new" per se, but it's nice that you've started editing again. WikiMacaroonsCinnamon? 08:47, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, WikiMacaroons! I appreciate it. My recent activity is partly due to pandemic-related free time (lol), but I'm enjoying it and plan to continue editing. I should probably change my page since I'm no longer new. Thanks again!DesertDana (talk) 02:48, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of David Fox (lawyer)[edit]

If 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 David Fox (lawyer) 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 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. 1292simon (talk) 06:17, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bob McDonald (Businessman)[edit]

Thank you for the recent approval of content to the Bob McDonald article.Tsmith47 (talk) 16:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Thrive Capital Logo.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Thrive Capital Logo.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) 17:49, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SVPGlobal moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, SVPGlobal, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Celestina007 (talk) 21:29, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: SVPGlobal (May 23)[edit]

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 organizations and companies). 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 when they have been resolved.
Theroadislong (talk) 19:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, DesertDana! Having an article 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) 19:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:SVPGlobal has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:SVPGlobal. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 19:37, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I responded on the Draft page. DesertDana (talk) 21:26, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: SVPGlobal (August 4)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nomadicghumakkad was:
This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Showing off Billions of dollars doesn't get us near to notability. WP:NPOV does. Also read WP:NCORP. This is going to be tricky, best to discuss notability in advance and what would be suitable to write as content in this. The boasting about specific clients and cases is surely not looking great.
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 when they have been resolved.
Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 10:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Branpedia per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Branpedia. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
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 ~~~~}}.  --Blablubbs (talk) 12:04, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Please consider unblocking my account. I do not know Branpedia or MaggieBC and cannot speak for them. Looking through our edit histories, it appears we have never edited the same page. It seems that the accusation is that IP accounts have edited the same pages as our accounts. I would suspect that any IP account with enough edit history would eventually edit the same pages of multiple user accounts, especially if those accounts focus on similar subject matter. This is a tangential connection and doesn't mean that those accounts are related. I have been editing in good faith since 2018 and I would love to keep using my account. (I am tagging the users involved in the original investigation: Blablubbs, MarioGom, and AmandaNP) Thanks for your consideration.DesertDana (talk) 19:48, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There is no such thing as "IP accounts"; by definition an IP is not an account. Regarding the block, I don't think this situation is a coincidence. It isn't just about the subject matter. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 23:50, 1 March 2022 (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, forgive me if I used the wrong term; by "IP account" I simply mean an IP. As far as I understand it the accusation boils down this: 154.17.0.0/16 edited the same pages as Branpedia and me (DesertDana), and therefore I am an alleged sockpuppet of Branpedia. However, a CU by AmandaNP determined "Unrelated - not using proxies, with very static IP a solid distances away from each other." Also, we never edited the same page, despite me making 169 total edits on 106 pages and Branpedia making 514 total edits on 292 pages. Furthermore, Branpedia uses a reference style different than mine. Below is a list of our last three citations.

Branpedia's last three citations:
Sarah Pringle, "Avista to Make 3.7 Times its Money with Sale of Arcadia Consumer Healthcare," PE Hub, August 9, 2021.
"The Fog 1979," Movie-Locations.com, retrieved September 25, 2021.
Nick Turner and Gregory Calderone, "GameStop Soars After Founder of Chewy Acquires a Stake," Bloomberg News, August 31, 2021.
DesertDana last three citations:
"Mayoral Spotlight: William Carr Lane". StLouis-MO.gov. 1 October 2015. Retrieved 8 September 2021.
"William Carr Lane". New Mexico History. Retrieved 7 September 2021.
"Our Team". The Asian American Foundation. Retrieved 7 September 2021.

I am focusing on Branpedia because that is the account of which I'm being accused of being a sockpuppet; I would prefer it if MaggieBC was dealt with separately from me. I do not know what, if anything, was going on between Branpedia and MaggieBC, but I can assure you the tangential connection made between me and Branpedia is a coincidence. Thank you for your time.DesertDana (talk) 18:48, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to make another request for another administrator to review. If you can convince another administrator that this is a coincidence, they will unblock you. 331dot (talk) 20:37, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request 2[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I am making one more unblock request in an attempt to present a more succinct argument that I am not a sockpuppet of Branpedia based off a CU result, distinct citation styles and a lack of content overlap. #CU by AmandaNP determined "Unrelated - not using proxies, with very static IP a solid distances away from each other". #Branpedia uses a reference style different than mine. Below is a list of our last three citations. #*Branpedia's last three citations: #**Sarah Pringle, "Avista to Make 3.7 Times its Money with Sale of Arcadia Consumer Healthcare," PE Hub, August 9, 2021. #**"The Fog 1979," Movie-Locations.com, retrieved September 25, 2021. #**Nick Turner and Gregory Calderone, "GameStop Soars After Founder of Chewy Acquires a Stake," Bloomberg News, August 31, 2021. #*DesertDana last three citations: #**"Mayoral Spotlight: William Carr Lane". StLouis-MO.gov. 1 October 2015. Retrieved 8 September 2021. #**"William Carr Lane". New Mexico History. Retrieved 7 September 2021. #**"Our Team". The Asian American Foundation. Retrieved 7 September 2021. #As for overlap, we never edited the same page, despite me making 169 total edits on 106 pages and Branpedia making 514 total edits on 292 pages. As for the fact that 154.17.0.0/16 edited the same pages as Branpedia and me, I would suspect that any IP with enough edit history would eventually edit the same pages of multiple user accounts. This is a tangential connection and doesn't mean that those accounts are related. I have focused my argument on Branpedia because that is the account of which I'm being accused of being a sockpuppet; I would prefer it if MaggieBC was dealt with separately from me. I do not know what, if anything, was going on between Branpedia and MaggieBC, but I can assure you the tangential connection made between me and Branpedia is a coincidence. I have been editing in good faith since 2018 and I would love to keep using my account. Thank you for your consideration.DesertDana (talk) 17:39, 4 March 2022 (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. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you
    1. understand what you have been blocked for,
    2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
    3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 11:01, 3 April 2022 (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.

Thrive Capital moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Thrive Capital, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. MarioGom (talk) 13:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Thrive Capital Logo.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Thrive Capital Logo.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) 18:24, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:SVPGlobal[edit]

Information icon Hello, DesertDana. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:SVPGlobal, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:01, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request 3 - previous request declined for "procedural" reasons only[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, I assert that the block on my account is unnecessary to prevent disruption on Wikipedia because my conduct is not connected with the block, I have been a positive contributor to Wikipedia since 2018 and would like to continue contributing in a constructive manner.

Positive contributions: 171 edits (163 live); my focus: Women - 11 pages edited; Artists - 18 pages edit; American Southwest - 16 pages edited; Private equity - 7 pages edited.
Block: I was blocked for being a suspected sockpuppet of Branpedia because an IP range (154.17.0.0/16) edited a page Branpedia edited (Avista Capital Partners) and two pages I edited (Li Lu and Thrive Capital). Also the investigation claimed that my account and Branpedia's had "Similar interests in US companies, same edit summary style, same timecard."
Evidence I'm not a sockpuppet of Branpedia:
  • A CU by AmandaNP determined "Unrelated - not using proxies, with very static IP a solid distances away from each other".
  • "Similar interests in US companies" - By my count I've edited 2 US companies (XPO Logistics and Warby Parker). More accurately, I've edited 7 Private Equity Firms and 2 banks.
  • Subject matter overlap - I made 171 edits and 154.17.0.0/16 made approximately 175 edits; I don't find it unusual to have edited 2 of the same pages. Also, as far as I can tell I never edited the same page as Branpedia.
  • "same edit summary style" - when I began editing on Wikipedia I mimicked edit summaries on the site. I think my style is pretty generic.
  • Branpedia uses a reference style different than mine. Below is a list of our last three citations to illustrate this point.
  • Branpedia's last three citations
  • DesertDana last three citations:

I would like to continue contributing to Wikipedia and I would prefer to do it under my established account. Thank for reconsidering the block on my account. DesertDana (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You would need to explain User:AnnaLatte, who seems to be another account of yours. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:42, 14 June 2022 (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.

Someone else will review your request, but "I would prefer to do it under my established account" sounds like you intend to evade your block if necessary. 331dot (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

331dot, apologies. It's not my intention to evade the block. I was under the misconception that a person could create a new account and start over. Is there a proper way to continue editing after a person's account is blocked indefinitely or is it only possible if and when that block is removed? Thanks. DesertDana (talk) 22:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The block is on you as an individual, not just your account. You may not edit under any account or IP address until the block on this account is successfully appealed and removed. 331dot (talk) 00:02, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, understood. Thanks. DesertDana (talk) 22:48, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DesertDana&oldid=1093127016"