User talk:Hissamelriys

March 2020[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed a file deletion tag from Kevin Leyes. When removing deletion tags, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 19:59, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe someone is a sock, you should present that evidence instead of making accusations, particularly as the deletion nomination is rather clear, despite it being malformed. Praxidicae (talk) 20:08, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sundayclose Are you sure? A new editor with just 3 edits placing a deletion tag and you think we should be wasting time on it? Hissamelriys (talk) 20:09, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't want the article deleted, express your concerns on the AfD page. If you think the editor is a sock, you need to go to WP:SPI or WP:ANI instead of inappropriately removing the template. But a word of caution: You've already gone to two admin boards, and forum shopping is a very bad practice that won't get you any support. My advice is let the AfD work itself out the usual way. Sundayclose (talk) 20:15, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sundayclose Thank you for the advise. I think I should focus on improving the article now. Hissamelriys (talk) 20:17, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Praxidicae do you have any suggestion as to how I can open a spi with only 1 account with no idea who the master might be? Hissamelriys (talk) 20:11, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea who they are and while I too find it suspicious, I'd focus more on improving the article for the reasons I just pointed out at the AFD. Praxidicae (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Praxidicae Thank you for the suggestion. I have focused more on improving the article. I was not sure how to add the additional newspaper and TV show links so I added these under a news separate section as "media coverage" and few more in other sections. Can you please check the article when you have time? I will greatly appreciate if you re-consider your vote on AFD after checking. Hissamelriys (talk) 16:39, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

Hello Hissamelriys. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Hissamelriys. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Hissamelriys|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. GSS ^💬 05:56, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what has made you think that but I am not being paid directly or indirectly. --Hissamelriys (talk) 06:36, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Off-wiki evidence tells a different story and I have shared the details with an admin and looking at the edit history of user Below in the box, I guess they might have some as well. GSS ^💬 07:07, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS: It may also possible that Kevin tried to hire an editor to create him a Wikipedia page but the editor failed to create him the page so he had to ask a friend of help. I understood that you want to keep the Wikipedia clean from promotional pages. Because you shared the details with an admin so I am sure they will find something useful here. And I thank you for looking at the edit history of the user:Below in the box because I believe he was the guy who tried extorting money from Kevin and now wants to delete his page. Hissamelriys (talk) 07:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And what about FileZigZag‎? GSS ^💬 07:51, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: FileZigZag (April 11)[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 GSS 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 websites). 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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:FileZigZag and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:FileZigZag, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

GSS ^💬 07:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines.

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 ~~~~}}. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:07, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doc James: why did you blocked me indefinitely? Can you please clarify how I did advertising or self-promotion? Or even violated a rule that warrant an indefinite block? Hissamelriys (talk) 20:28, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You were editing for pay without disclosure. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:39, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doc James: please tell me if Wikipedia gives a second chance to allow me to edit again? I have not received any money rather someone else is gaining the money and I have become a scapegoat here. I can send you the evidence who asked me to create the page and where. How can I send you? I do not want to edit Wikipedia for pay. I want to volunteer. Hissamelriys (talk) 21:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can email to me through WP or simple post it here.

You appear to be saying that one of your friends was being paid for the page. Had trouble creating it, so asked you? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doc James: How do I email you? What is you email please? He's not a friend, not anymore. He goes by the name "Internet_Lord" in forums. You can search in Google. He also said that he had an account Meme Lord 519. I want to send you the screenshots of whatsapp chats where he requested me to create pages for him and in exchnage he would provide me with a Gdrive with unlimited space for lifetime. I never knew I could be permanently blocked from editing Wikipedia or that he is getting paid. Hissamelriys (talk) 21:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Email sent to you. Hissamelriys (talk) 22:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What ever you are doing here is a violation of WP:MEAT. If not you, your friend was hired to create pages that you started (per off-wiki evidence) and most of their accounts were blocked in the past. GSS ^💬 03:25, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS: If that is the case then the person who get paid should be blocked, not me. I do not create pages for him. According to WP:MEAT, new editors or like-minded editors are brought for assistance in disputes. I am not a new editor, not here to influence consensus. In fact I have been editing Wikipedia long before he started. I do not want anymore trouble and I can assure you of no such violations from me rather I can help tracking down other paid articles by him and others. Hissamelriys (talk) 08:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doc James: please check your email. Hissamelriys (talk) 08:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wesleyner7. It is clear you are a meatpuppet (WP:MEAT) of your friend, so I don't think you'll be unblocked. Your friend has been indef blocked earlier per CheckUser evidence for abusing multiple accounts. -- Java Hurricane 07:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@~~Wesleyner7~~ Hissamelriys, can you list all the articles that your so-called friend asked you to create. GSS ^💬 08:30, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS: I do not get this? Are you trying to link me with Wesleyner7? He's just a sock among many others you still have not found yet. If it were me I wouldn't be asking here to unblock me. I would have created a new account. Email me if you want more evidences. I do not wish to leak out more here.Hissamelriys (talk) 09:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That message was for you. Please list all the articles here that your friend asked you to create. GSS ^💬 09:12, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will I be unblocked then? Hissamelriys (talk) 10:11, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So you were to be paid with "Gdrive with unlimited space for lifetime"... You were working with a family of spam accounts. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:34, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doc James: How many times do I have to say to you that I do not work for anyone. They requested to create the articles which I did and you deleted it. My other contributions or page creations are not paid by anyone in any means. I do not know why you guys are so obsessed with paid-editors! Speaking of morality, I have already seen it[2]. I have tried enough to convince both of you.Hissamelriys (talk) 18:14, 13 April 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am not a paid editor, I was not paid by anyone to create their pages. As already stated I was requested to create a article for a person named Kevin Leyes whom I still believe is notable as per Wikipedia guidelines. I did not know money was involved in it. I was under the impression that Kevin Leyes's team needed my help and as a reward they would provide me with a cloud storage from Google. I have already explained all of these in my previous messages here. I do not have any idea what off-wiki evidences GSS has been talking about and I do not even know if that is for real or even has any grounds or not. My other contributions to Wikipedia till date are not paid by any person. I still want to contribute to Wikipedia. I learned the hard way that I should not create any pages if someone request. I cannot make any page for any rewards or money. I also understood that it was my fault and I should have been more careful. I assure you this won't happen again and if I am unblocked I will only make positive constructive contributions. I really want to be a part of Wikipedia and want to be genuine editor. I am requesting to give me a second chance so please unblock me. This is my humble request. Hissamelriys (talk) 18:26, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You say you are not a paid editor, then describe the payment you expected to receive. It seems like you fundamentally misunderstand WP:PAID and WP:COI. Yamla (talk) 18:31, 13 April 2020 (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.

@Yamla: Sorry for the confusion. What I meant is that I was never a paid editor, nor expected any payment or will ever expect anything for my contributions here. I have read both WP:PAID and WP:COI and understood the policy. You can ask me any questions regarding this to test. Hissamelriys (talk) 18:35, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"as a reward they would provide me with a cloud storage from Google" This makes you a paid editor. Unambiguously. Paid. WP:PAID and WP:COI. Receiving cloud storage from Google is your payment. --Yamla (talk) 19:49, 13 April 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

My earlier appeal was declined within 5 minutes of posting it. I think the reviewing admin didn't read the previous discussion on my talk page or have misunderstood something. I have clearly said that I am not a paid editor. I have not received any money. I will not be doing anything such in future if I am unblocked. I wish to be unblocked and make positive contributions. Hissamelriys (talk) 18:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please stop wikilawyering. You received some kind of compensation for your edits. That makes you a paid editor by our standards. If you don't want to follow our rules, you'll have to find some other website to contribute to. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:52, 13 April 2020 (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.

@NinjaRobotPirate:, @Yamla: I want to follow the rules. If I was paid for creating a single page, will I be banned from editing Wikipedia forever? Please tell me. Hissamelriys (talk) 20:51, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You were blocked for undisclosed paid editing. So, to be unblocked, you need to comply with WP:PAID. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:30, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal for unblock[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).

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

Request reason:

I was blocked for violating WP:PAID and I apologies again for it. I have read it and I will not violate any Wikipedia guidelines. I will comply with WP:PAID if I ever get compensated for my edits in any way which is extremely unlikely because I will not make any editing for anyone or in exchange of anything from onwards. Please be kind enough to give me a second chance to allow me to contribute to Wikipedia in constructive way. Hissamelriys (talk) 18:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I fear you have burned your bridges here already. Our interest is in what benefits the encyclopedia, and I can see no benefit to Wikipedia in unblocking your account; trust is a vital commodity on Wikipedia, and you have already shown that we cannot trust you. Put bluntly - and I apologise if this offends - I simply am not convinced that you are here to help build an encyclopedia rather than to benefit yourself. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:17, 6 May 2020 (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.

Your draft article, Draft:FileZigZag[edit]

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

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:43, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]