User talk:SeanMXD

Welcome![edit]

Hello, SeanMXD, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Yenitza Muñoz, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

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 Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, 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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kirbanzo ^{(userpage - talk - contribs)} 01:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Yenitza Muñoz[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 Yenitza Muñoz, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Kirbanzo ^{(userpage - talk - contribs)} 01:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019[edit]

Hello, I'm Everedux. I noticed that in this edit to Yenitza Muñoz, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Everedux ^(talk) 01:31, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Yenitza Muñoz for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yenitza Muñoz 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/Yenitza Muñoz 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. – UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 03:25, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of New View Tree Care[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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on New View Tree Care requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 03:26, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of New View Tree Care[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 New View Tree Care 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. Largoplazo (talk) 06:45, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, SeanMXD. 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 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 or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} 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 WP:Spam);
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. — Jeff G. ツ 13:40, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:10, 2 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).

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

Request reason:

I do not have multiple accounts. My girlfriend created a Wikipedia account (Nathom2002) after I told her about how the article I was editing was flagged for deletion. She fixed some grammatical errors and removed the deletion notice. The article I was writing is the first article I have ever written. I have made a lot of mistakes so far but I am trying to fix them as quickly as possible. If my account remains blocked, I will not be able to bring this article up to an acceptable standard, and it will remain in bad shape, or will be deleted. I am still learning how Wikipedia works. Please give me some time to adjust. Also, please unblock my girlfriend's account: Nathom2002. She has done nothing that violates Wikipedia's rules. SeanMXD (talk) 17:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please review meat puppetry; we have no way of knowing who is sitting at the computer editing, and as such we must treat the two accounts as if it were one person operating two accounts. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 18:35, 2 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I understand that there is now way to know who is behind the computer screen, however, the two accounts in question (SeanMXD and nathom2002) are from two different IP addresses from two different ISPs in two different cities in the same state. I would understand the reasoning for the blocks if the accounts were from the same IP address or the same city, but they aren't. The block on my account shouldn't be here and neither should the block on Natalie's account (nathom2002) since that is her only account as well. You can verify that fact by doing an IP lookup of the accounts' IP addresses. If you look beyond the fact that both IP addresses are in Connecticut you will see that my IP address is from Franklin and hers is from Plantsville (or nearby cities where ISPs are located). I intend follow the rules of Wikipedia and make a positive impact on the community here. I have only been a part of the Wikipedia community for a day and I obviously have a lot to learn, but I have not been malicious with my publications. I'm excited to be a part of this community, and I hope that my girlfriend and I can be un-blocked. If you can't unblock me, at least un-block her. I don't want to be the reason that she can't use this website.

Decline reason:

Violation of WP:SOCK is established. WP:SO may be available to you, no sooner than six months from today. Yamla (talk) 14:07, 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.

Nathom2002 (talk · contribs · count) has not requested an unblock.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:36, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You also have not addressed Frdvjr (talk · contribs · count).--Bbb23 (talk) 01:39, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FRDVJR is my little brother, Felix Ruben Del Valle JR. He lives in the same house as me. I helped him make a Wikipedia account a while back and showed him how it works. He has trouble in school with focusing and other issues. I tried getting him involved in Wikipedia so he could have an outlet to the world but he was only interested in vandalizing pages. His changes never made it past spam filters, and he lost interest shortly thereafter. I don't think he's ready to be a part of this community yet. If he does decide to get back on Wikipedia I'll keep an eye on him so he uses this website properly. SeanMXD (talk) 05:09, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming for argument's sake that you are telling the truth, I wish you the best of luck with your family problems, but I don't think any of you should be permitted to edit Wikipedia. No doubt there are other things you can do with your time.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:49, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like to block us based on other terms I would understand, however, the CheckUser blocks on all three accounts are invalid, regardless of your stated opinion. As I have explained, each account belongs to a different person. I would completely understand and support a temporary block of Frdvjr since he had tried to vandalize pages and failed. He will not do that again, however. As for Nathom2002 and I, Nathom2002 has not made a single verifiable mistake on Wikipedia, and although I have made mistakes in creating my first article, I don't believe I have done anything to constitute a lifetime block on my account. SeanMXD (talk) 15:23, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
CheckUsers have the ability to see any account's IP address(es). I highly doubt you're telling the truth if your IPs were suspicious enough to have the CUs block you. Also, illegit meatpuppetry is still a blockable offense. Kirbanzo ^{(userpage - talk - contribs)} 01:45, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that I broke the rules. I intend to start using Wikipedia as it is meant to be used. I admit that I asked my girlfriend to do something on my behalf from her account, which qualifies as meatpuppetry. I won't do this again. Frdvjr has no connection to this incident. Nathom2002 had no idea that what I was asking her to do was a blockable offense. If you're gonna leave me blocked, fine, but please unblock Natalie. If you do unblock me, I promise that I won't commit the same offense, and I will follow the rules that are in place. If you unblock Frdvjr, I will make sure he knows that Wikipedia is not a place to be messing with things. I wish I could go back and undo the mess I made. I'm really sorry for causing all of this trouble. You guys probably have better things to do. SeanMXD (talk) 02:07, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As for whether or not I'm telling the truth about our IP addresses, there's nothing I can do to prove that to you. But you can go through all of my social media accounts (they're all SeanMXD) and ask any of the people I know if I am a liar. My reputation precedes me, and that is something you can verify.

Draft:Yenitza Muñoz concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Yenitza Muñoz, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:35, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Yenitza Muñoz[edit]

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

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!} 14:03, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock discussion[edit]

UTRS appeal #36438 is open.
Limited check user evidence found nothing concerning.
User has engaged in undeclared paid editing
User does have talk page access. Most efficient thing might be to carry UTRS appeal here and have user fill out standard unblock request. Continuing discussion at UTRS. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:34, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nathom2002 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) Frdvjr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
@Bbb23, Yamla, and 331dot:, any feedback or insight would be appreciated. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that the discussion should be here. 331dot (talk) 19:17, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, agree the discussion can be moved here. Given that CU evidence found no recent violations, I think this user is a candidate for unblocking if (but only if) they address the undeclared paid editing and sockpuppetry. WP:SO counts in their favour here but isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card. --Yamla (talk) 20:01, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moving the discussion here. This is what the UTRS appeal says:

Why should you be unblocked?

I got blocked over a year ago, I think. I was struggling to pay my bills at the time, and someone wanted me to make a Wikipedia page for his client. Being desperate for money at the time (freshly 18 and living on my own), I happily obliged. Honestly, I'm not even sure what the next steps were at that point but I definitely broke the rules somehow, pissed off some mods trying to get myself and my (then) girlfriend unblocked so I could get that article out, and I got her and I banned for life from Wiki. I think I had her make a Wiki account so she could change an article in a way that I wasn't allowed to, and mods saw that as me using another IP to circumvent the system. If I remember the situation correctly, I didn't explicitly meet the ban-me-for-life requirements, but I also didn't have any hard proof that I was telling the truth. Before that point I had never contributed to Wiki before, and I was admittedly reckless in my decisions as my only focus was meeting the client's needs so I could earn a paycheck. In case you're curious, I did wind up getting some compensation for the time I spent drafting the article and talking to mods to get unbanned. I'm in a different situation now. I write software for work and I write music in my free time. I'd like to contribute to Wiki for the first time (I don't count the time that I got banned - none of my work ever made it online), but I would also like to clear my name on Wiki. I could easily make a new account - there would be no association to my banned account whatsoever - but I've been using the name SeanMXD on every single website, app, etc. possible - or some variation of SeanMXD for places that want more than 7 characters - for at least 10 years now and I don't intend to change my identity over something trivial. Also I'm pretty sure you guys banned me for life with the intention of me - the person - never being able to contribute to wiki until the day I die, so I'm just gonna honor that until I get a response on this appeal. I know this is probably a difficult thing to make happen. A law wouldn't be a law if it wasn't consistently upheld. But in the real world, mercy is typically shown, and I would appreciate some of that. I don't appreciate the idea that someone would intentionally try to silence me from this platform until the end of time. Personally, I would reserve that kind of treatment for people whose actions were much more... sinister... But I digress. I would really like to contribute to Wikipedia, and there is no chance that what happened before will happen again. Please give me a second chance. I promise I'll do some good things here. Also, the girlfriend I roped into getting banned - her username is nathom2002. I'd love to be able to tell her I got her unblocked. Not that it matters to her - she had told me at the time that she didn't care at all - but it really does matter to me. I hurt her in quite a few ways when we were dating and it made me feel terrible. Getting her wiki-banned gave me another piece of ammo against myself to tell myself I just wasn't good for her and that I only served to hurt her and make her life worse, and that mentality almost exclusively ended our relationship. It definitely doesn't make sense to a stranger like yourself but it does makes sense to me. I'd like to undo at least one thing I did wrong to her. This one seems simple enough. It's like, maybe if I can get her unbanned - which seemed impossible a year ago - I can fix some other wrongs which also seemed impossible to fix at the time. . . . Anyways thanks for your consideration, and thanks for reading this far. Unless you didn't, I guess. In that case, tl;dr: please unblock me, I for sure won't break the rules again - I learned my lesson the hard way.

I just realized that really long appeals tend to take a lot longer, so I'll summarize everything here. I did break the rules, I won't do that again. I for sure learned my lesson. And please unblock nathom2002 (we were blocked together)

When asked what constructive edits would be made and what his relationship with Mark Roberts/New View Tree Care his response was: "Mark Roberts is my former stepfather. I don't have any particular edits in mind right now, but I've been learning a lot about programming through school and work. I can see myself in the future making edits to technology-related pages, or starting pages for lesser known tech startups."

I've closed the UTRS appeal so the discussion can take place here.-- 5 albert square (talk) 03:36, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23, Yamla, 331dot, and Deepfriedokra: As for the undeclared paid editing, I initially didn't know I was supposed to declare that I was a paid editor. I think at one point I did try to declare that, after I was notified. I can't find the history to verify that. Also, I still stand by the fact that (from what I understand sockpuppeting is) I wasn't sockpuppeting. I did ask my girlfriend if she could edit some part of the Yenitza Muñoz page, and she created the account Nathom2002 to do that. And I have never used the account Frdvjr. The only reason it was blocked was because it originated from my IP address at the time I was blocked. It belongs to my brother. I helped him make that account a couple months prior to myself being blocked so he could get involved with Wiki. I wanted him to do more with the internet than just play games. When should I fill out my unblock request? SeanMXD (talk) 15:59, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"ask my girlfriend if she could edit " = sockpuppetry, so meh. As long as y'all agree to not edit the same pages and disclose on both user pages that you share an IP, that should take care of that. I'm inclined to unblock with the understanding that y'all do not edit about Mark Roberts/New View Tree Care and heed WP:COI and WP:PAID. You can request unblocking placing (the part between the "pre" tags)

 {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}

at the bottom of your talk page, filling in your reason. That way a fresh admin can review your request, (pending feedback from Bbb23, Yanla, and 331dot). Best. --Deepfriedokra (talk)

Right now, Frdvjr, Nathom2002 and I are all on different IPs. I've moved out of state, Frdvjr moved to another city. Nathom2002 and I never had the same IP. I'm still not sure how Checkuser placed us at the same IP, but it's old news at this point. Thanks for everything.

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

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

Request reason:

I've been banned for a year now. I haven't made edits since then. I won't break the rules. Please refer to the discussion above. SeanMXD (talk) 05:50, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Accept reason:

As per consensus, and with no checkuser evidence of block evasion (thank you!). Yamla (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla this is a checkuser block so I'm not going to touch it, but from the discussion and the undertakings given above, it looks like we're happy with the idea of this account being unblocked. Do you want to push the button, or do you think we still need something from this user? GirthSummit _(blether) 15:28, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done! --Yamla (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]