User talk:TatyanaZhelyazkova

This is TatyanaZhelyazkova's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mario Bruno (November 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 Vanderwaalforces was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Many statements are unsourced.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mario Bruno and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 01:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TatyanaZhelyazkova! Having an article draft 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! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 01:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 46.183.103.8.~~~~}} TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was blocked but i didn't do anything wrong.[edit]

I read that i should post this text here.

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).

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

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is '46.183.103.8

Decline reason:

Confirmed p2p proxy. See Template:Blocked p2p proxy for more details. Yamla (talk) 11:29, 24 November 2023 (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.

I am new in this website so I'm not sure if I'm doing it right but i hope it works. TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TatyanaZhelyazkova. 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, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} 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 Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
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. --Yamla (talk) 11:30, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Yamla (talk) 15:12, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir/ Madam,

thank You for keeping wikipedia safe and fair, how ever i don't think my blocking was reasonable. As you were placing my blog I was in a process of adding sources to my page, the first version was poorly sourced because it was my first time in creating such.

The page is about a professional flutist that has contributed and achieved a lot in a small but important niche, and me being also a flute student myself, am an admirer of his work and wanted to let it be known. There are far too less pages about flutists and some of them deserve to be written about. This is why I think the block was not fair.

I would be glad if You reconsider Your decision.

Best regards

Tatyana TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 16:46, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are confused. This is not a blog. Nor have you addressed your violations of WP:COI. Additionally, the content you were uploading was blatantly inappropriate. --Yamla (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[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).

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

Request reason:

I have no conflict of interest. I am simply new to this and have not presented my page well enough since I am still learning what and how to.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; earlier, duplicate request. Yamla (talk) 11:05, 12 January 2024 (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.

If you are completely unaffiliated with the subject, how is this image your "own work"?-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:26, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not, I asked it to be sent to me. But since it is not made from a professional photographer and therefore freely licensed I thought I should list it as "my own work". It's my fault, I can change the description if I am allowed. TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 21:48, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you ask the subject of the photo to send it to you?-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:54, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I asked politely and they sent it and allowed me to use it. TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 22:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the photo situation has been finally cleared. What can i do to proceed with my request to review my block? Should i send it again? TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 15:13, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You should modify your unblock request to address your violation of WP:COPYRIGHT by falsely claiming someone else's image was your own work, thereby placing the entire project in jeopardy. You should address your inappropriately promotional edits (WP:PROMO). You should specify the exact nature of your relationship to the subject (note I'm not claiming you have a romantic relationship or anything like that, but you've clearly at least met). You should tell us how your future edits would differ from your prior edits. --Yamla (talk) 15:21, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help, I will do that. TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 15:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You also need to go to Wikimedia commons and stop falsely claiming the image is your own work. It currently still makes that claim. --Yamla (talk) 15:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can not find the option to change the author or source. TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 15:27, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request to review block[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).

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

Request reason:

I have violated WP:COPYRIGHT by falsely claiming someone else's image was my own work. This was made because i was not aware what to write in case that the photo is free to use, I didn't want to violate anybody. Since then I have asked the owner to contact Your team and i have edited the information on Wikimedia commons. This mistake put my whole project in jeopardy. I have been informed that I have been making inappropriately promotional edits WP:PROMO, I don't know what exactly was my mistake but I will edit my page to be strictly informative with proven facts. Maybe I used bad or too many sources, my intentions were to add as many different links and sources so that it can be seen that the information is proved from many sides. I have also been blocked for WP:COI. How I know the subject is that I have listened to concerts of his (I am also a flute player) and asked a photo and signature after concerts. Afterwards I have added him as a friend in my social media account and through it, I have asked to use his photo, to which he agreed and said it is free to use from anybody. I am sorry for all mistakes that I have made in the process, I am still learning how to do this in the best way. My wish is to create and edit more pages about classical musicians, orchestras and composers that have brought a lot to and achieved much in this area of culture. I assure You that my way of editing will change, and I will make sure to be better informed of what to do and how to do it correctly.

Decline reason:

As you do not understand the promotional nature of your edits, you cannot be unblocked to edit about Mario Bruno for now. Please describe the constructive edits you would make. Thanks-- Deepfriedokra (talk)

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).

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

Request reason:

I have read the "What Wikipedia is not" page and now i understand why my page was WP:PROMO. I have made my opinion be more important than a neutral point of view which is wrong. In the future I will only express facts. I am sorry for my mistake.TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 11:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

One open unblock request at a time, please. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:35, 28 January 2024 (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.

(deep sigh) Please describe what constructive, non promotional, non WP:conflict of interest edits you would make. Thanks.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:16, 19 January 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

Ok, thank you for being so obviously nice. Then I will give exact examples.

I will edit the first section to exclude date and place of birth with the regard of the subjects privacy. I will change the overall tone of the article to be dispassionate and more formal. I will review all citations and I will remove the ones that are not reliable. I will also summarise them so that i don't put an inline citation after every fact but after full sentences or sections, to ease the eye and not let it look too over full. I will remove the sentence starting with "the flutist is most known for..." with the reason of it seeming like an overstatement. It is a public knowledge and I know this for sure, living in musicians circles, but since this fact has not been published about in any reliable source it makes it look like an "original research". I will remove the two starting sentences in the second paragraph because they include personal information and are only backed by the subjects personal statements about himself in interviews. I will remove "always receiving critical and public acclaim" since it is not backed by sources. In the future I will add a lead section to establish context and summarise the most important topics. TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 19:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This plus your comments below is a little better, but still not quite there yet. You still need to go to Commons and either request the image be deleted(images are not relevant to the draft approval process so that can be dealt with if the draft is accepted) so you can start over or change the copyright to provide the actual author and show it was released under a copyright compatible with Wikipedia. You seem to understand that you won't be permitted to edit about Mr. Bruno further at this time- editing about other music topics could be challenging without violating WP:COI, if you wanted to edit about other topics, that might be better- please tell what in a new request. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 28 January 2024 (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've already been told, very clearly, you won't be unblocked to write about Mario Bruno. --Yamla (talk) 19:57, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have been told very clearly the following:

"(deep sigh) Please describe what constructive, non promotional, non WP:conflict of interest edits you would make. Thanks.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)".

And I am following these instructions.

As I understand the reason for there to even be the possibility of requesting to be unblocked is for people to learn from their mistakes and make their articles better. Not to be insulted or bullied into giving up any tries after the first mistake.

None of the comments given to me have been respectful or helpful. I would imagine that is one of the purposes of senior users.

TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 19:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make every comment here an unblock request, only one open request is needed at a time.

Our experience tells us that allowing people in your position to dive right back into editing about the same topic is a waste of time for everyone involved(including the editor) as despite what the editor may claim they usually don't understand our content and other policies. We're going to want to see you demonstrate your understanding of relevant policies by editing in other areas unrelated to your conflict of interest. After a time, you may later be permitted to indirectly edit about Mr. Bruno, but not now. Are there other topics you might edit about? 331dot (talk) 22:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear admin,

thank you for your answer and the explanation, this makes sense and I respect the decision.

I am interested in editing mostly about living musicians but also about classical music in general (composers, orchestras, festivals). But I don't need to stay in my area of expertise. I will maybe try editing also in other areas.

Thank you again TatyanaZhelyazkova (talk) 10:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]