User talk:Jinahpol

Bahadir Ünlü moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Bahadir Ünlü, does not have enough sources and citations 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. Praxidicae (talk) 14:33, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Praxidicae Bahadir Ünlü is a famous actor in Turkey. I could not understand why you have removed the page. Do you not think him to be famous? He had appeard in many turkish film and is a common face in turkey. Please explain and help me so that I can create the page successfully. --Jinahpol (talk) 21:58, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Hello Jinahpol. 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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:Jinahpol. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Jinahpol|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 ^💬 13:52, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have already left message in your talk page. What you are saying does not make any sense. Jinahpol (talk) 13:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. GSS ^💬 14:36, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have used the talk page already and it was obviously futile. So restoring the legitimate edit of mine. Jinahpol (talk) 14:47, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you use the talk page, Jinahpol? Tiderolls 14:59, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Tide rolls, I have asked them about their edits here Jinahpol (talk) 15:03, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are supposed to be using the article talk page. Please see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. And please stop calling GSS's edits vandalism; they are not. Tiderolls 15:09, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tide rolls thanks for your explanations. I thought user talk page will work. Do you think the way GSS moved my created PAGES back to draft without any reason is not vandalization? Its strange if you think so. I don't have any problem to make the articles pass through the AFC. The problem is why someone will behave in this way. More significantly why the same will be tolerated. It seems the way the editor is talking they might have 'something', but since I do not have any vocation of getting paid for writing Wikipedia articles, if there is some 'evidence' it ought to be fabricated. I am certain about that. I hope truth will prevail and if it doesn't I will move with this as far as possible both 'in-wiki' and 'off-wiki'. Jinahpol (talk) 15:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:NOTVAND. I understand your frustration but please moderate how you communicate. Tiderolls 15:50, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per your comment above I hope truth will prevail and if it doesn't I will move with this as far as possible both 'in-wiki' and 'off-wiki'. are you threatening us? GSS ^💬 15:54, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You need to wait for the admins to revert back to you at ANI or here so please stop reverting you are in a violation of WP:PAID, block evasion and now 3rr. GSS ^💬 14:52, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Same applies to you as well since admins should see what kind of vandalization and anarchy you are creating here. Do you have any issue with me? Why are you pouring me with ocean of false aspersions? You are showing me 3RR after reverting my edits for four times, "Very Funny" Right? Jinahpol (talk) 15:01, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You better see WP:3RRNO#3. GSS ^💬 15:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You edits do not qualify to be referred as WP:3RRNO#3, go through the rule again Jinahpol (talk) 15:24, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Jordan Nash shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:10, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 ~~~~}}. MER-C 18:49, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, I have been busy for some days regarding some of my consignments at my client's site so could not see what's happening here. I am blocked? I can't edit any other page than this page? Why? MER-C I did not see you involved in the ANI discussion. Would you mind telling me where from you came? Are you admin account of that GSS? There are close similarities in behavior of yours as you both do things which makes no sense. You are saying me I have been advertising? Sorry, I didn't know that telling about my family business would make me face a block. Its very strange if it is not allowed. Very Strange. Jinahpol (talk) 22:13, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would ping @The Bushranger and KillerChihuahua: as you knew what happened. Would you kindly let me know why no measure was taken in spite of the series of transgressions made by that GSS account? Is that account immune of any measure and I am not? Its very puzzling how things work at Wikipedia. Jinahpol (talk) 22:20, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Bahadir Ünlü

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

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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 01:33, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Mirko Baschetti

Hello, Jinahpol. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mirko Baschetti, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. 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 here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:02, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]