User talk:TechTechToe

Welcome!

Hello, TechTechToe, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! —J. M. (talk) 03:17, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure required

Hello TechTechToe. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that 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:TechTechToe. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=TechTechToe|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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. GSS (talk|c|em) 11:05, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS: Would you like to elaborate please? I am not getting this why you did this to approved articles with "May Be" factor. What is required? TechTechToe (talk) 18:50, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to ask, but are you a paid editor or related to the subject? Thank you – GSS (talk|c|em) 04:17, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS: No one paid me to come here and edit and waste my time. You deleted my 2 articles which were approved and checked by admins, I am sure they are not that inexperienced that they approved. I downloaded and started using Mixer (app) because one of my friend recommended me that for our project. He also requested me to research a bit for project and then to post the research on the platform where public could be benefited. He suggested me this and I posted it here I saw that the article was factually incorrect and was a bit promotional so I edited it on FR Wikipedia because I am Native English and French. I am editing Wikipedia articles for almost 6 years without an account and just recently after a long time I created an account. I can't say in which capacity the FR article was created if that is not right you can do anything with that one.

Now, BeautyStat, I didn't created that page, I created Ron Robinson but an expert Wikipedian changed and published it to beautystat as he felt that the article is good with this name. And no one paid me to do that. I am a Technology researcher and now prepare case studies for junior computer science schools. So, if you had concerns, you could have discussed first on my Talk or articles Talk page which is a standard procedure. You could have placed a template and allowed me to answer. It's a shame that my work is removed like this. Please restore.

Oh, You said that articles need to go AFC. If you really want to delete articles which are created by paid editors and without AFC do let me know I'll send you links, some 9 years old Wikipedians are doing this without AFC. I didn't highlighted them because I thought that good articles should stay for people's knowledge. You can send initial warnings and then delete articles if you are sure and there is no MAY HAVE BEEN factor. I spent 8 handsome hours from yesterday by checking your contributions and others to find articles which were created directly with a paid editing tag.

Thanks for highlighting this issue. I'll work with you on these issues, please let me know how you check which articles are created by paying someone and what is your source of information? Do you work somewhere? Like an agency or something? I would love to join Wikipedia agency if there's any. Wikipedia pays people to do this? TechTechToe (talk) 13:35, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have read the above message. I will reply when I have a moment. GSS (talk|c|em) 13:46, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS: So instead of cooperating you got me blocked? Not good. All my work was in good faith and that's all based on assumptions. Please send me any evidence. I don't understand who or from where you got that feeling. Please explain. I saw you edited other articles after replying me but don't have a moment to reply me.? You did wrong. I don't know what your intentions were but you are digging graves here. TechTechToe (talk) 14:16, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

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) 20:29, 19 November 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I don't know why I am blocked. With no evidence and no warning. I was trying to explain myself and learning the platform. If I am guilty you can block me but this is not a good way. Appears to be a paid editor, is that the only reason? If someone new is here and trying to edit you made up assumptions and blocks them? I made myself very clear, I was waiting for the reply. Please unblock me as I can't imagine to violate any policies. It's a shame that you are accusing me like this. Also, I didn;t self promoted and all my work was notable and duly checked by users here. The reasons are all based on assumptions. I assure you that my all work is under Wikipedia's GOOD FAITH policies. :I am aware and agree to Wikipedia terms of being paid editors. I don't know about any evidence and this editor may have misleading information. Therefore, I request an unblock and my work back. Thank you TechTechToe (talk) 18:30, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No answer to 331dot in over a week. Feel free to open a new request when you have time to interact with us. SQL ^{Query me!} 18:14, 27 December 2018 (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.

There is nothing based on assumptions we have good evidence that you have been involved in undisclosed paid editing and sockpuppetry. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:38, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-Administrator-comment) We dont have problems with granting good faith. But, Paid editing Violates the terms of use you accept with every edit (Especially Section 4). So if you dont adress that in your unblock request, it will be declined very soon. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Victor Schmidt: Thank you sir. I am awre of that and fully agree to this section 4. I never intend to mess up with policies. TechTechToe (talk) 18:29, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then you will need to comply with the paid editing policy and disclose your paid editing status as instructed in that policy. You will also need to address the sockpuppetry. 331dot (talk) 12:59, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Mixer (app)

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

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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CptViraj (📧) 08:48, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]