User talk:Explorers46
August 2024
[edit]
Hello, I'm BerryForPerpetuity. I noticed that in this edit to T&T Supermarket, 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. — BerryForPerpetuity (talk) 14:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hello. Thank you for the reminder! Actually, I did leave an edit summary explaining the reason for the deletion when I made the changes earlier. When I noticed someone had restored it, I immediately undid it, but I realize now that I should have provided more explanation. I appreciate your feedback. Explorers46 (talk) 14:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at T&T Supermarket. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. You deleted sourced information, and stated in your edit summary it was unsourced. You have also been edit warring. Please stop your disruptive editing. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:24, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
November 2024
[edit]
Hello Explorers46. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to T&T Supermarket, 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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 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 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:Explorers46. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Explorers46|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. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Hello Magnolia677, thank you for your message. I want to clarify that I am not being compensated directly for my edits. This is my favorite asian supermarket, and I have a deep personal connection to it, which motivated me to improve the article to reflect its significance accurately.
- I understand Wikipedia’s policies on neutrality and will review them carefully to ensure my contributions align with the guidelines. If any edits need adjustment, I’m happy to discuss them. Thank you for your dedication to maintaining Wikipedia’s standards. Explorers46 (talk) 15:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Why did you make this edit? --Magnolia677 (talk) 17:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.