User talk:Cannady212

Welcome

License tagging for File:ZainabUsmanHeadshot.webp

Thanks for uploading File:ZainabUsmanHeadshot.webp. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:30, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:ZainabUsmanHeadshot.webp

A tag has been placed on File:ZainabUsmanHeadshot.webp requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of https://zainabusman.net/about-2/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. Whpq (talk) 01:38, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have permission to use this photograph, but I don’t believe I designated that correctly. Cannady212 (talk) 15:07, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not sufficient to have permission to use the photograph. The photograph must be released under an acceptably free license by the copyright holder. Note that the copyright holder is often not the subject of the photo, but is normally the photographer who took the picture. Whpq (talk) 16:07, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Chris Calcinari

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 Chris Calcinari, 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. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:29, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing

Please note your paid disclosure is not adequate. You must disclose who pays you for each article, as well as each client and link to where you advertise your services. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:01, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for letting me know. I'll fix this immediately. Cannady212 (talk) 16:06, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your link doesn't work and you must link to your freelancer/upwork account. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:33, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The link didn’t work because the article is still a draft. I linked my Upwork account. Cannady212 (talk) 16:58, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Your edit to Chris Calcinari has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Copied from https://espnpressroom.com/us/bios/chris-calcinari/ Whpq (talk) 17:18, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

Hello, I'm Plantsurfer. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Anacardiaceae have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Plantsurfer 18:41, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did at Pistachio, you may be blocked from editing. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. JimRenge (talk) 19:15, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for adding spam links. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia and potentially penalized by search engines.

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 ~~~~}}. PhilKnight (talk) 19:21, 10 August 2022 (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).

Cannady212 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi! I apologize for the addition of these references. I am not experienced in specifically referencing articles on Wikipedia. It was not my intention to spam pages. I am more than happy to take these references down immediately and cease future referencing of this nature. I did not see these alerts until I logged back in, which is why I did not stop after the first alert. Again, I do apologize for these references and request that my indefinite block be lifted. Thank you! Cannady212 (talk) 01:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC) Cannady212 (talk) 15:52, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

All you've done is spam. Well, spam and violate copyright. It's not just links. This unblock request doesn't convince me you understand this. Yamla (talk) 18:09, 22 August 2022 (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).

Cannady212 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi! I read through instructions on requesting to be unblocked in an attempt to inform myself. I read that I needed to address the reason for my block. At least on my end of things, it doesn't appear that I was blocked for copyright violation. I understand completely that my addition of the references fell under spam on the Encyclopedia and have taken the time to educate myself on where the line is in terms of adding references. It was not my intention at all to spam the Encyclopedia and I am sorry to now know that I was clearly in violation. In the future, I will make sure that my referencing does not come across promotional and stays objective. If there is any other reason for my block that you would like me to address, please let me know and I would be happy to do so.

Cannady212 (talk) 16:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It seems obvious to me that you were paid to spam Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:06, 5 September 2022 (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.

What edits (or types of edits) do you intend to make if unblocked? And could you clarify what you mean by "In the future, I will make sure that my referencing does not come across promotional[...]"? Thanks. --Blablubbs (talk) 21:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- @Blablubbs: Hi! Thank you for your response. By that statement, I was referencing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#ADVERTISING. This page was linked to me previously in reference to my violation. I have read through this page and now understand that the references I was blocked for were not added objectively and therefore undermined the purpose of the encyclopedia.If unblocked, I intend on making edits to currently existing pages, especially on my areas of knowledge (American theatre, world politics, academia). I also will look to expand the Encyclopedia by writing new articles where gaps exist. Cannady212 (talk) 00:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blablubbs Hi! Just wanted to follow up with you on this conversation. Please let me know if you have any more questions at all and I am more than happy to answer them! Cannady212 (talk)

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).

Cannady212 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi! Requesting an unblock of my account. I was blocked over 2 years ago, and after reviewing the conversations above, I honestly cannot recall exactly what happened. It looks to me like I wrongfully added citations. Per, NinjaRobotPirate's comment that "It seems obvious to me that you were paid to spam Wikipedia", I can assure you that I was never paid to spam Wikipedia. I was, at one point, paid to write an article, although I cannot recall if this was related to that. Either way, I have no intention of every profiting off of Wikipedia writing in the future. I would simply like to contribute in small ways on the encyclopedia given new expertise from recent education. My apologies from previous exchanges (see above) still stand. Happy to discuss further! Cannady212 (talk) 16:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Most two-year unblock requests are looked on reasonably favourably, but it stretches credulity to post a request saying you've basically forgotten why you were blocked or who your clients were. Your edit history is almost entirely paid edits and spam links. If you're not willing to admit that we're unlikely to get far with unblock requests. -- Euryalus (talk) 07:01, 23 November 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.

@Euryalus: Hi! Thank you for reviewing my request. I am replying here, but please let me know if I should do so elsewhere. I am writing to respond to your decline of my unblock request. I opted not to immediately file another unblock request with my response, because I was concerned that would fall under spamming, but please let me know if that's the right way to do things. I could not find more specific guidance on the explanatory pages for editors.

I apologize for stating "I cannot recall what happened" generally in my unblock request. By saying "I was, at one point, paid to write an article, although I cannot recall if this was related to that" [that being the spam I was blocked for], I intended to indicate that I did not know (off the top of my head, two years later) how the spam links related to paid work, or the exact back-and-forth of by block history. This was unclear, and it was lazy of me not to look through my edit history/talk page thoroughly enough to articulate what happened.

I wanted to be clear that I never stated I could not remember who my clients were. Reviewing my edit history, I can clearly see that the link I spammed the Anacardiaceae page with was for a paid client. When I say I was "never paid to spam," I am stating that no client ever offered to pay me to intentionally spam/vandalize a Wikipedia page. I know the actions I took did constitute spamming and that they were not at all constructive, but rather solely promotional.

I am fully willing to admit that my edit history contains paid edits and spam links. These edits were not constructive, created unnecessary work for other editors and admins, and were obviously not motivated by a desire to improve the encyclopedia. In hindsight, I can see that this was deeply innapropriate.

I hope you will consider that my edit history also contains a number of constructive edits, ranging from constructive, non-paid original pages to smaller edits. These are the type of edits I plan to make, and I will never conduct any manner of paid or promotional work again.

If this remains inadequate, I would appreciate any advice on how I may restore my trustworthiness and credibility. Thank you!

Cannady212 (talk) 00:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question for administrator

<Hi! Per the above conversation, I'm just wondering what my next steps are. I thought my above post would alert the administrator who responded to my unblock request, but I am unsure if it did. Just don't want to push through another unblock request, because I'm not sure if that would count as spamming. Would appreciate any advice I could get!>

--Cannady212 (talk) 00:09, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the admin help template as the use of it is inappropriate. As far as I can tell, your ping of Euryalus should have worked, but I'm pinging them again for you, although there is no guarantee that they will respond - they are not required to.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thank you for removing it. I’m so sorry my use of it was inappropriate. I appreciate your response, you letting me know my ping worked, and for pinging them. Would you suggest that I wait for a response, or that I refile an unblock request, or a different third option. Again, I really appreciate your guidance. Cannady212 (talk) 03:18, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you had a chance to read WP:PAID? If so, please follow the instructions on that page for disclosing all your paid edits individually, including who paid for them. The current declaration on your userpage is obviously incomplete per your comments above. You also indicate you were paid for some edits (the ones you spammed web addresses into articles for), but that whoever paid you to do this didn't ask you to do this spamming? If so, can you let us know what they did actually ask you to do? -- Euryalus (talk) 12:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this information. I have read the page on paid contributions you included. I am unable to edit my user page currently, so I cannot make changes to my current disclosures. I am more than happy to edit it into compliance once I am able to. None of the edits/pages I was paid for exist anymore. Please let me know if this affects how I should disclose.

I believe the spammed web addresses were related to incorporating citations/facts from a blog about Matthew Baron and cashews, which is what I was asked to do. As I stated above, I know the actions I took did constitute spamming, regardless of what I was technically paid to do, and that they were not at all constructive, but rather solely promotional. Cannady212 (talk) 19:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]