User talk:Armyreenlistment

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 03:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Armyreenlistment. You have new messages at 78.26's talk page.
Message added 00:15, 4 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 00:15, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! (chat) techatology 23:33, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Senior Army Career Counselor, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Pratyya (Hello!) 13:43, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:58, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Secretary of the Army’s Active Component Career Counselor of the Year Award, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

RadioFan (talk) 16:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hello, Armyreenlistment. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Secretary of the Army’s Active Component Career Counselor of the Year Award, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

  • Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
  • Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
  • Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
  • Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:24, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy. It also appears that your account is intended to be used for the purpose of telling the world about an organization or cause that you consider worthwhile. Unfortunately, many good causes are not sufficiently notable for their own Wikipedia article, and all users are discouraged from editing in any area where they have an inherent conflict of interest. You may wish to consider one of these alternative outlets.

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice. Thank you.

--Orange Mike | Talk 21:24, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

I am fairly new to wikipedia. I am an active duty Army Career Counselor (20 years in the Army and 10 years as a Career Counselor) and creating a wikipedia page to preserve the history of our most prestigious award was my intention. I'm considered a innovative pioneer, leader and historian in our field and creating a wikipedia page was the latest source to continue improving our field. I am in no way promoting myself or another site and there is no COI (I am well respected and simply creating a historic reference) because I'm merely adding the annual Career Counselor of the Year Competition winners and the regulatory guidance which shows who's eligible for the award. If you'd rather I change my username, I will have no problem with that...no matter what username I have, I'll continue to create and educate those that seek information. Thank you for the opportunity to plead my case.Armyreenlistment (talk) 22:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline as, per below, this request did not propose a new username. — Daniel Case (talk) 16:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]


I've approved 1 of the 2 AFCs this editor has submitted. COI hasn't been a big problem here. I would recommend against unblocking but would encourage this editor to create a new userid and edit on their own behalf rather than imply they are editing for the US Army.--RadioFan (talk) 01:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Except that all the way back to his first edits, he has only used this account to spam for army re-enlistment (including spamlinks to armyreenlistment.com). He's not here for anything but his COI edits. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Only used this account to spam for army re-enlistment"? Not sure how you get that. If it weren't for me (or any 'close connection' to the Army retention program), these pages would not have been created. I am not on wikipedia to promote/profit from anything. There is one link to the ArmyReenlistment.com facebook note page to explain the difference between a Retention NCO (Additional Duty) and a Career Counselor (schooled trained career). My intention is not to 'spamlink' anything (I can remove the one link), but to preserve our history through this online encyclopedia. I mean no ill intent here...again, I am still learning the wikipedia workspace and I embrace all that assist in my betterment. --Armyreenlistment (talk) 02:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I tried to 'create a new account' so as to not perceive a COI, but cannot because "Account creation from this IP address (Armyreenlistment) has been temporarily restricted." Please assist. --Armyreenlistment (talk) 04:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the work you're trying to do here. Please remember a few things: a) WP:COI and WP:PROMO exist even if you're not trying to make a profit; b) you cannot refer to yourself as a subject matter expert - Wikipedia relies on formal publication by other entities as reliable sources - yes, I understand you've been front-line working with this subject, but that unfortunatelty does not grant you more status regarding content, nor does it qualify as an SME (not that SME's are all that important on Wikipedia anyway); c) some of your edits border on a "how-to" guide, which is most definitely not what Wikipedia is about.
If it is your intent to request an unblock in order to change usernames, you would use {{unblock-spamun|new username|reason}}. As per WP:GAB, your reason would need to acknowledge the issues that have led to the block, and convince an administrator that they will not recur - that includes COI, PROMO and violations of our external links policy (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Component Career Counselor of the Year, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eighth Army (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Unblock to change COI username

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

username is too close to edited material and need to create a new username

Decline reason:

Yes, it is, but you need to actually propose a new name that fits policy. — Daniel Case (talk) 16:51, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--Armyreenlistment (talk) 11:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to select MSGQuick79S as a new username. Thank you for your time and consideration. --Armyreenlistment (talk) 20:23, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock-spamun}}--Armyreenlistment (talk) 01:17, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply] 

-Armyreenlistment (talk) 19:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

After reading through the Username Policy, I see how my current username can be inappropriate. I've been using this username for the past 10 years for just about everything, but I shall retire it for wikipedia uses. Requesting a new username and becoming more proficient with editing wikipedia will allow so many to have the most up-to-date and relevant information possible. Although I was blocked for using spamlinks, I will continue to read up to better understand where I did this so I will not longer be suspected of doing this.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline, a week has passed with no response to reviewing administrator's questions. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 17:48, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You still have not really responded to my concerns above (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:45, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bwilkins, thank you for all the information and helpful links. After reading through the Wikipedia:COI and getting more information from the Wikipedia:Plain_and_simple_conflict_of_interest_guide (this page was especially helpful and now bookmarked), I understand where I was going wrong. Although my intentions were good (in my mind), I shouldn't think of myself as a subject matter expert, but as unbiased contributor. Instead of editing some live pages, ask for help and have other editors review my draft. I need to rein in my enthusiastic passion for a particular area/subject while on this site; creating draft edits and requesting an edit is more in line with what I should be doing. Wikipedia is a large team and I was trying to do it all be myself. I will not link to social networking sites (makes sense) and I will do a better job so as some sections do not appear like a "HOWTO" reference; I will work with other contributors for better wording. If unblocked and username is changed, I'll make productive contributions and create draft edits and work with others on talk pages for assistance.--Armyreenlistment (talk) 14:50, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia community has repeatedly reviewed the subject of "Component Career Counselor of the Year", both through the Article for Creation as well as the more stringent Articles for Deletion process, and found it did not meet the criteria for inclusion. As such, will you agree to discontinue your attempts to add this article to Wikipedia should you be unblocked? --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:04, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Component Career Counselor of the Year

Hello Armyreenlistment,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Component Career Counselor of the Year for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. TRL (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Component Career Counselor of the Year for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Component Career Counselor of the Year is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Component Career Counselor of the Year until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:39, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This page should be retained and placed in the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history category for preservation.--Armyreenlistment (talk) 12:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See, it's that exact comment that has made it difficult to believe that you understand that articles must fit into the enclopedia FIRST (based on WP:GNG) and then sometimes be sorted into projects. We don't have "military articles" - we have "acceptable articles that relate to the military" - there is a huge difference (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:58, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Senior Army Career Counselor for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Senior Army Career Counselor is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Senior Army Career Counselor until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 20:17, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Armyreenlistment"