User talk:DahSound

June 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm WikiDan61. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Olamide, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:21, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Olamide, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:32, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DahSound, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi DahSound! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

December 2023[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Tom Cruise. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very Sorry, I only added a 'good article badge'. Can you teach me how I can make a positive impact to WIKI?. DahSound (talk) 17:40, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, DahSound!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, DahSound (talk) 16:10, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly verify this sources[edit]

I found a relevant source of information for this draft, please help me see whether it's of standard Sam Kuru - [1] DahSound (talk) 23:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please My Draft[edit]

Please review these drafts @WikiDan61- Draft:Butlr and Draft:Jiani_Zeng DahSound (talk) 01:36, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024[edit]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have a financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:

Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future.

Spicy (talk) 22:17, 10 February 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

I don't understand, how am I being paid?. I am not paid for creating this article. The article I was paid to make was Christopher Naghili which was deleted and I disclosed. :I understand the rules and regulations that guides Wikipedia article creation and I wouldn't risk getting banned,rather I asked questions. :I am very sorry if you read my draft so. I made my research on those topics and checked whether it had an article or images before I went ahead. It is wrong to get paid and not disclose it, but I did in my Christopher Naghili article. Kindly see to this, because this is an error. I just went through the reasons why I was banned and I'm very shocked. I am being accused of being a sockpet?. The accounts I'm being accused of associating with I'm not acquainted with them or do I ever know they even existed. I discovered Butlr while searching the internet for companies and it popped up, I checked whether it had a Wikipedia page, and found out it didn't. I made my research and founded that the other founder didn't have a Wikipedia page so I researched about her. If I knew that those articles had issues I wouldn't have gone ahead at all. This is a big misunderstanding. I didn't investigate the articles and its issues and frequent attempt made in editing. I thought I was the first. This is an error, kindly investigate Thank you. DahSound (talk)

Decline reason:

What an amazing coincidence. No misunderstanding; you've simply failed to disclose your relationship with paid placements and now you're just lying about it. I'm disappointed that you were given another chance and chose to immediately abuse the administrators' good faith. Sam Kuru (talk) 00:41, 11 February 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.

Kindly unblock[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

@Kuru I am not lying, I never knew that the previous draft/article had a 'paid for tag' on it. You corrected me and I took correction and I have no joy of getting blocked again,I knew how I felt when that happened. If I knew there was a way to warn people from creating a banned draft or articles I would have avoided creating it at all. I don't want a draft/article I decided to make get my account blocked,if deleting them then do. How will I create a draft or article for educational purposes then,if there is no way to know if that draft or article had issues in the best. Before I draft a page I ensure that the page doesn't have a wiki page or draft.. Kindly deliberate on this issue,because this is a very big mistake and I am very shocked. I plead, verify this. But Please someone see to this. I feel very threatened, because anything I do here is an error, why? Is as if a group of people are targeting my userpage. Please verify. How can I contribute to Wikipedia if everything I do is an error, I reviewed Articles for creation and I got attacked and blocked, but I took correction, then I was unblocked, and now this?. I registered on Wikipedia 3 years ago. After which I totally forgot I had one because of my personal life and education,years later I got a new phone. I was scrolling on the web, and visited Wikipedia and I tried registering until I was notified that my email is already linked to an account And I got in into my account. An d I used my userpage to practice some edits by looking at other userpages. All this issues arose because of my Draft Christopher Naghili which I was paid for,and after much correction I followed the rules and guide. From that day my account as been under threat just because I followed the rules(disclosing that I was paid)?.Everything I do now is an error,from reviewing articles,to speedy deletion, to creating drafts?. Please verify. Thank youDahSound (talk) 01:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)DahSound (talk)[reply]

Decline reason:

I have just spent a significant amount of time doing extensive checking, as a favour to you, to see whether it would be possible to justify unblocking your account. As you may be able to imagine, I am not well pleased to discover that you were wasting my time and abusing my good will, because you are just lying. I don't know whether you thought that your unblock would be reviewed by an administrator who wouldn't bother to do the relevant checking, or whether you are unable to see how blindingly obvious it would be to anyone who did check. JBW (talk) 20:47, 11 February 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.

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Jiani Zeng[edit]

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 Draft:Jiani Zeng requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jiani Zeng. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Butlr (February 11)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Butlr and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:23, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

@JBW thank you for reviewing and I appreciate. Also in no form did I think any administrator is stupid. It was obviously my wrong, and I accept but I stand on what I say, I have no affiliation with those accounts or the person. How would I have knew that those articles had issues?. when I search for it I saw it didn't exist but the company founders does. Before I do anything here I ask for assistance and guidance from editors. I am very sorry,if the way I typed provoked anyone,I respect what you do and all I want is to be a part of what you do;being the eyes ,ears and mouth of the people both past and present,to become a writer of chronicles and history. I beg of you,I am not associated with those accounts or the articles, if my article writing style shows a form of advert I take the blame,and I'm sorry, for after learning, I will not receive a pay without disclosing it. DahSound (talk)

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, I am unable to unblock you at this time. I recommend waiting at least six months before you again request unblocking. (You should not evade your block by editing the English language Wikipedia from a different account or while not logged in during this time. It would reset the six month timer.) It would work in your favor for you to constructively edit a different Wikipedia or Wikimedia project during this time, for at least six months and at least 500 edits. You will then need to concisely and clearly tell how your editing merited a block, what you would do different, and what constructive edits you would make. A list of Wikimedia projects can be found at META:List_of_Wikipedias . Before again requesting unblocking, please read the Guide to Appealing Blocks. Please read and heed any other advice you have received in unblock declines or discussions. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 8:41 am, Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:37, 21 February 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.

o

Please DahSound (talk) 21:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that you probably have no connection to the previous accounts or the person or persons who operated them. It is also entirely likely that you didn't know that the articles had previously had problems; you may not even have known that there had been previous articles. However, you did not independently come along and create new articles on the same subjects as previous accounts, all on your own. You were recreating articles for or on behalf of someone, virtually certainly as a paid contract. Who were you doing it for? JBW (talk) 22:20, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody!, I have tried explaining myself, I leave in Africa, Lagos to be precised. If you guys had a physical address near me I would have come to proof myself. I made a very huge mistake but my problem now is that if I am unblock, I will be strictly monitored and many will still want to block my account immediately an offense is made..

Ever Since I made my account 3 years ago I have not made any useful article on Wikipedia, but now I want to. I know I messed up creating a paid for article, in which I later disclosed. I just want to be known by the community here as a useful contributor and not a menace. But now it seems my account seems to be and I want to change that impression.

If I am forgiven ,I need guidance on how to avoid creating articles that have issues in the past(previously deleted),how to know and identify them, so that I can avoid getting my account and myself in such a mess again.

It is not indicated on deleted articles,especially when searched for.

I have made so many mistakes and I am ashamed. DahSound (talk) 22:38, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Helo @JBW,please reply. DahSound (talk) 11:11, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have anything to say that I haven't already said. Nobody who has seen the drafts you created and the history of the related pages previously deleted and the accounts which created them could possibly believe your claim that you independently created new drafts without contact with anyone involved with the old ones. That's the end of what I have to say, unless you come up with something significantly different than what you have said so far. JBW (talk) 12:00, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was not paid to create the draft but it was suggested to me by someone. We have a WhatsApp group in which we contribute to Wikipedia.. Someone suggested and I decided to research and make the article,why?,it's because after researching I thought,it contains educational topics(IT),and also to make my very first article.

I am guilty and I decided to make it. I should have explained to an admin here on the type of article I want to make, and whether it meets Wikipedias criteria (Because they are experts).

I was very shocked when I got banned,and I wondered why,but after discovery I then understood the kind of mess I have gotten myself into.

To be honest, I have many more articles I desire to make but from my experience now I would first plead to an admin to check whether the topics are safe to be written.

I still stand on my word that I didn't receive any pay,and making the article was my choice.

If placing a 'Pay disclosure' template on my userpage will solve the issue I am will to do it...

Please, give me this chance, please.

please you all should give me this one more chance. DahSound (talk) 19:00, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) Who is 'we' in "We have a WhatsApp group"; which other Wikipedia user accounts are in that group, and who was it who suggested you create this draft? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is my defense: The Group is a group where we talk on how to contribute to Wikipedia and investigate new to-be articles, also whether the topic is educational or not (I'm no longer in this group because of me getting blocked).

Seeing this,I wanted to contribute(I don't want to repeat the story).

Well,it seems my account might never be unblocked. I am not a sockpuppet or was paid. I always disclose articles for pay.. I didn't disclose this because it is not paid for.. DahSound (talk) 00:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm saving up my unblock declines for later, but I see no way to unblock you unless you agree to stay away from Wikipedia for at least six months, and then request unblocking. You will need to describe how you merited a block, what you would do different, and what constructive edits you would make. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:07, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK,I accept,but can I review other articles?.

If no, I still accept, but six months seems too far. DahSound (talk) 21:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Helo,please can you help me create a backup Wikipedia userpage while I wait for my real account?. DahSound (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would be sockuppeting which is very much against the rules and would result in a much longer ban; just wait the six months. You're able to use your same account on other Wikimedia projects just by logging in on their respective sites. CoconutOctopus talk 11:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]