User talk:AE3yia1AJeQ

March 2020

Hello, I'm Bonadea. I noticed that you recently removed content from Young blood transfusion without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. bonadea contributions talk 14:24, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bonadea, why did you revert my edit? Your message implies it is due to a blank edit summary. Is that consistent with wikipedia policies? I have tried to go to your talk page but it is protected. AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 14:34, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AE3yia1AJeQ. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Young blood transfusion, 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 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:AE3yia1AJeQ. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=AE3yia1AJeQ|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. bonadea contributions talk 14:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have no conflicts of interest. I do not receive compensation for my edits. AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 14:35, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bonadea, now what? I cannot message you because your talk page is protected. AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, if you are not connected with Ambrosia, then the solution is very simple – edit one of the other six million Wikipedia pages where you don't risk inadvertently running the errands of unscrupulous commercial entities. Thanks! --bonadea contributions talk 14:45, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

bonadea, I would like to improve and correct the article located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_blood_transfusion. How do we proceed? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:00, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

your edits are obviously promotional in nature. I suggest you follow the advice of Bonadea and edit something else.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ThatMontrealIP, they aren't. I would like to help correct the article. How do we proceed? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DROPTHESTICK.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ThatMontrealIP, we are not at the end of this discussion, as you would hope. We disagree. How do we proceed? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine we will be at the end when you are blocked, which will probably be in a about ten minutes, since you have ignored all reasoned responses to stop wasting the valuable time of other volunteer editors. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:10, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ThatMontrealIP You're going to block me? I don't want to waste your time. I'm trying to understand how to improve and correct wikipedia. I don't want to waste your or Bonadea's time. So, you are telling me I cannot edit the talk pages for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_extension and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_blood_transfusion? If that is correct, let me know, and I will stop. Just be clear with what you want. I don't want to be blocked.

ThatMontrealIP, I'm not ignoring you. I am trying to improve and correct wikipedia. I am trying to understand you. You're suggesting explaining how to improve wikipedia is a waste of your time and that when I ask how to improve wikipedia it is disruptive editing? Please be clear and specific. AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:25, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

I have no conflicts of interest. I do not receive compensation for my edits.

March 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:51, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ThatMontrealIPDo not block me. I'm not disruptive editing. I have made a single edit, and it was reverted. Now I am reaching out to ask how to proceed. I have tried to correct errors on wikipedia and adjust the point of view so that it is neutrally written. What do I do now? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 14:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. Stop wasting the time of other volunteer editors whit questions about why you cannot use Wikipedia to promote a blood transfusion clinic.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:11, 13 March 2020 (UTC) ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:11, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So I am no longer allow to contribute to the discussion of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_extension and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_blood_transfusion? Don't block me. I'm not disruptive editing. I am trying to improve and correct the two articles. AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You misspelled "with". AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:16, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Given that your edits to those two article have been reverted, the proper path is to have a discussion at the Talk pages of the articles (already underway) to see if a consensus can be reached. You are not blocked from discussing, but leaving comments on the Talk pages of individual editors versus on the Talk pages of the articles in question is counter-productive. David notMD (talk) 15:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. No one had told me not to post on talk pages of wikipedians. Wikipedia seems to suggest you can leave messages on people's talk pages. I've replied on the talk pages of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_extension and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_blood_transfusion.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

El_C 15:51, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]