Katrickmusic

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kat-Rick (July 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RetroCraft314 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kat-Rick and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Kat-Rick, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

<RetroCraft314 /> 22:18, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Katrickmusic! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! <RetroCraft314 /> 22:18, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Blocked

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In that reason, you must:

• Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
• Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:06, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

If your user name is changed, you will still need to properly disclose your employment (information in following template message):

Hello Katrickmusic. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that 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:Katrickmusic. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Katrickmusic|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, please do not edit further until you answer this message.

(End template message) And if you decide to write an article on any topic, you would need to cite professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about the topic but neither dependent upon nor affiliated with it. Additionally, you would need to stop writing promotionally because we are not here for companies to advertise on. In other words, you would also need to write in such a way that even someone who hates the subject can agree with the facts.

As it is, Draft:Kat-Rick just links to Google searches, which does nothing to prove notability. "Currently a well know Disc Jockey" is promotional language. "incredible achievements" is promotional language. "His unique energy and sound" is promotional language. "There is no denying that Kat-Rick is a triple threat with his combination of skills, personality and experiences" is so promotional that you have no excuse (either you did not care or you lack the basic competence necessary to write neutrally). Writing like that, combined with your user name violation is why your account is currently blocked and the draft you made was deleted. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:16, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Kat-Rick

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:Kat-Rick, 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. Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:15, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

It's you

The more common Wikipedia comment is "It's not you, just what you wrote." In your case, blocked because what you submitted was completely inappropriate as an article. You can appeal your block. This will require stating that you now know what you did that was wrong. And a promise not to try to create an article about Kat-Rick. David notMD (talk) 21:10, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

<RetroCraft314 talk/>

Please explain your reverts on the article submitted for Kat-Rick, As i have given proper source for all the article submitted on the internet.