Lisabofita

Welcome!

Hi Lisabofita! I noticed your contributions to Maeve Binchy and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Toadette ^{(Let's talk together!)} 20:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited David Brickner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beverly. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 18:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ezekiel Lewis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Montgomery.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Blocked

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Graham87 (talk) 08:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Your editing pattern is highly suspicious and your edits (particularly those adding unnecessary links and references) have been disruptive. We don't need paid editors here. Graham87 (talk) 08:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about William H. Kerdyk, Jr.

Hello Lisabofita, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, William H. Kerdyk, Jr., should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William H. Kerdyk, Jr..

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Graham87}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Graham87 (talk) 08:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

I've changed your block to only affect the article and draft namespaces so you can participate in the above deletion discussion. Graham87 (talk) 08:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

@Graham87 I am new editor, so I kindly request the opportunity to rectify any edits that may have inadvertently been against policies, rather than facing immediate suspension. Is it customary to ban inexperienced editors outright, without prior warning, even though they may not be fully acquainted with all the policies? I am uncertain about the specific edits in question, so I would greatly appreciate a clarification.

So far I have submitted 2 new articles, the 2nd (William Kerdyk) I was compensated for, and my compensation has been disclosed in my userpage. Mr. Kedryk is a local politician in my area. We were introduced via a friend with the intention of my assisting in creating a page for him. I have tried my best to comply with policies and not post anything promotional sounding to his page. I have also done substantial edits to several other pages, which I hope were productive.

I would appreciate any feedback and your considerations for my reinstatement. Lisabofita (talk) 21:33, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

When your editing pattern is as suspicious as it is, yes. I'm not saying any more to stop you from getting ideas. Graham87 (talk) 06:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Please could you clarify the nature of the suspicions? I am uncertain as to the specific concerns that led to this action. Given that I have openly disclosed my compensation for contributions related to the Kerdyk page, I respectfully request further insight into the grounds for my suspension. Additionally, I extend my sincerest apologies for any inadvertent violations of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, and I am committed to rectifying any such issues promptly and appropriately. Lisabofita (talk) 04:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

You seem to have been using some sort of semi-automated tool to add random links and references in disruptive ways. And you've been editing too quickly. I don't think unblocking you would be good for this project. Graham87 (talk) 09:53, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Reblocked

Since the deletion discussion has closed, I've reblocked your account (also see the above notices). You are not welcome here. Graham87 (talk) 18:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I would like to appeal the block on my Wikipedia account as I believe the reasons given by the admin are unfounded. The admin claimed that I used an automated tool to insert references too quickly; however, I only used the Link insert tool in the visual editor, which efficiently creates references. It seems the admin might be unaware of this tool and mistakenly assumes manual link insertion is the only method. Moreover, for an edit to be deemed disruptive, it must negatively impact Wikipedia. I request examples of any edits I have made that are either negative or not compliant with Wikipedia guidelines. As a new editor, I acknowledge that I may have made some mistakes, which should warrant a warning rather than a complete ban. Additionally, while I did create a page for which I was compensated and disclosed my paid editing, this is not representative of all my contributions. My edit history shows numerous productive edits, such as those on Draft:Printer's_Waste and Ezekiel Lewis, demonstrating my commitment to improving Wikipedia. Lisabofita (talk) 00:52, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Your bludgeoning and editing pattern don't outweigh what productive edits you have made. It's not true that an edit itself must be negative to be considered disruptive if the overall behavior of the editor is. 331dot (talk) 07:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

---

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.