User talk:Gus1182

Giga Agladze

Hi, you seem to have created yet again the Giga Agladze article. I must say I think you're playing with fire, given the recent history, but I guess you must do what you must do. I will move the article to the draft space shortly, or request that it be deleted; just thought it fair to give you a heads-up. Regardless, my advice to you would be not to attempt creating this article again. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:21, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

i dont understand, i translated this articles and add independent sources, what more ic an do? Gus1182 (talk) 12:23, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't understand, what you can do is ask, eg. at the WP:TEAHOUSE. Also, the problems with this article have been explained to you in quite a lot of detail several times (I know, because I've done that myself at least once, and have seen others do it also), but you seem to ignore advice. So that is another thing you can do, take the advice that is offered. Instead you insist on ploughing on regardless. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:27, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking your talk page + no response to COI query

Another thing: Deb recently posted a message here asking you to declare any relationship you may have with Giga Agladze, or any other conflict of interest (COI) related to this matter. I believe you never responded to Deb's query, and have now blanked your talk page, including deleting the query. I will re-post it below, and would strongly suggest that you act upon it before you make any further edits to this or related articles. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Gus1182. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Giga Agladze, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:25, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

they ask me me to transled georgian page, i dont have any conflict of intereset, i just want to post true article Gus1182 (talk) 12:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "they"? Please answer carefully. Deb (talk) 12:29, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to write articles but my friends advised me to translate for now, and since I have already started with one article I don’t want to move on to another until I finish this one and figure it out without any problem Gus1182 (talk) 12:34, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know personally this person, I just want everyone to know that there are such Georgians Gus1182 (talk) 12:37, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

what should I do now for this article? Gus1182 (talk) 12:41, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't much you can do now that the article title has been protected, and an administrator is required to authorise any further creation. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:51, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will give you some unsolicited advice, please take it in the constructive spirit in which it is offered:

Different language wikis have different rules for notability etc. Just because an article exists in one language, doesn't mean one will be accepted on that subject in another language; or a higher standard of referencing may be required to get it accepted. On the English-language wiki, you must follow the rules that apply here.
Going against all the advice and doing what your friends urge, repeatedly, has now got you off to a bad start on this wiki, and made it much more difficult for this article to be ever published; in other words, a lose-lose situation all around. (There is probably also a broader life lesson in there somewhere.) Please listen to the advice you are given, it is given for a reason.
As this case has demonstrated, just because you can publish a new article by moving it yourself from drafts to the main article space, doesn't mean that you should do that. My suggestion (and it is only that) would be that you instead follow the standard drafting process from now on; see WP:FIRST for instructions on how to do that.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:50, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

yes but on last article was more right independet source and why is rejected? Gus1182 (talk) 12:56, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent version contained a significant and blatant copyright violation, which had to be removed. That left hardly any content, and only one source. But even while the other sources were still there, I checked them and concluded that they fell far short of establishing notability for the subject, so the article could not have remained in the main space no matter what. In any case, because this had been repeatedly created, and it was becoming apparent that you weren't intent on following the rules, the attending administrator clearly felt that it was time to put an end to this, which (for what it's worth) I fully understand. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:09, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

that means i can't create this draft article anymore? Gus1182 (talk) 13:15, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not for me to say. You can try to appeal to Deb or another administrator, but I suggest you first think of a good explanation for your role in how we got here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:31, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ok, how to talk to him? with talk on his page? i'll explain everything and if he says yes to continue to make draft how can i submit for review that article, with code? Gus1182 (talk) 14:40, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please just follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Articles for Creation, as you've previously been told. Deb (talk) 15:49, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! you are very kind, now I will carefully make this article, I found articles about this person and his movie on variety, metacritic, filmthreat and rotten tomatoes and I'll take information from there, can i take only born date from another language wikis artice? Gus1182 (talk) 18:23, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:The Other Me (2022) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Other Me (2022). Thanks! — DaxServer (t · m · c) 17:55, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gus1182 (talk) 18:17, 24 April 2022 (UTC) Hello, thank you for checking, 1 review is also in references, add only second yes?[reply]

Hello, thank you for checking, 1 review is also in references, add only second yes? Gus1182 (talk) 19:08, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Giga Agladze (May 4)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: I said I would not review this draft again, but as the creating editor insists, here goes:

After inspecting the sources, I find them insufficient to establish notability. My reasons follow, taking each source in turn:

Filmthreat: no significant coverage of the subject Variety x 2: no significant coverage of the subject WaPo: no mention of the subject USA Today: no mention of the subject Queer Review: no significant coverage of the subject; also, an interview Caucasian Journal: interview, not reliable and independent enough to establish notability Coming Soon: no significant coverage of the subject Georgia Today: no significant coverage of the subject 1TV: no mention of the subject Eurasianet: no mention of the subject Calvert Journal: no mention of the subject D&F Watch: no significant coverage of the subject Agenda: no significant coverage of the subject Bravo Records x 2: no significant coverage of the subject; also, close primary source

None of the sources cited therefore meets the criteria required for WP:GNG notability, of being significant coverage in an independent and reliable source. The Caucasian Journal one comes closest, but isn't fully reliable, and in any case not alone enough.

Meanwhile, there is nothing in the draft, or in the sources cited, which would suggest notability per WP:FILMMAKER. It seems the subject's main claim to fame is an association (of sorts) with David Lynch — of which, much is made throughout — but notability is NOTINHERITED.

Given the number of earlier declines, draftifications, deletions, etc., and the continued failure to provide appropriate sources, I can only conclude that such sources do not exist, and am therefore rejecting, rather than merely declining, this draft. I believe more than enough reviewer and administrator time has been expended on this.

As far as I am concerned, this concludes the matter. --

DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:35, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Other Me (2022 film) (May 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure. Note to reviewers: do not leave copyright violations sitting in the page history. Please follow the instructions here.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

Draft:The Other Me (2022 film) may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Hello, I'm Bovineboy2008. I noticed that you recently removed content from Draft:The Other Me (2022 film) 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 your 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. BOVINEBOY2008 15:49, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to The Other Me (2022 film), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Please remember to provide an explanation when removing well-sourced negative content (in this case, the claim that the film received negative reviews). Otherwise, it looks as if you're trying to whitewash the article. Bennv123 (talk) 19:34, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I showed the article to the filmmaker and he really didn’t like what you wrote, I don’t know if you have the right to write such things, there are good reviews too, why did you write that there are only bad reviews, he will contact his lawyers and they will review it, we'll be back to you soon Gus1182 (talk) 20:09, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

and please disable article Gus1182 (talk) 20:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is an excellent lesson in why having an article about yourself, (or your film, or your friend's film) isn't necessarilly a good idea. We do not delete articles because the creator wishes it to be done absent privacy violations, which this is not. Oddly, if you had left it in draft space instead of publishing it, this wouldn't have been an issue because the article wouldn't be in mainspace. Besides your legal threats, this is clear WP:UPE. Star Mississippi 20:33, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You say you "showed the article to the filmmaker", yet earlier you said you don't know the person. Care to elaborate? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:44, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising. You're clearly editing with a conflict of interest on Agladze and The Other Me. Continued persistence in promotion and removing sourced information will lead to your blocking. Star Mississippi 19:58, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

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 ~~~~}}. Star Mississippi 20:20, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Other Me (2022 film)

The article The Other Me (2022 film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional article by SPA

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:43, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]