User talk:Jennepicfoundation

Hi Ritchie333, Per your request, I revised the Wikipedia profile for Alexandre Mars and incorporated references as you suggested. There are a lot of great citations here. I also looked through the rules for writing a living person bio, to ensure that I was within all requirements. Take a look and let me know if this is to your liking. Thanks so much for your time. Jennepicfoundation (talk) 13:52, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Using multiple accounts

What is your relation to Andamanes (talk · contribs) and Jennchowdhury (talk · contribs) ? The Dissident Aggressor 15:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. If you are only here to promote Alexandre Mars and his media presence, you have no place editing on Wikipedia. The Dissident Aggressor 15:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Dissident, please note that this user is working with User:Ritchie333 to develop the article. Ritchie is a highly experienced content creator and an admin, so you can be sure that if the article passes his muster, it will be acceptable to Wikipedia. --MelanieN (talk) 17:26, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Other accounts blocked

At your request, the accounts User:Andamanes and User:Jennchowdhury have been blocked. This is now the only account you should use. Be sure to copy the conflict-of-interest notice from Jennchowdhury to this account. --MelanieN (talk) 17:24, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alexandre Mars (July 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy 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:Alexandre Mars and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• 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 get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 23:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello! Jennepicfoundation, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 23:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alexandre Mars (July 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy 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:Alexandre Mars and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• 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 get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 16:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Sulfurboy: Although the article was short and probably not enough to stand on its own two feet (I had to revert copyvios by the creator), every single fact was cited to a source that is generally considered to be perfectly acceptable per our BLP policies, including Bloomberg, Le Monde and the Financial Times. Can you be more specific? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:00, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I have expanded the draft and added several references. Please take another look. --MelanieN (talk) 14:55, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Melanie. Jenn had done a lot of work but I had to revert it as it appeared to be a copyvio. :-/ Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:03, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Just as well. Since she has a COI, she should probably not be the one writing the article. Better you and me. Back when we first encountered her, when she tried to write about the foundation, I concluded that the foundation wasn't yet notable - but he was. --MelanieN (talk) 15:24, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

She shouldn't be, but she's had a go, and at least we've given it a shot in the right direction. Right now, I'm busy thinking about cheap handbags and dead blues harp players. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:28, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

He's dead, maybe - but is he grateful? --MelanieN (talk) 15:34, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alexandre Mars has been accepted

Alexandre Mars, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 19:29, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Slow down!

Whoa, Jenn! You've been stuffing the article full of promotional stuff and we can't have that. I was only going to delete the latest batch; the External Links you added are inappropriate, except for the website, and so was the Press list. But I see someone has now reverted everything you added over the last few days. They are entitled to do that, per WP:COI. That means you are going to have to get consensus on the article's talk page for your edits from now on. I will add back a few things I thought were OK, but the rest will have to be looked at by the community. And don't even try to add back all those external links to Twitter (not allowed) and his blogs and so on. As for the "Press" section, that was pure hype, I doubt if any of it should be there. We had been allowing some edits from you because they seemed neutral and encyclopedic, and I thought you understood the rules. But after this latest batch - no. From now on, ask at the article's talk page if you want anything added to the article. Sorry, but you pushed the envelope too far. --MelanieN (talk) 19:53, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

Hello, I'm DissidentAggressor. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Alexandre Mars without 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; I restored the removed content. 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. The Dissident Aggressor 19:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

December 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising, as you did at Alexandre Mars ‎. See further discussion on Talk:Alexandre Mars. Toddst1 (talk) 19:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 19:34, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Jennepicfoundation, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Alexandre Mars have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:42, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at Administrators Noticeboard/Incidents

Hello, Jenn. This is to let you know that I have made a recommendation about you and your editing here. Basically I am suggesting that you should not be allowed to edit the Alexandre Mars article any more. I thought your recent addition of the "Epic Foundation-approved" material was the last straw, a strong violation of your requirement to keep your editing neutral. I don't have anything personal against you, but I feel that you are not following Wikipedia's rules for COI editors. There will be a discussion by the community, lasting at least several days, and you are welcome to contribute your own comments to it. --MelanieN (talk) 23:27, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames which give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy or request a change of username. It also appears that your account is intended to be used for the purpose of telling the world about an organization, person or cause that you consider worthwhile. Unfortunately, many good causes are not sufficiently notable for their own Wikipedia article, and all users are discouraged from editing in any area where they have an inherent conflict of interest. You may wish to consider one of these alternative outlets.

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page. Thank you. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:18, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Apologies

It appears I have made a mistake. I misread your user name. I do apologize for the block, but have unblocked you. I might suggest a user-name change so this doesn't happen in the future, perhaps "Jenn at Epicfoundation" which to me is not confusing. (To emphasize, this is a suggestion, not a requirement). Again, my profuse apologies. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:56, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Editing Alexandre Mars

The discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents has resulted in a clear editing restriction for you. There is consensus that you are now banned from making any direct edits at the article Alexandre Mars. You may, however, use the article's talk page Talk:Alexandre Mars to participate in discussions and to suggest that changes be made to the article by other editors. Any direct edits to the article page made by you will lead to an immediate indefinite block of your account.

This editing restriction was decided upon by the community of Wikipedia editors and it is indefinite. You may appeal the decision at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them here at your talk page. De728631 (talk) 02:21, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Just to be clear, the ban is very definite in scope, but its duration is indefinite i.e. it will remain in force until rescinded. EEng 10:49, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

January 2017

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 00:23, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Note

Hi Jennepicfoundation. Thanks again for being mindful of the COI guideline and terms of use while you are editing Wikipedia on behalf of your employer. Please keep in mind that declaring and participating on the Talk page is the minimum.

Please review WP:COITALK.

(pausing while you read that... :) )

What this is about, is that it is really not OK to be in Wikipedia only to advocate for your employer. An editor can mind the letter of PAID by declaring their COI and not editing directly, but still violate WP:SOAPBOX on the talk page. At some point every editor needs to take on the values of Wikipedia and strive for NPOV content. And ideally at some point you will stop being a single-purpose account and will edit elsewhere to improve Wikipedia - not required of course, but ideal. Does that make sense? Jytdog (talk) 17:03, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it appears that this editor is WP:NOTHERE to do anything besides promote her boss. Toddst1 (talk) 05:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jytdog! Thank you- this makes sense. I'll be frank with you- how will this affect my overall ambition to edit Alexandre Mars's page? I definitely hear you and will think about contributing to other wiki pages, but can you guarantee that this will change course for Alexandre's page? As you can see, we haven't received the best treatment here and I wouldn't want to waste my time or anyone else's if the end result continues to be backlash in trying to update his page :) Jennepicfoundation (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

There is no obligation to edit other pages - you can do what you wish. And no bargain was being offered.

As a Wikipedia editor, you have an obligation to learn the policies and guidelines that govern Wikipedia, and offer suggestions that comply with them. If you just keep badgering people at the talk page of the Wikipedia article about Alexandre to add policy violating content, you will eventually blocked for being NOTHERE to build an encyclopedia -- every editor ultimately needs to be here to improve Wikipedia, not to just lobby to promote something. If you don't understand the reason why content is rejected, please listen to the answer and learn from it, so that the next thing you ask for has a better chance of being accepted. Please also keep in mind everything in WP:NOT - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - articles exist to provide the public with accepted, enduring knowledge - they are not a place to provide news and they are not anything like social media or a personal webpage where a person provides updates on what they are up to. Does that make sense? Jytdog (talk) 21:50, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Fast forwarding this process, please see this proposal at ANI regarding your behavior. Toddst1 (talk) 00:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey Jytdog! Yes, this definitely makes sense. Being 100% honest, that's been our goal from the beginning to LISTEN TO THE EDITORS and try to PROGRESS from what they're saying. First, one editor said it's too PR so we took out everything that seemed promotional. Then, they said the sources we were giving were not acceptable, so recently I came across another wiki page with sources that we also have and asked the editors on the talk page if those sources are acceptable and whether we could also use them to edit Alexandre's page. I don't think working from the feedback of our previous correspondence and then going back to the page to say "hey, we listened to what you had to say and here's what we found that we think would be acceptable based on your guidance" is badgering, do you? There's a loooong history here so I'll save you the trouble of having to go through it all and just come to me- the source. At this point, I understand what differentiates a promotional wikipedia article from an encyclopedic one. I'm just having trouble understanding why we can't add more information to this page, if we really are here to make a good article for Alexandre Mars 2) why do the sources used on one page- literally, the exact platform- can't be used for another?Jennepicfoundation (talk) 19:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

The example article you have cited as an example to justify your changes, Liv Boeree is a terrible WP page, full of unsourced and promotional content, obviously created by fans or someone working on her behalf. Wikipedia has lots of great content but also lots of terrible content. The volunteer community is constantly working to improve things, but WP is very far from perfect or complete.

I have read through the discussions and have read what you have written, and I don't see much that shows that you have tried to understand the mission of WP to provide NPOV, well-sourced, encyclopedic content to readers. Your recent citing of the Boeree article at the Talk page and even again here shows that you are no closer to understanding what WP is all about today, than when you made your first edits.

I tried to say to you above, that the problems seem to be arising due to a basic lack of understanding of what WP is, and what it isn't, and a basic mis-alignment with the mission of Wikipedia.

If you want to learn, please read WP:NOT carefully, and then look at some "featured articles" that are biographies, and some "good articles" too. You can find links to them at Category:FA-Class_biography_articles and Category:A-Class biography articles and Category:GA-Class biography articles. If the assessment folks have done their work well, you should find articles that provide encyclopedic (enduringly important) content, sourced to strong, independent sources, written in neutral language. Jytdog (talk) 20:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for not being here to build an encyclopedia, per consensus at the Administrator's Noticeboard. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 18:56, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Please note that this block is in my personal capacity as an admin, based on the consensus of editors at the Administrators' Noticeboard discussion, and that pending the final outcome of the discussion your block may be converted into a community-issued siteban. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 19:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Jenn, this discussion at the Administrator's Noticeboard displays in fact a strong consensus among the community of editors to ban you from editing any and all pages of the English Wikipedia (see WP:SBAN). This includes editing your own user talk page, so I will revoke your access to this page. You may, however, appeal the site ban by sending an email to the Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System. Like your previous topic ban, this site ban is indefinite. De728631 (talk) 16:21, 23 April 2017 (UTC)