User talk:Newinwiki8

This is Newinwiki8's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kocaeli Health and Technology University (March 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kocaeli Health and Technology University and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:03, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Newinwiki8. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
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, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:42, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Newinwiki8, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Newinwiki8|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:57, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:58, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to remove maintenance templates without resolving the problem that the template refers to, you may be blocked from editing. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:01, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't know what the problem is with the page. The page is owned by Turkish Wikipedia. All rights reserved. You also think the cause of the problem is due to previous drafts. Instead of helping and improving the page, you are acting more hostilely. Newinwiki8 (talk) 14:04, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One more time: there is no evidence whatsoever in this article that the subject is notable. Notability is a hard requirement for inclusion in the encyclopaedia. As it stands, this article will not remain published, it will either be moved to drafts or taken to AfD. I asked you which you prefer, but you didn't reply, so I will have to make my own decision.

Also, the article is not "owned" by anybody; not you, not the Turkish Wikipedia, not the university in question. No one. And no rights are "reserved", other than what the Wikipedia licence terms stipulate. Please don't try any of this quasi-legal nonsense, or you may find yourself blocked for legal threats.

And please, skip that "hostilely" (sic) stuff, after you've come to my talk page to call me stupid. Make sure that was your last personal attack here.

Finally, one last time: do not remove maintenance templates from articles without addressing the problems they highlight.

Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:22, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. I understand the concerns regarding notability. The university is listed in Times Higher Education and other independent sources, and I will add these references to improve the article. If you have any specific recommendations on how to better demonstrate notability, I would appreciate your guidance. Also, I apologize if my previous comments seemed inappropriate. I will ensure that all issues raised are properly addressed before making any further edits Newinwiki8 (talk) 14:27, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“I have added multiple reliable sources, including WHED (World Higher Education Database), AD Scientific Index, and other reputable academic rankings. These sources confirm the university’s existence and relevance. Please review the updates, and let me know if further improvements are needed. Thank you.” Newinwiki8 (talk) 14:40, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Kocaeli Health and Technology University.

You also have to address the questions about your connection to Kocaeli Health and Technology University, and whether you are compensated by them in any way. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 15:29, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I want to clarify that I am a student at Kocaeli Health and Technology University and have no financial affiliation with the institution. I am not being compensated in any way for editing this article. My sole intention was to improve the article by adding reliable sources and ensuring that the university is fairly represented, just like many other universities that have pages on Wikipedia, even those without significant recognition.

I have addressed the concerns raised by adding multiple reputable sources, including WHED, AD Scientific Index, and Times Higher Education. These sources confirm the university’s notability. Given these improvements, I kindly request a review of the article and reconsideration of the maintenance templates.

Thank you for your time and consideration.”* Newinwiki8 (talk) 15:42, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the templates again. Database listings and similar sources are very far from providing significant coverage. If you do add sufficient sourcing you should still allow the templates to remain to allow an editor without any connection to the organisation to evaluate it. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 15:49, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would add to this that since Newinwiki8 is self-evidently unable to evaluate notability, they by definition cannot also ascertain whether or not sufficient evidence thereof has been provided.

@Newinwiki8, please do not remove any more maintenance tags, or you will be sanctioned. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:53, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“I acknowledge your feedback and will not remove the templates again. I have added multiple sources, but I understand that independent editors should evaluate the article’s notability. If there are specific types of sources needed, I would appreciate guidance on how to improve the article further. Thank you for your time.” Newinwiki8 (talk) 16:02, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Newinwiki8, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Monmtiiii (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections.

Asking another editor to remove the maintenance tags is no different from doing it yourself. bonadea contributions talk 20:34, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. In general, it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing others' user pages without their permission. Instead, please bring the matter to their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. Please refer to Wikipedia:User page for more information on user page etiquette. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:27, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kocaeli Health and Technology University. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Woodroar (talk) 15:59, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thx Newinwiki8 (talk) 16:49, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Woodroar (talk) 18:52, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No its for 1 month ago and u was blocked then now there no subjects for this i just improve pages Newinwiki8 (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:23, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Newinwiki8 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand that I was blocked for edit warring. I apologize for my repeated reverts and acknowledge that this behavior was disruptive. I will not engage in edit warring again. Instead, I will use the article talk page and seek consensus before making further changes. I ask for a chance to contribute constructively. Thank you for considering my request.

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:20, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.