User talk:Tonyeny

Your submission at Articles for creation: HUE (Clothing) (April 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. 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, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HUE (Clothing).
• To edit the submission, 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 .

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

• Please remember to link to the submission!

• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Tonyeny, 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!

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HUE (Clothing) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HUE (Clothing), a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HUE (Clothing)

Hello Tonyeny. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "HUE (Clothing)".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HUE (Clothing)}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 11:34, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tribeca Grand Hotel

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 Tribeca Grand Hotel, 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, product, group, service or person 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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Rasel lio (talk) 17:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Elite SEM

Hello Tonyeny,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Elite SEM for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Atlasowa (talk) 00:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fullbeauty (May 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 FoCuSandLeArN 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:Fullbeauty 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 real-time chat help from experienced editors.

FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:00, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fullbeauty

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 Fullbeauty, 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, product, group, service or person 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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Iamahashtag (talk) 14:42, 22 June 2015 (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. Dialectric (talk) 22:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi Tony. I work on Conflict of Interest (COI) issues in Wikipedia. I saw that you have disclosed your COI on your Userpage and you responded a bit COIN, which is great. I'd like to continue the conversation, if you are open to that.

I'll start by giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below. Please do read this carefully.

Hello, Tonyeny. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

Comments/requests

Wikipedia is a widely used referenced work, and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. I don't know if you are familiar with public scandals that COI editing have caused in the past... if you are not, please see:

• Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia (yes we actually have an article about it)
• Wikipedia:Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms
• the Statement above grew out of two scandals that hit us ~2013. One was about Banc de Binary with offered $10,000 for editors to "fix" their page in the midst of other scandals they were having. and the other was about a firm called Wiki-PR. (see Wiki-PR editing of Wikipedia) See this WSJ article which names the BdB scandal but not the other. The WSJ piece says "Throughout February and March, the Wikimedia community extensively discussed the issue of undisclosed paid editing, resulting in 320,000 words of discussion on the site and 6.3 million views of the proposal that is being adopted." It was actually a much longer time, and many more words. There is a good-sized chunk of the community that hates paid editors. Another big chunk says "content not contributors" and doesn't care if you are paid or not. So people talked and talked and talked, mostly at each other, and at the end of the say, we didn't ban paid editing. As a result, the WMF, which owns us, updated the terms of use, to at least require paid editors to disclose what they were doing. Then the WMF would have legal grounds to take action, if they wanted to.

That is the context that you are working in, as someone who works for an SEO firm. (My stance is that we need to help editors manage their COIs. We have gotten some great contributions from conflicted editors; I have also given hours and hours of my time to cleaning up after conflicted editors who wouldn't follow our procedure for managing COI.)

What everybody cares about, is good, neutral point of view content. The thing about COI is that it causes bias. People with a COI tend to write crappy content, because they cannot see what they are actually doing (they always say they can; they are pretty much always wrong) If you don't believe me, I can show you diffs of people being either unbelievably blind to themselves, or lying. Really.

Anyway, I wanted to make sure you were aware of all that.

Here is the heart of what I want to communicate to you.

Wikipedia highly values contributions by subject matter experts; at the same time, experts have some special challenges when they first start editing here. Please see the essay with advice for experts, WP:EXPERTS, which discusses both sides of that coin.

One of the challenges is related to conflicts of interest (COI). You may be familiar with that concept from your real world work, but it has some interesting twists here in Wikipedia, since we allow editors to be anonymous here (not an issue with you as you have disclosed who you are) but even more so with the instant nature of publishing here. You make an edit, you save it, and you are published - no intervening publisher, no peer review.

So... as in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review.

Like I said, disclosure is complete with you. So how do we do peer review? We ask editors who have a COI to refrain from directly editing content where they have a COI, but rather, propose content at the relevant article's Talk page. You can do that easily - and provide notice to the community of your request - by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline. I made that easy for you by adding a section to the bottom of the beige box at the top of the Talk pages where you have a COI - there is a link at "click here" in that section -- if you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request. What that does, is it gives everybody a chance to review the content to make sure it is NPOV and well-sourced. No drama.

The other way we do peer review, is that we ask editors who create articles, who have a COI with regard to topics in the article, to a) put the article through the WP:AFC process instead of creating them directly (AfC is very clearly a peer review process) and b) to disclose their COI so that the reviewers are aware of it, while reviewing.

Will you please agree to do that going forward?

Also, we prefer if editors refrain from citing their own work here - it is a big temptation, we know, but again that becomes a form of self-promotion. Please see WP:SELFCITE about that.

So - will you please agree to do that too? You can reply here if you have any questions or want to discuss anything - I am watching this page. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 01:30, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

this was a step in the wrong direction. The very wrong direction. :( Jytdog (talk) 01:50, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

• Tony, I think that if you remove the social media links you should be OK for the most part. Leaving your official website up is sort of iffy, but you may be able to justify it by writing something like "My official work profile and any further potential COI details can be seen at (insert website link)." I also need to say that it's a little redundant since your official website already has these links as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:53, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Elite SEM for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elite SEM is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elite SEM until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fullbeauty (July 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Flat Out 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:Fullbeauty 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.

Flat Out (talk) 03:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Healthfirst

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 Healthfirst requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. DGG ( talk ) 03:43, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tonyeny. You have new messages at Ahecht's talk page.
Message added 20:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Fullbeauty concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Fullbeauty, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 23:56, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Time to change...

Hi Tony. So you are back and you are working directly on articles about Elite SEM clients like your work on the Roxy Hotel which is owned by GrandHotels, your client.

You are editing in violation of the Terms of Use, which we have discussed before (see above). I will give you a last chance to make the appropriate disclosures on your User page and the relevant article Talk pages (again, see above). If you start editing again and don't do that, I will seek to have banned from Wikipedia, and I will likely succeed. There is no tolerance for this kind of behavior, I explained to you before. There is a place for you here, but not in way you are doing things. Jytdog (talk) 22:47, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

My apologies, I have updated my profile to advise that I work for Elite SEM. I will also specify on the article pages that I currently or have worked in the past with the companies of which I am editing. Tonyeny

Please post your clients on your user page and make the required disclosure on the Talk pages of the articles you worked on. Appropriate behavior from you is all that matters now and at this point you have no wiggle room. And per the COI guideline please you are strongly advised not to directly' do not direct edit or directly create any more articles about your clients. Do not use WP to make money or for any PR/SEO purposes without disclosing and going through the peer review processes I described above. Jytdog (talk) 00:18, 28 January 2016 (UTC) (redacted Jytdog (talk) 05:30, 28 January 2016 (UTC))

I have added my clients to my user page and to the pages of those clients that I edited. Thank you. Tonyeny (talk)

Your disclosure is far from complete. I don't know if you are aware that everyone can see your contributions. I am bringing this to ANI to get you banned from Wikipedia. You'll receive a notice when that is posted. Jytdog (talk) 02:31, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jytdog (talk) 03:06, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Banned

By the consensus reached in the above discussion, you have been banned from editing by the Wikipedia community. If you wish to contest this ban, you can appeal using the processes discussed at WP:UNBAN. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:38, 30 January 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. Jytdog (talk) 03:25, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

I see you've been met by Wikipedia's friendly brigade. Hopefully this beer will make things a bit more palatable! Cheers! MurderByDeletionism"bang!" 06:56, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Ben Kirshner for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ben Kirshner is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Kirshner until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Theroadislong (talk) 20:03, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Healthfirst for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Healthfirst is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Healthfirst until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Theroadislong (talk) 20:07, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of TravelStore for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article TravelStore is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TravelStore until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Theroadislong (talk) 17:52, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Roxy Hotel (New York City) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Roxy Hotel (New York City) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roxy Hotel (New York City) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MB 22:36, 5 May 2019 (UTC)