![]() |
Hi Sbrteamrevilla! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 00:30, 2 March 2019 (UTC) |
Hello Sbrteamrevilla, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to
Bong Revilla have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the
public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a
suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see
Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid
copyright and
plagiarism issues.
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. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 22:33, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Sbrteamrevilla. We
welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things
you have written about in the page
Bong Revilla, 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:
In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).
Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. GermanJoe ( talk) 10:31, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to
Bong Revilla, 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:Sbrteamrevilla, and the template {{
Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Sbrteamrevilla|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}
. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia.
bonadea
contributions
talk 18:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
We are not paid in looking after this page. We are avid followers of the former senator ensuring that troll armies of his opposition are not out in vandalizing his entry. Please review the changes being done by those people and actually read and translate what they are putting on his page. We removed the previous entry because the senator has been acquitted and is NOT required to return the 124M in civil liability. The court has not given the decision regarding that matter. The troll armies are twisting the facts, yet it is being allowed. They have put source citations, but even those articles do not indicate what they write up on with wiki entry. There are now screenshots of wikipedia entries with false information that is being spread throughout Facebook. At least, do not allow the trolls to leave misleading information as they are being used during this election period. bonadea GermanJoe Ymblanter
Hi bonadea There is a community of people that check to make sure that there are no incorrect "Facts" are being put on this entry. You can see by the edit history how the opposition trolls are trying to add false information on this entry. You can see how they twist words from the source they cite. Some of the community notify me when there's false information and I edit it using this account.
Hello, I'm
Allenjambalaya. I wanted to let you know that one or more of
your recent contributions to
Bong Revilla have been undone because they appeared to be promotional.
Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "
soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a
neutral perspective. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.
Allenjambalaya (
talk) 13:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
~Oshwah~
(talk)
(contribs) 13:57, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Sbrteamrevilla ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Hi Oshwah Allenjambalaya Namayan bonadea GermanJoe Ymblanter. There is no violation of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest since I am just stating the facts thats from the source provided by the person who added the negative information. Is it a fact that Bong Revilla is REQUIRED to return the 124M in civil liability? Wikipedia is supposed to show factual information by using cited material. To re-iterate, the cited material DOES NOT say that Bong Revilla is REQUIRED to return the 124M in civil liability. The citation says "State prosecutors from the Office of the Ombudsman have urged the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan to issue a writ of execution that would compel former senator Ramon Revilla Jr. to pay P124.5 million in civil liability". However the court itself has not decided on this issue. So, isnt that person who wrote that portion the one violating Wikipedia's own Rule 9. Write neutrally and with due weight. Read the cited material and ask your self if that statement that I removed is legit.
Decline reason:
Your edits aren't themselves the biggest issue here; you seem to be acting on behalf of this Philippine Senator and/or supporters of him which suggests that you have a conflict of interest that you have not disclosed. You need to address this in any unblock request. I am declining this one. 331dot ( talk) 08:22, 3 April 2019 (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.
Sbrteamrevilla ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Hi 331dot, you say i violate Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for being a supporter of the senator and denied my edit in question, which is based on the two references cited by the original person who posted the incorrect information. But supporters of political oppositions are ok to put edit on the page, even if the facts are twisted from their own sources. I dont care if you block me, i'm just asking for you to actually review the information being put on the page to make sure its factual.
Decline reason:
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.
Someone else will review your request- though you don't seem to be requesting to be unblocked. While blocked, the only legitimate use of this page is to request to be unblocked, you cannot use it to edit by proxy. I'm not sure there is a pathway to an unblock for you without agreeing to a topic ban from Philippine politics, but that will be up to the next reviewer. 331dot ( talk) 01:40, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi Sbrteamrevilla! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 00:30, 2 March 2019 (UTC) |
Hello Sbrteamrevilla, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to
Bong Revilla have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the
public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a
suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see
Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid
copyright and
plagiarism issues.
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. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 22:33, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Sbrteamrevilla. We
welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things
you have written about in the page
Bong Revilla, 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:
In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).
Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. GermanJoe ( talk) 10:31, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to
Bong Revilla, 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:Sbrteamrevilla, and the template {{
Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Sbrteamrevilla|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}
. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia.
bonadea
contributions
talk 18:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
We are not paid in looking after this page. We are avid followers of the former senator ensuring that troll armies of his opposition are not out in vandalizing his entry. Please review the changes being done by those people and actually read and translate what they are putting on his page. We removed the previous entry because the senator has been acquitted and is NOT required to return the 124M in civil liability. The court has not given the decision regarding that matter. The troll armies are twisting the facts, yet it is being allowed. They have put source citations, but even those articles do not indicate what they write up on with wiki entry. There are now screenshots of wikipedia entries with false information that is being spread throughout Facebook. At least, do not allow the trolls to leave misleading information as they are being used during this election period. bonadea GermanJoe Ymblanter
Hi bonadea There is a community of people that check to make sure that there are no incorrect "Facts" are being put on this entry. You can see by the edit history how the opposition trolls are trying to add false information on this entry. You can see how they twist words from the source they cite. Some of the community notify me when there's false information and I edit it using this account.
Hello, I'm
Allenjambalaya. I wanted to let you know that one or more of
your recent contributions to
Bong Revilla have been undone because they appeared to be promotional.
Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "
soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a
neutral perspective. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.
Allenjambalaya (
talk) 13:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
~Oshwah~
(talk)
(contribs) 13:57, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Sbrteamrevilla ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Hi Oshwah Allenjambalaya Namayan bonadea GermanJoe Ymblanter. There is no violation of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest since I am just stating the facts thats from the source provided by the person who added the negative information. Is it a fact that Bong Revilla is REQUIRED to return the 124M in civil liability? Wikipedia is supposed to show factual information by using cited material. To re-iterate, the cited material DOES NOT say that Bong Revilla is REQUIRED to return the 124M in civil liability. The citation says "State prosecutors from the Office of the Ombudsman have urged the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan to issue a writ of execution that would compel former senator Ramon Revilla Jr. to pay P124.5 million in civil liability". However the court itself has not decided on this issue. So, isnt that person who wrote that portion the one violating Wikipedia's own Rule 9. Write neutrally and with due weight. Read the cited material and ask your self if that statement that I removed is legit.
Decline reason:
Your edits aren't themselves the biggest issue here; you seem to be acting on behalf of this Philippine Senator and/or supporters of him which suggests that you have a conflict of interest that you have not disclosed. You need to address this in any unblock request. I am declining this one. 331dot ( talk) 08:22, 3 April 2019 (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.
Sbrteamrevilla ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Hi 331dot, you say i violate Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for being a supporter of the senator and denied my edit in question, which is based on the two references cited by the original person who posted the incorrect information. But supporters of political oppositions are ok to put edit on the page, even if the facts are twisted from their own sources. I dont care if you block me, i'm just asking for you to actually review the information being put on the page to make sure its factual.
Decline reason:
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.
Someone else will review your request- though you don't seem to be requesting to be unblocked. While blocked, the only legitimate use of this page is to request to be unblocked, you cannot use it to edit by proxy. I'm not sure there is a pathway to an unblock for you without agreeing to a topic ban from Philippine politics, but that will be up to the next reviewer. 331dot ( talk) 01:40, 5 April 2019 (UTC)