Dominique Kuhne

Your submission at Articles for creation: Draft:Crown Group (Crown Group Holdings Pty Ltd) (August 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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.

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.

Anupmehra -Let's talk! 13:27, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Dominique Kuhne, 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!

Your submission at Articles for creation: Crown Group (Crown Group Holdings Pty Ltd) (November 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 Hell in a Bucket 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:Crown Group (Crown Group Holdings Pty Ltd) 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.

Hell in a Bucket (talk) 11:15, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

January 2015

Please do not use Wikipedia to promote businesses. Wikipedia is not the Yellow pages. If you want to list a company for potential customers to find, please consider alternative outlets. Thank you. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 00:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Artist impression, Sydney by Crown.jpeg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Artist impression, Sydney by Crown.jpeg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 02:40, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Artist impression, Sydney by Crown.jpeg

A tag has been placed on File:Artist impression, Sydney by Crown.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

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. Eeekster (talk) 04:39, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:49, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dominique Kuhne, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:26, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am new to Wikipedia and still learning, I have been adding and changing information to try and improve based on editors comments, I am still learning how to best write for Wikipedia and have familiarized myself with the guidelines, a block seems extreme

Decline reason:

It doesn't appear that you understand and acknowledge what the issues with your editing are, and it appears you may be evading this block and/or recruiting others to push an advertising agenda. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:11, 2 February 2015 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hi Beeblebrox I understand that the information I have posted is of a promotional and advertising style. I did try not to do this however on review I can understand why even with the changes I posted the text was not approved. I understand and will not continue to do this moving forward. I would like to be unblocked if possible please so that I can try to improve as per the guidelines. I hope to hear from you soon. Thanks!

Decline reason:

You haven't addressed the concerns in regard to block evasion. PhilKnight (talk) 08:27, 2 February 2015 (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.