LAmmons911

Speedy deletion nomination of Monge & Associates, P.C.

Hello LAmmons911,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Monge & Associates, P.C. 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. Trivialist (talk) 21:23, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Final warning

As you have been aggressively spamming and advertising across multiple namespaces, please consider this your final warning. Should you post one more inappropriate page anywhere on Wikipedia for the purpose of marketing or advertising, you will be blocked from editing without further warning. All material you've already posted has been deleted. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:04, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Monge & Associates, P.C. (September 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dodger67 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 User:LAmmons911/Monge & Associates, P.C. 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.

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:19, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello! LAmmons911, 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! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:19, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:LAmmons911/Monge & Associates, P.C.

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 User:LAmmons911/Monge & Associates, P.C., 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 "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. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:20, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  –Grondemar 05:14, 25 September 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).

LAmmons911 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I did try to reach out for assistance 3 times, I moved the page to wikipedia. Not spam, or promotional. I tried following instructions on creating the 2nd page following the link, getting my account blocked. I would like to move the article back to my sandbox and rewrite the article with more references with news articles. I was having issues navigating wikipedia, if you google it now reflects Monge & Associates poorly as a spammer. I would like a 2nd chance to move back to the sandbox, and add the news articles, I have spend the entire day yesterday doing that. I was blocked prior to me being able to publish the references or completing the new article. Thank you for the considerationLAmmons911 (talk) 12:55, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Congratultations, you have won awards for some of your clients. There is no reason to unblock if your only intention here is to create an article about a non-notable law firm. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:42, 25 September 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.

Please take a moment to review WP:N, and then please explain below how the law firm Monge & Associates meets our notability requirements. –Grondemar 13:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

I have 2 notable law suits (and more, from his Avvo.com, and I can pull public record regarding this law firm), Kendrick Parks vs. Chazlyn Yu, Personal Injury Case, Settled policy limits $1,250,000. The client suffered a testicular injur and sexual function loss after his motorcycle was hit by a 17 year old student. Another Mayo vs. A, C & S, et a. in a Wrongful death settled January 1, 2002, $4,000,000, in the decedent was exposed to asbestos. Evidence showed manufacturers of asbestos knew since the 1940's the health hazards and failed to warn the dangers which resulted in death. That is just a few. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LAmmons911 (talk • contribs)

A lawsuit would generally only be considered notable and worthy of its own article if it resulted in a US Supreme Court ruling or at least a significant Court of Appeals / State Supreme Court ruling. Even if the lawsuit was notable, however, this would not establish notability for a law firm. The firm itself would need to satisfy WP:GNG, meaning that it would require substantive coverage from independent reliable sources. If you have any reliable sources discussing your law firm, please feel free to provide.

Also, please note WP:COI. In general you should not be creating an article on an entity you own or work for because of the apparent conflict of interest. –Grondemar 01:06, 27 September 2015 (UTC)