User talk:Dukology

This is Dukology'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: Emmanuel Njoku (July 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Princess of Ara was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:Emmanuel Njoku 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.

Princess of Ara 12:58, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dukology! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering 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! Princess of Ara 12:58, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Emmanuel Njoku has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Emmanuel Njoku. Thanks! Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:12, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Emmanuel Njoku (August 10)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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:Emmanuel Njoku 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.

Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:16, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Emmanuel Njoku has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Emmanuel Njoku. Thanks! Qcne (talk) 18:19, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Emmanuel Njoku (September 1)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please, just choose the three (and only three) best sources that you think prove his notability under WP:NPEOPLE.

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:Emmanuel Njoku 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.

Qcne (talk) 20:02, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Osahon Okunbo (September 12)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:Osahon Okunbo 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.

Jamiebuba (talk) 19:53, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Emmanuel Njoku (September 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt was:

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails to establish what the individual is actually notable for due to the citation bombing.

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:Emmanuel Njoku 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 03:08, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Emmanuel Njoku (September 14)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by S0091 was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Sources 1 and 5 are the exact same article published by different sources which means it is PR piece so not independent. Other sources are largely what he says so likewise not independent. Nothing suggests this can meet the notability criteria.

S0091 (talk) 14:44, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Osahon Okunbo (September 17)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:Osahon Okunbo 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.

Jamiebuba (talk) 12:49, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} to the bottom of the talk page of your original account. JBW (talk) 16:26, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you have acted indecorously by blocking my account on the basis of spurious claims.

this defeats the purpose of wikipedia being a platform operating with guidelines.

I have no relationship whatsoever with the accounts you have linked me on the wrong and false allegations of sock puppeting.

The articles I wrote about do not have the same writing styles as the ones you referenced, any other factors you based your very wrong decision on is purely coincidental and i should have been given an opportunity to defend myself.

I never wrote or edited any article with the accounts you linked my account to,I never edited or wrote with the same ip addresses,if you disagree, provide evidence.

The title of the articles which bear similarity were seen from an inexperienced editor who tried to work on the articles previously.

i repeat, I have no relationship with the account ekpestar.

it is not known to me,

I hereby request that this block decision should be rescinded and my articles judged on the merit and rules of wikipedia.

i believe you should not be sentimental and unnecessarily a kill-joy to other peoples effort here. Dukology (talk) 14:26, 30 October 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have no relationship with the account ekpestar, I state unequivocally that i operate independent of such account, I work with a team and there are several topics that we could work on that are similar depending on the flow or direction of interest. There is no justification for the block, I do not know the owner of the account ekpestar. I strongly request for my accout to be unblocked for the many other reasons and rules which align with wikpedia's policies and guidleines which i carefully observe. Dukology (talk) 14:36, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. There's not enough information here to review your request. What exactly and specifically do you mean by "I work with a team and there are several topics that we could work on that are similar depending on the flow or direction of interest." Please answer fully and completely. Yamla (talk) 14:56, 30 October 2023 (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.

What i mean here is that I worked on the articles independently because i noticed a member of my team brought the topics and several other topics to my attention and i then went ahead to start editing on it. I have no knowledge of the existence of ekpestar, i was only seeing it for the first time when i noticed my account was blocked.

This does not answer the question I posed. --Yamla (talk) 15:24, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i work with a team, and there are several projects that we could work on which are similar depending on the flow or direction of interest...to explain this further, I mean a team member brought the article that bears similarity to my attention but i have zero relationship with the account "ekpestar" that was referenced as the basis for blocking my account or deleting my new articles. one can easily verify that my writing format is unique and different and i abide by the wukipedia guidelines. my account is not in breach of any guideline except this hazy link with an account i do not have any personal knowledge of. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dukology (talk • contribs)

You appear to be deliberately wasting my time. Until you are willing to fully and completely answer the question I have posed, I will not respond further. --Yamla (talk) 15:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i inadvertently worked with a similar topic passed to me by a team member and we work collaboratively on a number of common topics but i have no personal relationship with the account "ekpestar" referenced as a reason for blocking my account. I hope I have explained myself clearly and i do not intend to waste your time. I am asking for a positive resolution on the issue.

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).

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

Request reason:

i inadvertently worked on a similar topic passed to me by a team member and we work collaboratively on a number of common topics for articles creation. However i have absolutely no personal relationship with the account "ekpestar" referenced as a reason for blocking my account. I hope I have explained myself clearly and i do not intend to waste your time. I am appealing for my account to be unblocked,henceforth I shall do my utmost to cross check carefully around the even the flimsy reasons that could lead to issues of this nature. thank you I am asking for a positive resolution on the issue.Dukology (talk) 17:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

How do you "inadvertently" work on something given to you by someone else and have no relationship with them? This doesn't make sense. Do you even understand what we are asking? I suggest you read WP:MEAT. 331dot (talk) 19:44, 30 October 2023 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I am resolutely stating here again that i have no relationship whatsoever with he account ekpestar or any other accounts which i have been wrongly linked to. a cursory look will reveal that i do not have the same writing style or guideline application pattern with these characters. This is a community guided by rules, I do not believe any other persons should be harassing, bullying other users or playing God over issues that cannot be proven beyond reasonable factsDukology (talk) 15:07, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Declined per the comment by Yamla below. Aoidh (talk) 16:28, 31 October 2023 (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.

Confirmed (unambiguously) to Ansadensiks, another blocked sockpuppet. Additionally, note this user has so far refused to explain what team they are a part of. --Yamla (talk) 15:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #80840

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:11, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: Indeed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:13, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]