User talk:Gyejournal

This is Gyejournal'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: Ogden Valley, Utah (September 16)

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

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Ogden Valley, Utah instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Two copies of this page have been created, in draft space and in article space. It is not necessary to create two copies of the same page, and it annoys the reviewers. This is sometimes done in order to bypass Articles for Creation review. However, if a submitter is ready to have the article in article space, it can be moved into article space, rather than creating a copy. It is common for a page that has been duplicated in draft space and in article space to be nominated for deletion or proposed for deletion.

If the article is kept, this draft should be redirected to the article. If the article is deleted, this draft may be kept for future improvement.

This draft is either essentially the same as the article with the same name, or a subset of the article with the same name. The draft will be replaced by a redirect from draft space to the article.

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:Ogden Valley, Utah and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Ogden Valley, Utah, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 14:19, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gyejournal! Having an article 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 14:19, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Ogden Valley, Utah

Hello, Gyejournal. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Ogden Valley, Utah, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. 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 here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Ogden Valley, Utah

Hello, Gyejournal. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ogden Valley".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! —Belwine (talk) 20:31, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Gyejournal! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Jorm (talk) 17:20, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DS Alerts

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

And yes, Floyd is still covered by BLP. He is still in the news; it is still a topic; his biography is still under BLP concerns. Jorm (talk) 17:21, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Hello, I'm Atlantic306. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Atlantic306 (talk) 20:39, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am adding the source now. It's from an interview he did. Gyejournal (talk) 20:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, that youtube channel is not a reliable source for blp claims. As it is a comedy channel his claims could be a joke, or very exaggerated which comedians often do, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Neil Strauss. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Rift (talk) 04:46, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t believe this was vandalism 63.248.211.171 (talk) 04:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

31 October 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Richmond, Virginia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 05:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:13, 31 October 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

I understand that my edits are considered "vandalism" and I will not do the same edits again. I have many constructive edits and several articles that I have written that are worthwhile and NOT vandalism. please lift the block. Gyejournal (talk) 14:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No. WP:0T. Take your hateful garbage someplace else, it isn't welcome here. Yamla (talk) 14:19, 31 October 2024 (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.

You are not permitted to modify or remove declined unblock requests for your currently active block. I want to be very clear here, this is your only warning. --Yamla (talk) 14:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I don't know how to reply but I assume I can do it right here. Can you please review this block request further? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gyejournal (talk • contribs)

I have reviewed your request. I declined your request. You are free to make a new unblock request, WP:GAB explains how. Note, though, that I would very strongly oppose anyone else granting any future unblock request. --Yamla (talk) 14:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla you are denying an unblock request for an account that has never been blocked before. Why the harsh response? Gyejournal (talk) 14:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:0T. --Yamla (talk) 14:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My edits didn't meet any of the criteria on that page. I suggest you review your work and follow the "assume good intent" rule. Wikipedia is for all, and is NOT your personal project. Gyejournal (talk) 14:43, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla, it's worth mentioning that Gyejournal also posts from 63.248.211.171 (that IP posted a defense of Gyejournal further up this talk page), which similarly features other blatantly racist edits that closely mirror Gyejournal's. Rift (talk) 23:09, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is so racist about my edits? George Floyd WAS big floyd. Neil Strauss IS jewish. Gyejournal (talk) 03:21, 1 November 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

See above reasons AND please consider that this account has never been blocked before, and the edits deemed "vandalism" were, indeed, factual. They may not be wikipedia-friendly but they were factual. I won't put them in again but this wasn't some simple, dumb case of vandalism like blocking is meant to address. Gyejournal (talk) 14:31, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I concur with Yamla, your hatred is not welcome here. You are free to hold your views, but you aren't free to give them on this privately operated platform. Go find somewhere else to spew your hatred of fellow human beings. I too would strongly oppose anyone unblocking you. 331dot (talk) 15:10, 31 October 2024 (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.