User talk:Medellinir

This is Medellinir'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: Faizal Atcha (March 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 Theroadislong 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:Faizal Atcha 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 11:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Medellinir! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 11:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Reza Sajedi (March 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by BuySomeApples 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:Reza Sajedi 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.

BuySomeApples (talk) 05:55, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editing problems

Most of your editing consists of arbitrarily bolding more or less random words in articles, for no evident reason. Further edits add unhelpful wikilinks to article; for example, nobody reading the article Coelioxys porterae is likely to need to consult the article Bee in order to know what a bee is, so the word "bee" should not be linked in that article, and likewise nothing in the article District is likely to help anyone understand the content of the article Beetzseeheide, so it shouldn't be linked. Generally speaking, a word in a Wikipedia article should link to another article only in one of two situations: the word in question is likely to need explanation to a significant proportion of readers, or the linked article contains further information about the subject of the linking article. Please don't link common words without any good reason. Edits which fall under those two categories, while unhelpful, may be put down to a new editor who is not yet aware of what is considered constructive and what isn't, but a smaller number of your edits, such as an edit you made in the article Dendropanax appear to be outright vandalism. Please don't continue in the same way. A small proportion of your edits seem to be perfectly constructive; please stick to edits of that kind. JBW (talk) 20:11, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Faizal Atcha

Hello, Medellinir. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Faizal Atcha, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:02, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Faizal Atcha

Hello, Medellinir. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Faizal Atcha".

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! Hey man im josh (talk) 12:18, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing editing problems

You have continued with the kinds of unconstructive editing which I warned you about above, on the 25th of July. You have been adding completely arbitrary and irrelevant bolding of words in numerous articles, such as Love This Giant, John Brown's Body (band), and Jesson's Church of England Primary School. As for unsuitable wikilinks, you have been adding links which are not merely unnecessary, but outright wrong. For example, in the article Excess mortality you linked the word "mortality" to the article Mortality salience, but the use of the word in the article where you placed the link had nothing to do with mortality salience; in the article U.S. Route 1A (Wake Forest–Youngsville, North Carolina), in a mention of the Dr. Calvin Jones Highway to the article Dr. Calvin Jones House, which is totally irrelevant; in the article Wage subsidy you linked "economic value" to Economic value added, but economic value added is not at all the same thing as economic value. Those are a few examples, but there are many more. Please stop doing these unhelpful things; if you don't, then you are likely to be blocked from editing. JBW (talk) 11:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have now seen some even worse examples. Perhaps the single worst one that I have seen is in the article Port Authority (play), where you linked the actor "Stephen Brennan" to Stephen Brendan McMahon, which is not only a completely different person (a physiologist) but he does not even have the same name. It is really difficult to see how that can have been done in good faith as a mistake. JBW (talk) 11:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it gets even worse. In the article 2002 Herzliya shawarma restaurant bombing, about an incident in Israel, your link relating to Korea must have been deliberate vandalism. JBW (talk) 11:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing because you have continued with the same unconstructive kinds of editing as before; for example, you have added totally unnecessary bolding in the article Tiger tail wire, and you have continued to add irrelevant wikilinks in numerous articles. It is most unfortunate to have to block you from editing because of such little things, but since messages to you have no effect, this is the one available method which stands a chance of persuading you to change your ways. The block is set to expire after a week, but it does not have to last that long; if you can persuade an administrator that you will not continue in the same way then they are perfectly welcome to remove the block. I hope that you will take that option. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. JBW (talk) 20:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Reza Sajedi

Hello, Medellinir. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Reza Sajedi, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Reza Sajedi

Hello, Medellinir. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Reza Sajedi".

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 deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:05, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Ghalbeyakh per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Huda-omr. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:54, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]