User talk:Objectivescholar

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you.

Please do not use misleading edit summaries when making changes to Wikipedia pages. This behavior is viewed as disruptive, and continuation may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Watercheetah99 (talk) 15:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gombe Emirate Mosque (August 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic 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. 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:Gombe Emirate Mosque 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Objectivescholar! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Gombe Emirate Mosque

Hello, Objectivescholar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Gombe Emirate Mosque, 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) 20:02, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kolmani (January 30)

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

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 sources provided do not label this a town, but rather as an area around a river between two states. The entire demographics section is unsourced.

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:Kolmani 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.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Federal Scholarship Board

Hello, Objectivescholar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Federal Scholarship Board, 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) 14:03, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Gombe Emirate Mosque

Hello, Objectivescholar. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Gombe Emirate Mosque".

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!} 19:11, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Federal Scholarship Board

Hello, Objectivescholar. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Federal Scholarship Board".

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) 13:38, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Nigeria's Ethnic groups

The estimates are not only from CIA and the CIA estimate has been argued on before as the figures (especially for those of the Hausa), seem to be exaggerated, giving the other ethnic groups a smaller population. The current estimate was derived from a combination of Worldometers, Joshua's Project as well as the CIA. You can check the estimates on there for only before you continue your disruptive editing Da5ft9 (talk) 10:29, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The CIA estimate also has no base as Nigeria's censuses throughout history does not recognize ethnic groups, it only breakdown is gender, so it estimate is based on mere perceptions Da5ft9 (talk) 10:32, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was clearly stated that it is an estimate and the year for the estimate is given, which is enough. All the other data on the table are also estimates citing the same source. Objectivescholar (talk) 10:34, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am talking about the reference given. You cannot just edit thing without citing a reliable source. Wikipedia is not a place for you to insert your opinions. We work with facts. You failed to cite any source to justify your edit. So what you are doing is just disruption. Objectivescholar (talk) 10:32, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

One of your recent edits has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Moxy- 20:31, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Canadian+Security+Intelligence+Service&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 Moxy-

20:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Likely a case of mistaken identity. Check if your message is meant for me. I don't remember making that edit. Objectivescholar (talk) 20:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea which of my edits violated the copyright policy. Give me the link. I will check it out and make appropriate adjustment if necessary. Objectivescholar (talk) 20:40, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry wrong link above ......pls review WP:Undue... but mass copy pasting ...[1] is the main concern here. Let's break this down to a sentence or two or 3. Can lift the block on this page when all good!!! Moxy-

21:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Objectivescholar reported by User:Moxy (Result: ). Thank you. Moxy- 20:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

You have been blocked temporarily from editing certain pages (Nigeria) for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Black Kite (talk) 21:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Middle Belt: take it to talk page, edit warring is unacceptable

If you think there are changes that need to be made to the article, you need to take the matter to the talk page and get consensus. Part of your edits yesterday were incorporated to the article, because they were supported by the sources you cited. However, your latest changes are not supported by the sources.

You need to discuss this matter at the talk page for two reasons. First, it is the right way to resolve these sorts of issues on Wikipedia: for editors to discuss the matter, review the sources, and come to consensus about what the article should say. Second, you have been reported to the Administrators' noticeboard for edit warring once before, and you were blocked indefinitely from the Nigeria article as a result. If you were to be reported again, your account could wind up being blocked from editing all articles on Wikipedia, and possibly for an indefinite period of time. Thus, it is very directly in your best interests that you not edit war on this article or any other article. —C.Fred (talk) 12:58, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please block me once and for all. I am no longer interested in the volunteer work. Bye. Objectivescholar (talk) 16:03, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Kolmani

Hello, Objectivescholar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kolmani, 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) 00:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Federal Scholarship Board

Hello, Objectivescholar. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Federal Scholarship Board".

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!} 15:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Federal Scholarship Board (March 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 Kline was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Federal Scholarship Board 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.

Kline • talk to me! • contribs 20:33, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Federal Scholarship Board (March 14)

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

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.

This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read "What Wikipedia is not" for more information.

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:Federal Scholarship Board 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.

microbiologyMarcus ^{[petri dish·growths]} 18:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Gombe State, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 21:32, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

kindly go through the page's history!. I only restored the page after series of vandalisms. I expanded the article as well. Most of the information do not require any source. Where needed I cite sources as you can see by yourself. Objectivescholar (talk) 22:06, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In all of your Gombe State edits, you did not cite a single source other than a few government websites in the unnecessary sections on agencies and parastatals. You need to understand that other editors can see your edits so lying about them in edit summaries or talk pages makes no sense. Your edits were more clear attempts to erase non-Fulani groups and languages from the page along with the sourceless change of religious statistics and the aforementioned addition of government agencies with no place on a state page. Unless you address the reasons why the edits were reverted, they will continue to be taken down. Watercheetah99 (talk) 23:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are the one lying here. I did not change any religious statistics! Check that again. The nigerian census does not ask or publish data on ethnicity or religion. Any figure you see there is just somebody's opinion. It is for this that the page contradicted itself. The religious figures on the introduction section differs from that on the demographics sections and in all the two, no source was cited. It is the work of vandals from time to time. In the case the solution was to remove the figures in totality.

Yes, State pages here do contain information on state agencies. Visit other pages and see. I am not the one that added the agencies, I only expanded the section by adding all.

No part of my edit suggests that i want to erase "non-fulani" groups - whatever that means. Go through the page again.

Are official government websites not sources for reliable information? Why should I not cite them?

I repeat, if you have any issue, bring it up for discussion and stop vandalising the page. Objectivescholar (talk) 23:37, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, you need to learn that others can view everything that you edited, lying about it will not get you anywhere. You have a long history of attempting to remove ethnicities, religions, and languages from (mainly Gombe State-related) pages from a clearly biased perspective, unless you have some other reason for removing all religious statistics under the false summary of "added number of languagaes", removing mentions of most non-Fulani groups and religious statistics under the false summary of "I added more tourist attractuons", deleting cited information under false summary of "added more data. removed irrevelant and uncited information", and the deleting of cited population statistics under false summary of "added up to date references, improved citations, corrected misinformation, etc" — this is a clear pattern of POV violations and false edit summaries in an attempt to push a identity-based agenda, change or your edits will be reverted. Watercheetah99 (talk) 00:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Gombe State, you may be blocked from editing. - Arjayay (talk) 21:32, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Fula people, you may be blocked from editing. — Watercheetah99 (talk) 23:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Fula people, you may be blocked from editing. — Watercheetah99 (talk) 23:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Fula people, you may be blocked from editing. — Watercheetah99 (talk) 23:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Watercheetah99 (talk) 01:55, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Fula people. - Arjayay (talk) 08:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You failed to respond to my points and you are here threatening with blocking. Since it is not reason that you are looking for, then go ahead and make the block. Objectivescholar (talk) 11:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Fula people shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - Arjayay (talk) 12:58, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}. 331dot (talk) 13:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

One of your recent edits has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Canterbury Tail talk 13:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]