User talk:Raabbustamante

Welcome!

Hello, Raabbustamante, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Oncosperma tigillarium, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Aunty-S (talk) 14:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On a side note, please sign your comments with ~~~~. It help keeping track who is who in discussions. Bgwhite ([[User t

February 2013

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Aerides. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. --Rkitko ^(talk) 05:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Auction for Action

Hello Raabbustamante,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Auction for Action 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. LS1979 (talk) 16:23, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Daphne Oseña-Paez may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

BP" /> She was awarded Best TV Host for a Lifestyle Program at the 2002, 2003 and 2004 Star Awards (the Philippines’ version of the [[Emmy Awards]]. ''F'' has been awarded Best Lifestyle Program at
Oseña-Paez is the first Filipina ever appointed Special Advocate for Children by [[UNICEF Philippines]. She promotes the practice of exclusive breastfeeding among Filipino mothers.<

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:39, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Criticism of the Catholic Church, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 00:10, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from editing Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines

Your editing of theCatholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines article is close to engaging in an Wikipedia:Edit war which is prohibited by Wikipedia. Always remember the three re-vert rule, WP:3RR. Some may already consider that you are already violating Wikipedia rules. Please refrain from editing until a WP:Consensus has been reached on the Talk:Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines page. If you choose to engage in an Edit War, you risk losing editing privileges. --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 06:34, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On quotations

It's best to paraphrase quotations. Extensive ones are forbidden as it is already copyright violation. I'm fixing the quotations that you added in the Korina Sanchez article to avoid any legal action against the Wiki. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:30, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of André Schuiteman

Hello Raabbustamante,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged André Schuiteman for deletion, because it seems to be vandalism or a hoax.

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. Vvvaggot (talk) 07:36, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to User talk:Vvvaggot, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you.--Vvvaggot (talk)

No MOVING posts![[1]]

Ulysses Ferreras

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Ulysses Ferreras, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://palomapolo.com/unrest/ulisses_ferreras.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ulysses Ferreras

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 Ulysses Ferreras, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It appears to be a clear copyright infringement of http://palomapolo.com/unrest/ulisses_ferreras.html. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:23, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COPYVIO

It seems that you are finally okay with reverting copyvios as you did in Korina Sanchez. Good job. Anyways I did the same and reverted all your changes at CBCP.

Anyways, do the same to what I did at the Sanchez article: Address the copyvios, clear the unsupported claims and added reliable references. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:32, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Waling-waling

Could you please provide a reliable source stating that the waling-waling should be called vanda instead of euanthe? For the moment, I have reverted your edit. Cheers! — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 13:13, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ulysses Ferreras

A tag has been placed on Ulysses Ferreras requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

A7 - Fails WP:PROF

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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 "Click here to 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:51, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Korina Sanchez

You should at least try to use the talk page to say why the content belongs in the article and if it is properly sourced. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:22, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The content is biased. It produces wrong impression of the article. The citations are from press releases of groups/individuals that joining the bandwagon of Korina's controversy. It would be better if we can have her story discuss on the page. Kaye2Santos (talk) 01:21, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one week for sock puppetry. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AFD tags

Do not tag additional articles for deletion until you've completed the nominations you've already started. Placing the AFD tag is only one step in the process - you also need to actually state why the article should be deleted. See WP:AFDHOWTO. Unless you complete the nominations, expect that the redlinked AFD tags will be removed. Thank you. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 12:52, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed all of your redlinked AFD tags. I strongly suggest you discuss your concerns with these articles before tagging them for deletion again. Thank you. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 17:45, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CSD

All bishops are considered notable here. In addition, the criterion for deletion by A7 is not even notability but some claim to significance, and such a claim certainly is that. You need to familiarize yourself with WP:Deletion policy and WP:CSD and WP:AFD before making any deletion nomination.

The series of nominations you have been making is disruptive. Please stop right now. DGG ( talk ) 13:40, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In general, an individual is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources. In particular, an individual will often meet notability guidelines if they: Are the head of a major Religion. Played an important role in a significant religious event which itself received considerable coverage in sources. Made a material contribution to the Philosophy of religion that is indisputably attributed to them. Were recognized by their peers as an authoritative source on religious matters/writing. Conversely, brief descriptions in genealogical records or church histories of specific individuals are not considered specific indicators of notability. To this end, more than just a church record of a Bishop existing is required to establish notability. Raabbustamante (talk)

none the less, no afd on a bishop of a territorially-organized mainstream denomination on the basis of notability has succeeded in the last 5 or 6 years at least. The effective guidelines are what we do here as much as what is written down. If you wish to challenge this consensus, the best way to do this is not to nominate all at the same time a few dozen bishops all from the same country and denomination, but 1 particularly weak article.

And remember that to pass CSD, does not require notability , only an indication of significance, which isdeliberately set as a much lower standard. DGG ( talk ) 21:55, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mandatory Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:20, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to José Roel Lungay

Please see my edit summary here. Do not blank this article again and then add {{db-A7}}. Doing so will make you subject to an immediate block from editing. That is an obvious end-run around procedure. No admin would act on it for a few reasons, including that CSD A7 is obviously inapplicable, on its face; blanking the content and then adding the tag – as if the current content is what is to be considered for purposes of assessing A7's applicability – is gaming the system; and your tagging has previously been [properly] declined and you simply blanked and added the tag again.

You may, however, carefully remove unsourced content you believe is actually incorrect, or unverifiable, or negative or controversial in this article on a living person, and the burden is then on those wishing to return it to provide a reliable source, using an inline citation upon any such return See WP:BURDEN. That procedure is not at all the same as simply blanking the content.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:21, 13 September 2016 (UTC) I did remove unsourced content first. as most content is unsourced.Raabbustamante (talk) 04:16, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Diplocaulobium

Two things - I'll keep this short, because by now I heartily dislike interacting with you.

When you redirect a page, you don't just slop "redirect" on top of the text; you replace the contents with it. If you don't know anything about redirects, read up or ask for assistance. (Nice, isn't it?)
When you turn an article into a redirect but give an inapplicable source as a basis, as you did, you forfeit any right to mouth off about it. I am aware you aren't that hot on sources (I basically had to carry your ass after you on the Lessepsian thing), but try to combine the arrogance with actual competence next time.--Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh... creating a new article and copy-pasting the complete contents of another one into it for purposes of making a redirect, as you did at Dendrobium utile and Dendrobium validicolle, has the effect of completely erasing the editing history. Now it looks as if you had written everything in there. To avoid that, one moves the article to a new namespace, preserving the history, and then establishes the redirect. - Technically now an admin would have to be asked to delete the page so the old one can be moved over it, but I honestly can't be bothered to clean up after you any more. For future reference, if you don't know anything about moving article content, read up or ask for assistance... -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:12, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pholidota

The article about the orchid has been at Pholidota (plant) for a few months and before that at Pholidota (orchid) for years. Could you write your work there, instead of overwriting the redirect to Pangolin? phma (talk) 20:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Raabbustamante. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Declined speedies for Filipino actors

Hi, a bunch of us have declined all the A7 nominations for the Filipino actors you tagged today because they do not meet the criteria. Please see User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to A7 or User:SoWhy/Common A7 mistakes. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:59, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help please

Hallo Raabbustamante, could yo try to identify these orchids:

Best greetings. Orchi (talk) 20:26, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Raabbustamante. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Raabbustamante. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Do not blank articles Atlantic306 (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

...on the description of Dendrochilum ignisiflorum. If you have a picture available that you could upload to Commons, it would be very much appreciated. Choess (talk) 19:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dilochia deleoniae moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Dilochia deleoniae, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:14, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Begonia truncatifolia moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Begonia truncatifolia, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:17, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine Taxonomic Initiative moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Philippine Taxonomic Initiative, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. — Sagotreespirit (^talk) 04:53, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine Taxonomic Initiative

Your contributions are more than welcome. Wikipedia needs more articles about taxonomic research, but please make sure to get the wiki markup right first. Use sandboxes and draftspaces first before publishing live. — Sagotreespirit (^talk) 04:54, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit at Melastoma

Hi, it is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia that all information must be supported by a reliable source, in most cases a secondary source. The source given for the species of Melastoma is Plants of the World Online. It does not yet include Melastoma malabituin. So to add this species, you need (1) to alter the list heading to say something like "accepted by Plants of the World Online except where otherwise indicated" and (2) add a reference for Melastoma malabituin. Please understand that I am not being awkward about this: see WP:5P2: "All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources" and WP:RS. We've usually taken the view in WP:PLANTS that we will accept new species based on good primary sources, but then to maintain neutrality then it must be made clear that secondary sources don't yet list the species. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:49, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop re-adding a species without a reference. I have sorted out the article Melastoma malabituin, and I will add it correctly to the list soon, unless you do. I've explained how above. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:49, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done I have now added Melastoma malabituin to the Melastoma article with supporting references. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:22, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Danilo N. Tandang for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Danilo N. Tandang is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danilo N. Tandang until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:37, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Raabbustamante

Hello Raabbustamante,

Your contributions on plant taxonomy are more than welcome on Wikipedia. We are sorely in need of experts rather than anti-elitist amateurs (as satirized at WP:RANDY).

However, a few things:

Wikipedia policies strongly discourage against writing biographies about yourself, your colleagues, or your workplace. This is the complete opposite of academia, where specialists in specific niches must contribute using their full legal names, so Wikipedia's COI policies can be difficult to understand for academics new to Wikipedia.
Next time, it would be better to submit drafts through WP:AFC and ask another friendly Wikipedia reviewer interested in taxonomy to review them. If you'd like, you can ask me or other experienced users like User:Plantdrew. You will also need to use a template declaring your COI. Otherwise, some other users may delete your articles and give you a hard time for perceived COI issues.
Be sure to get the wiki syntax and article layout right by reading the various tutorials on Wikipedia (there are a few links to them on my userpage).
Please continue contributing on Wikipedia and enjoy editing!

— Sagotreespirit (^talk) 16:43, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Reijiro, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Cabayi (talk) 13:09, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]