User talk:TheTrueSauce

This is TheTrueSauce'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: sandbox (April 17)

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

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 passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet 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 User:TheTrueSauce/sandbox 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.

- Rich^T|C|E-Mail 19:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheTrueSauce! 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! - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 19:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Hello, I'm Squared.Circle.Boxing. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Jaren Jackson Jr., 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. – ².O.^Boxing 19:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Jaren Jackson Jr.. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 20:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And because I saw your previous edit that you undid yourself, no, you are not a source. See WP:OR. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 20:27, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Jaren Jackson Jr., you may be blocked from editing. – ².O.^Boxing 20:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You will see at 7:00 that Jaren Jackson Jr is the DPOY TheTrueSauce (talk) 20:48, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TrueSauce. Couple of things. For one, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. We don't predict the future. We only print information that can be verified. Second, I take issue with the review you started at Talk:Agriculture in Turkey/GA1. I appreciate your enthusiasm, and am glad you want to help build Wikipedia. But the WP:GA review process is generally something you should have more editing experience for first. I would suggest you work on improving some articles yourself first before trying to give advice to others, which is basically what the GA process is. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:23, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are no rules (that I am aware of) about how long I you need to edit to start a review. You can check my work and make sure I will be thorough :) TheTrueSauce (talk) 01:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I already have, and that's the issue. You said that "prose, spelling, and grammar" are sufficient to meet the GA standard. But I just went through and made a wide number of copyedits, some of which were blindingly obvious, so I'm not reassured that you read the article at all, let alone with a fine toothed comb. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:37, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TheTrueSauce I am glad you started a GA review as there is a backlog. But @CaptainEek is right that editing more yourself will likely help you see more mistakes in what I have written. While you are waiting for me to get agriculture in Turkey up to scratch I have plenty of suggestions for articles which need your tender loving editing if you have time. Are you interested in agriculture or Turkey or climate change(I do quite a lot on that) or something else entirely? Chidgk1 (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for how to choose articles to edit

Obviously choose a general topic which you are interested in.

It is then easy to find articles which are important for the topic but in bad shape by looking at the quality/importance grid for a “project”. For example scrolling down Wikipedia:WikiProject College Basketball a little we can see a colorful grid of “College basketball articles by quality and importance”. So there are 4 articles which are top importance for that project but only stub quality. And 84 which are high importance but only stub quality. Clicking on “4” or “84” shows a list of those articles maybe one of which would be interesting for you Chidgk1 (talk) 13:10, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! TheTrueSauce (talk) 13:15, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ban

Hi, I am out of town and, I am trying to edit a couple articles and make some headway on a GA review I have started. But, I am banned from editing. Since, I have not done anything bannable, could this please be lifted for my account? Thank You!

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

TheTrueSauce (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Block message:

Not provided

Blocking administrator: not provided.

Decline reason: To look into this, we need to know your IP address. It should be in the message that appears when you attempt to edit. If you do not want to post it publicly, you may use WP:UTRS to make a private unblock request. 331dot (talk) 17:45, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

67.240.185.115 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Blocking administrator: not provided.

Decline reason: Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. Now directly blocked. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 19:33, 23 April 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).

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

Request reason:

I do believe there is a misunderstanding here. I am staying at an airbnb as I am on a work trip. I am not a "sockpuppet". Considering I have made many small, but good edits, I see no reason to assume bad faith here. When I return from my work-trip, will the account still be banned even though the ip's will be different? Thank you! Have a good day! TheTrueSauce (talk) 22:18, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed sockpuppetry. Your explanation doesn't match the technical data, data which is unambiguous. Frankly, you aren't very good at this. Yamla (talk) 22:33, 23 April 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.

Yamla May you provide an detailed yet simplified explanation of the data and what it shows? If not, that is fine. Thank You!

No, sorry. Note, though, that two checkusers have now reviewed your request and have verified you have indeed been abusing multiple accounts. We aren't going to help you get better at this. --Yamla (talk) 00:15, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could the link to the invesagation be provided, as usual?

You mean like the other times we've blocked you? Go away. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 02:36, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations \| August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding User:TheTrueSauce/sandbox

Hello, TheTrueSauce. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that User:TheTrueSauce/sandbox, 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, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:TheTrueSauce/sandbox

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

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!} 19:05, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations \| March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]