User talk:Trabeltomed

Welcome!

Hi Trabeltomed! I would like 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

Happy editing! — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No

Do not ever move drafts to mainspace, as you did with Torres Castle (Al Hoceima). I have reverted what you have done. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why this draft was transferred without any warning

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computational_chemistry

The topic caught my attention so I moved it Trabeltomed (talk) 23:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems Erdabravest is impatient and as ill-advised as you are. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't mean anything, I'm a person who cares about history Trabeltomed (talk) 01:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what your edit history shows. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:37, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I thought I just changed the title. This is my first time actually drafting an article. Erdabravest (talk) 03:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:45, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking

Please don't link common words and phrases, as you did at Technique for human error-rate prediction - for guidance, see MOS:OVERLINK. Happy editing! Narky Blert (talk) 23:01, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok Sorry Trabeltomed (talk) 23:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! A useful rule-of-thumb is to ask, Is any reader going to click this link for more info? If no, don't link it.

Not every article tagged {{underlinked}} actually is - someone else might already have worked on it, or the tag might have been over-enthusiastic. Reviewing an article, deciding that it's properly linked, and removing the tag helps clear the backlog and is valuable gnoming work. Season's greetings! Narky Blert (talk) 10:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this valuable information, I dno't know it Trabeltomed (talk) 10:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Tetouan Archaeological Museum

Hello Trabeltomed, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Tetouan Archaeological Museum, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tetouan Archaeological Museum.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Chris troutman}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Chris Troutman (talk) 02:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mustapha Aarab moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Mustapha Aarab. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it is promotional and reads like an advertisement. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Annh07 (talk) 18:49, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mustapha Aarab (December 24)

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

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 comment the reviewer left was:

Thanks for the article! Wikipedia requires articles to have a handful (think 5 or 6) reliable sources, ideally from the list at WP:RSP. Let me know if you have any questions!

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:Mustapha Aarab 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.

Crunchydillpickle🥒 (talk) 19:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Trabeltomed! 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! Crunchydillpickle🥒 (talk) 19:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mustapha Aarab (December 24)

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

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 comment the reviewer left was:

Apparently, the first source could be unreliable so the source should be replaced with reliable sources. Profiles are less concerned. Feel free to resubmit the draft again.

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:Mustapha Aarab 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.

Toadette ^{(Merry Christmas, and a happy new year)} 19:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 23:32, 24 December 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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, can you know the reason for the block? I already have two accounts, but I have never done anything offensive to them. I am just editing some articles or something similar.

Decline reason:

Please reread WP:SOCK. Yamla (talk) 12:38, 25 December 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.

Hello, Trabeltomed,

You should only use one account here. If you have more than one account and you don't declare your alternate accounts on your User page, it can be seen as sockpuppetry which will get you blocked on Wikipedia. 06:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mustapha Aarab

The article Mustapha Aarab has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I don't think this article subject meets Wikipedia:NACTOR and shouldn't have been moved into main space of the project.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:16, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my account has been blocked, so I cannot edit or discuss about deleting the article. If you think the article is inappropriate, you can delete it. You are more aware of this, and I hope to reconsider my request to unblock me. Thank you Trabeltomed (talk) 06:52, 25 December 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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, can you reconsider this request because I did not do anything wrong?

Decline reason:

Technical evidence shows more than just 4 accounts, including several globally locked ones like Tommytras. --Blablubbs (talk) 20:12, 29 December 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.

So we're clear, you are accused of violating WP:SOCK. The only way forward from here is to admit what you did wrong. I'll also add that you are legally obligated to tell us if you are editing for pay. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:24, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any mistake I made, I do not edit a paid article, any article I create in which I show all reliable sources and independent sources, you can verify the article.Mustapha Aarab and Tetouan Archaeological Museum You can see reliable and unpaid sources here. I do not do anything like this. I am a person who loves editing and writing about things that I think are good. Trabeltomed (talk) 21:39, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But you said above that you operate two different Wikipedia accounts. This violates WP:BADSOCK. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:31, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was managing two accounts, but both of them do not violate Wikipedia policy. You can verify that the two accounts are archived, but if the ban on me in this account is lifted, I will suspend the other account or leave it blocked. You decide. Trabeltomed (talk) 23:34, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Such incredible denial from a user who now has four socks. This block will not be "lifted".--Bbb23 (talk) 23:39, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I created them just to try to resolve the conflict, but you were blocking me. I have no bad intentions. We can solve this problem with understanding. Unblock me on this account, and if you see a minor violation from me, block me. I am a person who only wants to edit articles. Trabeltomed (talk) 23:42, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But you are the decision maker and you have more knowledge than me, so I respect any decision you make Trabeltomed (talk) 23:44, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23 Please reconsider. I explained everything to you. This is my basic account Trabeltomed (talk) 00:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Mustapha Aarab

Hello Trabeltomed, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Mustapha Aarab, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mustapha Aarab.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|CNMall41}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

CNMall41 (talk) 04:01, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you. At this time, I cannot discuss deleting the article because I am banned, and I also cannot edit it. You are more knowledgeable, so do what you deem appropriate. Also, can you reconsider the request to unblock me? Trabeltomed (talk) 12:34, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]