User talk:WikNad

Welcome WikNad!

Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 48,303,763 registered editors!

Hello, WikNad. Welcome to Wikipedia!

I'm DVRTed, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

To help get you started, you may find these useful:

Introduction to Wikipedia (and editing)

The Five Pillars (fundamental principles) of Wikipedia

Ask a Question about How to Use Wikipedia

When editing, follow the 3 Core Content Policies:

1. Neutral point of view: represent significant views fairly

2. Verifiability: claims should cite reliable, published sources

3. No original research: no originality; reference published sources

Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.

Sincerely, — DVRTed (Talk) 10:25, 13 February 2023 (UTC) (Leave me a message)[reply]

WP:PGAME?

Hello, your recent edits to your userpage seem to suggest that you're attempting to game the system—although I'm unsure what permission you're aiming to gain as you're already on the verge of becoming an autoconfirmed user (Extended confirmed, perhaps?). Either way, please stop doing that and flooding the recent changes feed with your one-word-per-edit edits; instead take a minute to go through Help:Getting started. Thanks! — DVRTed (Talk) 10:51, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is it written anywhere that it is prohibited to do on our own page? as long as I just want to achieve 500 edits milestone for some reasonble project. WikNad (talk) 10:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (February 14)

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 User:WikNad/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.

Theroadislong (talk) 10:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WikNad! 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) 10:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. 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.

--Blablubbs (talk) 15:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do tell me one thing. Why Wikimoderators are so obsessed with blocking users? I have been trying for long time publishing my article, doing research, and trying to achieve more and more edit counts so that I could get extended rights. You could have warned me for that, but you didn't. It looks like you guys love experiencing your given keyboard powers to people who want to write here. Okay what would I do with this account at max? I was up to publishing my article and tried every way possible to increase view counts. You should have at least given me a warning to desist with the practices I was endulged in, but you banned me instead. You guys urge people to do foul stuff for their writings and push them to become stubborn. I owe an explanation on this or else I'm going to raise the issue to higher authority. WikNad (talk) 05:41, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]