User talk:WikiFan1358

Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia everyone

Most Wikipedia editors are good at editing and I'm also good at editing as well WikiFan1358 (talk) 03:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kristen Hanby (January 10)

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

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.

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.

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:Kristen Hanby 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.

Qcne (talk) 21:17, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WikiFan1358! 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! Qcne (talk) 21:17, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Roger Cash

Hello WikiFan1358, 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, Roger Cash, 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/Roger Cash.

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|Pickersgill-Cunliffe}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Roger Cash

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 Roger Cash requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about 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 "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 deleted 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. CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:52, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is the first article I have created WikiFan1358 (talk) 20:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have a financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:

Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future.

Bbb23 (talk) 21:09, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

WikiFan1358 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason hereWikiFan1358 (talk) 16:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Aoidh (talk) 16:32, 18 February 2024 (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.

I was blocked for advertising or promotion. I originally created an account to edit Wikipedia and make articles WikiFan1358 (talk) 16:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

WikiFan1358 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason hereWikiFan1358 (talk) 04:29, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have not complied with the WMF TOS that require disclosure as described in the block notice. As you are a WP:check user confirmed WP:sock puppet, you should request unblocking via your original account. Best.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:51, 22 February 2024 (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.

I've been working hard to not be disruptive and I'm working hard too with making articles and citing sources WikiFan1358 (talk) 04:29, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your hard work not withstanding, you have not complied with the WMF TOS that require disclosure as described in the block notice.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:47, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you are a WP:check user confirmed WP:sock puppet, you should request unblocking via your original account. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

WikiFan1358 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason hereWikiFan1358 (talk) 15:22, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

We know why you are blocked, you need to return to your original account and request unblock there. 331dot (talk) 15:54, 22 February 2024 (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.

I did not in fact disrupt Wikipedia. I was also blocked for being a sock puppet of Liamb2011. And was also blocked for being a check user confirmed user of another user as well WikiFan1358 (talk) 15:22, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

WikiFan1358 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to be unblocked because I did not mean to evade my block or do undisclosed edits on Wikipedia WikiFan1358 (talk) 17:33, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You keep trying this excuse. We keep shooting it down. Nobody believes you, you've worked hard to demonstrate you aren't telling the truth. Yamla (talk) 20:53, 7 April 2024 (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.

Your statement should replace the words "your reason here" in your request, I've fixed this for you. 331dot (talk) 19:17, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]