Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing 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 Draft:William Trump 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.
Hello, 54rt678!
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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:08, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ibjaja055 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 Draft:William Trump 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.
Thanks for your contributions to Knowiska culture. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. TarnishedPathtalk03:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have unblocked this account, and reduced the user right back to auto confirmed. Normally we trust editors with the 30 days and 500 edits; the user right was applied automatically when your account met both thresholds. Unfortunately, you decided to cheat on the 500 edits. This happens; we've seen it. Lots of worse things are done on Wikipedia all day. However, you have demonstrated we can't trust you. You've deliberately misled the community. So you'll need to put in another 250 real edits. Here's the thing: The counter won't click automatically now. You'll be forced to ask a human being at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Extended confirmed. And that person will review all of your edits. Welcome to consequences. BusterD (talk) 04:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are no restrictions on your account, other than the one you started the day with. Lesson: cheat and we'll see you. This is not a place for screwing around. BusterD (talk) 04:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That seems sound mathematically. But you'll have to apply on the noticeboard I linked. The respondents aren't required to say yes, just because you've met the number. Now you'll need to demonstrate to them you have a reason to be on Wikipedia. Consquences. BusterD (talk) 05:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your contributions to Andrew Ortony. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and Article needs multiple reliable secondary sources to establish notability. All sources currently in the article are either primary or the subjects own website. .
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
OK now worries. Once you've improved the article and you think it is ready for mainspace, please utilise the WP:AFC banner I placed at the top of the article and submit it for review. This is not compulsory, however I would highly recommend it. TarnishedPathtalk04:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Top right corner of your screen (I'm presuming you're using a PC) click on the little man and then select Preferences. Scroll down to the Signature heading and make your changes. Make sure you tick the box that states "Treat the above as wiki markup". In my case the markup for my signature is ''[[User:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>]]''<sup>[[User talk:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b>]]</sup>. Google "hex colour picker" to determine what the hex codes are for the colours you want to use in your signature. TarnishedPathtalk05:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd recommend not departing too much from what your actual username is with your signature. There's policy about it which is not heavily enforced (see WP:SIGNATURE). however, it's still policy. TarnishedPathtalk05:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Any experienced user will look at this sig and see an account using a signature which is 1) factually incorrect, 2) a brag, 3) an invitation to "ban" you. I'm not seeing you in the best circumstances, granted, but in my opinion, this signature has block me all over it. I'm not trying to be mean... BusterD (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And none of these edits will credit towards your EC permissions. People who are obviously gaming the system are often quickly removed from the community by some method. You've got one strike against you now... BusterD (talk) 13:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello 54rt678! Your additions to Draft:Andrew Ortony have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:
Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Nobody (talk) 06:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I genuinely thought that I was doing significant paraphrasing but if you disagree that it's okay. I don't have any hard feelings 54rt678 (talk) 00:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Making mistakes by helping at recent changes is an excellent way to get those edits. I'm not joking. User:54rt678, thank you for finding that task and taking it on. I used to hit the random article link in the top left corner of the page and do copyediting. Working on stubs. I'm happy to see you're interacting with others in a responsible way. This is the kind of behavior wikipedians expect from each other. As you can see at your request, I'm not choosing to grant it, but I'm also not standing in the way. BusterD (talk) 22:19, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's how I found this article, "randomly". Really, though, I believe in a perfectly ordered universe wherein mistakes are supposed to happen, as surely as anything anyone's intended. I'm leaving those headers as restored and would (in theory) have absolutely no problem if someone else later removes them again, for any reason. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:27, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. Unfortunately, I have had to decline your permissions request. The incident of gaming the system was too recent. While you've gained a lot of editing experience since then, the incident was just a few days ago. I would not be comfortable with having you edit EC-protected pages just yet. However, I wanted to drop you a note to thank you for all your recent contributions and encourage you to keep contributing without the permission. Best wishes, arcticocean ■22:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to wait until a couple of experienced users in good standing have suggested that you request the permission. That way, you can be surer that the next request will not be declined as well. Sorry that I can't give a fixed duration, but it's impossible to say. arcticocean ■22:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
