User talk:DarklarkOxs

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I have spent the last day reading up on Wikipedia rules and why articles should be deleted, I am very embarrassed and sorry for my actions, i now realise bBB23'S speedy deletion is valid and I am sorry for contesting it. I am sorry for nominating articles for deletion without experience, please forgive me, I truly am here to build an encyclopedia. I also am sorry for assuming the rider (game) discussion was over and removing the nomination for deletion tag, I have realised it cannot be removed until the discussion is over, and I am sorry for my mistake DarklarkOxs (talk) 17:59, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per checkuser confirmed evidence of socking. Ponyo^bons mots 22:34, 26 May 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.

@Courcelles: What say ye?-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:54, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I don’t know. They had pretty clearly exhausted the community’s patience yesterday, now they’ve completely changed? This unblock request reads exactly like “tell them what they want to hear”, though at least it’s written in the first person, so maybe not written by ChatGPT? Courcelles (talk) 10:35, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Socking while waiting on an unblock request was a pretty bad move. Courcelles (talk) 21:54, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh, wait. You always were a sock. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Masterofroblox Courcelles (talk) 22:19, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Your editing history here is bizarre, but the only thing I want to address now is your speedy tagging, which is at best uninformed. You do not have sufficient experience to tag articles for speedy deletion. You tagged two different articles with WP:A1 and WP:A7. The A1 tags were completely wrong. The A7 tag on one was at least arguable, but the A7 tag on the other was totally unjustified. Stop tagging pages, or you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you DarklarkOxs (talk) 18:09, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for telling me, please tell me how much experience I need. DarklarkOxs (talk) 18:09, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked all over wikipedia, and have found there is no needed "experience", to tag pages for speedy deletion, if there is then please provide me with a valid URL to the specific page. DarklarkOxs (talk) 18:16, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no bright-line rule, but you aren't even in a gray area. In addition, your use of tags demonstrates that you don't know what you're doing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:19, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand you, I will think more carefully before tagging pages. DarklarkOxs (talk) 18:26, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just so it's clear, my comments here constitute a warning. "Think[ing] more carefully before tagging pages" may still get you into trouble.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:56, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Superfy

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 Superfy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not spam or promotional, but a factual and neutral description of a notable software product. Here are some points to support my claim

The article uses reliable sources to verify the information, such as press releases, news articles, and app reviews. The sources are properly cited using the <ref> tags and the {{cite web}}: Empty citation (help) template.

The article does not use any subjective or exaggerated language, such as “amazing”, “awesome”, or “best”. It also does not make any claims that are not supported by the sources, such as “uses artificial intelligence” or “proprietary algorithm”.

The article follows the Wikipedia criteria for writing a video game article, such as using the

DarklarkOxs

template, providing a summary, describing the gameplay and features, and reporting the reception and ratings. The article also uses appropriate headings and formatting to organize the content.

The article does not violate any Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:RS, WP:OR, WP:NOT, or WP:COI. DarklarkOxs (talk) 18:21, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DarklarkOxs, to expand on my reasons for speedy deleting the Superfy page you (re)cretaed as unambigiously promotional:

• The cited sources were: [1], [2], [3]. None reliable. Two of them dead-links.
• A google search didn't find anything substantially better.
• Description in wikipedia's voice, including Superfy has a simple and intuitive interface... etc
• Unsourced, placeholder text: Superfy has been featured in various media outlets, such as , , etc. The app has received positive reviews from users who praised its features and community. You shouldn't compose such laudatory text first and then hope to find sources later. Instead first find high-quality sources, and then summarize whatever they say.

I would highly recommend that you use draft-space to create any new articles in the near future because currently your understanding of wikipedia's policies concerning verifiability, reliable sources, and notability is not adequate. Continuing to create/recreate subpar articles, especially in mainspace, is likely to see you sanctioned. Abecedare (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My Talk page

Stop posting to my Talk page about Superfy. I've tagged it for deletion per WP:G11, and another editor, most likely another administrator, will decide whether it should be deleted or kept. I do not have to instruct you on what constitutes promotion and what does not. If you have questions about Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you can ask at the WP:Teahouse.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:44, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bbb23, I respectfully disagree with your tagging of Superfy for deletion per WP:G11. I do not think the article is unambiguously promotional or spam, but a factual and neutral description of a notable software product. I have provided reliable sources and a neutral tone to support my claim. I think you have misapplied the criterion and acted in bad faith. According to the Wikipedia guideline on WP:CSD, you should not tag an article for speedy deletion if there is any doubt about its eligibility. You should also not tag an article for speedy deletion if you have a conflict of interest or a personal grudge against the subject or the creator. You should also not tag an article for speedy deletion if you have not notified the creator or other significant contributors. You have failed to do any of these things.

Furthermore, I do not appreciate your deletion of my messages on your talk page. According to the Wikipedia policy on WP:TPG, you should not remove comments from your talk page unless they are blatant vandalism, personal attacks, harassment, or violations of the WP:BLP policy. You should also not remove comments from your talk page that are part of an ongoing discussion or dispute resolution. You should also not remove comments from your talk page that are relevant to your actions as an administrator or that request an explanation for your actions. You have violated all of these principles by removing my messages.

I request that you restore my messages on your talk page and remove the speedy deletion tag from Superfy. I also request that you explain your reasons for tagging Superfy for deletion and provide evidence that it meets the criterion of WP:G11. If you refuse to do so, I will appeal the deletion of Superfy and report your conduct to the appropriate noticeboards. Thank you for your attention and cooperation DarklarkOxs (talk) 19:53, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now, as far as help goes, New article creation can be difficult, but the Article Wizard can help you. The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems. You can also ask for help at the TEAHOUSE and on IRC chat, as well as Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure is a useful tutorial. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (User talk:Bbb23) for a period of 24 hours for Repeatedly creating talk page sections on a user's talk page after being told not to.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Lofe

Hello, DarklarkOxs, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Jamiebuba, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Lofe, 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/Lofe.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. 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|Jamiebuba}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

Jamiebuba (talk) 20:13, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Rider Game for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rider Game is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rider Game until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

 Velella  ^Velella Talk  20:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. 192.76.8.94 (talk) 20:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Courcelles (talk) 21:24, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for speedy deletion of article on Pietro Paolo Drei by DarklarkOxs‬

Hello DarklarkOxs I herewith contest the speedy deletion you have nominated. Drei is a notable artist but of course little is known about him because he lived in the long distant past. There are verifiable links to his work that are published in paper form and a few in the internet. Please rescind the speedy deletion request. Currently it seems to be impossible to even add to the article if one wanted to. I am unable to find how to contest the speedy deletion on the page itself. Thank you RFrMM (talk) 09:36, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=I am sorry if my edits/contributions appeared to be in bad faith, I understand now my actions. I have spent the past day reading Wikipedia rules and understand why bBB23 contested it for speedy deletion and now I agree, please forgive me, I didn't mean to cause any harm