User talk:Encyclopediahawk

January 2024[edit]

Hello, Encyclopediahawk, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Hani ali0 (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. GPL93 (talk) 22:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I created a new account. How can I disclose that it is me? Thank you Encyclopediahawk (talk) 00:13, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GPL93, thank you. Actually, a new username isn't a bad idea: it saves us some paperwork. On the other hand, what this editor produced is no better than what came out from the other account, and was declined four times. I am going to block the other account (and leave a not there), and I am going to reject this submission. Encyclopediahawk, you are likely to get blocked indefinitely, with your IP address blocked as well, if you keep submitting articles that provide no proof of notability: if a draft is declined five times, and comments are made, and blocks are placed, then we are spending more time on you than you are spending on the draft. There's not even a single secondary source in there, and it took you five or more turns to get the basic mistakes out. Look, and look again, before you submit something. Drmies (talk) 01:24, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, so I just blocked [[User talk:Hani1of1]. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (January 26)[edit]

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

No--like the last four times: see User talk:Hani ali0, and see User talk:Encyclopediahawk for more comments.

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:Encyclopediahawk/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.

Drmies (talk) 01:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Encyclopediahawk! 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! Drmies (talk) 01:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]