User talk:Uniquewanders

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Michael Anthony Williams.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:24, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sock[edit]

Please stick to your Mikeawtn (talk · contribs) account which makes your self-promotion more evident. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:16, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I realize my actions seem odd in accessing Mikeawtn account. However, I wanted to see if the content on the artist Michael Anthony Williams was a repeat of prevously deleted articles in the user's account. My intention is to offer the highest quality article possible and I do need help in making this project a success. I have every intention to honor the guidelines of Wikipedia and not cause and confusion. However, I am confused on the whole redirect process, which is the cause of the multiuse situation. I do apoligize for the SOCK situation. I do hereby uphold the rules and guidelines to the fullest. I also ask for your continue suggestions if I am causing any problems with the article. I also thought I was doing a corrected thing by adding the artist to the "Blind artists" and "People who are blind" articels

I also can't remember how to get this article directed to the visual arts BLP section please help.

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).

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

Request reason:

your reason here

Decline reason:

No reason given to unblock. If you do apply correctly you will have to address the sockpuppetry issue, being the reason for your block. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 20:45, 7 December 2012 (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.