User talk:Hanna Mania300

This is Hanna Mania300's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dwen Gyimah (July 1)

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

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dwen Gyimah (September 5)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dwen Gyimah and 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.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Abdullah Alam (talk) 08:01, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Hanna Mania300, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Abdullah Alam (talk) 08:01, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dwen Gyimah (January 8)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Wikipedia is not Facebook and what's here is only a profile, therefore only suitable for his own social media because that's not what Wikipedia involves itself with.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dwen Gyimah and 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.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 19:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Dwen Gyimah has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Dwen Gyimah. Thanks! SwisterTwister talk 17:16, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dwen Gyimah (January 16)

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

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

There are no online citations, but the sources provided aren't sufficient to establish notability according to WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dwen Gyimah and 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.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Flat Out (talk) 01:11, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Dwen Gyimah

Hi, I'm Satdeep Gill. Hanna Mania300, thanks for creating Dwen Gyimah!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This articles needs a lot of improvement, else it could be deleted as there is no indication of importance.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Satdeep Gill (talk • contribs 02:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dwen Gyimah (2nd nomination). 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. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hanna Mania300, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Exemplo347 (talk) 22:43, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of an Administrator discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Exemplo347 (talk) 11:01, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. NeilN ^{talk to me} 11:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Hanna Mania300 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear Admin, I have just realized I have been blocked and I personally believe it may had been a mistake, the user who blocked me was apart of an article deletion discussion, I have gone back to look at the article and I made a -note to the admin- at the bottom of the talk page and now I see that the note has been deleted, The user supposedly reported me for deleting comments and using multiple accounts and now I see that the user his/herself is deleting my comments in the articles for deletions page, this is worrying to me as it seems that the user is proposing for the written article to not only be deleted but to also be sALted, The note I made to the admin clearly explained why the article should not be sALted at all but now I see it has been deleted I believe that is an unfair target that should not have occurred, also in regards to using multiple accounts, I apologise if that was the appearance of the edits as there have been two accounts logged in via my IP address, from me and another user, that may had been why admins would have thought it was by the same user, that issue will not happen again thank you, and also as to why the user is claiming that I was purposely deleting comments, I believe was re-editing my argument to include my signatures in which I forgot to add, this has also been noted and will be prevented in the futer as I will make sure to remember to add my signatures to the article deletion comments so there will not be any disruptions in having to go back to add signatures Hanna Mania300 (talk) 12:08, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser Confirmed abuse of multiple accounts. —DoRD (talk) 12:49, 8 February 2017 (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.