User talk:82.3.185.12

November 2020

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Arcadia, California—has been undone because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 15:58, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a valid Wikipedia article which specifically mentions Arcadia, so I see no reason why it should be removed. 82.3.185.12 (talk) 14:10, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We may not link draft articles to mainspace articles. Materialscientist (talk) 14:17, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:03, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was not using it in the same place, thank you. 82.3.185.12 (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Justine Tung (November 28)

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

zero reliable independent sources, Twitter is not a suitable source.

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:Justine Tung and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Justine Tung, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 15:59, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 82.3.185.12! Having an article 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! Theroadislong (talk) 15:59, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Justine Tung has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Justine Tung. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 19:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Justine Tung (December 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 KylieTastic 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:

Requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability

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:Justine Tung and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Justine Tung, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 11:32, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Justine Tung (December 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 KylieTastic 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:

Those are not "significant coverage", and not independent reliable 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:Justine Tung and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Justine Tung, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 11:42, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Justine Tung (December 5)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by KylieTastic was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

KylieTastic (talk) 12:33, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Justine Tung (December 5)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: It is purely disruptive to keep re-submitting with zero reliable sources.

Theroadislong (talk) 12:55, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whalemeat

Yum! Delicious!

The whale you used to squish another Wikipedian has been sliced and served as Japanese sashimi.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that, just like the whale in the picture, you have overused your {{whale}}.

TigerScientist (talk) 16:37, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian. CLCStudent (talk) 17:15, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is fine CLCStudent I have been in much worse (just check yesterday with scottrichard3) Please don't block the IP user. Even the trout and whale say it is not meant to be taken seriously. TigerScientist Chat 17:27, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Smash!

You've been squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.

You started this

Sizzle!

The trout you used to slap another Wikipedian has been gutted, roasted over the coals, and served with tartar sauce.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that, just like the trout in this picture, you have overused your {{trout}}.

TigerScientist has given you a WikiTrout! Trouts promote WikiFun and hopefully this one has made your day more fun. Spread the WikiFun by giving someone else a trout, especially when they are doing something silly. Happy slapping!

Spread the fun of trouts by adding {{subst:Troutalt}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Question

Hi,

Why did you blank your user talk page? Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker 17:35, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you again blank your talk page? Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker 17:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked temporarily from editing for contravening Wikipedia's harassment policy.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Favonian (talk) 17:43, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

Unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

I was not harassing anyone, read my conversation with @TigerScientist 82.3.185.12 (talk) 17:48, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Block extended, talk page access revoked. We've wasted enough time here. Yamla (talk) 18:12, 18 December 2020 (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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.