User talk:JJMhonest 2020

This is JJMhonest 2020'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: Alina Padikkal (September 29)

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

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 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:

Fails WP:ANYBIO, requires significant coverage in multiple independent secondary sources. Wikibio is not an acceptable or reliable 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:Alina Padikkal 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:Alina Padikkal, 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 09:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JJMhonest 2020! 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! Dan arndt (talk) 09:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

.. (The Subject Alina padkkal is most notable in south india,i have made reliable references to prove the notability and the coverage of the subject..No reviewer is ready to spend some time on checking the references.we have been trying to create this article since 2018,why cant the reviewer show some patience for checking the reliability of the Subject.....It shouldnt be deleted . THIS ARTICLE SHOULD BE APPROVED...KINDLY GO THROUGH THE REFERENCES JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 14:09, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Draft:Alina Padikkal—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 18:27, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete the page i made another JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 11:40, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Alina Padikkal has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Alina Padikkal. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 22:35, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please publish the article....I have attached all the relaible sources of the subject coverage JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 04:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alina Padikkal (October 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 Salimfadhley 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:

Notability issues have not been resolved since this draft was last declined.

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:Alina Padikkal 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:Alina Padikkal, 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.

Salimfadhley (talk) 10:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have attached all the evidence of the subjects reliability and coverage.... May i know the reason in specific for the declination JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 11:34, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have attached all the sources and proof of the articles notability in south india in the references... Kindly go through that and give approval JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 11:49, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please Check the references.. It shows the proof of popularity JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 14:01, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Alina Padikkal

The article Alina Padikkal has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not satisfy acting notability or general notability. See previous deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alina Padikkal. There is also a draft. The draft can be kept.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:51, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alina Padikkal for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alina Padikkal 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/Alina Padikkal (2nd nomination) 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. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It shoudnt be deleted the subject is qulaified for article check the references JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 05:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Iam the one created both thats why 2 nomination....

I have attached all sources in the reference which shows the reliability and popularity of the subject JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 05:09, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alina Padikkal, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Fiddle Faddle 11:01, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

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/JJMhonest 2020, 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.

Fiddle Faddle 12:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

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/JJMhonest 2020, 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.

Salimfadhley (talk) 12:49, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Albinjose636 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Albinjose636. 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 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 ~~~~}}. GeneralNotability (talk) 13:49, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand whats happening... You blocked with out any proper reason... Iam using only one account... JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 14:05, 6 October 2020 (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).

JJMhonest 2020 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This may be misunderstanding here JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 14:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Doesn't appear so. If you believe there is, you need to specifically address all of the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Albinjose636. Yamla (talk) 14:30, 6 October 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.

Albinjose is not me JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 20:10, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alina Padikkal (October 9)

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 Robert McClenon was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This draft has been resubmitted without any visible improvement, or with very little improvement. If you do not know what is needed to improve this draft, please ask for advice rather than making minor improvements and resubmitting.

You may ask for advice on how to improve this draft at the Teahouse or on the talk pages of any of the declining reviewers. (The declining reviewers may advise you to ask for advice at the Teahouse.)

If this draft is resubmitted without any improvement or with very little improvement again, it is likely to be rejected, and it may be nominated for deletion, or a topic-ban may even be requested against further submission by the responsible editor.

This draft has been Rejected by a reviewer in the Articles for Creation review process. DO NOT resubmit this draft or attempt to resubmit this draft or prepare or submit a draft that is substantially the same as this draft without discussing the reasons for the rejection. You may request a discussion with the rejecting reviewer, or you may request a discussion with the community at the Teahouse. A discussion will not necessarily agree to a resubmission. If this draft is resubmitted, or an attempt is made to resubmit this draft or an equivalent draft, without addressing the reasons for the Rejection, a topic-ban or a partial block may be requested against the submitting editor, and the draft may be nominated for deletion.

You may ask for advice about Rejection at the Teahouse.

Regardless of whether this draft will be speedily deleted, or deleted after discussion, or kept in draft space, it is insulting to the reviewers and the Wikipedia community to resubmit it.

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:49, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake

I am new to Wikipedia.i created one account in Mobile and one in laptop....May be it's a mistake...I don't know anything about Wikipedia editing...I didn't check whether I am logged in with same account...I usually click history and go through page JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This seems unlikely based upon Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Albinjose636. Creation of a second account might be an error, but not this many. I am not an administrator. If I were I would not be lifting any block based upon what you have said here so far

Please place {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} on this page filling ut your reason for unblock. I doubt any admin will look further at this unless you do. Fiddle Faddle 20:15, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will I be in jail JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 20:19, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JJMhonest 2020, I think that is best ignored. You either do what is required or don't. Either way Wikipedia will continue, whether you persuade an admin to lift a block or not Fiddle Faddle 20:22, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't create many accounts JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 20:22, 9 October 2020 (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).

JJMhonest 2020 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am new to Wikipedia.i created one account in Mobile and one in laptop....May be it's a mistake...I don't know anything about Wikipedia editing...I didn't check whether I am logged in with same account...I usually click history and go through page.i used only two accounts others are not me JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 20:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Given the checkuser results, your explanation is not convincing.OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:58, 9 October 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.

What are the consequences of this case..

JJMhonest 2020 (talk) 20:41, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]