User talk:Sweety439

Welcome!

Hi Sweety439! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Larryzhao|Talk|Contribs 17:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to List of unsolved problems in mathematics, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:44, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to List of unsolved problems in mathematics. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you.

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:54, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Xayahrainie43 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xayahrainie43. 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) 14:08, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Smarandache prime

Hello, Sweety439

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username JayBeeEll, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've proposed an article that you started, Smarandache prime, for deletion because it meets one or more of our deletion criteria, and I don't think that it is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to contest the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click the Publish changes button.

If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|JayBeeEll}}. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

JBL (talk) 14:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]