User talk:Humanist920

Hello Humanist920! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you feel that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Ronz (talk) 03:21, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

Hi Humanist920! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Mz7 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

00:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Humanist920! You created a thread called What is a adjective to Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mackenzie Sol (May 6)

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

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 music-related topics). 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:

Needs more independent reliable sources than 1 local newspaper.

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:Mackenzie Sol 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:Mackenzie Sol, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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, 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.

Lopifalko (talk) 09:39, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your attention needed at WP:CHU

Hello. A renamer or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up at your username change request entry as soon as possible. Thank you. -★- PlyrStar93 _{→Message me. ←} 14:58, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An extended welcome

Hi Humanist920. Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.

Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter. Regardless, editing in a manner that promotes an entity or viewpoint over others can appear to be detrimental to the purpose of Wikipedia and the neutrality required in articles.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Ronz (talk) 03:21, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 17)

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 seems to be a test edit and not an article worthy of an encyclopedia. Please use the sandbox for any editing tests, but do not submit for review until you have an article that you want reviewed for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thank you.

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 User:Humanist920/sandbox 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 User:Humanist920/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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, 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) 12:12, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Mackenzie Sol

Greetings! I see you attempted to move Draft:Mackenzie Sol to the main encyclopedia space. However, the article is not yet ready: there is no clear assertion that Sol is a notable person. Rather than delete the page for failing to assert his significance or importance (criterion for speedy deletion A7), I have moved it back to draft space. —C.Fred (talk) 01:56, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mackenzie Sol (May 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Stevey7788 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:

May be notable soon, but not yet. Promising rising star. But please see WP:TOOSOON first.

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:Mackenzie Sol 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:Mackenzie Sol, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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, 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.

— Stevey7788 (talk) 14:43, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mackenzie Sol (May 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SamHolt6 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 music-related topics). 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:

Declining as a WP:NMUSICIAN failure; sources are needed that attest to the subject's notability, and the two cited are not enough in this regard.

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:Mackenzie Sol 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:Mackenzie Sol, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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, 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.

SamHolt6 (talk) 23:44, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:39, 19 May 2019 (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).

Humanist920 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

It's my mistake because I have to create Apple screenshot for copyright warning message and I have to get through it. So I do not know how to do. If you want to unblock me, do not decline request for now, Thank you. Regards, HUmanist920 Humanist920 (talk) 22:41, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Any request must come from your main account. —C.Fred (talk) 22:42, 19 May 2019 (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.

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).

Humanist920 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please Diannaa, I need to unblock this page and I edit article again. because I cannot edit articles at once. Humanist920 (talk) 22:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As C.Fred states, you must request unblock from your main account. 331dot (talk) 22:52, 19 May 2019 (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.

BTW, I just looked at your main account's page. I see that you had an appeal denied by ArbCom with instructions not to make another appeal to be unbanned until 16 May 2020. Based on that, there is literally nothing any admin will do for you during the next year. —C.Fred (talk) 22:56, 19 May 2019 (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).

Humanist920 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear C.Fred, I have to explain something.
Sometimes my main account has been block indefinitely, because I disrupt and not clearly contribute the encyclopedia last 15 February, and on 26 February, I was been a sockpuppet. my account has been extremely disrupt my behaviour of edits on my wikipedia. and lastly in 26 March, my main account has been locked for long-term abuse.
Please, I would not vandalize edits on Wikipedia and so it will take to to appeal.
Thank you.
regards,
Humanist920Humanist920 (talk) 23:11, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You attempted to evade the block earlier today. Instead, try appealing in 2020. Huon (talk) 23:18, 19 May 2019 (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.

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).

Humanist920 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Are you kidding me? how long do i take that next year? no way! because i cannot wait to appeal my account! Humanist920 (talk) 23:29, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

2020 is indeed when you will need to wait until. stwalkerster (talk) 23:37, 19 May 2019 (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.

I feel bad watching your edits being removed and your accounts being blocked, because you have made genuine contributions and tried your best to help. But I think your understanding of Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines is weak–although your English is not the worst, I think it may have been an issue. Next year if you want to resume contributing to Wikipedia, I think you may be better off either doing it in your native language, or thoroughly reading and understanding the policies you have got in trouble with (e.g. WP:COPYVIO before resuming editing, and avoiding resuming old conflicts or returning to old conflict areas. Discussing controversial edits on the talk page before making them is generally a good idea, and your more recent edits are positive steps in that direction. Blythwood (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

However, actions like harassing users on other projects about your en.wiki account being blocked [1] are negative steps and will only hurt your prospects of being unblocked. —C.Fred (talk) 13:54, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]