User talk:QUOBSERVER

Your submission at Articles for creation: Quôc Anh Nguyên (February 13)

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. 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:

not clear what the topic is?

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:Quôc Anh Nguyên 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:Quôc Anh Nguyên, 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) 15:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, QUOBSERVER! 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) 15:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Quôc Anh Nguyên (February 14)

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 Mcmatter was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This has only gotten worse since the last decline and it too hard to make sense of.

McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 03:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (March 2)

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

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.

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

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:QUOBSERVER/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:QUOBSERVER/sandbox, 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.

>>> Ingenuity.talk(); 03:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (March 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Eagleash 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. 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 reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This does not represent a usable Wikipedia item; please review the guide to article creation and the manual of style together with how to add sourcing. Wikipedia reports on what has been written about a topic in multiple independent, reliable sources. It does not 'discuss' topics or express an opinion.

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:QUOBSERVER/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:QUOBSERVER/sandbox, 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.

Eagleash (talk) 10:38, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (March 24)

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 submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

Theroadislong (talk) 02:50, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Hello, I'm Wtmitchell. An edit that you recently made to Paracel Islands seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I've reverted two recent insertions of yours which introduced wikitext errors into the article. Please be more careful. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 17:16, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Don't hesitate to contact if necessary. I've just make somes changes on the webpage of "Paracel Islands" today and invite you to visit. QUOBSERVER (talk) 02:00, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Paracel Islands. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Your recent edits, the ones reverted here and others, would have added problems to this article. The ones reverted here may be supportable, but they were unsupported -- please read WP:V. Also, some of the inserted points I've reverted here do not have a clear connection with the article topic -- it is not clear to me how you think they relate to this article; besides support, these need clarification. Please discuss on the article talk page if you disagree -- see WP:BRD. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:45, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your remarks. They're carefully taken note. QUOBSERVER (talk) 01:16, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Wtmitchell. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Paracel Islands have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. I have removed two Further reading items you added in this recent edit. Both of these have problems. The asterisk character beginning each added item is not recognized by the wikipedia parser -- possibly you cut/pasted these items from another wikipedia which uses a different character set (I have corrected this problem in some of your other additions). Also, see the documemtation for {{cite document}} and correct the item which uses that template improperly. Also, note that the template {{cite copy}} is not supported on the English wikipedia Note that your continued addition of items with problems such as this is disruptive -- continued disruptive editing could get you blocked from editing on the English wikipedia. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:13, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK! Thank you very much. QUOBSERVER (talk) 00:26, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well! Just to inform you that my last view of Paracel Islands is absolutely complete and doesn't need any other contributions else. QUOBSERVER (talk) 00:35, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:The Pentagon Papers

Template:The Pentagon Papers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 13:51, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Paracel Islands, you may be blocked from editing. I have reverted this edit. See this. Your edits are becoming very disruptive. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:36, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See also this edit, repairing a broken cite you added. I have similarly repaired a number of your other cites. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:48, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Paracel Islands. I've reverted this addition as vandalism. Like many other additions by this editor, the asterisk char in the addition is incompatible with wikitext in Wikipedia, and that causes rendering problems. Also, if this item is somehow relevant to this article, there needs to be some indications of how it may be relevant and where in the cited item the relevant portion can be found. See WP:CITE. This is disruptive editing. If continued, it will result in loss of editing privileges. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:39, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Paracel Islands. Here, I have removed another problematic item added by this user. The URL parameter content of this item is completely improper. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:14, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Added note: See this edit removing your insertions subsequent to the warnings above. See aalso WP:NOTFORUM. See also WP:V. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: A New Reign: What choice? (September 15)

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

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:A New Reign: What choice? and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 03:50, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: A New Reign: What choice? (September 17)

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

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.

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:A New Reign: What choice? and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Akevsharma (talk) 05:17, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: A New Reign: What choice? (September 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 Ingenuity was:

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I'm not even sure what this draft is supposed to be about.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:A New Reign: What choice? and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

— Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 01:37, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reminding QUOBSERVER (talk) 04:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: A New Reign: What choice? (September 19)

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 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.

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:A New Reign: What choice? and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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) 01:37, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: A New Reign: What choice? (September 19)

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 reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This is essentially written like an essay - it provides no context as to what topic the article is actually about. It contains a whole series of unsourced statements (personal opinions) about different monarchies without any clear purpose.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:A New Reign: What choice? and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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) 04:05, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, i remind all esteemed readers that my edit has been arbitrarily written as an essay, not in complete encyclopedic manner, as required, which certainly will be done from a neutral point of view!

Subsequently, according to John Locke (1632-1704), a british physician, philosopher and politician, an essay is an editing written with the author's personal opinions and points of view about a

miscellaneous occurrence that everybody could willingly comment, interpret, justify, outline, reckon with Introduction , Middle paragraphs, Conclusion. 42.119.150.245 (talk) 01:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: A New Reign: What choice? (September 19)

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 submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

Theroadislong (talk) 06:30, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let me remind you that, of course, my works don't look like a true wikipedia's version as required, which concern a complete subject! Indeed, they're simply short essays relating only latest topics susceptible

to catch sights of interested readers. For complete subjects, such as the Paracel islands, they should rather consult wikipedia's webpages. 1.55.92.91 (talk) 00:27, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:NOTESSAY. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:02, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:A New Reign: What choice?

Draft:A New Reign: What choice?, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:A New Reign: What choice? and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:A New Reign: What choice? during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 02:31, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:22, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Quôc Anh Nguyên

Draft:Quôc Anh Nguyên, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Quôc Anh Nguyên and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Quôc Anh Nguyên during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:39, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. firefly ( t · c ) 21:03, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]