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

See WP:OVERKILL and your first sentence ;)

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:CoinFlip (Bitcoin ATMs) 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:CoinFlip (Bitcoin ATMs), 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, 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.

-- TheImaCow ( talk • contribs) 14:33, 15 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doubledownon10! 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! -- TheImaCow ( talk • contribs) 14:33, 15 July 2020 (UTC) reply

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

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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This is a prime example of WP:CITEKILL. Instead we need one excellent reference per fact asserted. If you are sure it is beneficial, two, and at an absolute maximum, three. A fact you assert once verified in a reliable source, is verified. More is gilding the lily. Please choose the very best in each case of multiple referencing for a single point and either drop or repurpose the remainder.

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:CoinFlip 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:CoinFlip, 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, 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.

Fiddle Faddle 09:43, 18 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello Doubledownon10. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Doubledownon10. The template {{ Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Doubledownon10|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Fiddle Faddle 09:48, 18 July 2020 (UTC) reply

@ Timtrent: I'm not paid to edit anything on Wikipedia. 2600:8801:2F05:5B00:40B6:4DC1:53EA:A57C ( talk) 17:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC) reply

To the IP only editor, you may not be, but what of the editor whose page this is? Fiddle Faddle 19:25, 18 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Also, what (if any) is your relationship to the user FaultySubset84? GeneralNotability ( talk) 20:16, 18 July 2020 (UTC) reply

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies.
The specific details of these sanctions are described here.

Broadly, general sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

GeneralNotability ( talk) 19:53, 18 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Draft:CoinFlip, 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:CoinFlip and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:CoinFlip 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. Fiddle Faddle 15:37, 25 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have an undisclosed financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{ unblock|reason=your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:

• Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
• State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
• Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future. GeneralNotability ( talk) 14:07, 28 July 2020 (UTC) reply

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 Timtrent was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

Fiddle Faddle 14:12, 28 July 2020 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lyann Nguyen 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/Lyann Nguyen 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. GeneralNotability ( talk) 14:17, 28 July 2020 (UTC) reply