Hi Seemplez! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 10 May 2019 (UTC) |
Seemplez, I have reopened this review; there were a number of issues that you missed, based on a quick scan of the article and the review. I'd like to suggest that you gain quite a bit more experience on Wikipedia as an editor before you start reviewing GA nominations, since the standards for such articles are high and you missed a number of things in your review.
I hope this doesn't discourage you, and that you continue contributing to Wikipedia in other areas. We always need editors to improve articles; thanks for your contributions thus far. BlueMoonset ( talk) 15:22, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "HarrisAcademyPeckham". The reason given for HarrisAcademyPeckham's block is: " There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.".
Accept reason: Done. Yamla ( talk) 13:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Gandhi Muhalla Sikanderpur, 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 the sandbox for that. Thank you. Dl2000 ( talk) 02:35, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello there. Thank you for adding your name to the list of experienced editors offering to adopt newcomers. Your profile summary certainly looks impressive and enticing.
Unfortunately, after taking a look at all 222 of your past edits (and 43 edits from your previous, compromised account), I see you have only created one page thus far ( this DAB page), and have made only 86 edits to mainspace in total. So, right now, I am not convinced you have anything like enough experience to be able adopt another new user, and I propose to remove your entry as an adopter.
Please tell me if I have missed anything, and if you want to discuss this further I'm only too happy to help. What I suggest you do is to continue with your Wikignoming activities, gaining closer to 500 mainspace edits, and maybe lurk at one of the Help Desks, chipping in when with a friendly, helpful response when you are able to answer a question. I found that was also a great place to learn new things from others. Having done that for a while, you'll be in a much better position to return to WP:AAU to offer to support to others. Right now, I don't think it would be fair on them if you were to become an adopter, sorry. Best wishes, Nick Moyes ( talk) 14:16, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello.
At your user page, 'Wikinews' is mis-spelled as 'WikiNews'; and 'alignment' is mis-spelt as 'alignnment'. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Also, may I ask what is your GitHub username? I am looking for help with programming sometimes. This is why I would like to know what technologies you are familiar with.
Thanks, -- Gryllida ( talk) 22:05, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'm SummerPhDv2.0. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Sweet Home Alabama, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SummerPhD v2.0 14:40, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Seemplez. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! — Wug· a·po·des 22:39, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
You wrote "Hello, I'm Seemplez. I noticed that in this edit to Katrina Karkazis, you removed content without adequately explaining why." Seemplez, are you unable to read the text in the edit summary? That adequately explains why: Wikipedia is not the place for academics to put their CVs.
Your recent editing history at Katrina Karkazis 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.
Please do not do any more reverts until someone has provided an opinion through the RfC.
jp×
g
09:17, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. jp× g 09:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Excuse me why do you remove something from this Wikipedia website from Beer in Denmark, and please tell me why because many of these factories still exist and many of them close it so why we move them they are still finish up maybe some of them was Danish in the past, my friend, ;) :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.186.116.173 ( talk) 19:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Seemplez! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 10 May 2019 (UTC) |
Seemplez, I have reopened this review; there were a number of issues that you missed, based on a quick scan of the article and the review. I'd like to suggest that you gain quite a bit more experience on Wikipedia as an editor before you start reviewing GA nominations, since the standards for such articles are high and you missed a number of things in your review.
I hope this doesn't discourage you, and that you continue contributing to Wikipedia in other areas. We always need editors to improve articles; thanks for your contributions thus far. BlueMoonset ( talk) 15:22, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "HarrisAcademyPeckham". The reason given for HarrisAcademyPeckham's block is: " There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.".
Accept reason: Done. Yamla ( talk) 13:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Gandhi Muhalla Sikanderpur, 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 the sandbox for that. Thank you. Dl2000 ( talk) 02:35, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello there. Thank you for adding your name to the list of experienced editors offering to adopt newcomers. Your profile summary certainly looks impressive and enticing.
Unfortunately, after taking a look at all 222 of your past edits (and 43 edits from your previous, compromised account), I see you have only created one page thus far ( this DAB page), and have made only 86 edits to mainspace in total. So, right now, I am not convinced you have anything like enough experience to be able adopt another new user, and I propose to remove your entry as an adopter.
Please tell me if I have missed anything, and if you want to discuss this further I'm only too happy to help. What I suggest you do is to continue with your Wikignoming activities, gaining closer to 500 mainspace edits, and maybe lurk at one of the Help Desks, chipping in when with a friendly, helpful response when you are able to answer a question. I found that was also a great place to learn new things from others. Having done that for a while, you'll be in a much better position to return to WP:AAU to offer to support to others. Right now, I don't think it would be fair on them if you were to become an adopter, sorry. Best wishes, Nick Moyes ( talk) 14:16, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello.
At your user page, 'Wikinews' is mis-spelled as 'WikiNews'; and 'alignment' is mis-spelt as 'alignnment'. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Also, may I ask what is your GitHub username? I am looking for help with programming sometimes. This is why I would like to know what technologies you are familiar with.
Thanks, -- Gryllida ( talk) 22:05, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'm SummerPhDv2.0. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Sweet Home Alabama, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SummerPhD v2.0 14:40, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Seemplez. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! — Wug· a·po·des 22:39, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
You wrote "Hello, I'm Seemplez. I noticed that in this edit to Katrina Karkazis, you removed content without adequately explaining why." Seemplez, are you unable to read the text in the edit summary? That adequately explains why: Wikipedia is not the place for academics to put their CVs.
Your recent editing history at Katrina Karkazis 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.
Please do not do any more reverts until someone has provided an opinion through the RfC.
jp×
g
09:17, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. jp× g 09:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Excuse me why do you remove something from this Wikipedia website from Beer in Denmark, and please tell me why because many of these factories still exist and many of them close it so why we move them they are still finish up maybe some of them was Danish in the past, my friend, ;) :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.186.116.173 ( talk) 19:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)