Hello, Rapydapy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction and Getting started
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! --Animalparty! ( talk) 05:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Louise Peltzer, Rapydapy!
Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
I've done general cleanup - linked to the pages on her in other languages and to her published works, and added some categories.
To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Blythwood ( talk) 08:35, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- The importance in all articles is that they must either satisfy WP:AUTHOR or WP:PROF as these are what we judge the articles by, and what will gauge the chances of its acceptance. At least one of these, Akachi Ezeigbo, isn't showing the criteria so far and therefore cannot be accepted, based on what you've provided. SwisterTwister talk 06:31, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
The idea of the Wikipedia jest integration of texts by links. Your page is an orphan and contains only few internal links. Please help to integrtae the page. Xx236 ( talk) 13:44, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
- Please compare the French page, which is integrated. Xx236 ( talk) 13:48, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for using {{ Infobox person/wikidata}}. When you are adding it to articles (particularly new ones), please could you make sure that the information on Wikidata has references associated with it (and add them if it doesn't)? Then the information will show up in the infobox, rather than empty infoboxes appearing. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel ( talk) 17:51, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- thanks i'm all confused about that. do dead people need referenced data? i do not think that is a wise policy.
Rapydapy (
talk)
17:54, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- For non-living people, you can set onlysourced=no to fetch unreferenced values as well, but it's not recommended. It's best just to add references on Wikidata - if you're writing the article, then you probably have the references to hand and can quickly add them at the same time, which saves people's time later on to double-check the information. Thanks. Mike Peel ( talk) 21:36, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- thanks i'm all confused about that. do dead people need referenced data? i do not think that is a wise policy.
Rapydapy (
talk)
17:54, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 | 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.
Dirk Beetstra
T
C
07:35, 22 November 2017 (UTC) |
Rapydapy ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Are you sure you did a check thingy right? I'm looking around the library and do not see any pokemon. I'm just adding encyclopedic content for a contest. Are you sure you want to delete encyclopedic content because of personal issues? It does not sounds like a wise policy. Rapydapy ( talk) 18:42, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Where to start? With the gibberish of that request or the total lack of dealing with the reason for the block? Decisions, decisions. Maybe in six months log on from your original account and we will see. -- Dlohcierekim ( talk) 18:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
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.
- where to start: you did not answer my questions: is it because you do not have the answer, or you do not answer questions? "we'll see" ? decisions decisions. Rapydapy ( talk) 19:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Rapydapy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction and Getting started
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! --Animalparty! ( talk) 05:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Louise Peltzer, Rapydapy!
Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
I've done general cleanup - linked to the pages on her in other languages and to her published works, and added some categories.
To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Blythwood ( talk) 08:35, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- The importance in all articles is that they must either satisfy WP:AUTHOR or WP:PROF as these are what we judge the articles by, and what will gauge the chances of its acceptance. At least one of these, Akachi Ezeigbo, isn't showing the criteria so far and therefore cannot be accepted, based on what you've provided. SwisterTwister talk 06:31, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
The idea of the Wikipedia jest integration of texts by links. Your page is an orphan and contains only few internal links. Please help to integrtae the page. Xx236 ( talk) 13:44, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
- Please compare the French page, which is integrated. Xx236 ( talk) 13:48, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for using {{ Infobox person/wikidata}}. When you are adding it to articles (particularly new ones), please could you make sure that the information on Wikidata has references associated with it (and add them if it doesn't)? Then the information will show up in the infobox, rather than empty infoboxes appearing. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel ( talk) 17:51, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- thanks i'm all confused about that. do dead people need referenced data? i do not think that is a wise policy.
Rapydapy (
talk)
17:54, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- For non-living people, you can set onlysourced=no to fetch unreferenced values as well, but it's not recommended. It's best just to add references on Wikidata - if you're writing the article, then you probably have the references to hand and can quickly add them at the same time, which saves people's time later on to double-check the information. Thanks. Mike Peel ( talk) 21:36, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- thanks i'm all confused about that. do dead people need referenced data? i do not think that is a wise policy.
Rapydapy (
talk)
17:54, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
|
| 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.
Dirk Beetstra
T
C
07:35, 22 November 2017 (UTC) |
Rapydapy ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Are you sure you did a check thingy right? I'm looking around the library and do not see any pokemon. I'm just adding encyclopedic content for a contest. Are you sure you want to delete encyclopedic content because of personal issues? It does not sounds like a wise policy. Rapydapy ( talk) 18:42, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Where to start? With the gibberish of that request or the total lack of dealing with the reason for the block? Decisions, decisions. Maybe in six months log on from your original account and we will see. -- Dlohcierekim ( talk) 18:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
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.
- where to start: you did not answer my questions: is it because you do not have the answer, or you do not answer questions? "we'll see" ? decisions decisions. Rapydapy ( talk) 19:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)