User talk:BeamAlexander25/Archive 1

NOTE, This Subpage is my archived talk pages and notification, please do not modify it

Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, BeamAlexander25, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as EthanGamer, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content protocols, and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are struck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you thru the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at the our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• How to write a great article
• The perfect article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --MuZemike 11:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of EthanGamer

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on EthanGamer requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. --MuZemike 11:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of EthanGamer

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on EthanGamer requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DMySon 12:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of EthanGamer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article EthanGamer 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/EthanGamer 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. Praxidicae (talk) 15:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cesar Apolinario (May 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Cesar Apolinario 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:Cesar Apolinario, 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.

Sulfurboy (talk) 03:41, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BeamAlexander25! 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 03:41, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

True Skate moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, True Skate, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ~ Amkgp ✉ 11:18, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited EDSA (road), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Avenue (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Philip Bale alive?

Bale died sometime in the 16th century (unless he is immortal)Bashereyre (talk) 13:50, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

I explained my edits

I did not remove the section from Robert Adam's page without explanation. The sources cited in that section were all marked "Better source needed," and the sources don't meet Wikipedia's guidelines. This section was added by one user, who mobilizes insufficient evidence and cites speciously related studies to make an obviously biased and misleading argument.

You are marked as inactive but mark pages for speedy deletion??

Hoi, in addition to that there are procedures for speedy deletion and you can not apply them when you are inactive. Even more, what you find at User:GlobalYoungAcademyTeam are listeria lists about early career science. You find applicable programs, awards. It is inclusive so how come you consider this promotional. Promotional for what? .. Any way.. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 10:42, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to RedWarn

Hello, BeamAlexander25! I'm Ed6767. I noticed you have been using Twinkle and was wondering if you'd like to beta my new tool called RedWarn, specifically designed to improve your editing experience.

RedWarn is currently in use by over 80 other Wikipedians, and feedback so far has been extremely positive. In fact, in a recent survey of RedWarn users, 90% of users said they would recommend RedWarn to another editor. If you're interested, please see the RedWarn tool page for more information on RedWarn's features and instructions on how to install it. Otherwise, feel free to remove this message from your talk page. If you have any further questions, please ping me or leave a message on my talk page. Your feedback is much appreciated! Ed6767 talk! 13:18, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Your reversion at Voivodeships--what you reverted wasn't vandalism

Hello. I follow things on Polish subjects. And I noticed that you reverted an edit at the article on the Voivodeships of Poland; you referred to the edit as vandalism; you also left a message for the IP User who did it, suggesting that s/he give a reason for his/her edits. In fact s/he did give a reason. S/he removed from the article a pair of tables of the Gross Regional Products of the individual Voivodeships, and explained that there already is a separate article. In fact, that's absolutely true, List of Polish voivodeships (provinces) by GRP, and it's been there for years. In fact, it seems that what the IP User removed and you put back is simply a copy of that other article. So whether it was advisable to remove it or not, the IP User did not "commit" vandalism.
All that said, I do think it's advisable to remove it from the article on the Voivoideships. One could probably have a dozen different tables in that article, listing the Voivodeships according to a dozen different details--many of which might have their own articles. And these in particular are statistics that are bound to change over time. Have the same table in two places, and almost inevevitably someone will update one and not be aware of the other. Or, someone has to do the updating twice.
I think that given the existence of the other article, it's best handled with a "See Also." Uporządnicki (talk) 20:42, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Since writing all that a few minutes ago, I noticed something more. That main article on the Voivodeships, in addition to that section (and well above it in placement), there is another section called "Economy of Voivodeships." That section has a link to an article "List of Polish Voivodeships by GDP per capita." And in fact, that links to the article I cited above about the Voivodeships by GRP (someone moved the article, explaining the correct terminology). Uporządnicki (talk) 20:58, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Skywalker family

Hello, are you a bot? You reverted my edits at Skywalker family, which was specifying that what the script said was that Palpatine said that he manipulated the midichlorians to allow for Anakin's conception, calling himself his father; how is that vandalism? 2001:BB6:52F1:AB00:5D66:CB57:F535:C81A (talk) 19:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Ffrydd Faldwyn vandalism

Why did you revert sensible edits on this Montgomery site? Thus the RCHMW abbreviation was wrong and is now correct with the full title of the Commission. You seem to know nothing about editing! 109.152.19.214 (talk) 19:42, 19 June 2020 (UTC) replay: sorry, i have revert mistake, thank you - BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 19:45, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

replay: sorry, i have revert mistake, thank you - BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 19:45, 19 June 2020 (UTC) BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 19:56, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Non-Admin Closures

Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Calling Out the Chords, Vol. 1, I've reverted your close. While we do encourage new users to participate in all aspects of Wikipedia, please note that AfD is a highly technical area, and Non-Admin Closures should only be performed by users with extensive experience. Please refrain from performing any more WP:NACs. Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:08, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Revert to Robert Adams (spiritual teacher)

Please be careful when using stock templates to revert edits - I've undone your edit at Robert Adams (spiritual teacher) because you said that it was unexplained content removal, whereas it was explained clearly in the original edit summary (and the reason appears valid - all the references in that section are from personal blogs, not normally considered reliable sources). Thank you! OcarinaOfTime (talk) 16:51, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Archiving

It looks like you're archiving your talk page manually. You might want to look at User:Lowercase sigmabot III/Archive HowTo, which can automate the process for you. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:41, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Your signature

There's something up with your signature. It has two timestamps; the correct one and one from yesterday. SpinningSpark 21:06, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Red signature is for use comptuter Blue for phone BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 17:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC) 21:46, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

How does that explain why it has two timestamps? And why is that a good thing? Having wrong timestamps is a bad thing. It is misleading and confuses archiving bots. SpinningSpark 22:29, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

What he said. Please fix this. It's just plain confusing and obfuscatory, and thus disruptive. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:33, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. You've been asked to remove the fake timestamp from your signature twice now. I will block you if you don't do it per WP:CUSTOMSIG/P. SpinningSpark 15:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

• To be more emphatic about this, you are participating in AfD discussions (example: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unexploded (2nd nomination)). Certain events happen there based on how long a discussion has been open, and both human editors and automated processes depend on parsing the timestamps in signatures. Please do not continue to edit until you fix this. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:04, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
  • I have fixed this issue now look this BEAMALEXANDER25, talk its currently being my mistake - thank you! BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 16:30, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Just a heads up that it's broken the link to your Talk page - but yes, once that's fixed you should be all set signature-wise. OcarinaOfTime (talk) 16:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Natural History

Apparently you are not familiar with MOS or are not able to recognize vandalism. 50.25.221.206 (talk) 17:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

European school

The edits of User:109.87.48.66 were not vandalism. It appears that a misunderstanding arose because they forgot to include an edit summary explaining their intentions to split the content into a new article. I subsequently left them a note on their talk page and they seem to have followed. Please read the article talk page and user talk page before reverting; since it is not obvious vandalism (or vandalism at all), hastily reverting contravenes WP:ROLLBACKUSE, whose points are still applicable even though this is not Wikimedia built-in rollback. And also, the IP left a clear summary and so did I when reinstating their edit, yet you proceed to revert my edit as if it were vandalism. I'm open to discussing to clear this misunderstanding, but I urge you not to template the regulars or overzealously revert edits—especially those of established users.—and instead carefully examine edits before reverting them, otherwise misunderstandings like this will continue to happen and your patrols may be scrutinized by others. If you have any questions, leave a personal message on my talk page or ping me back here. ComplexRational (talk) 17:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

One other thing: it seems like several others have questioned your reverts and identification of "vandalism" as well, so please take care to understand this and keep it mind should you choose to continue doing recent changes patrol. ComplexRational (talk) 17:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Please stop reverting good faith edits as vandalism

Per other requests on this Talk page, please take much more care when reviewing edits. Neither this[1] nor this[2] are vandalism - they might need additional sourcing, but that is not the same as vandalism. We want good-faith IP/new editors to stick around - this sort of action does the opposite and is starting to be borderline disruptive in itself. OcarinaOfTime (talk) 19:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Reply - i am reverting, thanks

- BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 19:28, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi - just to clarify, you intend to continue reverting such edits? OcarinaOfTime (talk) 19:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, if my rollback request is approved, its easier but if declined, its bit harder of bit easier to detect vandalism. - BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 19:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

BeamAlexander25, I'm sorry to see you don't seem to understand the warnings you have been getting. If you keep reverting non-vandalism edits calling them vandalism, I will block you from editing. Is that clearer? Please read What is not vandalism to get a clearer idea of what is and is not vandalism. Furthermore, you are obviously not ready for rollback, and I have declined your request. Bishonen | tålk 19:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC).

Bishonen - Please explain why decline my rollback request, thanks - BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 19:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Because the warnings and your replies to them on this page show that you don't understand the difference between vandalism and not-vandalism. Did you follow the link I gave you, What is not vandalism? Are you having difficulty with the English language? Bishonen | tålk 20:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC).

Promise i never happened again this not-vandalism, and i reverting carefully - BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 20:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Categories

If an article is tagged as {{uncategorised}}, it needs categories. If you are only adding categories such as their birth date and "living people", without taking the trouble to add the obviously needed categories identifying someone's reason for notability, nationality, etc, please change the tag to {{Improve categories}} or {{CI}}, so that it still comes to the attention of an editor who is willing to put in that little bit more effort. The point of tagging the article as needing categories is that it needs useful categories: please make sure that your edits are actually helping the encyclopedia. Same applies to this edit. Having noticed these two I will sort them out, but please take more care with your edits. Thanks. PamD 08:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

And please note that all categories go above any stub tag, not as you did for Kang Ki-doong. See WP:ORDER. If HotCat gets it wrong it is still your responsibility to get it right. Thanks. PamD 08:20, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Administrator's Noticeboard discussion notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --OcarinaOfTime (talk) 19:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

See the complaint at WP:ANI#Recent changes patrolling by BeamAlexander25. You may respond there if you wish. In my opinion you are risking a block of your account. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:08, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

WikiLoop Battlefield new name vote

Dear BeamAlexander25,

Thank you for your interest and contributions to WikiLoop Battlefield. We are holding a voting for proposed new name. We would like to invite you to this voting. The voting is held at m:WikiProject_WikiLoop/New_name_vote and ends on July 13th 00:00 UTC.

xinbenlv ^{Talk, Remember to "ping" me} 04:57, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Melonhead

Hi,

Not sure why you think my edit to Melon heads is vandalism? Anthony Fantano is commonly known as "Melonhead". It even says this on his page with multiple citations. Did you even check this or just reverted automatically?

Short descriptions

Please don't change correct short descriptions to incorrect ones. They should start with a capital letter, so "Hotel", not "hotel".[3] Adding it twice[4] is even worse of course.

The opposite is true here: "pandemic" should be lowercase, not uppercase, in this header. Fram (talk) 07:33, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind my editing your userpage

Hi, BeamAlexander25. Thank you very much for taking the criticism seriously and making a statement about your future editing on your userpage ("Statement about my Recent Changes Patroll"). But the link you gave there, to WP:ANI, wouldn't have helped yourself or anybody else find the relevant discussion, which will in any case soon be archived. I've changed it to a specific and also permanent link to the discussion itself. Hope you don't mind my editing your userpage! PS, if you want to learn how to create such links, see Wikipedia:Simple diff and link guide. Bishonen | tålk 08:17, 3 July 2020 (UTC).

Blocked

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 ~~~~}}.  Cabayi (talk) 06:33, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Despite your promises made in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1041#Recent changes patrolling by BeamAlexander25 and to Puddleglum2.0 at Special:Permalink/967741150#CVUA Training you went and tagged Draft:EMINEM MS for deletion as an attack page which it clearly wasn't.

You also closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claudio Andrea Gemme as a merge when none of the !votes mentioned merge, all were clearly for deletion. It appears that you've now moved on to misusing XFDCloser to cause more disruption.

It's not a sustainable position that you should continue to review other editors' contributions and, since you seem incapable of keeping to your word, an indefinite block is the only option left. Cabayi (talk) 06:52, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Email received at 07:07 UTC - per my emailnotice:

Hello, why did you Blocked me, i have enrolled at CVUA, because trainer is turning on Twinkle. Why did you blocked me? with a Good-Faith edits. Now this is my last word, Cabayi, Next time you do not block with good reasons, i will cease editing until further notice, thanks.

My comments above at 06:52 UTC provide my reasoning. Cabayi (talk) 07:12, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Email received at 07:17 UTC - per my emailnotice:

Why did blocked as disruptive editing? I am not disruptive editing, I have no vandalism history and warning. Unblock Request - I promise, i never use Twinkle again if unless trained at CVUA. And my enrollment is pending.

The instructions for requesting an unblock are given above. Further misuse of email will result in your access to email being removed as well. Cabayi (talk) 07:25, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Statement about 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).

BeamAlexander25 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Next time, Promise i will never XFD Closer again because i have mistake of tools but i have CVUA Training soon, thanks -BEAMALEXANDER25, talk 07:29, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

The issue is not just your use of the tools, but your judgement as well(such as closing a discussion as merge when no one even suggested doing so). I think that you should not be unblocked until you agree to not use any automated tools, except as directed by the user training you in their use, until that trainer believes that you have learned how to use them properly. Using the tools outside of that would result in your being reblocked, with or without warning. I am declining this request. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 15 July 2020 (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.

This is my last word after i blocked - I will never editing Wikipedia again unless if I Unblock request is declined, @Cabayi: i will promise i would never abuse tool again and i would monitor me and perhaps, if accepted, i will continue editing again, if not i will quit wait another 1 month.

The problem was RedWarn, now it's XFD Closer and Twinkle. If you were to edit again I'd be afraid of which tool you'd discover next. These tools are both amplifying the damage you do to the wiki, and holding you back from engaging with what Wikipedia is really about and learning from that experience.

Somehow you would need to be held back from installing or using tools for several months. Ultimately you've ignored the {{Tool warning}} on each tool and need to take responsibility.

I recuse myself from considering the unblock request. Cabayi (talk) 08:17, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@Cabayi:Please see User talk:Puddleglum2.0 for my pending enrollment at CVUA. BeamAlexander25 (Rest in Peace) (talk) 08:36, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

I've seen it. I even linked to it (Special:Permalink/967741150#CVUA Training) in my post above at 06:52 UTC. Cabayi (talk) 08:58, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Update, Draft:EMINEM MS was being deleted as db-g11, you have mistake BeamAlexander25 (Rest in Peace) (talk) 09:00, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

You nominated it as a G10 attack page, as shown by the accompanying notice you left on User talk:EMINEM MS (Special:Permalink/967768987). Cabayi (talk) 09:23, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@331dot:,@Cabayi: i will promise i not use automated edits for several months, thanks. BeamAlexander25 (Rest in Peace) (talk) 09:15, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

You are free to make another unblock request, for review by another administrator. 331dot (talk) 09:19, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks BeamAlexander25 (Rest in Peace) (talk) 09:20, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

I would add that while any unblock request will be decided by another administrator, I would not support their being a time-based limit on your use of the tools; only when your trainer or an administrator is satisfied that you will use them properly should you be permitted to use them. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@Cabayi: wait, this cause to be blocked me is i clicked wrong button, i clicked g10 but this is my mistake instead of g11 BeamAlexander25 (Rest in Peace) (talk) 09:28, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

... and the misclosure of an AFD, and breaking the promises you made at ANI, and ignoring the requests of Puddleglum2.0... You're not going to convince anybody that you've understood your block if you try to reduce it to one action on one day. It's not that simple. Cabayi (talk) 09:34, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@Cabayi: i have emotional for you, after you made a blocked to me, i still young editor and i continue other wikipedias like tl.wikipedia.org and break my dayBeamAlexander25 (Rest in Peace) (talk) 09:44, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

• Having worked on the ANI report and followed this for a last week or so, it is my opinion that the individual needs to remain blocked indefinitely. There are problems here that promises aren't going to fix, including an inability to fully comprehend their actions. This can't be solved by discussion alone, if at all. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 10:47, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

• If you are a youth(do not tell what your age is) and English is not your primary language, those are both good reasons for you to wait and mature as a person and editor before requesting unblock. 331dot (talk) 11:03, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
• Checkuser note: Due to  Confirmed socking I've switched this to a checkuser block.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:42, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

I highly recommend studying the WP:GNG before using Twinkle again once you get unblocked. JTZegers (talk) 01:06, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Join the RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck

Hi BeamAlexander25/Archive 1,
you are receiving this message because you are an active user of WikiLoop DoubleCheck. We are currently holding a Request for Comments to define trust levels for users of this tool. If you can spare a few minutes, please consider leaving your feedback on the RfC page.
Thank you in advance for sharing your thoughts. Your opinion matters greatly!
María Cruz

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
If you would like to modify your subscription to these messages you can do so here.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cesar Apolinario (August 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MapleSoy was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Cesar Apolinario 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:Cesar Apolinario, 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.

MapleSoy (talk) 06:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BeamAlexander25! 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! MapleSoy (talk) 06:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)