Vivalionel1
Your submission at Articles for creation: Gabriel Kunda Jr. (February 27)
edit
|
Hello, Vivalionel1!
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) 02:37, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
|
March 2020
edit
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Gabriel Kunda, Jr, from its old location at User:Vivalionel1/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
AfC notification: Draft:Gabriel Kunda Jr. has a new comment
edit
Your submission at Articles for creation: Gabriel Kunda, Jr has been accepted
edit The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Bkissin (talk) 13:16, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Your submission at Articles for creation: Gabriel Kunda Jr. (March 9)
edit - If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gabriel Kunda Jr. 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:Gabriel Kunda Jr., 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.
Draft:Gabriel Kunda Jr. concern
editHi there, I'm MDanielsBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Gabriel Kunda Jr., a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. MDanielsBot (talk) 01:42, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Gabriel Kunda Jr.
edit
Hello, Vivalionel1. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Gabriel Kunda Jr.".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 01:44, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Gabriel Kunda Jr for deletion
edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gabriel Kunda Jr 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/Gabriel Kunda Jr 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. BlameRuiner (talk) 10:50, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
November 2020
edit | This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet 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 sockpuppet, 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. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:23, 13 November 2020 (UTC) |
Vivalionel1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi Sir Sputnik, I would like an unblock if you look at the article I recently created, about a professional athlete who clearly met the criteria for the article to remain in Wikipedia. He plays in a professional league, I also added official club website links to further meet the criteria, I have never vandalized nor misused me being able to edit, if you could look at my logs from the article created, it was about a professional footballer. I did not edit on other pages apart from trying to improve the article I created, when I also asked admins to also help me on the article, I was given further instructions on how to improve it so I did. If you could please take a look at the past logs and the article itself, I have not vandalized or created fake articles, the article written you could see on google and other verified links I linked the players Wikipedia, and provided further external references, for this reason I would please like to be unblocked I created the article in good faith knowing it met the criteria, which I was improving its content and adding on to make it more digestible to everyone else and being meticulous in the process with the advice of other admins. When the article was put up for deletion I reached out to five different admins, asking them to review the Wikipedia page and why it was being nominated, and the advice given I begun to try and better it. But it was too late by that point, I did not create my account to vandalize Wikipedia, nor i'm I a sockpuppett, I created a Wikipedia page that met the criteria but whatever reason, even with the advice of admins was still deleted, so for this reason I would please like to be unblocked, thanks. Vivalionel1 (talk) 14:52, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Comparing your edits to some of the older sock puppets, they seem similar. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:57, 13 November 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.
Vivalionel1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi, I used the information that is google to create the wikipedia page, so the previous Wikipedia page might have looked the same given the information on google, I did not vandalize nor did I miss edit or provide false information on the player, I linked official verified sites and news links to the player, I asked for help from other admins and the advice given I went to add to the article itself, please look at the article itself there was no false news, I was working to better the page as the advice given by other admins.
Decline reason:
Not remotely plausible. You contributed content that was exactly the same as previously blocked accounts. If you are claiming you stole the material from another source, you still shouldn't be unblocked as you were violating WP:COPYRIGHT and placing the entire project in jeopardy. Yamla (talk) 13:21, 14 November 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.
Vivalionel1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I clearly stated I used news links to verify the article, and used official club links as the page needed more references, because admins told me I needed to add more references to the page which I did. I did not use any outside information apart from verified sources, or use any copyright information that's false, I did not use someone else is material, I used the news links to add as references which I was told to do so by admins, to verify what was being said in the wikipedia page I created. I did not use the material in the news links but I used them as references if you could look at the page itself you will see what I have mentioned is what was written in the wikipedia page . Vivalionel1 (talk) 2:05 pm, 14 November 2020, last Saturday (3 days ago) (UTC+0)
Decline reason:
Because the only edits you have made are to recreate a deleted article which has been repeatedly recreated by the same person using various accounts, all of which just concentrate on the same article, the appearance to us is that you are the same person returning, and so we must treat you that way. The best way back onto Wikipedia is to wait at least six months, and then make an unblock appeal using your original account, admitting all your accounts and edits. The community is very forgiving of people who are honest. If by some slim chance you are a different person who has been caught up accidently in this, then unfortunately there is little we can do. But if you do decide to later create another account, then best not to create or edit any article related to Gabriel Kunda Jr. or you will found and blocked again. SilkTork (talk) 02:13, 18 November 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.
How do you account for the fact that your version of the article is often word-for-word identical to previous versions written by other accounts? --Yamla (talk) 14:13, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you know anything about football judging by your wording Yamla, if you look at the news articles that where linked to the wikipedia page, you will clearly see that the information provided in the news articles and the wiki page I created mentioned who he played for, so if you are taking that as the same as the previous pages that where deleted, that's fair to say because that's how his career has been going, and I was meticulous enough to add external references that linked the progress of his career, how many teams his played for (from official club websites), - most of the information was sourced from various verified links. I am befuddled at you saying you can't report what team a player played for how he started his career because a verified news link that meets wikipedia criteria is used, I can not speak to what you speak of, when you try to make it seem as if I stole material when that's far from the truth. Everything had a reference to verify what was being said, about said individual's career. (talk) 15:48, 14 November 2020 (UTC)