User talk:Robotking95129

This is Robotking95129's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Star Wars Analogy (December 18)[edit]

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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:Star Wars Analogy and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Enterprisey (talk!) 06:47, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Robotking95129, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Enterprisey (talk!) 06:47, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017[edit]

Hello, I'm Beeblebrox. Your recent edit to the page Alaska Purchase appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:02, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Petals Around the Rose. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Petals Around the Rose was changed by Robotking95129 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.961557 on 2017-03-30T23:16:31+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:16, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Robotking, ClueBot may have exceeded its brief here, but I'm afraid most human editors would have reverted your edit too. You see, Wikipedia doesn't include statements beginning "It's often said that..." or similar expressions. If a statement is useful at all it needs to be supported by telling the reader exactly who made the statement and in what "reliable source" it was published. If it's just your opinion or has come out on some blog or tweet then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. If you do find a good source then by all means re-add the statement but make sure that you give a reference. Maybe before you do more here you might like to take the Tutorial or the Adventure, which will help you understand more about how this place works: Noyster (talk), 13:15, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Star Wars Analogy concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Star Wars Analogy, 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. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Thinning 2: New World Order[edit]

The article The Thinning 2: New World Order has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced and no evidence of notability. Nothing but a publicity blurb for a future web movie.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Meters (talk) 05:28, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]