User talk:TheSkyIsGreen

Hi TheSkyIsGreen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! AngusMEOW (chatter • paw trail) 13:44, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Hello, I'm Blablubbs. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Ken Penders—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. — Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Thumpers (Gang)

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Thumpers".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:41, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some clarification on SCP Secret Laboratory AfD

I saw there was a misunderstanding back in September (exactly 1 month ago) on the AfD page here. It looks like you were trying to dispute the point of it being unsourced by stating that the wiki would be good for sourcing. However, they were attempting to state that the subject was not notable enough. The system on Wikipedia as I understand it is that Secondary sources (news sources like the exampled NY Times) must cover it sufficiently so that it should give its' own article. (WP:GNG) The New York Times probably will not create an article on SCP: Secret Laboratory, however there have been some sources found on the article right now.

What they were trying to say is that there needs to be some coverage of the game outside of sources provided by the game developer.

You also said that the steam guides verify the content on the wiki. However, the steam guides are created by people who are not professionals/have had work published by notable secondary sources or working at a notable news website or company (WP:SPS).

Self published sources are used as this secondary source. Primary sources are the developers making formal statements or giving formal information, which is what you were attempting to use as a secondary source.

I hope this explanation helped you understand what the other side was trying to tell you during the debate. Rafplayz001^{(talk | contribs)} 18:27, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kitty Online

There was a template that you left for editors to see and I tried revising the History section in a more simplified version, since it was indicated it is "better read as a prose". I did not alter any content or source, just simply the format. Any further input is welcome and if I have made a mistake feel free to undo. Just trying to help around! Yogibur (talk) 08:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: 11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports (April 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by EDG 543 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Already covered sufficiently on Timeline_for_September_following_the_September_11_attacks#Wednesday,_September_12

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:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports 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:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports, 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 15:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen! 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! Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 15:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports".

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 edit the submission 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! Celestina007 (talk) 15:39, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:42, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Ready Player One. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments belong on the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and may respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 19:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to User:Yoshi24517. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 19:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to User:Yoshi24517, you may be blocked from editing. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 19:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 19:38, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if someone will answer this but if I write "this can't be happening to me" in all caps with a bunch of exclamation marks in response to this notice, then will that be considered a "troll comment" and removed? Or can I do that? Awaiting confirmation.TheSkyIsGreen (talk) 19:40, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]