User talk:Dwinug

Hello, Dwinug, 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:

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 ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! JarrahTree 09:02, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The foreign players list is sorted based on nations, and then by names. I just wondering why did you do something unimportant like that? What's your motivation? If you add some information that are not in the page yet, that would be great. Thanks. Wira rhea (talk) 11:14, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let me tell you about something in Personnel and kits section in 2020 Liga 1. If the sponsors already had wikilinks before, for example Indomie already linked in Arema, no need to linked again in Bali United and other teams below it. Thanks. Wira rhea (talk) 22:22, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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:

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 (see the guidelines for sports persons and athletes). 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.

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:Mahir Radja Satya 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:Mahir Radja Satya, 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) 07:52, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dwinug! 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) 07:52, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm MDanielsBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Mahir Radja Satya, 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) 01:33, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dwinug. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mahir Radja Satya".

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! —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 00:33, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since much of its content is user-edited Transfermarkt is not considered a reliable source. Please do not cite the website in articles. Thank you. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:24, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source that Jatidiri will be ready in July 2022 for PSIS home stadium? Please provide the source if you have any. And don't change the format in 2022–23 Liga 1 (Indonesia). Wira rhea (talk) 09:33, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dwinug,

Thank you for creating Sérgio Alexandre.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

This article needs references to satisfy notability for sport. What is needed are references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS; that is your guide. You may also read WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources. A more comprehensive guide is WP:SOURCES ... Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion. Kindly do the needful. Thank you.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru (talk) 22:20, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. As I've explained to you before, Transfermarkt is not considered a reliable source. Please stop citing it in articles. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Jihad Ayoub. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 13:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Rory Grand has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. PamD 17:37, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Rory Grand, you may be blocked from editing. As I've explained to you several times now, Transfermarkt is not considered a reliable source. If you continue to cite it in articles you may be blocked from editing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:36, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Carlos Fortes (footballer, born 1994). BRDude⁷⁰ (talk) 18:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kévin Koubemba. GiantSnowman 18:04, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rory Grand 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/Rory Grand 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 until the discussion has finished.

BlameRuiner (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  GiantSnowman 18:42, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Ok, I admit I was wrong for forgetting to give the source. Now unblock my account, thanks.

Decline reason:

Per below, and really the block will end of its own accord soon. — Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

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.

Dwinug (talk) 13:45, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I see warnings for unsourced editing. I am disinclined to unblock you as you seem to forget to source too much. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:54, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

---

Request reason:

According to transfermarkt.com and various sources, the player is not part of Kuala Lumpur City. Dwinug (talk) 02:20, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You didn't provide any sources with your edit. All such information must be provided with a source, especially if the information involves a living person, please see WP:BLP, an important policy. 331dot (talk) 08:40, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

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.

The article Sérgio Alexandre has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Can't find enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG.

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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:25, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Shanon Carmelia. GiantSnowman 13:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dwinug, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username GeoffreyT2000, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Sérgio Alexandre, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sérgio Alexandre.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|GeoffreyT2000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eduardus Aditya 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/Eduardus Aditya 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 until the discussion has finished.

_signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:55, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Ridho Syuhada, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) 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.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Ridho Syuhada instead.

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 (see the guidelines for sports persons and athletes). 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:

Two copies of this page have been created, in draft space and in article space. It is not necessary to create two copies of the same page, and it annoys the reviewers. This is sometimes done in order to bypass Articles for Creation review. However, if a submitter is ready to have the article in article space, it can be moved into article space, rather than creating a copy. It is common for a page that has been duplicated in draft space and in article space to be nominated for deletion or proposed for deletion. If the article is kept, this draft should be redirected to the article. If the article is deleted, this draft may be kept for future improvement.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ridho Syuhada and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 08:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Rennan Saldanha. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. echidnaLives - talk - edits 06:23, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Carlyle Mitchell. GiantSnowman 19:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Eduardus Aditya requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eduardus Aditya. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Meru Kimura, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) WP:NFOOTY is no longer a valid SNG, so GNG must be met. It needs several refs from independent, reliable, secondary sources to pass WP:GNG. It should have at least 3 of those. Please remember that routine sports coverage does not satisfy GNG, and that interviews, being primary sources, do not go to notability either. 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:11, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mattdaviesfsic 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 (see the guidelines on the notability of people). 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.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Meru Kimura and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 20:33, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Takumi Ito, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ichikawa. 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) 06:04, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Meru Kimura instead.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft was copy-pasted into article space. A history merge has been requested.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Meru Kimura and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Brandon Scheunemann, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) WP:NFOOTY is no longer a valid SNG, so GNG must be met. It needs several refs from independent, reliable, secondary sources to pass WP:GNG. It should have at least 3 of those. Please remember that routine sports coverage does not satisfy GNG, and that interviews, being primary sources, do not go to notability either. 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Devonian Wombat 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 (see the guidelines on the notability of people). 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:

Article has not been improved.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Eduardus Aditya and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Rizky Dwi Pangestu, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) WP:NFOOTY is no longer a valid SNG, so GNG must be met. It needs several refs from independent, reliable, secondary sources to pass WP:GNG. It should have at least 3 of those. Please remember that routine sports coverage does not satisfy GNG, and that interviews, being primary sources, do not go to notability either. 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Greenman was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Repeated submissions without improvement.

Greenman (talk) 10:31, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Yudi Safrizal, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) 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.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:21, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Daniel Sturridge, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 00:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mateo Bustos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malagueño.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:34, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Thiago Beserra dos Santos. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 05:46, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Spiderone 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 (see the guidelines for sports persons and athletes). 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:

Database sources are not sufficient for WP:SPORTBASIC.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Thiaguinho (footballer, born April 1997) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:12, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Eduardus Aditya requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eduardus Aditya. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:40, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you create an inappropriate page, as you did at Eduardus Aditya. This article is the same as the rejected article Draft:Eduardus Aditya - copying and pasting this into article space when there is already an AfD for an identical article before is unacceptable Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. When 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. ✗plicit 01:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi dear, I need help from you. Can you create my Wikipedia profile page, thank you for your kindness. my link https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rim_soheng Rim soheng (talk) 14:44, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kervens Belfort. GiantSnowman 18:05, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to verify information, especially about living people. You didn't provide a source for your changes to the Lévy Madinda article, and I couldn't find one either. If you have a reliable source please let me know and we can change the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. GiantSnowman 17:30, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kervens Belfort. GiantSnowman 17:52, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. When 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. ✗plicit 14:11, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Kervens Belfort. GiantSnowman 16:35, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kervens Belfort. GiantSnowman 11:21, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GiantSnowman 18:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

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 ~~~~}}.

Providing references to reliable sources is especially important when editing biographies of living people. You were blocked for this reason in 2022 and warned repeatedly ever since. Cullen328 (talk) 19:21, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I changed it by looking at the source from the Liga 2 operator (source: https://ligaindonesiabaru.com/clubs/singleplayer/pegadaian_liga_2_2023-24/kervens_fils_belfort?token=UDAuMzA3OTAzMzI=). And I am Indonesian, so I know about football here.

Decline reason:

This unblock request indicates you think it's appropriate to add unsourced content, provided you personally know the source. It isn't appropriate, nor is it appropriate to rely on your own knowledge about Indonesian football. Yamla (talk) 10:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

---

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 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).

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

---

Request reason:

Sorry at that time I forgot to provide the source, so please unblock it and I won't do it again. I want to contribute to Wikipedia.

Decline reason:

You need to explain why it's going to be different this time. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

---

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.

is closed. User's memory is problematical. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; thank you. GiantSnowman 15:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now socking as Dnugroho97 (talk · contribs). GiantSnowman 18:24, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Dear Admin, I am writing to you to request the removal of the block on my account. I am very sorry for the mistakes I have made and fully understand that my actions have violated the rules that have been set. I promise not to repeat such mistakes and commit to always abide by the applicable rules and guidelines in the future. I truly value this platform and would like to continue to be a part of this community in a positive and constructive way. I hope that you will consider my request and give me a second chance. I am confident that I can learn and grow from this experience. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Dwinug

Decline reason:

Not only did you not answer the question posed by NinjaRobotPirate last time, not only did you not address your block evasion, but this unblock request was written by an AI, according to zerogpt. That makes it completely clear that the block needs to remain in place. Yamla (talk) 11:39, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

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 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).

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

---

Request reason:

I have known my mistake and will not repeat it again. I just want to contribute to Wikipedia wholeheartedly. I am very sorry for the mistakes I have made and fully understand that my actions have violated the established regulations.

Decline reason:

Since you seem unable or unwilling to address the reasons for the block, I am declining your request and removing talk page access. You may feel more comfortable editing a version of Wikipedia in an Indonesian language that you may be more familiar with. 331dot (talk) 12:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

 331dot (talk) 12:19, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]