User talk:Sturgehel

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Paris Institute for Critical Thinking 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.

❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 10:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sturgehel! Having an article draft 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! ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 10:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Paris Institute for Critical Thinking. Thanks! CNMall41 (talk) 04:28, 2 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 S0091 was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Paris Institute for Critical Thinking 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.

S0091 (talk) 15:39, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sturgehel. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Paris Institute for Critical Thinking, 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) 16:01, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Zehra Sayers shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Note that the rules on the sourcing required for inclusion of negative material about a living person are particularly strict. See WP:PUBLICFIGURE and WP:NPF, also WP:BLPCRIME. The article has recently been discussed at WP:BLPN. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 08:34, 27 October 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.Kathleen's bike (talk) 14:13, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 17:08, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My contributions to Wikipedia have started to be erased arbitrarily, while my own account has been blocked. In protest, I request that all my contributions to Wikipedia be deleted without exception, and that my account be permanently deleted as well. Sturgehel (talk) 18:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have also been threatened by an editor named "Daniel" with "outing" of my name. This person is very welcome to divulge whatever they think my name is, but they are not welcome to resort to threats of this sort, which should be off-limits for any Wikipedia editor.

Finally, I would like it noted that this entire effort against me is being expended in order to <blp violation removed>. Sturgehel (talk) 18:25, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the admin help templates. You may make an unblock request if you like, but there's no point to using admin help templates while you are blocked. Also, any more personal attacks, and you risk losing access to this page.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I repeat my request that all my contributions be taken off Wikipedia and that my account be deleted. Sturgehel (talk) 23:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts cannot be deleted, and there is no legitimate basis for deleting your contributions, which is not the same as what I think you mean by "taken off Wikipedia".--Bbb23 (talk) 23:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The basis is that Wikipedia editors have started truncating my labor for the site in a wholly arbitrary manner. Two clear instances:

• On the page Âşık Veysel, a poem translation I entered into the article has been maintained while the citation to the source of the translation has been deleted, thereby turning my contribution into unsourced plagiarism.
• On the page Mortaza Behboudi, the reference to an organization that has supported the release of this journalist from a Taliban prison in Afghanistan has been deleted even though the source is Reporters Without Borders.

For the sole reason that I dared to address fraud charges against a well-connected public figure, wikipedia editors are currently carrying out a systematic vendetta against my labor for the site, even the part of it that has nothing to do with said public figure.

This is why I must insist that my labor for Wikipedia either be respected in its entirety and integrity or deleted completely from the site. Sturgehel (talk) 08:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Your comments and repeated demands are disruptive. I've revoked TPA. You may use WP:UTRS to appeal.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:12, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sturgehel. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Paris Institute for Critical Thinking".

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. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:06, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]