User talk:Electricgirl22

This is Electricgirl22'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: Ruby Gillman (Character) (July 20)

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

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.

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:Ruby Gillman (Character) 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.

Waqar💬 16:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That’s okay, I’m just new to creating a draft. Electricgirl22 (talk) 16:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Electricgirl22! 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! Waqar💬 16:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ruby Gillman (Character) (July 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Qcne 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 passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Cut down on this draft's content significantly. At least 50% should be deleted. Every single statement must be backed up by a reliable and independent source. Original research is prohibited.

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:Ruby Gillman (Character) 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.

Qcne (talk) 18:14, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Draft:Ruby Gillman (Character), without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 18:58, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my mistake. Electricgirl22 (talk) 19:01, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Findlay High School, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop adding alumni without reliable sources to show they attended. You have done this on more than one article. It's not enough to link to the alumnus's article if that article does not contain a reliable source to show their attendance. Meters (talk) 01:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And please check the result when you add links. Your edit to Leslie Rutledge added a link to the disambiguation page Southside High School rather than to the correct page Southside High School (Batesville, Arkansas). Meters (talk) 02:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, your edit Cindy Byrd added a link to a high school Coalgate High School that is just a redirect to the already linked article about the town. Meters (talk) 02:11, 28 July 2024 (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 Newman Smith High School. Your supposed source does not even mention the school. You cannot simply copy a source form another article with verifying it. Meters (talk) 00:47, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm tired of checking all your edits, and having to fix or undo most of them. I've reported you for a block. You continue to add links to DAB pages, and unverified claims of school alumni. It does not help to link to the person's article if it does not contain a source for the high school the person attended, and it does not help to add sources that do not mention the school. Meters (talk) 01:16, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ruby Gillman (Character) (July 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chaotic Enby 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 passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet 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:Ruby Gillman (Character) 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.

Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

Derek Wulf

added a link pointing to Hudson High School

Kent Eken

added a link pointing to Twin Valley High School

Rodger Reedy

added a link pointing to Lincoln High School

Troy Smith (politician)

added a link pointing to Quitman High School

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 20:48, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. 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 ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Message picture. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. What are you doing? Erin Brockovich is an article about the person. It is not the same as the article about the movie, Erin Brockovich (film). Meters (talk) 09:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken, you may be blocked from editing. Do not restore redundant categories. For example, if a film is in Category:American teen comedy-drama films it is already included in Category:American teen comedy films Category:American teen drama films and Category:American teen films because each of those is a parent category that includes the category "American teen comedy-drama films". If you don't understand this you should not be adding categories. Meters (talk) 09:05, 31 July 2024 (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 Temple High School (Texas). Once again you have added a supposed alumnus without providing a source for their attendance or verifying that the subject's article contains a working, reliable source for their attendance. You just came off a block for this. Meters (talk) 09:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And again in Putnam City High School and Stephanie Bice. You have to actually read the reference to see if it supports the attendance. Meters (talk) 09:28, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and in MacArthur High School (Lawton, Oklahoma) Meters (talk) 09:35, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And in Pedro Menendez High School Meters (talk) 09:41, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And in Roxana High School Meters (talk) 09:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And in Everett High School (Michigan) you copied a supposed alumnus ref that does not even mention her name. Meters (talk) 10:01, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for another block. Meters (talk) 09:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. 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 ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:07, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

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 Clements High School. Enough. You're just back from your second block for adding unsourced material, and the very first edit of yours that I check is the same thing all over again. I've explained this to you before. Mini Timmaraju contains an unsourced claim that she attended Clements High School. You add her to the high school page as an alumnus with a source https://www.thequint.com/south-asians/indian-american-mini-timmaraju-leading-the-fight-for-reproductive-freedom-united-states that does not mention the high school. You must provide a reliable source that shows that she attended. Meters (talk) 22:46, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it was a mistake Electricgirl22 (talk) 22:47, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I suggest that you check the rest of your edits, because if I see another "mistake" I'm going to ask for a third block. Meters (talk) 22:49, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I’ll check my edits, you got my warning. Electricgirl22 (talk) 22:51, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too late. On Pocatello High School you restored an alumnus that I previously removed as being unsourced. You just added a {{cn}}. So, that's not a "mistake". You knew it wasn't sourced. You knew I had asked that it be sourced. My WP:AGF is done]]. Meters (talk) 22:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know it was unsourced because I don’t see any article. Electricgirl22 (talk) 22:56, 7 August 2024 (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 ~~~~}}. Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:00, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As timed blocks haven't worked and you continue to make the same disruptive edits, the block is for an indefinite duration. You are blocked until you are able to demonstrate to an admin that you understand our requirements regarding reliable sources.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:00, 7 August 2024 (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).

Electricgirl22 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Meters I understand all of the requirements regarding reliable sources, unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. I know that reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both. These qualifications should be demonstrable to other people. disruptive editing is wrong, and I finally understood all the requirements of reliable sources Electricgirl22 (talk) 23:10, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It would help if you used your own words instead of quoting the guideline back at us. That would demonstrate that you truly understand it. It would also help if you gave us an example of a reliable source. You can immediately make another unblock request. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:00, 8 August 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.

Unblock request

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).

Electricgirl22 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand all of the requirements regarding reliable sources. I know that reliable sources should be used correctly and checking to see if there is evidence or not is important. I knew that disruptive editing is wrong, and I finally understood all the requirements of reliable sources Electricgirl22 (talk) 02:32, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You haven't provided an example of a reliable source as requested. You also say that you understand, but we need you to demonstrate your understanding. 331dot (talk) 08:18, 8 August 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.