User talk:Islimfit

June 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm S.Hinakawa. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to SystemSpecs seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please also review Wikipedia's guidelines on promotional content. -- S.Hinakawa (talk) 20:58, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wale Adetona (March 29)[edit]

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 reasons left by Celestina007 were: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: First, you are one and the same person as the subject of your article, which from your userpage you have disclosed this, however, the problem is you are trying to use Wikipedia to promote yourself, which isn’t allowed here and secondly, you aren’t remotely notable to warrant an article on Wikipedia. On Wikipedia, Internet popularity or real life popularity does not translate to notability, which is what we require. We roughly test notability by stringent policies and the most common being WP:GNG which requires that a subject has in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them and currently you are grossly lacking.

Celestina007 (talk) 23:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Islimfit! 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! Celestina007 (talk) 23:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User_talk:Celestina007. 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. Thank you. Celestina007 (talk) 10:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

Vandalize my Userpage one more time(you have done so thrice now) do it one more time and you would be blocked. You may not remove comments from my Userpage, do it one more time and you’re done here. Celestina007 (talk) 10:22, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Islimfit, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Celestina007 (talk) 10:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User_talk: Celestina007. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Celestina007 (talk) 11:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have partially blocked you from editing User talk:Celestina007 for two days as you are being disruptive on that page. Kind regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 11:28, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at User_talk: Celestina007, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Celestina007 (talk) 15:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Islimfit. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. Cabayi (talk) 13:53, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Wale Adetona[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Wale Adetona, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Cabayi (talk) 13:55, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]