User talk:Nevets20

Welcome

Hello, Nevets20, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! - ^theWOLFchild 17:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory Help directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Article for review

Hi, i have an article in my sandbox regarding my local area i would like to put forward for review. Is this possible?https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nevets20/sandbox&action=edit&redlink=1#

February 2016

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Willowbrae Road, from its old location at User:Nevets20/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. /wiae /tlk 01:25, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nevets20 (February 25)

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:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment they left was:

It isn't clear whether this draft is about an expression or about a possible person.

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 User:Nevets20 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 23:01, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Nevets20, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 23:01, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nevets20 (February 25)

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

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

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 User:Nevets20 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

-Liance^{talk/contribs} 23:29, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nevets20 (February 26)

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:

This draft does not make a case for notability, and is being tendentiously resubmitted. If it is resubmitted again, it may be nominated for miscellany for deletion. If you want to ask other experienced editors for feedback, please visit the Teahouse. They may agree with the reviewers, or they offer useful advice.

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 User:Nevets20 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 00:19, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

−

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Doug Weller talk 11:42, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: This looks like a misunderstanding. This editor seems to be new and trying to figure out the rules. A quick look through their contributions doesn't show any abusive edits. Can you take another look at the edits and let me know if you think they should still be blocked? It doesn't seem to me that there's anything that would merit a block, but perhaps I am missing something. 28bytes (talk) 07:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked

I've unblocked you. If you'd given the explanation of the other accounts you created here I would have done it earlier. Not mentioning them had me a concerned. Also note that I didn't know about the name change request as you hadn't mentioned it here. Please put a note on your userpage about those and that you are a new account for the blocked 'sockmaster'. I accept that you were acting in good faith (see WP:AGF) and I'm sure the Admin who originally blocked you, User:Drmies, will be ok with this (you'd better be, Drmies! :-) ). I'm arranging a 'Teahouse' invitation, a place for new users like you to help you find your way. Or you can always ask me on my talk page. Good luck and happy editing! Doug Weller talk 09:15, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing User:Doug Weller--thanks. Nevets, happy editing. Drmies (talk) 15:26, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If only you WP admins were this vigilant and diligent with established editors who break the rules as you are at raising hell with newbies, WP would be a much better place. Cla68 (talk) 14:34, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A belated Welcome and some resources for new editors

Welcome!

Hello, Nevets20, 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 take 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! →StaniStani 10:40, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to the Teahouse

Hello! Nevets20, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. The Teahouse is an awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Cordless Larry (talk) 11:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're back!

I see you finally took my advice and posted an unblock request on your the user talk page of your other account (Reptilian Agenda), and that has led to your status being reviewed, your accounts becoming consolidated and you are now unblocked and free to edit again. I hope you realize now I was trying to help you as this was the very course of action I suggested for you a couple days ago. By now you realize that Wikipedia can be complicated, if not daunting, for new users. But there is plenty of help available. If you look at the 'welcome' template at the top of this page, there are plenty of useful links there to assist you in getting started. You will also note you have an invite to the "Tea House" above. You should definitely check that out, it's a good resource, as is the help desk. There are also plenty of experienced editors here to help you. Take your time, learn your way around, learn how to edit properly, learn how to contribute and how to create, and you should be ok. I know you were just frustrated earlier, there's no hard feelings. Happy editing! - ^theWOLFchild 18:11, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Of course thank you. Thank you also for understanding my frustration, that is very thoughtful of you.(Nevets20 (talk) 00:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)).[reply]

Also, is "Nevets7" your account as well? - ^theWOLFchild 00:41, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your user draft

I'm very concerned about this and have taken it to WP:BLPN#User:Nevets20 - draft about Satanic cult and child sexual abuse. Doug Weller talk 19:28, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nevets20/Sandbox

Hello, Nevets20,
I moved the content on your user page to your sandbox. For Wikipedia editors, we work on articles we are creating in a user sandbox, not the editor's user page or talk page. It was not appropriate content for your main user page. See Wikipedia:User pages for more information. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]