User talk:Rdxmen000

November 2021[edit]

Hello, I'm Escape Orbit. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to June Drummond have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:34, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Draft:Juned king. 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. Please do not remove the templates from Wikipedia pages. I've asked you multiple times. If I keep having to ask you the next step will be to escalate the matter to Wikipedia administrators. Salimfadhley (talk) 14:00, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete AFC comments from drafts[edit]

I noticed that you deleted the comment I left on Draft:Juned King. I restored the comment and then you deleted them again. Please do not do this. The comments need to be preserved until the article is accepted. Salimfadhley (talk) 00:17, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Juned king has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Juned king. Thanks! Salimfadhley (talk) 00:19, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am telling you last time that do not work with my page directly because the grammar is fine in this and don't put your mind to waste Rdxmen000 (talk) 03:15, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove comments. They are there not just for you, but for other editors who are reviewing the page. Salimfadhley (talk) 12:49, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Juned king (November 12)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Juned king 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:Juned king, 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, 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 12:25, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rdxmen000! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 12:25, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Draft talk:Juned king[edit]

The page Draft talk:Juned king has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done for the following reason:

Duplicates draft

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or 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. 331dot (talk) 13:01, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Juned king has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Juned king. Thanks! Salimfadhley (talk) 19:16, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing, because it is clear that you are not here to contribute to building the encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JBW (talk) 21:32, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

i'm sorry for that[edit]

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).

Rdxmen000 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am sorry to all of you from now on I will do the right thing and will not give you a chance to complain in future. Rdxmen000 (talk) 03:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. 331dot (talk) 09:47, 13 November 2021 (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.

please unblock me so that i can do better editing in future and i will not do any wrong in future i promise Rdxmen000 (talk) 03:42, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

try to understand me Rdxmen000 (talk) 09:49, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

please unblock my editing tab[edit]

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).

Rdxmen000 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

please unblock me so that i can do better editing in future and i will not do any wrong in future i promise Rdxmen000 (talk) 09:56, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 11:36, 13 November 2021 (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.

Please tell us what edits you intend to make and why we should trust that you won't make further hoax edits. 331dot (talk) 10:13, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]