User talk:TheSkyIsGreen

Hi TheSkyIsGreen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! AngusMEOW (chatter • paw trail) 13:44, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Hello, I'm Blablubbs. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Ken Penders—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. — Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Thumpers (Gang)

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Thumpers".

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. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:41, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some clarification on SCP Secret Laboratory AfD

I saw there was a misunderstanding back in September (exactly 1 month ago) on the AfD page here. It looks like you were trying to dispute the point of it being unsourced by stating that the wiki would be good for sourcing. However, they were attempting to state that the subject was not notable enough. The system on Wikipedia as I understand it is that Secondary sources (news sources like the exampled NY Times) must cover it sufficiently so that it should give its' own article. (WP:GNG) The New York Times probably will not create an article on SCP: Secret Laboratory, however there have been some sources found on the article right now.

What they were trying to say is that there needs to be some coverage of the game outside of sources provided by the game developer.

You also said that the steam guides verify the content on the wiki. However, the steam guides are created by people who are not professionals/have had work published by notable secondary sources or working at a notable news website or company (WP:SPS).

Self published sources are used as this secondary source. Primary sources are the developers making formal statements or giving formal information, which is what you were attempting to use as a secondary source.

I hope this explanation helped you understand what the other side was trying to tell you during the debate. Rafplayz001^{(talk | contribs)} 18:27, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kitty Online

There was a template that you left for editors to see and I tried revising the History section in a more simplified version, since it was indicated it is "better read as a prose". I did not alter any content or source, just simply the format. Any further input is welcome and if I have made a mistake feel free to undo. Just trying to help around! Yogibur (talk) 08:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: 11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports (April 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by EDG 543 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. 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Already covered sufficiently on Timeline_for_September_following_the_September_11_attacks#Wednesday,_September_12

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:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports 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:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports, 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.

Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 15:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen! 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! Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 15:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports, 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) 16:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Celestina007 (talk) 15:39, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:9/11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports

Hello, TheSkyIsGreen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "11 George Washington Bridge Explosives Reports".

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. If 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:42, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Ready Player One. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments belong on the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and may respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 19:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to User:Yoshi24517. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 19:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to User:Yoshi24517, you may be blocked from editing. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 19:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 19:38, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING TO ME!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! TheSkyIsGreen (talk) 19:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:SupaOHHH.jpeg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:SupaOHHH.jpeg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 13:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Supatalking.jpeg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Supatalking.jpeg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 13:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}. Whpq (talk) 13:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not acceptable. -- Whpq (talk) 13:57, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Although it may be unacceptable and agaisnt Wikipedia's guidelines for image usage, I thought it was playful and humorous. I think it was acceptable, because, not only, did I spell Shakespeare's name correctly (I could've spelled it the more humourous way: shakespear), but I also made sure that the captions for the images were on-topic and (somewhat) accurately portrayed the cultural impact and significance of To Be or Not To Be. Additionally, Wikipedia has the guidelines WP:BOLD and WPIAR, which should be taken into consideration as well. TheSkyIsGreen (talk) 14:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]