User talk:Erchongyee

Welcome

Hello, Erchongyee, 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 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! KylieTastic (talk) 08:26, 22 May 2018 (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 Directories and indexes Department 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 The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages 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

This is Erchongyee'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.

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I need help on my account blockage. We were new and had not known the rules of the WIKIPEDIA but we had really tried to contribute positively to the community with new knowledge based on our expertise. Hope we could get unblocked. Thank you very much. Erchongyee (talk) 03:47, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You can only be unlocked by an admin through the unblock requests such as the ones you have already tried. Alduin2000 (talk) 06:37, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 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 David.moreno72 was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Erchongyee/sandbox 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 User:Erchongyee/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
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.

David.moreno72 13:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Erchongyee! 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! David.moreno72 13:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Erchongyee/sandbox

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 User:Erchongyee/sandbox, 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. David.moreno72 13:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Hello, Erchongyee. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. I'm sorry, but User:Erchongyee/sandbox has been deleted as meeting WP:CSD#G11. "This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to conform with Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION." These must be rewritten from scratch from "reliable, third party sources unconnected to the subject." See WP:RS.

Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Users who do so may be blocked from editing. Promotional content is vigorously deleted. Wikipedia:Identifying blatant advertising#Typical signs of blatant advertising contains information about content to avoid. For more information on content that may be perceived as promotional, click User:Dlohcierekim/promo. Sometimes pages meeting WP:CSD#G11 give the appearance of an editor violating Wikipedia:Conflict of interest or WP:PAID. Please read and heed them if they apply to you.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources providing verifiable information. That generally means someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. Please see Wikipedia:Citing sources . Template:cite has templates you can use in citing your sources. Place the template {{references}} at the bottom of the page, and references cited in the text will appear there.

YOU CAN ASK FOR HELP AT THE TEAHOUSE

Any deficiencies should be remedied before reposting as they can lead to repeated deletions. Wikipedia is not a webhost. You may wish to consider alternative outlets.

If you want to try again, please use the Article Wizard or articles for creation to guide you through the creation process. The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems.

You may find this tool useful: Google custom search Don't feel discouraged. My first attempts at creating articles were deleted too.

Wikipedia has many articles in need of improvement. Perhaps you can help.

Category:All articles needing copy edit

Category:Articles lacking sources

Category:Articles lacking in-text citations

There is more information at Wikipedia:Community portal Cheers, and happy editing. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Internet 2.0

Hi. I see you are building out Internet 2.0. Rather than do so at that article I would encourage you to do so on a Draft or Sandbox page and then move it over when completed. Right now that article is live and this will give you the time you need to flesh out your outline and find reliable sources. If you need help doing this let me know by pinging me here or leaving a message on my talk page. 04:42, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much. How can we speak further to improve it? I am currently being blocked. Thanks. Erchongyee (talk) 03:51, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 22)

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

We're sorry, but we cannot accept blank submissions. Please consider submitting to Wikipedia:Requested articles instead. If in fact you did include text within the article, but it isn't showing, please make sure that any extra text above your entry is removed, as it may be causing it to hide and not be shown to the reviewer.

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:Erchongyee/sandbox 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 User:Erchongyee/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
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.

KylieTastic (talk) 08:26, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Hello, I'm Barkeep49. I noticed that you recently removed content from Internet 2.0 without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 13:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barkeep49, thank you very much. I am currently being blocked from editing WIKIPEDIA articles hence really needs help to be unblocked. We do not intend to offend anyone and is sincerely want to contribute to the society with new knowledge and technology. Hope to listen to your feedback. Erchongyee (talk) 03:59, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. 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/Alexctlee, 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.

Polyamorph (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Erchongyee. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 15:27, 22 May 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am sorry that this had caused trouble for you to block my account and my colleague's account (Alexctlee). We are working on the same project and want to contribute to the WIKIPEDIA new knowledge we developed and patented, about how the Internet can be evolved into Internet 2.0. Both of our accounts are real person account but we did not know that editing the document simultaneously will be treated as malicious and got our account blocked. Please help to unblock us and if you need any further information to prove our real identity please let us know. Thank you very much. Erchongyee (talk) 04:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Wikipedia is not a forum for you to promote your own ideas and developments, and you will not be unblocked if you intend to continue doing that. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:19, 23 May 2018 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Ok, noted. For Internet 2.0 we shall not insist to publish at the moment but we believe it will be technology for the future. We hope you review our draft as well as it is backed by existing knowledge and patents across many countries. Anyway we hope to be unblocked so that we could contribute in other areas. Thank you. Erchongyee (talk) 02:50, 24 May 2018 (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) 11:14, 24 May 2018 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I understand that that the block is due to the behavior that me and my colleague accounts had been seems to be sock puppetry but it was not. We are 2 real person who were just trying to contribute to the same article. We will avoid such for the future and will make useful contribution to WIKIPEDIA. Thank you very much. Erchongyee (talk) 04:16, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficiently convincing for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 12:14, 30 June 2018 (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.

Hi admins, we hope that we could be unblocked to contribute to WIKIPEDIA. Can you please consider our case? Thanks. Erchongyee (talk) 06:28, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Internet 2.0 (May 31)

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

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Internet 2.0 instead.

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:Internet 2.0 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:Internet 2.0, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
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.

Legacypac (talk) 17:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Legacypac, thank you very much. My account is currently being blocked due to we did not understand well how the system works. Can you please advise how we could get unblocked? Thank you. Erchongyee (talk) 10:57, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin so can't do an unblock. There are instructions above on making an unblock request, which you seem to have followed correctly and the request is pending. Legacypac (talk) 16:28, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Legacypac. Erchongyee (talk) 13:35, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request to unblock my account

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).

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

Request reason:

I am a real person; you may verify anything you want but can you please unblock my account? Thank you Erchongyee (talk) 15:20, 26 July 2020 (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) 17:55, 26 July 2020 (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.