User talk:Minkyumthemaster

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Wikiisawesome 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:Minkyumthemaster/sandbox 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 get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

/wia /talk 18:05, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Minkyumthemaster, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! /wia /talk 18:05, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Minkyumthemaster. You have new messages at Wikiisawesome's talk page.
Message added 15:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

/wia /talk 15:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 18)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

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:Minkyumthemaster/sandbox 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 get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

/wia /talk 16:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Minkyumthemaster, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! /wia /talk 16:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:Minkyumthemaster/sandbox

Hello, Minkyumthemaster. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation 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}} 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 16:04, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Bit, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Alexf^(talk) 19:58, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was not disruptive editing, I have seen that I had made a mistake and reverted the action.

But it was. As indicated below, several of your wholesale text deletions were intercepted and prevented by filters. Making a mistake and being prevented by a filter is one thing; doing so repeatedly and constantly triggering filters is another. If you have any questions about how Wikipedia works, please ask at the Tea House. -- Alexf^(talk) 21:41, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some of your recent edits have been disruptive to the point where they triggered the edit filter and look like vandalism. You need to be very careful in your editing as future such behavior may lead to your being blocked w/o further notice. This should be understood as a Final Warning. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:42, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 22:32, 9 May 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, this was my first offense, I did not know much about the rules, if it fell under vandalism, I was given a last chance, but was blocked without even having the chance... Minkyumthemaster (talk) 17:42, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This was not your first offense, you responded to an earlier warning above, so you were aware of them. To be unblocked, you will need to explain what you did wrong, why you won't do it again, and what constructive contributions you intend to make. I am declining this request. 331dot (talk) 09:07, 11 May 2019 (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 accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

Hi, sorry, maybe I misread the final warning, but I had not read the warning before I made changes to Wikipedia page Markiplier. I am so sorry, and that I know what I did wrong, I thought I was trying to be helpful by adding a meme section but I guess it had some funny purposes as well to show my friends. I am truly sorry, and I will not repeat this action again. The first time, I had been dared by my friends to delete half of a wikipedia post, then I realized that this was wrong and I reverted the action, but still I guess that was a form of vandalism, so I will not repeat that action again. I think that I wont do it again, since I already know the consequences of "vandalism" or useless information on Wikipedia, I was just confused as to why I would get a permanent ban on my first/second offense. I am deeply sorry, and I will try to make constructive contributions rather than vandalism and/or useless information. Thank you, and I hope that you will trust me on this, and I will not make it happen again. Minkyumthemaster (talk) 09:56, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

This entire unblock request indicates you lack the maturity necessary to edit Wikipedia. You knew perfectly well the dare was inappropriate but you did it anyway. You can't honestly claim you did not realise it was wrong. You don't have to guess, or if you did then you lack sufficient competence to edit Wikipedia. You say you think you won't do it again. No, that's not enough. You have to convince us we can trust you'll never do it again. I think the best plan here is for you to wait at least six months then apply under WP:SO. Hopefully by then, you'll be more mature and can convince us you won't actively try to harm Wikipedia. Yamla (talk) 13:56, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]