User talk:Orc 0001

Your submission at Articles for creation: Berenstain Bears Conspiracy Theory (December 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by HickoryOughtShirt?4 was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:Berenstain Bears Conspiracy Theory 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:Berenstain Bears Conspiracy Theory, 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.

HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 02:55, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Orc 0001! 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! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 02:55, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

Hello, I'm Ixfd64. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Gollum 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. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your recent edits to Gollum, as well as this. clpo13_(talk) 00:19, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The edits to United States Presidential Election were by accident. I was trying to use the source editor and I made a mistake because I am a new editor and am not yet experienced with it. I would never edit anything like that as a joke. You can see that I reverted it and apologized with an explanation on the edit description. The edit to Gollum was indeed a joke, and a lapse in judgment. I apologize for that. I will make constructive edits from now on.Orc 0001 (talk) 00:23, 2 December 2021 (UTC)Orc 0001[reply]

I honestly don't care about politics and on the Gollum edit I was just making a joke about a popular phrase flying around. I apologize. Orc 0001 (talk) 00:25, 2 December 2021 (UTC)Orc 0001[reply]

All right, just don't do it again. It's still vandalism even if you didn't mean anything by it or intended to revert it yourself. If you need more experience with the source editor, you can experiment in the sandbox, and always be sure to preview your changes on actual articles so you don't accidentally introduce a mistake. Happy editing. clpo13_(talk) 00:31, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Orc 0001, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Orc 0003 (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Particularly, "good-hand" and "bad-hand" alternative accounts are explicitly disallowed by policy, and will result in both accounts being blocked. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:59, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, User:Elli. The orc 0003 account does indeed belong to me. I was not aware that multiple accounts were not allowed. I apologize for this. I will immediately discontinue use of User:Orc 0003. From now on my only account that I will use will be User:Orc 0001. I do plan to make constructive edits and become a respected wikipedian. I am sorry if I have caused any difficulties. Thank you, Orc 0001 (talk) 05:04, 2 December 2021 (UTC)Orc 0001[reply]

Thank you, no worries, and feel free to ask me if you have any questions about Wikipedia. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:05, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Gavin Newsom, you may be blocked from editing. —C.Fred (talk) 20:06, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Gavin Newsom. —C.Fred (talk) 20:08, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours to prevent further vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. —C.Fred (talk) 20:09, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 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 ~~~~}}. —C.Fred (talk) 20:16, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since Orc 0002 committed the same vandalism you had been committing, both accounts have now been blocked indefinitely. —C.Fred (talk) 20:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

—C.Fred (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Berenstain Bears Conspiracy Theory

Hello, Orc 0001. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Berenstain Bears Conspiracy Theory, 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) 01:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]