Your submission at Articles for creation: Takaku Fuke (May 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Dan arndt were:

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.

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

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:Takaku Fuke 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:Takaku Fuke, 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, 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 05:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jacee215! 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! Dan arndt (talk) 05:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.TrickShotFinn (talk) 09:16, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to sign your posts

Minkai^(rawr!)_{(see where I screwed up)} 18:29, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. 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 ~~~~)). —valereee (talk) 18:53, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is unacceptable. I've blocked for 31 hours to see if we can get this editor's attention. —valereee (talk) 18:55, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Jacee215 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Overbearing mod potentially the girlfriend of the user I responded too. No attacks toward the person were made, except for the statement that they do not seem very knowledgeable on the subject which I dont think is very personal.

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

((Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2= Overbearing mod potentially the girlfriend of the user I responded too. No attacks toward the person were made, except for the statement that they do not seem very knowledgeable on the subject which I dont think is very personal. |3 = ~~~~))

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting ((subst:Decline reason here)) with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

((unblock reviewed |1= Overbearing mod potentially the girlfriend of the user I responded too. No attacks toward the person were made, except for the statement that they do not seem very knowledgeable on the subject which I dont think is very personal. |decline = ((subst:Decline reason here)) ~~~~))

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

((unblock reviewed |1= Overbearing mod potentially the girlfriend of the user I responded too. No attacks toward the person were made, except for the statement that they do not seem very knowledgeable on the subject which I dont think is very personal. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~))