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

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Christopher Ononukwe and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

GSS ^💬 14:02, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Nwachinazo1 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GSS ^💬 18:11, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

== Contested deletion ==

This page should not be speedily deleted because (your reason here) --Nwachinazo1 (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A message was sent to my talk page seeking for speedy deletion of my user detail. I wish to contest this because the section of Wikipedia policies cited does not seem to apply to me because I have been on Wikipedia for over 6 years now, creating contents and making significant edits in other Wikipedia pages and contents that I didn't create. This nomination for speedy deletion of my user detail does not go well with me and is likely to affect my reputation in contributing to Wikipedia. Therefore,my user detail doesn't deserve to be deleted. Please I appeal for fairness and remove the tag place on it. Nwachinazo1 (talk) 15:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Christopher Ononukwe and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Jamiebuba (talk) 06:40, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nwachinazo1! Having an article draft 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! Jamiebuba (talk) 06:40, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate you for your time and efforts, your assessment of my article's references is saddening and discouraging as your review does not consider the content of reference in terms of substantive coverage of the subject which establishes its notability. Are you saying that news publications cited as reference number 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 12 merely mention the subject in the passing? About about the news publication cited in number 3? Is that too discuss the subject in the passing? Does a news content need to be over-detailed before you agree with its in-depth coverage? Seriously, you have left me confused and discouraged with your review. Please clarify your judgement, so that I can improve on the references, or consider approving the draft. Nwachinazo1 (talk) 11:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Christopher Ononukwe and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 11:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review. Unfortunately, a submission does not need to have hundreds of reliable sources before it passes Wikipedia test of adequate references. At least, up to 3 reliable, third-party sources are enough for a submissiom. In my own case, I have more than 10 reliable sources that speak to the subject yet you said they are not adequate. I beg to disagree with your review on this very reason. Please mention how many reliable references will be adequate? Nwachinazo1 (talk) 12:56, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nwachinazo1. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:Christopher Ononukwe, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the ((edit COI)) template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. GSS ^💬 15:27, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your concern in safeguarding the integrity of Wikipedia. Sadly, you can't come on board to accuse someone who is driven by passion to create a content of CoI, simply by a mere allegation that is unjustifiable. Please this is unethical allegation influenced by assumptions. My talk page was blocked because of a tag you perhaps placed on it. Now, I want to make it clear to you and the rest of you who have the same feeling about this accusation that I have no relationship, directly or indirectly, with the subject I make my contributions. I am simply driven by passion to make valuable contributions on building Wikipedia in line with its policies. Nwachinazo1 (talk) 15:57, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, the COI notice I posted here has nothing to do with the block. Now, do you mind explaining how you own File:PhotoRoom-20230708 111353.jpg and where did you get this image from? GSS ^💬 16:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am beginning to suspect that you feel you own Wikipedia or you are on a witch-hunting mission. Sometimes, I begin to wonder why an editor should allow frustration s/he experienced somewhere else affects his selfless Wikipedia job.

Back to your question, you placed a tag for speedy deletion of my talk page without any convincing reason but on a mere assumption. Now, you have achieved your aim and my user page has been blocked, what is your benefit? Nothing. If you like, place a tag for the deletion of that image because there is no reason that will be given to you that will convinced a preconceived mind like yours. On this note, I can't answer whatever questions you may offer here. People like you chase beginners away from Wikipedia yet you receive nothing from it. Nwachinazo1 (talk) 20:44, 25 February 2024 (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).

Nwachinazo1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 102.90.44.76. Place any further information here. Nwachinazo1 (talk) 16:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed p2p proxy. See Template:blocked p2p proxy for more details. Yamla (talk) 18:01, 25 February 2024 (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.

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

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Christopher Ononukwe and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 20:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, what type of reviewers do we have nowadays on Wikipedia? Why would an editor not do a thorough investigation of a submission's references to assess whether or not they meet Wikipedia's criteria instead of relying on reviews by others on the same submission. Is that not a clique-review? In fact, I beg to disagree with this review and decline because a thorough consideration was not done on the number of reliable, third-party and independent sources that adequately support the subject. Nwachinazo1 (talk) 21:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: repeatedly re-submitted with no improvement.

Theroadislong (talk) 21:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was an improvement but you took to ignore it. Nwachinazo1 (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. GSS ^💬 04:35, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. But that is based on your mere assumption. The burden of prove depends on you who allege. Continue with your presumption and further allegations. A single mistake by a Wikipedia beginner on a content does not amount to a justification of conflict of interest. You have proved to me as if you own Wikipedia. Alternatively, your mission is to chase away beginners like us. Soon, someone else will place a ban on your user talk page for presumptuous behavior, bully and vandalism. Nwachinazo1 (talk) 06:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Vanderwaalforces was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:17, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]