Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Avicii. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. MOS:DUPLINK second notice. TylerBurden (talk) 20:26, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Grimlock, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Please also refrain from making personal attacks against other editors. akidfrombethany! (_talk|^contribs) 02:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my misbehavior. Can you check this copy of the Grimlock article (sandbox) and let me know if this follows the manual of style and is eligible to do the same to the original article? I've noticed that the Grimlock article mostly contains the plot of the stories; I've reduced it and made the article shorter. Moreover, I removed the "Toys" section as it has unnecessary content and only a very few people would find it interesting.

Thank you

User:Tomlovesfar/sandbox Tomlovesfar (talk) 03:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Crypto Browser. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Significa liberdade

Thank you for your feedback. I've added two sources, and I think that it is ready to be published as the topic is new and there are only a few research books and articles about this particular topic, so should I leave it as a draft or should I submit it for review? Tomlovesfar (talk) 03:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest submitting it for review. If it still needs extra work to meet Wikipedia's guidelines, the reviewer should let you know what you can do to improve it. :) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:41, 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 reasons left by KylieTastic 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.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Crypto Browser 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 15:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tomlovesfar! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 15:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tomlovesfar, I noticed you moved Speedcubing and European BEST Engineering Competition to draft space but articles over 90 days old should not be draftified. You can read more at WP:Deletion policy#Incubation. S0091 (talk) 19:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing that out to me. Can you tell me how to handle certain articles that are either ads or contain original research? Of course I can flag it, but as you can see, a few posts like these have been flagged over the past year, and still nothing has changed. So is there anyway to remove a page like that?. Thank you once again Tomlovesfar (talk) 01:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first option is to try to fix the issues. If they do meet the notability criteria and it's likely non-controversial you can use the Proposed deletion (PROD) process which gives 7 days for anyone to object before it is deleted or you can nomination it for deletion (AfD) which goes through at least a 7 day discussion to determine if there is consensus to delete. Something like Speedcubing, which is certainly notable so would not be deleted, the only option is to fix the article. European BEST Engineering Competition is currently nominated for deletion and it as it stands now consensus is to delete (WP:Articles for deletion/European BEST Engineering Competition).

There's also Speedy Deletion (CSD) which has very narrow and strict requirements for immediate deletion. If an article is tagged with issues, that is good indication it does not meet the speedy criteria or it would been deleted rather than tagged. I suggest installing the WP:Twinkle gadget which makes all these processes easier but go slow to get a feel for what is appropriate. I also suggest looking through some of the current ones to get a feel: PRODs (Category:Proposed deletion), CSD's (Category:Candidates for speedy deletion, though tricky because they get deleted or declined quickly) and AfD's (WP:AFD#Current and past articles for deletion (AfD) discussions). S0091 (talk) 15:09, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I reverted you edits to Twitter, Inc. because you removed the merge tag though there is an active merge discussion on the talk page. You also changed quoted material. Quotes should not be changed, even if they have grammatical errors (see MOS:TYPOFIX for how handle) and you also introduced some grammatical errors. I also reverted your last change to Qiagen which removed citations to their website. Primary sources can be used for very basic facts such as name, location(s), executive leadership, etc. S0091 (talk) 16:08, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your corrections. However, regarding Twitter, I think there should not be a discussion in the first place since Twitter officially stated that it is "owned" by a company named X Corp., and that is the end of the discussion. Moreover, Twitter got re-branded as "X" Hence, I think that the page title should be renamed from Twitter, Inc. to X (Social Network company). Tomlovesfar (talk) 16:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not up to you if a discussion should happen or if it should or should not be merged. Please do read consensus which is how decisions are made on Wikipedia. You are welcome to join the current discussion on the talk page, Talk:Twitter, Inc.. S0091 (talk) 16:39, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At ReadCube, Indian Penal Code, and Feleti Teo you're breaking date formats, like changing "2 December 2014" to "December 2 December 2014". You also need to be aware that many articles use a DMY format for dates and are tagged as such; randomly changing the formats to your preferred version is disruptive. You seem to be indicating that you're using an "AI" to make grammar corrections - it's a really bad idea to do that blindly. Please carefully review those edits and ensure they are correct before submitting.Sam Kuru (talk) 12:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DATEVAR and WP:VAR for the relevant guidelines on national varieties of English. S0091 (talk) 15:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tomlovesfar: Why did you remove this to draft, considering it spam, when it most prestigious medal awarded for outstanding scientific research over a lifetime in Germany? scope_creep^Talk 06:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your not even an article reviewer, dude. What are doing? Are you looking to get indef blocked off of Wikipedia. If you keep up this behaviour, you will get blocked for disruptive editing. scope_creep^Talk 06:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do not move any more articles to AFC or its a visit to WP:ANI. You don't know what your doing. scope_creep^Talk 06:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: I'm wondering if you've heard of WP:BITE and WP:THREATEN— because this is textbook hostility. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 20:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You could have added it to the same page of the Cothenius_Medal. It is Unnecessary that you create a separate page for awardees between certain years Tomlovesfar (talk) 06:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. scope_creep^Talk 06:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upon reflection, I recognize that my decision to draftify the article about the Cothenius Medal lacked the thorough consideration it deserved, especially regarding its significance within the scientific community. I now understand that my actions may have seemed hasty and disrespectful to experienced editors like yourself. I genuinely regret any disruption or upset my actions may have caused and want to emphasize that it was never my intention to undermine the importance of the Cothenius Medal or the efforts of dedicated editors. I apologize for any distress or frustration I may have caused and appreciate your patience and understanding. I am committed to learning from this experience and approaching future editing tasks with greater care and consideration. Tomlovesfar (talk) 07:12, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tomlovesfar,

You are a new editor. You have been editing for a few weeks. That is not enough experience to know when it is appropriate to move an article from main space to Draft space. It also can anger experienced editors who have been working on this project for decades to have article draftified as you can see in the discussion above this message. You're a newbie, please take things slowly when it comes to administrative tasks.

If you have questions, please bring them to the Teahouse. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tomlovesfar: How goes it. I wouldn't worry about it to much. I appreciated the help although it was the wrong direction. Next time. I'll look out for you. scope_creep^Talk 10:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

03:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, dear friend, I have corrected the sources of the article, if you please check it, thank youAbarz54 (talk) 17:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead submit the Article and see if the admins will accept the article or not ‍ Tom Joe James 📝 💬 Wanna talk? | 📝 Contributions 17:57, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm AKS. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jagadish Chandra Bose 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 or the Help desk. Thanks. AKS (talk) 17:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you think this and this are improvements? S0091 (talk) 20:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After the revert, I've fixed grammar for Ciudad de las Ideas, and I have more work to do on the Jagadish Chandra Bose page.

And No, I don't think those are improvements, Sorry for my mistake. ‍‍ Tom Joe James ‍💬 04:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tomlovesfar: Please note WP:CUSTOMSIG/P, and make whatever change is needed to ensure your username is easily identifiable from your current signature. Thanks. Bazza 7 (talk) 09:50, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:CoolUserInfo, was deleted as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	for your help with my signature! i salute you! akidfrombethany!(talk|contribs) 14:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fimbristylis dura, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Mar Sebastian Pozholiparampil. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ratnahastin (talk) 05:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your concern, But according to this Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Notability guide Bishops are considered notable.

and about COI - I am a member of the Catholic Church under that particular dioceses, That is the only relation I have with that person. I am not paid by anyone to make that article.

The sources I have linked to the references are reliable and they hold a certain level of authority in the catholic community. If you are clarified with your doubts, please revert your changes. if not, please let me know why. ‍‍ TomLovesFar ‍💬 09:35, 3 May 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 DoubleGrazing 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.

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:Mar Sebastian Pozholiparampil 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, dear friend, more than 3 months have passed since the draft of Abdolreza Razmjoo, and it has not yet turned into an article, please check it. Abarz54 (talk) 05:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tomlovesfar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tony Chittettukalam, 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) 04:06, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tomlovesfar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Web3 Browser, 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) 14:05, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tomlovesfar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mar Sebastian Pozholiparampil, 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) 15:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tomlovesfar. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Mar Sebastian Pozholiparampil".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:13, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]