User talk:188.77.39.132

This is 188.77.39.132's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nicolas Atanes (December 12)

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

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 188.77.39.132! 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! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nicolas Atanes has been accepted

Nicolas Atanes, 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.

You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

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!

qcne (talk) 21:23, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Nicolás Atanes

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Nicolás Atanes, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicolás Atanes (2nd nomination). (See section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) If a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it 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. — MarkH₂₁^talk 04:00, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page history of Nicolás Atanes/Draft:Nicolás Atanes and so on

@MarkH21, SafariScribe, David Eppstein, RoySmith, Girth Summit, Explicit, Qcne, Materialscientist, and Scottywong: Hi 188.77.39.132.

Hi IP user. In this context, please see

amongst any number of other concerns

Please also see;

Please do let me know if I can assist you in any way this, or anything else related to the English language Wikipedia.

Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 11:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shirt58 I accepted it via AfC after the IP editor came into IRC Live Chat for some help with it, feeling it just about squeaked past the notability threshold and there was a 50% chance it would survive an AfD. qcne (talk) 13:42, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article was deleted with no reason. I understand what the article past was, I came here to contribute on a topic was of interest. I looked after help, I asked for it, and article was written following notability guidelines. What makes me have so much interest is that I was said how to do it right, in an attempt to find a way to contribute here, unfortunately I wrote on a notable topic, I contested the deletion, and, with no reason, article got eliminated. Is there any reason for the article to be eliminated? If no, can the article be recovered? Because it seems that there are taboo topics? 188.77.39.132 (talk) 15:42, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Remitbuber per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Remitbuber. 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. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Izno (talk) 19:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

Hi Izno, also MarkH21, I do not understand all this rigmarole. I am very confused on the reasons that are leading to blocks, deletions and accusations, I understand the article may have a disruptive and repeated historic and it may be true that for editors it should be boring to prevent situations like this. But, please, objectivity goes first. I would like to understand how to work on here better, but when I see that a relevant article, that follows every guideline, gets deleted, my first question is: how to create an article, if following all the guidelines and being notable is not still enough for Wikipedia admins? I just want to ask you if you are going to keep the article deleted or you are going to check notability and restore it if it becomes evident is notable?

Ah, I do not understand why got blocked for no real reason. I will paste the undelete request made, so you can make history of the reasons:

Article was deleted despite being notable and relevant based on reliable sources. It cannot be said that reliable and independent sources were used that prove that the subject is notable and the information provided is verifiable. I read the deletion log—I think this is the name—and it says: "Multiple reasons: speedy deletion criteria G4, G5. User: Remitbuber." For instance, G4 does not apply. G4 says "This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion." I do not know how was the past article to know if I should do it different. What I researched is that it was deleted in 2022 and many sources come from 2023 or 2024. And G5 neither, is about "Creations by banned or blocked users, or in violation of general sanctions", and I don't understand why that applies to myself? I understand what may be the past of this article, but it is objectively (as far as I asked and got answer) deserving a Wikipedia entry. I request the article to be undeleted and consider all the underlying problems later. I said it in the Talk page of the article as a contest to the speedy deletion. 188.77.39.132 (talk) 19:23, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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=Hi [[User:Izno|Izno]], also [[User:MarkH21|MarkH21]], I do not understand all this rigmarole. I am very confused on the reasons that are leading to blocks, deletions and accusations, I understand the article may have a disruptive and repeated historic and it may be true that for editors it should be boring to prevent situations like this. But, please, objectivity goes first. I would like to understand how to work on here better, but when I see that a relevant article, that follows every guideline, gets deleted, my first question is: how to create an article, if following all the guidelines and being notable is not still enough for Wikipedia admins? I just want to ask you if you are going to keep the article deleted or you are going to check notability and restore it if it becomes evident is notable? 
:Ah, I do not understand why got blocked for no real reason. I will paste the undelete request made, so you can make history of the reasons:
:Article was deleted despite being notable and relevant based on reliable sources. It cannot be said that reliable and independent sources were used that prove that the subject is notable and the information provided is verifiable. I read the deletion log—I think this is the name—and it says: "Multiple reasons: speedy deletion criteria G4, G5. User: Remitbuber." For instance, G4 does not apply. G4 says "This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion." I do not know how was the past article to know if I should do it different. What I researched is that it was deleted in 2022 and many sources come from 2023 or 2024. And G5 neither, is about "Creations by banned or blocked users, or in violation of general sanctions", and I don't understand why that applies to myself? I understand what may be the past of this article, but it is objectively (as far as I asked and got answer) deserving a Wikipedia entry. I request the article to be undeleted and consider all the underlying problems later. I said it in the Talk page of the article as a contest to the speedy deletion. [[Special:Contributions/188.77.39.132|188.77.39.132]] ([[User talk:188.77.39.132#top|talk]]) 19:23, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |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=Hi [[User:Izno|Izno]], also [[User:MarkH21|MarkH21]], I do not understand all this rigmarole. I am very confused on the reasons that are leading to blocks, deletions and accusations, I understand the article may have a disruptive and repeated historic and it may be true that for editors it should be boring to prevent situations like this. But, please, objectivity goes first. I would like to understand how to work on here better, but when I see that a relevant article, that follows every guideline, gets deleted, my first question is: how to create an article, if following all the guidelines and being notable is not still enough for Wikipedia admins? I just want to ask you if you are going to keep the article deleted or you are going to check notability and restore it if it becomes evident is notable? 
:Ah, I do not understand why got blocked for no real reason. I will paste the undelete request made, so you can make history of the reasons:
:Article was deleted despite being notable and relevant based on reliable sources. It cannot be said that reliable and independent sources were used that prove that the subject is notable and the information provided is verifiable. I read the deletion log—I think this is the name—and it says: "Multiple reasons: speedy deletion criteria G4, G5. User: Remitbuber." For instance, G4 does not apply. G4 says "This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion." I do not know how was the past article to know if I should do it different. What I researched is that it was deleted in 2022 and many sources come from 2023 or 2024. And G5 neither, is about "Creations by banned or blocked users, or in violation of general sanctions", and I don't understand why that applies to myself? I understand what may be the past of this article, but it is objectively (as far as I asked and got answer) deserving a Wikipedia entry. I request the article to be undeleted and consider all the underlying problems later. I said it in the Talk page of the article as a contest to the speedy deletion. [[Special:Contributions/188.77.39.132|188.77.39.132]] ([[User talk:188.77.39.132#top|talk]]) 19:23, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |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=Hi [[User:Izno|Izno]], also [[User:MarkH21|MarkH21]], I do not understand all this rigmarole. I am very confused on the reasons that are leading to blocks, deletions and accusations, I understand the article may have a disruptive and repeated historic and it may be true that for editors it should be boring to prevent situations like this. But, please, objectivity goes first. I would like to understand how to work on here better, but when I see that a relevant article, that follows every guideline, gets deleted, my first question is: how to create an article, if following all the guidelines and being notable is not still enough for Wikipedia admins? I just want to ask you if you are going to keep the article deleted or you are going to check notability and restore it if it becomes evident is notable? 
:Ah, I do not understand why got blocked for no real reason. I will paste the undelete request made, so you can make history of the reasons:
:Article was deleted despite being notable and relevant based on reliable sources. It cannot be said that reliable and independent sources were used that prove that the subject is notable and the information provided is verifiable. I read the deletion log—I think this is the name—and it says: "Multiple reasons: speedy deletion criteria G4, G5. User: Remitbuber." For instance, G4 does not apply. G4 says "This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion." I do not know how was the past article to know if I should do it different. What I researched is that it was deleted in 2022 and many sources come from 2023 or 2024. And G5 neither, is about "Creations by banned or blocked users, or in violation of general sanctions", and I don't understand why that applies to myself? I understand what may be the past of this article, but it is objectively (as far as I asked and got answer) deserving a Wikipedia entry. I request the article to be undeleted and consider all the underlying problems later. I said it in the Talk page of the article as a contest to the speedy deletion. [[Special:Contributions/188.77.39.132|188.77.39.132]] ([[User talk:188.77.39.132#top|talk]]) 19:23, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.