User talk:Fifthapril

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Fifthapril! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 13:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Really appreciate your feedback :) ~~~~ Fifthapril (talk) 15:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

May 2022[edit]

Information icon Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Presentation program. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. [1][2][3] MrOllie (talk) 16:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. Appreciated Fifthapril (talk) 12:52, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request[edit]

{{unblock|Today I was trying to make some wiki edits but I am getting notification that This account has been blocked from editing Wikipedia by ‪RoySmith‬ for the following reason(s) "43.245.8.235". Can someone please explain what this is? I have never done anything wrong. ~~~~}} Fifthapril (talk) 04:28, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That IP was blocked because it is being used by sockpuppets. Please see Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System for how to request an exemption from that block. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:33, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. I searched the term "sockpuppets" after your comment and now I know what sockpuppet is. I am using mobile data and according to my knowledge, the IP Address changes every time you use mobile data. So that's why maybe it matched with the IP of any previous user. I really appreciate your quick response. Thanks again. Fifthapril (talk) 15:53, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Fifthapril! Your additions to Nessly have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 17:45, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the feedback. Appreciate it :) Fifthapril (talk) 15:49, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Emirates Draw moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Emirates Draw, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Pridemanty (talk) 10:25, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. But I feel the article already got significant references and adding more referencing would make it WP:REFBOMB because it is a small article with less content. The article already got references from reliable, independent sources like Gulf News and Khaleej Times which are top news channels in Gulf region. Thanks. Fifthapril (talk) 05:31, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

The article 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.

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!

119.160.68.230 (talk) 13:48, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please explain it? I don't get it. Thanks Fifthapril (talk) 09:26, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haomo.AI moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Haomo.AI, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. BBSTOP (talk) 13:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. But I feel the article already got significant references and adding more referencing would make it WP:REFBOMB because it is a small article with less content. The article already got references from reliable, independent sources like Bangkok Post, The Nikkei and Reuters. Thanks. Fifthapril (talk) 15:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Haomo.AI (August 19)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Greenman was:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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.
Greenman (talk) 08:44, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Fifthapril! 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! Greenman (talk) 08:44, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Emirates Draw (September 11)[edit]

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 appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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.
Theroadislong (talk) 20:41, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Emirates Draw (September 24)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Styyx 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 organizations and companies). 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 comment the reviewer left was:
I don't see how to sources pass the strict criteria of WP:NCORP, specifically WP:ORGIND.
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.
~StyyxTalk? 20:16, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nessly for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nessly is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nessly (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:36, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the guidance below:

  • When you write about a person, you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.
  • You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.
  • There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
  • You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:34, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the feedback. Fifthapril (talk) 03:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sushil Pandey moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Sushil Pandey, is not suitable as written to remain published. As a result of an AfD, it is required to go through AfC for re-creation. I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. As per the AfD, do not move it yourself.Onel5969 TT me 12:20, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Onel5969 Thanks for the feedback. I appreciate it. I moved it directly to the mainspace because there was no option of submitting it for review. I do think he is notable and I will make further changes before submitting it for review to ensure that it meets the WP:GNG. Thanks again. Fifthapril (talk) 16:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Mathieu Vouillamoz per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mathieu Vouillamoz. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.
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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.
Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
Girth Summit (blether) 16:48, 26 November 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

I saw this notification with great shock and disbelief. First of all, I will state it confidently and clearly that "I have no association with anyone else nor I am paid for any edits/contributions on Wikipedia". This account was created in April 2022 but you can see that for the first 2-3 months, I was not making any significant or regular edits due to my job and I was also busy in understanding the processes and different categories of editors on Wikipedia. Then from July/August I started to become more active on Wikipedia to mainly contribute in the AFD discussions. Then my focus also shifted towards politicians because I am from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and found out that there are several politicians and members of parliament who don't have Wikipedia pages. So I started creating their pages. Then at the same time I also fulfilled the minimum criteria of becoming "AFC Reviewer" so I applied and I was granted the status. Then if you look at the stats, initially I was very careful and reviewed a very articles in the first few days because I don't wanted to make any mistake. Now coming towards the Articles of Lisa Camillo and Alina Alam (Which is the reason behind my blocks), I was not aware about the previous sock creations. I saw the Drafts in the submission and then after careful review, I approved them since there was enough significant sources available. But I also saw that you guys have deleted all other articles too. Even you deleted the articles of those politicians who died 8-10 years ago. I will again declare that I have no association with anyone and I am not a paid editor. If I was a UPE Editor then I would not have waited for 7-8 months before creating articles of Alina Alam or Lisa Camillo. I could have easily created 4-5 random articles for getting access as a AFC Reviewer after making 500 edits in 3 months. :Now coming towards the technical logs, I am not sure how much technical background check you do but One thing I know is that if I was using any IP that was previously involved in sock then you guys would have blocked it earlier. So I am now here presenting my case in front you and I am available for any kind of verification to make my name clear because I have worked hard on Wikipedia to make contributions. Thanks

Decline reason:

All this is irrelevant to this discussion save the last part. As for what we look at, well, I sort of know but can't tell you for obvious reasons. But it is a lot more sophisticated than you make it out to be. And I rarely see "technically indistinguishable" used in SPI investigations, as it was in yours. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:31, 28 November 2022 (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.

Fifthapril (talk) 12:44, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fifthapril&oldid=1124303023"