User talk:SanoSirius

Welcome![edit]

Hi SanoSirius! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! - SUN EYE 1 10:37, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

😁 SanoSirius (talk) 10:40, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022[edit]

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 Annamalai, 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. Thank you. Mr.weedle (talk) 00:19, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for enlightening on this issue, I will definitely go through the welcome page and do better contributions further.

Thank you,

Sanocontributes (talk) 00:28, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Annamalai. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - SUN EYE 1 10:21, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and I'll be more Cautious further SanoSirius (talk) 10:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Annamalai Kuppuswamy (November 26)[edit]

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

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.

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:Annamalai Kuppuswamy 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.

bonadea contributions talk 15:23, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SanoSirius! 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! bonadea contributions talk 15:23, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Annamalai Kuppuswamy (December 12)[edit]

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

"of 5.61% across TN.[4][5][6][7][8]" is a prime example of WP:CITEKILL. Instead we need one excellent reference per fact asserted. If you are sure it is beneficial, two, and at an absolute maximum, three. A fact you assert, once verified in a reliable source, is verified. More is gilding the lily. Please choose the very best in each case of multiple referencing for a single point and either drop or repurpose the remainder. To remind you: For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

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:Annamalai Kuppuswamy 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.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023[edit]

Please stop. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, as you did at Draft:Annamalai Kuppusamy, you may be blocked from editing. - SUN EYE 1 18:13, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Annamalai kuppusamy[edit]

If this was the first article that you 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.

The page Annamalai kuppusamy has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, 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.

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. UtherSRG (talk) 15:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeatedly recreating an article deleted by discussion and rejected at AfC, as you did at Annamalai kuppusamy.

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 ~~~~}}. UtherSRG (talk) 15:05, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request.[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I am writing this unlock request in regards to my recent attempt to create an article for a living person whose article had previously been deleted due to notability issues. I understand that my actions were in violation of the guidelines and policies of your platform, and for that, I sincerely apologize. I now realize that repeatedly trying to create an article for a living person who has been deleted for notability issues is against the rules and can result in negative consequences. I assure you that I will not repeat this mistake in the future and will make every effort to adhere to your platform's policies and guidelines. I take full responsibility for my actions and hope that you will grant me the opportunity to rectify my mistake. I understand that I need to demonstrate responsible behavior going forward to rebuild your trust in me as a user of your platform. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matterSanoSirius (talk) 04:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. UtherSRG (talk) 14:39, 17 February 2023 (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.

What edits do you intend to make? Will you abandon attempting to edit about Mr. Kuppusamy? 331dot (talk) 09:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I was trying to create a new article for Mr Annamalai Kuppusamy as there was no article on Wikipedia for him. Also later found that the article which was previously contributed by Some user was deleted long back for notability issues. Where as now in the current period he is most famous politician in Tamil Nadu. Also he is the president of state party office. His News are daily published in all the News and paper media. If it is mandatory to abandon, attempting to edit about Mr Annamalai Kuppusamy article, I will adhere to the policy and abandon editing about this person. I will take up the advice from the review team and follow the policy and guidelines. Thank you. SanoSirius