User talk:PanKaycke

Welcome!
Hello, PanKaycke, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Olga Gorodetskaya, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 333-blue 06:49, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Proposed deletion of Olga Gorodetskaya


The article Olga Gorodetskaya has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. 333-blue 06:49, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

File:親人與天命.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:親人與天命.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. -  Earth Saver  ( talk ) at 16:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

File:天神與天命之道.jpeg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:天神與天命之道.jpeg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. -  Earth Saver  ( talk ) at 16:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Spirits Of Heaven and Ways of Heaven & Earth: Shamanistic Beliefs and Origins of Chinese Traditional Thoughts
Hello PanKaycke,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Spirits Of Heaven and Ways of Heaven & Earth: Shamanistic Beliefs and Origins of Chinese Traditional Thoughts for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Cotton2 (talk) 05:57, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited House of Lunin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Polish and Russian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Reliable sources
Please review Identifying reliable sources and refrain from inserting unreliably-sourced text into articles, as you did here. Neutralitytalk 02:45, 25 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Also please read WP:FRINGE, and refrain from reverting to reinserting unreliable and unsourced content. Neutralitytalk 02:57, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. You can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~. I still find it difficult to see why you removed your bot-signed signature without replacing it with a proper one, but although that's odd it's not a big deal. What I said was that I can restore the deleted text to a subpage for you, you don't have to write from scratch. However
 * you must provide independent verifiable sources. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the publisher or author, press releases 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 publisher claims or interviewing the author.
 * you gave a reference, but it appears to be a personal opinion or review rather than factual material from a reliable source as linked above
 * Even if the article is considered non-promotional, books must meet the notability criteria, and will be nominated for a deletion discussion if they don't
 * I considered the article was written in a promotional tone because it simply said what it was about with no facts at all to show why it was significant. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.
 * Your edits indicate that you have a conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject.
 * If you are the author or work directly or indirectly for the publisher, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly. Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by the publisher or author you are writing about, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:     . If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message. Once you have done so, I'll post the deleted text to a user subpage Jimfbleak (talk) 06:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

April 2021
Hello, I'm 2A03:F80:32:194:71:227:81:1. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Antoine, Duke of Montpensier 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. Thanks. 2A03:F80:32:194:71:227:81:1 (talk) 04:05, 4 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi there! Just wanted to test the response time to vandalism on a rather obscure page. Cheers! PanKaycke (talk) 04:15, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I can certainly understand the motivation. But you really shouldn't make unconstructive edits in mainspace even as a test. Not really a big deal in this case though. It's unlikely to yield useful data anyway, vandalism response time varies a lot depending on the article, the time of day, the current filter configuration, the type of vandalism performed etc. Most vandalism is reverted in minutes but some takes hours. Especially in unwatched articles it's not unheard of for vandalism to last days or weeks. In terms of records, we are now finding 15 year old pieces of obvious vandalism, some of which have been widely reproduced across the internet. You can go to meta and ask the WMF community liasons if your really interested in all the statistics that have been collected over the years. Cheers, 2A03:F80:32:194:71:227:81:1 (talk) 13:38, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Gotcha! Thanks. PanKaycke (talk) 15:39, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

November 2022
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. 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:. Widr (talk) 13:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)