Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Crazy Lovely, Cool, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 10:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I need your help. I created an article titled Ikenna Aniekwe and it appears it hasn't been approved, I don't find it listed when I use a search engine. Apparently there is something I need to do be publication. Please what am I supposed to do differently? MarkCarey911 (talk) 07:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ikenna Aniekwe 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/Ikenna Aniekwe 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.  Versace1608  ^{Wanna Talk?} 13:31, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Versace1608: thank you so much for informing me. You are kind. Help me too, it is my first article here. MarkCarey911 (talk) 08:34, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Versace1608: I appreciate you for the assistance, you are truly pointing me in the right direction and I am learning. It feels like I am in wiki school... Thanks MarkCarey911 (talk) 16:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Feel free to contact me if you need help with anything Wikipedia-related.  Versace1608  ^{Wanna Talk?} 17:17, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@I dream of horses: I checked out your work on wiki so far and I must say you are doing a great job Keep it up. About Jide Kene Achufusi, I have been able to add some items, maybe you should check it out. MarkCarey911 (talk) 20:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MarkCarey911, also care to explain how you got the image on the article? Celestina007 (talk) 22:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Celestina007, the image is my property, I am a film journalist. So I visit movie locations and attend events. I took it. Thank you so much for asking MarkCarey911 (talk) 08:23, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Patricia (Financial Technology Company) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Patricia (Financial Technology Company), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 01:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sulfurboy, the truth is that this company is one of the most important tech companies in Africa. They grew really fast and have been helping a lot of smaller ones. It is VERY NOTABLE. PATRICIA BITCOIN ATM CARD is Africa’s First Bitcoin card; a global initiative that simplifies the way that its current and new users interact with bitcoin, giving them access to do everyday financial transactions at the swipe of a card. If they are not qualified to be on wikipedia, then I wonder who is. Please help me fix this. I can't keep having my pages declined or deleted all the time, and I have seen all the great work you've been doing, please help me, I beg you. MarkCarey911 (talk) 21:26, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MarkCarey911! Having an article 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 01:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Luchy Donalds 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/Luchy Donalds 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. DGG ( talk ) 20:36, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Celestina007 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 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:

Include reliable sources per WP:RS to substantiate notability claims.

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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Charles Okpaleke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Charles Okpaleke, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Celestina007 23:39, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Celestina007, Thank you. MarkCarey911 (talk) 06:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Okpaleke, 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 . 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Fiddle Faddle 09:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtrent Thank you for all the great work you've been doing here. Thank you for the encouragement to keep editing too, sometimes it feels like some editors do not want us here. But we will stay here and continue doing what we love. Someone just nominated the same article Charles Okpaleke for speedy deletion. I need you to help fix it, thank you. MarkCarey911 (talk) 19:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else contested the speedy deletion. There is a suggestion that it is promotional. May I suggest you give that issue a hard stare? It could still be proposed for a deletion discussion

My role as a reviewer is to accept drafts that stand a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. I think it should survive even a full deletion discussion, but your enhancing its chances by taking any hint of promotion out is a good thing to attempt

I take no part in deletion processes on drafts I've accepted (almost never, anyway). I recognise that others have opinions that differ from my own Fiddle Faddle 21:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Charles Okpaleke, 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/Charles Okpaleke. (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.
• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Praxidicae (talk) 12:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae Thank you for the great work you've been doing on Wikipedia. This page has been properly researched and rewritten. All the errors of the ones deleted were corrected in this one through proper research and reliable sources. The subject is very notable and a few wikipedia admins and editors assessed this version on its merits, and viewed it to be of sufficient merit, showing sufficient notability to be created as an article. Even though it had been deleted, but there is more than enough coverage now. Please, look at it and advise. It took me several months to research and I even wrote it as draft first on Articles for creation before it was approved. It just feels like we are not welcome to edit here on wikipedia. The subject has won the biggest awards in Africa, including seven awards at the Africa Magic Viewers’ Choice Awards 2020. The highest grossing film of 2019. You can help fix the errors or show me exactly which line you find erroneous, you can also decide to remove the notice, thank you very much. If you google, you will see that this man is qualified to be on Wikipedia. MarkCarey911 (talk) 19:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a site where nothing should ever be taken personally. If an article you've spent sweat and blood on is criticised it is hard not to feel affronted, but stand back a moment.

Editors here tend not to care who you are (unless you have a conflict or interest) nor about your feelings, nor mine! They care only about article quality. Some of the processes for caring are pretty 'robust', especially the deletion processes. They can, if taken personally, create bad feeling. So never take them personally.

Wikipedia is probably the hardest site to write for, and the only accolade you will receive is your own quiet satisfaction Fiddle Faddle 21:46, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charles Okpaleke 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/Charles Okpaleke (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. scope_creep^Talk 00:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All's well that ends well. The deletion proposal was withdrawn Fiddle Faddle 10:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MarkCarey911

Thank you for creating Charles Nwodo Jr..

User:Nnadigoodluck, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Please, try to add all your references at the appropriate places and try checking the article to see what I've done on it. Best,

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Nnadigoodluck}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

—Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 01:34, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nnadigoodluck, Thank you for the work you did in this article. I differ from your view insofar as you (presumably) felt it should be kept in its present form whereas I feel it to be in need of substantial work. See the section below here which summarises what I feel should be done within it together with a note to the creating editor explaining what my rational is for using the PROD process.

It may be that you wish to add to the work you have done already and to help the creating editor to make the changes, or you may disagree with me completely. Fiddle Faddle 07:42, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Timtrent, you're right and I respect your input and overall assessment. The proposed deletion process is the proper way to start at this time. Best, —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 09:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nnadigoodluck, PROD gives people a spur to action, whereas AfD is combative immediately. It's a matter of horses for courses. With a PROD the incentive is to save the article by work. With an AfD the temptation is to argue but do no work, despite work being the only way to effect a save.

If the gentleman in question interested me I'd look to improve the article myself, assuming it to be improvable and the gentleman to be inherently notable. Fiddle Faddle 09:08, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Timtrent, I too believe in improvement when the subject of an article looks notable instead of sending straight to AfD. It's true that PROD encourages work, but some editors tend to abuse the process by removing the tag even without doing any real work and this is where AfD comes in. —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 09:32, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Charles Nwodo Jr. has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While it is likely that the gentleman is inherently notable, this is not the article that asserts it nor verifies it. As written he is a run of the mill businessman with some pretty ordinary qualifications and memberships of organisations. The majority of the references are for his corporations. One at least is an interview with him, thus both unreliable and primary. It needs to be re-written to be about the gentleman, with his corporations simply being matters of interest, not the major thrust. If his corporations are notable they may have a separate article, but they have undue weight in this article. Draftification and incubation there with reviewer comments and eventual acceptance might be the route to go other than deletion should the relevant improvements not be forthcoming main space

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fiddle Faddle 07:26, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, I think you have some work to do. Enough editing had taken place by other editors to mean that I felt unable to move the article to Draft for incubation there, but it is not suitable in its current form in my view as an article. I've tried to give guidance in my deletion rationale.

We need the article to reflect the man, not his business, though I agree that his business does matter in a description of him. There is a balance to be kept, and the scales must be tilted to him, and what people say about him.

The Proposed Deletion process is the gentlest of the three deletion mechanisms. Any editor may remove the PROD banner, including you. That is unique to this process. But removing the banner alone is unlikely to end the process in my own view, because just removing it will not alter my view of the article. With no extra work done, whoever removes it, I would view it as necessary to reach a community consensus upon retention or deletion. The community is wiser than I am.

As I said way up there ^^^^^ this is not in any way personal. I view articles here as being of primary importance and editors as secondary. Fiddle Faddle 07:37, 18 September 2020 (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).

MarkCarey911 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I do not remember anyone using my PC at all, let alone edit wikipedia on it. I have been contributing my part to wikipedia enjoying every moment my article is approved. I need to be unblocked as I do not have a hand in the account mentioned and the advertisement and promotion they are involved in. I use a real person's name not a company or organisation's

Decline reason:

You are not currently blocked. If you're experiencing some sort of autoblock, you'll need to copy the template as the instructions say on that block page. only (talk) 01:43, 23 September 2020 (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.

@Glen: please help unblock me, thanks MarkCarey911 (talk) 00:15, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MarkCarey911. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Patricia".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtrent please, take a look at this page Draft:Seamfix Thank you. MarkCarey911 (talk) 01:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did. I am finding it hard to reach a definite opinion on it and will allow others to review it Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 07:42, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Celestina007 was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Promotional article , possible UPE

Celestina007 (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MarkCarey911. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Seamfix, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely 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 receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, 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:MarkCarey911. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=MarkCarey911|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Celestina007 (talk) 01:50, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

celestina007 it is truly sad that since I joined wikipedia you have hated me and everything I represent. You just don't think I deserve to succeed on this platform. All you see is 'negativity' in everything I write and post on here. What is this payment you keep talking about? No one pays me for what I do here, I create based on what I like and who I think deserves to be on wikipedia. So, if you keep rejecting my articles as always, just because you think I was paid, it is not my loss exactly. If you believe that everyone from my country is a fraud just because you had an encounter with some or something, then that will be telling a single story about a people and hoping it becomes their story. Once again, I haven't been paid for any of these. MarkCarey911 (talk) 21:36, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are casting aspersions, on the other hand, your edit history speaks for itself, I would not say more than this, please retract your aspersions. I’m not so sure how one succeeds here we are all volunteers there isn’t any failing or succeeding here AFAIK. The UPE warning was left because your edit pattern had shown a consistency with UPE editors, which is applicable to all editors and not just you, for example creating articles for non notable organizations, see your talk page for reference. you are correct to create articles via AFC I commend you for that, if you aren’t sure of what constitutes notability for an organization see WP:NCORP. Celestina007 (talk) 21:44, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007 I never meant to attack your reputation, I withdraw that statement if it sounds so. When I said 'succeed', I meant grow. I use AFC because I want to be sure I am getting it right, and also to learn how not to create articles in the process. That organization has won all the major technology awards in Nigeria. They also just opened a new branch in London, according to Business Insider. I believe it is more notable than a lot of organizations with articles already on wikipedia. MarkCarey911 (talk) 22:00, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If any editor is here for good purposes and wants to be mentored I am ready to help you attain your maximum potential, but I hope you do understand and appreciate my previous concerns, if you believe you have read to satisfaction what constitutes a reliable source and you feel they are already contained in the draft article then by all means resubmit the article and I wouldn’t do the reviewing, I would leave it to another reviewer. I have chosen today to assume good faith please do not let me down. Go on then. Celestina007 (talk) 22:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MarkCarey911, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Celestina007 (talk) 01:54, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007 you have always accused me of this, you connected me to one strange account once and I told you we weren't the same but you insisted. Seems like a conscious effort to frustrate me out of here. Well, fingers are crossed. THIS IS MY ONLY ACCOUNT, thank you MarkCarey911 (talk) 21:49, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your transparency, I have left a reason for the UPE tag above. If you have chosen biographies of living people and organizations to be the core of your article creations then you must internalize GNG and RS as a matter of necessity. Celestina007 (talk) 21:53, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MarkCarey911. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Seamfix, 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) 02:01, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ije Awele has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to fail WP:NFILM. All citations are about the actress, or promos for the film. Tagged for notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 22:45, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]