User talk:Paleotheus

Otodus debrayi, 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 Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs 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 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!

NotAGenious (talk) 13:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Otodus poseidoni, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Discovery. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 19:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Otodus debrayi did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! UtherSRG (talk) 00:30, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my friend. You do not appear familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. In particular, Wikipedia requires citations to reliable and authoritative third-party sources. Two good sets of Wikipedia guidelines that I have found really useful can be found HERE, regarding verifiability and HERE, regarding the need to maintain a neutral point of view. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 12:06, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry I didn't put more references, the reason, is because the shark species of these genera are not mentioned clearly and rarely post articles about. If you have any articles that you can use as references, click HERE, HERE, Otodus minor. Paleotheus (talk) 12:13, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you can not find adequate references, then you should not write about the subject. Also, please see my warning above about your lack of edit summaries. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:58, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll be more careful then next time. A question: I have already tried to put the URL of the article, but I could not infer the URL, since in some articles I used as a reference, it did not cite it. I tried to look for some informative articles to help me, but apparently it didn't work, and probably these authors of the article (Reference), didn't want to write a URL for the article, or there was no way. Paleotheus (talk) 16:54, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Lamniformes. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 17:53, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paleotheus! 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! Wikishovel (talk) 13:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for creating the article Cetorhinus huddlestoni. Unfortunately, the grammar is pretty poor, and the citations display error messages. I would suggest you to copyedit your articles when writing them, in order to achieve a more readable prose. Good luck! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop repeatedly creating articles without checking for grammar mistakes first. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the sources you are using in Draft:E.D. Cope (dinosaur) fail Wikipedia's Wikipedia:Reliable sources policy. Wikipedia articles are only supposed to be written using sources that are non-self published like newspaper articles and scholarly works ideally by experts for a scientific topic like this. You've cited sources like YouTube, DeviantArt, Facebook, Reddit that appear to be written by people with no particular expertise in the topic and are not reliable according to WP:SOCIALMEDIA and WP:RSPYOUTUBE. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Cosmopolitodus xiphodon. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources and it has too many problems of language or grammar. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. UtherSRG (talk) 23:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Isurus desori. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources, it has too many problems of language or grammar and references are error-filled. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. UtherSRG (talk) 23:28, 7 October 2024 (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 CanonNi was:

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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Do not immediately resubmit after draftication. The refs are broken (I would've fixed them, but I don't have access to the original sources) Also poorly written with a uncertain tone.

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:Isurus desori 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.

'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Paleotheus! 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! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cladoselachida 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/Cladoselachida 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.

Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page Category:Cladoselachida has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category had been empty for seven days or more and was not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may have become empty on occasion.

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, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. UtherSRG (talk) 19:04, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Paleotheus. 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.

Izno (talk) 21:02, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page Megatooth sharks has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it was a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. UtherSRG (talk) 11:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page Carcharodon productus has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it was a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. UtherSRG (talk) 11:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]