User talk:Linus Hagenbach

This is Linus Hagenbach's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Irish people in Germany (October 31)[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 Mcmatter was:

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

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:Irish people in Germany 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:Irish people in Germany, 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, 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.

McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 16:27, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Linus Hagenbach! 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! McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 16:27, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Irish people in Germany (October 31)[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 Mcmatter 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.

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:Irish people in Germany 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:Irish people in Germany, 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, 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.

McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 16:36, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022[edit]

Hello, I'm TylerBurden. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Swedes, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. TylerBurden (talk) 09:33, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022[edit]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Swedes. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. TylerBurden (talk) 23:11, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Swedes, you may be blocked from editing. At this point you are close to getting reported. TylerBurden (talk) 07:29, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Swedes. Sjö (talk) 10:25, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User:Sjö. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. --*Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page ♮ 07:40, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistent disruptive editing. Most of your editing has consisted of posting material into articles which is at best unsupported by cited sources, and very often contradicted by them. You have also added false citations which do not support the material you have posted, and you have posted different numbers on different occasions for the same statistics. You have edit-warred over such unacceptable material. You have posted a personal attack on another editor. Everything suggests that your purpose here is to plug a nationalist agenda. If you return to the same kind of editing when this block is over, you may well be blocked indefinitely. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. JBW (talk) 09:36, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Swedes. TylerBurden (talk) 15:12, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for continuing the same kind of editing which led to the previous block. It is clear that at least some of your editing is fictitious, and some of it absurdly so.

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 ~~~~}}. JBW (talk) 16:22, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW Hello JBW I'm sorry I saw the error with the Swedes and I would like to get the ban lifted and if I want to change something I'll send you the link beforehand. I'm sorry please give me a chance.

Linus Hagenbach Linus Hagenbach (talk) 16:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Swedes from Linus Hagenbach[edit]

Sorry about Sweden it doesn't matter anymore! Please give me all the last Chnace please I am so sad please.

I'm sorry. Please give me another chance. Linus Hagenbach (talk) 19:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you follow the advice given above to read the guide to appealing blocks, and then post a request for unblock in line with what it says. To stand any chance of being accepted, that request will need to address all the issues which led to the block, and show that you understand what the problems were, and won't do the same kinds of things again. The trouble with just saying vague things such as "I'm sorry" and "I won't do it again", without making it totally clear what you won't do again, is that experience over the years is that blocked editors who say things like that in fact usually do do the same things again. JBW (talk) 07:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have difficulties with this I just want to solve this and I will never do it again I am an honest person who does not lie. I would like to talk to you in more detail about what my problem is but not where the whole world is reading along.

do you have an email? Linus Hagenbach (talk) 21:03, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

unblocking Linus Hagenbach[edit]

Hi JBW this is Linus meanwhile I have learned from my mistakes and would like to unblock me, in the future I will be nice to newcomers and also read through general posts thoroughly first. please unblock me Linus Hagenbach.

Unblocking Linus Hagenbach[edit]

Hallo @JBW, hier ist Linus, inzwischen habe ich aus meinen Fehlern gelernt und möchte mich entsperren, in Zukunft werde ich nett zu Neulingen sein und auch zuerst allgemeine Beiträge gründlich durchlesen. Bitte entsperren Sie mich Linus Hagenbach. Linus Hagenbach (talk) 21:39, 15 January 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here Linus Hagenbach (talk) 18:39, 19 September 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. Yamla (talk) 18:44, 19 September 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.

Unblocked Linus Hagenbach[edit]

Hi @JBW i am Linus Why am I blocked again? I've been waiting for months to be unblocked Linus Hagenbach (talk) 18:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]