User talk:A Prime Knight

Your submission at Articles for creation: D Rajkumar Vudayar (April 21)

Draft declined

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.

Feedback

The reviewer, Meadowlark, left the following feedback:

This draft's references do not show that the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

• provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis;
• are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
• are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

This draft does not demonstrate that your subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. Please see WP:42 for more information on what kind of sources you need to present. At least three sources that meet all three criteria in WP:42 are required. In particular, interviews with or sources written by the subject (or their friends, family, colleagues, etc) are not considered independent.

Next steps

• Edit Draft:D Rajkumar Vudayar to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
• When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

• For an overview of our policies and guidelines see Everything you need to know.
• You can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Scam warning

• If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam. Learn about scams on Wikipedia.

Meadowlark (talk) 05:00, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, A Prime Knight! 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! Meadowlark (talk) 05:00, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

June 2026

Hello A Prime Knight. The nature of your edits 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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 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 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:A Prime Knight. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=A Prime Knight|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. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 01:24, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

If I get paid on edits, I assure you I'll add paid template on the article.

sorry if you assessed me like that. A Prime Knight (talk) 20:08, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Loft conversions in the United Kingdom. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 20:02, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Josephine Mbaye per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Josephine Mbaye. 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.

Vanamonde93 (talk) 20:42, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Please Unblock

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).

A Prime Knight (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

Please Unblock me, because I'm a good contributor as you can see my contributions globally. A Prime Knight (talk) 00:57, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Per Checkuser, you have been abusing multiple accounts, which is against policy. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:51, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

---

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.