User talk:Solopku

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Add new text under old text.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Start a new topic

Your submission at Articles for creation: Filter and Refine Principle (May 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ToadetteEdit 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Filter and Refine Principle 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.

Toadette^Edit! 07:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Solopku! 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! Toadette^Edit! 07:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Filter and Refine Principle (September 3)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Filter and Refine Principle 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 13:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Welcome!

Thanks for creating a draft!

Hello Solopku, welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Liance, and I've been editing here for a while. I wanted to thank you for submitting Draft:Filter and Refine Principle to WikiProject Articles for Creation and helping to grow the encyclopedia! We appreciate your contributions and hope you stick around. I can see you've already started writing draft articles, so here are a few more resources that might be helpful:

The Teahouse - ask Wikipedians for general editing help
Articles for Creation Help Desk - ask reviewers for draft article help
Creating your first article
Referencing for beginners
Wikipedia Manual of Style

I highly recommend visiting The Teahouse if you are unsure about anything Wiki related. It's a place where experienced editors answer questions and assist newcomers in the editing process. In addition, please do not hesitate to reach out on my talk page if you have any specific questions. Once again, welcome! I hope you enjoy your time here. ~Liance^talk 23:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Filter and refine has been accepted

Filter and refine, 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 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!

Theroadislong (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Solopku. 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) 20:51, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

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).

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

Request reason:

below are the clarifications:

Sockpuppetry - my accounts in use and explanations:

1. I first created the account 'solopku' using my personal email, and started editing to share knowledge in Computer Science using this account.

2. later on, I created the other account 'CaiShaofeng' using my institutional email and my real name as the ID, mainly for accountability and transparency.

3. the IDs of the two accounts ('solopku' and 'CaiShaofeng'), the first returned items if searching them in Google, point to the same Person.

4. I did not intend to use alternative accounts to mislead, deceive, disrupt or undermine consensusl (you must know that there are much 'clever' ways malicious users use to achieve so, if really intended to)

5. I did edit the same page using the two accounts, but only occasionally, and mainly for technical reasons, e.g., 1. to keep the editing contents in the sandbox while working on a new topic (e.g., see the BlockBench page's early history - 30 Nov 2025, 2 Dec 2025, 1 Feb 2026), 2. to edit meanwhile being able to view the effects from another account perspective, 3. to check what's going on for the account in use.

6. all other affected accounts are not mine. I know some of them are from my friends in the same department, e.g., Ho Nhut Minh (an ID with real name, real person). Can check the login history, IPs etc to verify.

COI:

1. BlockBench: I started edited this page for introducing this framework for benchmarking blockchain systems (1 Feb 2026). As my friend Ho Nhut Minh is an expert in blockchain, I later on invited him to edit as as to share his knowledge about this framework (23 Mar 2026). We are not authors/developers of this framework.

2. Learnable function: This is a general CS concept.

I drafted this page on 30 Nov 2025, and it's published on the same day (30 Nov 2025). Later on, as one of my recent research work is 'related' to this concept, so I added a short description in the 'History and Development' section to introduce the latest example of this concept ('A prominent example is ...') to this page on 31 Mar 2026. At that time, I did not fully understand the COI policy. If this is not appropriate, can just remove this description, or delete the whole page if necessary.

I was here mainly to share knowledge not currently included in wikipedia, as there were not related pages when I searched those keywords, definitely not to promote/bublicize/advertise any of my works (all of them have ben peer-reviewed by professional reviewers in the same field, and published in top venues).

3. NeruDB: My another friend Zhanhaozhao started editing this page a while ago (can check the edit history).

On 6/7 Apr 2026, he said his editing encountered 'reliable sources' issue and asked me on how to address it. Based on my past editing experience, I thought this could be addressed by citing related and published papers.

To save time, I asked him for the draft link, and then edited and published it (all these are transparenet, with real names+timestamps on each edit). We were simply collaborting to refine/polish the page for a higher quality and credibility, as researchers always do in resaerch. Again, at that time, we did not fully understand the editing/reviewing/discussion process and especially the COI/multi-account policies of wikipedia. If this is not appropriate/supported/allowed, I will no longer edit it.

4. Other edits/pages: those are general CS concepts/techniques/algorithms/systems, I have not COI.

Hope the above clariy the issues and misunderstanding. Btw, feel free to keep the way it is, as I don't have much time/interest/willingness to continue editing in wikipedia. Thank you and have a nice day.

Solopku (talk) 06:05, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been pending for more than two weeks with no response to questions raised during that time. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially address these questions.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information.

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.

What is your relationship to the other accounts mentioned at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Solopku/Archive. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:04, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Apologies, past me somehow missed that question is already answered in point 6 of the actual request. Sorry for wasting your time. Next up is Checkuser needed to see if that explanation is consistent with the technical data. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:14, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I can answer that without further checks: yes, the explanation is consistent with the technical data. But the reason I chose to block rather than warn was that the COI editing goes a bit further than Solopku acknowledges above. Based wholly on usernames disclosed on-wiki and the information above, it's fairly clear that there were multiple being operated by the same person to write about their colleagues' work and their own (or at least, citing their own). And the edits included ones that look like attempts to avoid scrutiny - moving drafts to mainspace with other accounts, for instance. I wouldn't oppose the unblock outright but I suggest that there be a formal prohibition on writing about their own work, and a one-account restriction. Vanamonde93 (talk) 04:02, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Solopku, is there anything else you'd like to edit about other than your own work? voorts (talk/contributions) 02:36, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles