User talk:SteppeEditor76

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, SteppeEditor76!

I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help. Has a list of maintenance tasks you can do.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, MCE89 (talk) 11:21, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello SteppeEditor76! While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's eligibility.
Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § Licensing.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. MCE89 (talk) 11:21, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:53, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

January 2026

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you recently created, Draft:The OSCE Academy, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it has been moved to where you can continue to work on it. Please consider using the Article Wizard or the Articles for Creation procedure. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read "Your first article". You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. MightyRanger (talk) 19:49, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The OSCE Academy (January 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Hurricane Wind and Fire was:

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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The only provided source is not independent of the subject.

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 it after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The OSCE Academy 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.

🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 19:59, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, SteppeEditor76! 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! 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 19:59, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Foreign policy

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Foreign policy, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 10:02, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Political feasibility analysis

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Political feasibility analysis, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 10:06, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Climate Policy Initiative

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Climate Policy Initiative, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 10:11, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on World Trade Organization

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page World Trade Organization, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 10:31, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on World Trade Organization

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page World Trade Organization, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 12:23, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Please don't mark major edits as minor edits

Hi SteppeEditor76! I noticed that you recently made an edit at Gender inequality and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. ParticipantObserver (talk) 17:12, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Energy transition

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Energy transition, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:46, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Politics of climate change

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Politics of climate change, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:58, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

March 2026

Hello, I'm Fountains of Bryn Mawr. I wanted to let you know that one or more citations you added have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Take a look at our guidelines about citation spamming. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:09, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Newslinger talk 14:49, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

To clarify, you have been blocked for your persistent citation spamming of works by Indra Overland, as described in the spam report. — Newslinger talk 14:49, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

SteppeEditor76 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

Request reason:

The following request was written through the unblock wizard.

Can you explain, in your own words, why your edits were promotional?

I understand that my edits may have been perceived as promotional because I focused heavily on a specific topic and relied repeatedly on a limited set of sources, which could have given undue weight to certain perspectives. My intention was not to promote any individual, organization, or viewpoint, but to contribute as a researcher in climate and energy using peer-reviewed academic literature and reputable journals. However, I recognize that this approach may not have sufficiently reflected Wikipedia’s expectations for neutrality, balance, and diversity of sources. Going forward, I will ensure a broader range of independent sources, present multiple viewpoints more clearly, and adhere more strictly to Wikipedia’s neutral point of view and sourcing guidelines.

What is your relationship with the subjects you have been editing about?

I am a energy and climate researcher; and I am interested in climate advocacy, climate change and energy security and democracy topics

If you are unblocked, what topic areas will you edit in?

I will edit more wikipedia suggested topics and pages; also if unblocked, I plan to continue editing in topic areas related to climate change, energy systems, and environmental policy, where I have academic background and familiarity with the literature. I will focus on making balanced, well-sourced contributions using a diverse range of independent, reliable sources, and ensure that all edits follow Wikipedia’s neutral point of view and verifiability guidelines. I will also be more cautious about my editing patterns, contribute to a wider range of articles where appropriate, and use talk pages to discuss substantial changes before making them.

Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?

I am committed to contributing in line with Wikipedia’s policies. I have experience using academic sources and aim to make well-referenced, high-quality edits, while ensuring neutrality, balance, and a diversity of sources.

SteppeEditor76 (talk) 12:03, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=<small>The following request was written through the [[Wikipedia:Unblock wizard|unblock wizard]].</small><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''Can you explain, in your own words, why your edits were promotional?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I understand that my edits may have been perceived as promotional because I focused heavily on a specific topic and relied repeatedly on a limited set of sources, which could have given undue weight to certain perspectives. My intention was not to promote any individual, organization, or viewpoint, but to contribute as a researcher in climate and energy using peer-reviewed academic literature and reputable journals. However, I recognize that this approach may not have sufficiently reflected Wikipedia’s expectations for neutrality, balance, and diversity of sources. Going forward, I will ensure a broader range of independent sources, present multiple viewpoints more clearly, and adhere more strictly to Wikipedia’s neutral point of view and sourcing guidelines.<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''What is your relationship with the subjects you have been editing about?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I am a energy and climate researcher; and I am interested in climate advocacy, climate change and energy security and democracy topics<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''If you are unblocked, what topic areas will you edit in?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I will edit more wikipedia suggested topics and pages; also if unblocked, I plan to continue editing in topic areas related to climate change, energy systems, and environmental policy, where I have academic background and familiarity with the literature. I will focus on making balanced, well-sourced contributions using a diverse range of independent, reliable sources, and ensure that all edits follow Wikipedia’s neutral point of view and verifiability guidelines. I will also be more cautious about my editing patterns, contribute to a wider range of articles where appropriate, and use talk pages to discuss substantial changes before making them.<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I am committed to contributing in line with Wikipedia’s policies. I have experience using academic sources and aim to make well-referenced, high-quality edits, while ensuring neutrality, balance, and a diversity of sources.<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
 [[User:SteppeEditor76|SteppeEditor76]] ([[User talk:SteppeEditor76#top|talk]]) 12:03, 20 March 2026 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=<small>The following request was written through the [[Wikipedia:Unblock wizard|unblock wizard]].</small><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''Can you explain, in your own words, why your edits were promotional?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I understand that my edits may have been perceived as promotional because I focused heavily on a specific topic and relied repeatedly on a limited set of sources, which could have given undue weight to certain perspectives. My intention was not to promote any individual, organization, or viewpoint, but to contribute as a researcher in climate and energy using peer-reviewed academic literature and reputable journals. However, I recognize that this approach may not have sufficiently reflected Wikipedia’s expectations for neutrality, balance, and diversity of sources. Going forward, I will ensure a broader range of independent sources, present multiple viewpoints more clearly, and adhere more strictly to Wikipedia’s neutral point of view and sourcing guidelines.<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''What is your relationship with the subjects you have been editing about?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I am a energy and climate researcher; and I am interested in climate advocacy, climate change and energy security and democracy topics<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''If you are unblocked, what topic areas will you edit in?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I will edit more wikipedia suggested topics and pages; also if unblocked, I plan to continue editing in topic areas related to climate change, energy systems, and environmental policy, where I have academic background and familiarity with the literature. I will focus on making balanced, well-sourced contributions using a diverse range of independent, reliable sources, and ensure that all edits follow Wikipedia’s neutral point of view and verifiability guidelines. I will also be more cautious about my editing patterns, contribute to a wider range of articles where appropriate, and use talk pages to discuss substantial changes before making them.<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I am committed to contributing in line with Wikipedia’s policies. I have experience using academic sources and aim to make well-referenced, high-quality edits, while ensuring neutrality, balance, and a diversity of sources.<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
 [[User:SteppeEditor76|SteppeEditor76]] ([[User talk:SteppeEditor76#top|talk]]) 12:03, 20 March 2026 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=<small>The following request was written through the [[Wikipedia:Unblock wizard|unblock wizard]].</small><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''Can you explain, in your own words, why your edits were promotional?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I understand that my edits may have been perceived as promotional because I focused heavily on a specific topic and relied repeatedly on a limited set of sources, which could have given undue weight to certain perspectives. My intention was not to promote any individual, organization, or viewpoint, but to contribute as a researcher in climate and energy using peer-reviewed academic literature and reputable journals. However, I recognize that this approach may not have sufficiently reflected Wikipedia’s expectations for neutrality, balance, and diversity of sources. Going forward, I will ensure a broader range of independent sources, present multiple viewpoints more clearly, and adhere more strictly to Wikipedia’s neutral point of view and sourcing guidelines.<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''What is your relationship with the subjects you have been editing about?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I am a energy and climate researcher; and I am interested in climate advocacy, climate change and energy security and democracy topics<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''If you are unblocked, what topic areas will you edit in?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I will edit more wikipedia suggested topics and pages; also if unblocked, I plan to continue editing in topic areas related to climate change, energy systems, and environmental policy, where I have academic background and familiarity with the literature. I will focus on making balanced, well-sourced contributions using a diverse range of independent, reliable sources, and ensure that all edits follow Wikipedia’s neutral point of view and verifiability guidelines. I will also be more cautious about my editing patterns, contribute to a wider range of articles where appropriate, and use talk pages to discuss substantial changes before making them.<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
'''''Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?'''''<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
I am committed to contributing in line with Wikipedia’s policies. I have experience using academic sources and aim to make well-referenced, high-quality edits, while ensuring neutrality, balance, and a diversity of sources.<div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div>
 [[User:SteppeEditor76|SteppeEditor76]] ([[User talk:SteppeEditor76#top|talk]]) 12:03, 20 March 2026 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

I think you used the wrong template, as your username is not at issue, so I put the right one. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Are you associated with the works or researchers you edited about? 331dot (talk) 09:54, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

No I am not associated with, connected with and don't know the authors personally. However, I think they do interesting research which I have used in my own work and that is why I ended up citing them a lot. I now understand that this was not right and will not do it in the future. SteppeEditor76 (talk) 12:48, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles