Your works aren't bad. You'll quickly learn that asking for input like this on the internet isn't a great idea, as a lot of people can't really discern between alright, good, great, masterful, etc. There's either good or bad. I've seen this work to some artists' advantage, where they're pretty successful on social media, despite not really being that great. It turns out that the average person isn't that discerning. It's helpful to get your work from being bad to good, but since your work is already passable, it gets harder. Also, keep in mind that a lot of people's idea of good art is based on whether or not they think they could have created that same thing. You must be careful not to listen to such people.

Anyways, you're not crazy to think that your work could be coming up to a higher level. The good news is that the fact you can even detect that possibility usually means you have the capability of getting there. You can look at some of Jean Giraud (Moebius) abstract works for reference of how this sort of thing is done in a cleaner more orderly style. And of course Basquiat would be a good reference if you want to lean into the dirtier chaotic style. But regardless of direction, we can make some observations:

1. Your lines could be more confident, you are "petting" them too much still in some places. Notice the confident, steady lines that only waver or change convexity/concavity intentionally here: https://pin.it/58POenjTv . Even Basquiat, which you might expect to do otherwise, take a look: https://pin.it/4OWMkZcm6 Really every line in there is confident and decisive. Even the scribbles are tightly confined to their intentional regions.

2. You would benefit immensely from a better ability to draw in perspective, with dimension, etc. The lines and spiderwebs on the second to last piece, for example, only roughly match the implied 3D form, so it ends up looking sketchy. Basquiat is more pictographic, iconic, and thus can tolerate a more 2D and perspectiveless approach. This is made workable by avoiding patterns that we would expect to conform to perspective (like your grids, stripes, webs, etc) and mostly sticking with block color and symbols (think the famous crown, stars, etc.), and if there are patterns, we see them from straight-ahead views. https://pin.it/17eJNORyh Moebius has deep mastery of perspective from drawing traditional comic strips, and therefore his style can lean into that with highlights and stripes in physically correct places. https://pin.it/5mdD43Z5e You could go in either direction or some mixture of both, just make sure you understand what makes each work.

3. It may be worth trying a workflow where you do the initial sketch in a very light pencil to explore and find your forms, and then confidently ink in the final lines, scribbles, crosshatching, etc. This would probably help give you better composition too, while also helping with the previous improvements.

In general, you ought to look around for artists whose work you really like - They don't even need to look like your work, but maybe it just has something particular about it that you like, like the line control or the shading or even just the conceptual content of what is being depicted. Then you want to play a compare and contrast game between your art and theirs and see what parts can you borrow or learn from that aren't being used in your work. Then you try that out in a piece and if you find that it doesn't fit or you don't like it then you can always try something else. But you will learn from it either way!