User talk:Lauravictoriaj

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edits you made to Nemesysco, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.

A couple points to keep in mind:

Wikipedia operates on consensus. The Nemesysco article is the product of extensive debate. If your changes to it have been reverted, you should come to the talk page to discuss them so we can figure out whether and how to incorporate them.
Information you add to the Nemesysco page and any other should include references to reliable source.
The Nemesysco page is closely monitored for alterations to its consensus-driven changes, and each edit to the Nemesysco page pushes it further up in Google's search algorithms.

2600:1702:16E1:68E0:6DFD:4FEB:1230:9CD1 (talk) 17:26, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing on Nemesysco

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Nemesysco. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. In particular, please review the Wikipedia guidelines for ensuring that all new material is cited to a reliable source. Thanks! 96.11.238.86 (talk) 17:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing on Nemesysco

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Nemesysco. Please stop adding uncited material. 98.160.76.178 (talk) 23:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jean Baptiste Fort

The article Jean Baptiste Fort has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks notability. Borderline speedy deletion (for promotional language and for lack of notability), but in any case I can find no evidence that he is actually a notable photographer (minor, passing mentions) or entrepreneur (nothing at all about him).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 12:43, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nikol Algerdos Kovalchuk (March 13)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:

Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO) but presently it is not clear that it does.

As you may know, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. Please note that many of the references are not from sources that are considered reliable for establishing notability and should be removed (including blogs, company websites, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, Spotify etc). Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a CV, which Wikipedia is not; and contains prose that is not of a standard appropriate for an encyclopaedia (also see WP:PEACOCK). Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being the subject (see WP:AUTOBIO) or being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject. It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:ANYBIO criteria #3, because XXXXX").

Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess.

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:Nikol Algerdos Kovalchuk 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.

Cabrils (talk) 00:22, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lauravictoriaj! 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! Cabrils (talk) 00:22, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest Disclosure: Nikol Algerdos Kovalchuk

This user has publicly declared that they have a conflict of interest regarding the Wikipedia article Nikol Algerdos Kovalchuk.

COI Disclosure

I am disclosing a connection to the subject of Draft:Nikol_Algerdos_Kovalchuk. I have known Nikol personally for years and currently work as a freelance contributor for a PR agency she has contracted (Uprising Productions). I am **not being paid** to write or edit her Wikipedia page, but I recognize that my personal and professional connection may represent a **conflict of interest** under Wikipedia guidelines. I understand Wikipedia’s guidelines for editors with a conflict of interest and am aiming to contribute neutral, well-sourced content that meets Wikipedia's notability and sourcing standards. I will not edit the article directly once it's published in mainspace and will use the Talk page to suggest changes going forward. Lauravictoriaj (talk) 08:46, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nikol Algerdos Kovalchuk (June 2)

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:Nikol Algerdos Kovalchuk 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.

ToadetteEdit (talk) 06:21, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Nikol Algerdos Kovalchuk has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Nikol Algerdos Kovalchuk. Thanks! Cabrils (talk) 07:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]