User talk:Nicmart

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Nicmart. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abraham Perry

Thank you for your efforts in creating the article for Abraham Perry, someone I knew next to nothing about. I added an infobox and a bit more information but will try to find more. Stretchrunner (talk) 14:35, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I hope you and others can provide more detail. Nicmart (talk) 17:34, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Robert Christgau shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dan56 (talk) 20:49, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I DID provide a source; what do you call this???. And I have opened this talk page post. So go there; don't click that "undo" button (WP:BRD). Dan56 (talk) 20:56, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I even included the relevant quotation in the citation: "Hailed by many as the dean of American rock criticism..." (Cleo Simon, The Boston Globe) Your reverting and removing are baffling. Dan56 (talk) 21:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you see this clear enough? Dan56 (talk) 21:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

"Christgau, who’s often referred to as the Dean of American rock critics." (Claiborne Smith, Kirkus Reviews)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jimmy Rushing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Billy King (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:27, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Mitrione

I have done some editing on the Dan Mitrione article, which you commented on many years ago. If you have any new information or comments, I would be interested in reading them on the article's talk page. Rgr09 (talk) 05:24, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Stephen Barrett for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. --Ronz (talk) 15:44, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You misrepresent what I posted. I pointed to very relevant evidence about Barrett’s credibility, or lack thereof. You may not like it on other grounds, but it had nothing to do with chatting. Nicmart (talk) 00:59, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Putting it another way, it was a violation of our WP:BLP policy which also applies to talk pages. Doug Weller talk 17:06, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marion Elizabeth Rodgers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Blade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alerts, please read

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in pseudoscience and fringe science. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 17:04, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Hayton (industrialist) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Philip Hayton (industrialist), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Praxidicae (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Westcotec moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Westcotec, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Praxidicae (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

Hello Nicmart. 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, 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:Nicmart. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Nicmart|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. Praxidicae (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is outrageous and false. I have no relationship at all with Westcotec. All of the sources were entirely objective, and I also created a linked page about the founder which describes his criminal record. How dare you make such an unsupported and unsupportable accusation. Nicmart (talk) 21:38, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, to be clear, I have never had any relationship with Westcotec. You owe me an apology and the page should be restored. Nicmart (talk) 21:40, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing in the Westcotec entry I created which expresses any opinion, positive or negative. It is a statement of facts about the history of the company, the products it makes, and its earning. There is zero that "gives the impression" that I am connected in any way to the company — and I am not. You provided no example of anything that I wrote that was not a simple statement of fact about the company, similar to those on thousands of other pages. Why would anyone promoting the company (for any reason) create a page about the founder which described his criminal history? That would be utterly illogical. Nicmart (talk) 21:47, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion of corruption

Praxidicae has suggested, without a hint of evidence or truth, that I have had, do have, or will have, some financial relationship with Westcotec, about which I created an entry. This is outrageous and false, even defamatory. At no time have I had ANY relationship with the company, nor will I, and I certainly won't be paid for the entry. What I wrote is void of POV and simple statements of facts about the history, finances, and products of a highly visible though fairly small British company. If I were promoting the company, why would I also create a linked entry about the founder which describes his serious criminal record? Praxidicae has also moved that entry to draft on dubious grounds

It's definitely worth noting that the founder has gone to great lengths in other contexts to keep his criminal record out of the public eye, and that may explain what is happening here. If anyone has an unstated motive, it isn't me. Nicmart (talk) 22:34, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Westcotec

Hello, Nicmart. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Westcotec".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 07:05, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abraham Perry.jpeg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Abraham Perry.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ✗plicit 01:33, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Air fryer merge?

You previously discussed this issue, so please weigh in here if you care. — AjaxSmack 14:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]