User talk:Nicoledonawho

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

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Historians at the Movies (HATM) (December 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

Draft:Historians at the Movies (HATM) may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Quantum^Realm (meow🦁 • pawtrack🐾) 21:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm confused as to which part is flagged as copyrighted? I've cited all of the parts that are quoted from news articles. Is that not allowed at all, even if cited? Nicoledonawho (talk) 22:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nicoledonawho! 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! Quantum^Realm (meow🦁 • pawtrack🐾) 21:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Historians at the Movies (December 7)

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

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:NORG - blogsites, X (formerly Twitter) and podcasts are not acceptable or reliable sources, for the purposes of establishing notability.

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:Historians at the Movies 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 01:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also included links from the American Historical Association and the Chronicle of Higher Education. Are these not sufficient? What is the numerical threshold someone has to meet for citations? Nicoledonawho (talk) 01:41, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Nicoledonawho. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:Historians at the Movies, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted.

Having a COI does not preclude you from continuing to work on and submitting the draft, in fact I encourage to do so, but if you are affiliated, you do need to make the appropriate declaration as instructed above. No need for details about how/why or revealing any personal information. If you have questions or need help, you can ask at the Teahouse. I will also keep an eye on your talk page for the next day to two in case you post something here. S0091 (talk) 18:42, 15 December 2023 (UTC) S0091 (talk) 18:42, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

I was a co-guest host on one podcast episode of the HATM podcast nearly a year ago. Other than that, I'm a professional historian with a very good sense of objectivity. I don't have any other "conflict of interest" that would impact this article. 2600:1702:5220:FB10:8DCE:E96D:623F:A2FD (talk) 18:50, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You do have a conflict of interest if you hosted the podcast so please make the declaration on your User page. It's simple; just copy and paste {{UserboxCOI|Historians at the Movies}} to User:Nicoledonawho, then click publish. I also encourage you to log-in because IP addresses can reveal personal data and can make communication difficult. S0091 (talk) 19:07, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Primary/Secondary Source

I keep getting messages that say the articles I'm using are "primary sources." But as a professional historian, I think y'all are either confused about what a primary source is, or making up your own definition of a primary source that makes entirely zero sense. I've got articles written by the New York Times, the New Yorker, the American Historical Association, and the Chronicle of Higher Education - none of which were written by Mr. Herbert. If you're going to discount a source as secondary because it was about someone, then you're doing a significant amount to diminish the agency of the person who wrote it and the editors who approved it. Nicoledonawho (talk) 19:14, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look at the draft tomorrow unless another reviewer picks it up before I do but note primary sources also includes interviews/comments from those affiliated. Please do read primary including the notes along with independent and you may find this essay about interviews helpful. Again, it is not that they can't be used and sometimes are the best sources but care is required and they don't contribute to notability. In order for a source to contribute to notability, it needs to meet all four criteria: reliable, secondary, independent and cover the topic directly and in-depth (meaning at least a couple paragraphs or so of independent coverage, not what those affiliated say or have written). In the interim, please be sure all statements are directly cited to a reliable source so when someone reads a sentence or paragraph, the cited sources support the content. Also, are there any secondary sources that have written about the podcast? A Twitter post is not sufficient (see WP:SOCIALMEDIA). (I know, lots of links to lots of Wikipedia stuff but honestly reading through them is pretty much a requirement to understanding Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and norms). S0091 (talk) 21:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Historians at the Movies

Hello, Nicoledonawho. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Historians at the Movies, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Historians at the Movies

Hello, Nicoledonawho. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Historians at the Movies".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]