User talk:SaraReadsSpecFic

This is SaraReadsSpecFic'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: Angeline Trevena (May 21)

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

tone is totally inappropriate and the public appearances are not required

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Angeline Trevena and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Angeline Trevena, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 14:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SpecFicAuthors! Having an article 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! Theroadislong (talk) 14:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Angeline Trevena (July 6)

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Angeline Trevena and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Angeline Trevena, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 10:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to draft

I moved your article to Draft:Stephanie Ellis. It needs significant cleanup work before it can be in main space. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mandatory paid editing disclosure

Hello SpecFicAuthors. 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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:SpecFicAuthors. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=SpecFicAuthors|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. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:05, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm not paid for making edits. I picked my name as I noticed there was a lot of popular speculative fiction authors out there who weren't getting any attention on wiki even if they were published through multiple outlets big and small so I wanted to help change that. Should I change my name even with that in mind? I'm still new to Wiki so don't know what to do in this case (sorry to be taking your time on this!)

September 2021

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing because of the following problems: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of name and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions other than promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. 331dot (talk) 20:23, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock?

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

Hi there! I read a lot of speculative fiction and was hoping to help authors who have been widely published and aren't properly represented on Wiki. Apparently, I'm writing articles incorrectly and will be researching more on the proper format (even though they appear in line with many fiction authors already on the site.) At this point, until I know what I was doing wrong I will just add updates to existing wikis (such as new books.) I haven't made and was not offered compensation for any articles I've written or edited.

Accept reason:

Based on the discussion below, you are unblocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:01, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to unblock you after your username is changed. Your current username sounds like the name of a specialized PR company.

You aren't writing articles incorrectly, you're doing pretty well, and you are correct to write them in draft space and submit them for review, as long as you're still learning about all the policies and guidelines.

One of the articles you created in main space I put into draft, because the sourcing wasn't good and there was a lot of unnecessary detail.

Please have a look at Wikipedia:Golden rule to get an overview of what we expect. That is, we need significant coverage of the author, not the books. The coverage should be substantive, not brief blurbs or 1-paragraph profiles. We need sources with content that wasn't produced by the author (such as interviews and the authors own writings). You should be able to point to three sources in your reference list that meet the criteria of having significant coverage of the author in a reliable source that is independent of the author. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:26, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, thank you so much! I see what is needed for significant coverage now so will be sure to have at least three like that for any future article submissions. Offhand, after the name change is approved, for adding to bibliographies for existing wikis or misc. items such as birthdates, colleges, where an author lives, etc can I use publisher websites or author interviews as sources? I just want to make sure I'm doing the right thing there. Thanks!SpecFicAuthors (talk) 03:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More or less, although we generally don't report the subject's claims as facts in Wikipedia's voice. Some subjects are dishonest in interviews. It's better to have the reporter state it, even if it's in the reporter's introduction to the interview. Otherwise we would attribute a statement to the author, as in "Smith stated in an interview that he grew up with 7 siblings." ~Anachronist (talk) 03:52, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thank you for the clarification! Now to wait on the name change request above. I do appreciate all of the help here :) I've used Wiki for so long that this has been fun to start actually adding to it in an area that I love! SpecFicAuthors (talk) 14:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all! I'm sorry again for all the time that had to be wasted on this, hopefully it won't ever be an issue again :) SaraReadsSpecFic (talk) 17:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

globally renamed SpecFicAuthors to SaraReadsSpecFic

globally renamed SpecFicAuthors to SaraReadsSpecFic --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:46, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: Any objection to unblocking? Username has changed, the editor has made a statement about not being paid, and seems to know what to do if unblocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:16, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No objection. 331dot (talk) 00:52, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Angeline Trevena

Hello, SaraReadsSpecFic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Angeline Trevena, 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) 04:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Stephanie Ellis

Hello, SaraReadsSpecFic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Stephanie Ellis, 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) 21:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Angeline Trevena

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

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 deleted. If 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Stephanie Ellis

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

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 deleted. If 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:30, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]