User talk:AWiseWoman22

Welcome!

Hello, AWiseWoman22, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising. For more information on this, please see:

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page and how to develop articles
Help pages
Tutorials
Article wizard for creating new articles
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! bonadea contributions talk 14:18, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Lovable Curves

A tag has been placed on Draft:Lovable Curves, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It is an "attack page" or an unsourced biography of a living person that is entirely negative in tone. (See section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)
Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity, or articles about living people that are entirely negative and unsourced. Attack pages, attack files and negative unreferenced BLPs are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing
It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. bonadea contributions talk 10:41, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This page was not meant to attack anyone or be promotional. Majority of it is factual and proof by citations and links was given. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 03:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you when you say that you did not intend to attack anybody, nor to be promotional. Unfortunately, the draft you created about an individual contained severely negative claims about her relatives which amounted to attacks on those people. I removed those parts and referred you to Wikipedia's policy for biographies about living persons, and I also removed some (not all) of the promotional content, referring you to "Wikipedia is not a means of promotion" and pointed out that there is really no part of the text that is written from a neutral point of view. At that point, you seemed to understand and accept that, but a week later you restored all the removed content. When I looked at it again, I saw that the negative material about non-notable family members was actually too severe to be kept even in the draft's history, and so I tagged it for deletion for that reason and for the purely promotional tone of the rest of the text. The administrator who reviewed the deletion tag clearly agreed with me, since he did delete the draft page.

In reply to your message on my user talk page earlier today, being popular on social media is not a notability criterion in English Wikipedia, nor does being an author, a musician, or a public speaker automatically make a person notable. "Notability" means something very specific here. As I mentioned to you before, these criteria determine if a living person is notable; a musician may also be notable if they meet these criteria, and an author if they meet these criteria. But they all boil down to essentially the same thing: the person must already have been "noted" by people who are completely unconnected to them, and there must be significant coverage of the person in reliable, independent, secondary sources. As I recall, there were no such sources in the draft. An interview is never secondary, and if you interview a person yourself you cannot use a single word of that unless it has also been published in an independent reliable source. In addition, even if a person is notable, an article about them must be written from a neutral point of view. Please take a bit of time to follow the blue links in this post as well as in other informational posts on this page, and read the policies and guidelines. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:45, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just want a copy for my personal records I need a copy of it AWiseWoman22 (talk) 05:22, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review?

Hello, I believe you should address your concerns with a speedy deletion to WP:Deletion review. Arbitration is for complex disputes over user conduct. Deletion review is the best place to get a second look at something that was deleted when you don't understand why or believe it to have been inappropriate. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 02:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I attempted to do this and the option was not available as it was already deleted before I had time to edit. I had personal things this past week and the page and my work here is work in progress - deleting work in progress is harsh and unreasonable

I did put in a request for deletion review the deletion was so fast I did not have a chance to contest. This is factual information from reliable source and I cited many things and linked to show proof of fact, no for promotion. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 03:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Contesting a speedy deletion and deletion review are different processes. Please click the link and follow the process listed at the deletion review page to protest the speedy deletion that's already been done. Contesting is done before the page is deleted, deletion review happens afterwards, and appears to be what's most appropriate here. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 06:32, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just need a copy of it - I don’t want it restored I need a copy of my work. That’s my copyright I own it and I want it back. Where do I send a lawsuit to Wikipedia? AWiseWoman22 (talk) 05:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request for arbitration declined as premature

In response to your request for arbitration, the Arbitration Committee has agreed that arbitration is not required at this stage. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.

Grievances about the actions of an administrator (like their decision to block an editor, or protect or delete a page) should also be approached in the first instance on the administrator's talk page, but administrators are expected to be accountable and you can ask on the administrators' incidents noticeboard for the action to be reviewed. In the case of deletions by deletion discussion, you can also open a deletion review.

In all cases, you should review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact me or a member of the community if you have more questions. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 09:38, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, most administrators will take around a day to respond to things posted on their talk page especially when they live in a different part of the world due to timezone differences. When asking for the administrator who performed the action to reconsider their action you should give them at least a day to respond. In this case the administrator, Jimfbleak, has not made any edits since the 7th of October so it's likely they are taking a bit of a break so won't have seen your message. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 09:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least I would like a copy of the deleted pages with hyperlinks. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 13:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also tried to open deletion review and requested copies of my work and have not assisted. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 13:49, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lovable Curves

Hey, AWW22! Creating an article for Wikipedia from scratch is really difficult -- it requires an understanding of multiple policies, including those at wp:reliable sources, wp:significant coverage, and in this case, wp:biographies of living persons.

I looked at the draft, and in addition to the problems noted above -- the unsourced content including negative content about living people, the promotional tone -- from a quick look, most of the sourcing doesn't meet our standards. You can read more about those standards at the links above. You can also find good information at wp:Your first article.

Please don't leave requests for help in multiple places. It means multiple people may end up wasting time trying to provide assistance someone else is already working on. We're all volunteers here, so we take wasted time pretty seriously. Valereee (talk) 11:46, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I need a copy of it. I need a copy of my work, where can I send a letter of demand before filing a lawsuit ? AWiseWoman22 (talk) 05:23, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be a legal threat, which is an immediately blockable offense. Please retract that immediately. It appears I've already addressed this request in the section immediately below. Here for the second time is the link: User:AWiseWoman22/Lovable Curves Valereee (talk) 16:12, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My IP address is blocked on commons

I feel so unwelcomed but the Wikipedia community especially when I feel I am making a great honest effort and mean no harm. If I seem defensive it’s because I feel attacked, hurt and offended. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 13:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, AWW22. I'm sorry you're feeling that way. As I said above, creating an article from scratch is hard, and for people who've not done much editing already, it can be extremely frustrating as we have many policies governing the creation of articles. Have you read the links we've provided? Valereee (talk) 14:23, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I have read through them. I still think the article deserves to be salvaged and just edited down for whatever content they felt was negative or promotional. It wasn’t intended and I still do not understand how it comes off that way. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 14:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Plus if I can’t get my first tiktokker article done correctly then I won’t be able to continue my mission of adding TikTokkers to Wikipedia. I need to get this one right. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 14:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if I were you and I wanted to get my first article right, I'd find an actually-notable TikToker to start with, as this one isn't yet. I googled her. There's nothing.

I've edited out the defamatory content and restored the draft to User:AWiseWoman22/Lovable Curves. Do not add back in the defamatory content; that will absolutely be considered disruptive. You'll have to find significant coverage in reliable, independent sources; none of the sources you've got right now are usable for showing LC is notable. If you move it to article space before you fixed that, it will simply be deleted again. You'll also have to remove all the promotional content, ditto. If the article has to be deleted again, it's quite likely to be permanent, so don't take any chances. Consider asking someone at WP:Teahouse (where new users can ask for help) to take a look at it before you try moving it to article space. Valereee (talk) 14:39, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! AWiseWoman22, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. The Teahouse is an awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us!

Valereee (talk) 14:45, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies

When you write about a person, you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.
You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.
There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:17, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Valereee (talk) 16:21, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: I've already addressed your request; the copy of your work is at User:AWiseWoman22/Lovable Curves where I placed it six weeks ago, as I said at that time in a section above. Valereee (talk) 16:24, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]