User talk:Nick.lucchesi

Welcome!

Hello, Nick.lucchesi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Linkspamming

Hi there. I wanted to ask if you please stop spamming external links to Riverfront Times. It seems like all your edits are solely to add links to this site and such continuous editing seems to be promotional linkspamming. WP:SPAM. Canterbury Tail talk 22:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. contributing to public knowledge through current journalism is not spam. please re-add those links. -Nick

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --John (talk) 19:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

john, linking to further articles documenting events related to the topic at hand is not considered spam. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick.lucchesi (talk • contribs) 20:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you read WP:EL. --John (talk) 20:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from all of Wikipedia. --neonwhite user page talk 20:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Themfromspace (talk) 08:02, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've already left a message on your talk page on Commons, but I wanted to alert you here as well. Wikimedia needs some confirmation from copyright holder of permission to free license File:June 26.jpg. See linked details of how to take care of that. Thanks. Infrogmation (talk) 13:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for adding spam links. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia and potentially penalized by search engines. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Spam

Currently 586+ spamlinks to Westword. These will be removed and the site blacklisted. 7 02:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

westword.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

These links are not spam under your definitions. Each link contributed directs readers to relevant, useful, pertinent content. Westword is a weekly newspaper based in Denver, Colorado. It is clearly not advertising. I'd advise you to read the content and make an educated decision. If you do not, I will bring it up with those who will. - Nick.lucchesi

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I have been blocked from adding external links to Westword.com because of an allegation of spamming advertising links, when 100 percent of external links I have contributed have been to editorial content, primarily interviews with subjects of which the Wikipedia article is about. There is no advertising component.

Decline reason:

Your entire editing history at Wikipedia seems to consist almost exclusively of adding links to a single blog, which you appear to have a stake in promoting. This is spamming, regardless of your own opinion of the value of the content of this blog, the action of repeatedly adding links to the blog to articles about topics the blog has written about, is what is disruptive. It is not necessarily the content of the blog that makes it spamming, it is YOUR actions in doing nothing but adding it over and over to various article that makes it spamming. Jayron32 06:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

COI

Leaving the unblock request for an uninvolved admin to review. However, your twitter page makes it clear that you have a affiliation with Westword. 7 06:00, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I assure you I "exercise great caution" with every single contribution I make to Wikipedia. I think you'll find it's clear by looking at my contributions. Please reread the [to avoid] section of the COI page.

Best, Nick.lucchesi

Interesting Engineering (website) moved to draftspace

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this draft. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Nick.lucchesi (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection.

An article you recently created, Interesting Engineering (website), is not suitable 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. Lopifalko (talk) 16:45, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! 24.46.212.3 (talk) 16:51, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Interesting Engineering (website) has been accepted

Interesting Engineering (website), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Kirbanzo ^{(talk - contribs)} 22:03, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do note: While the article is passable enough to be accepted, any COI editing related to it will still be scrutinized. Kirbanzo ^{(talk - contribs)} 22:14, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting Engineering

Hi. It's unclear that Interesting Engineering meets our requirements for inclusion here, in particular, our Notability Guideline. Presently, except for the Substack essay, none of the references cited provide "Significant coverage" as defined in our guideline. The Substack essay gives good coverage but probably can't be considered a "Reliable source" per our Reliable Sources Guideline; that's because it's self-published (see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources).

It's possible that a higher notability threshold may apply; see Notability.

Can you find some references that meet notability and reliable source guidelines? Otherwise, at some point this article may be deleted.

Since you have a conflict of interest, it would be best to add them at Talk:Interesting Engineering.

Thanks.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:33, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Interesting Engineering for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Interesting Engineering is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interesting Engineering until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 17:01, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]