User talk:CRostvik

Welcome!

Hey there! Hope you had a good time at the recent Art+Feminism editathon. Now that you've learned the basics, I do encourage you to stay logged in, and have another go at editing. If you don't want to write a new article straight away, then why not try a small edit or two first, add a link, or maybe a picture? Remember that we learned in Visual Editor, but you may want to have a look at Wiki mark up for use on talk pages and other discussion pages.

Wiki is never finished - it's a constantly evolving entity. And there are a huge community of other editors out there who can help.

Here's some links that I hope you'll find useful:

You can find out more about what's happening with Wikimedia in Scotland on the WMUK site here.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. See you soon!Lirazelf (talk) 15:17, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Critical Menstrual Studies (November 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Calliopejen1 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. 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:

Seems too new a field of research to merit its own article (also, most fields of research don't merit their own articles -- the topics researched do). I'd recommend reframing more broadly as an article about the history of "menstruation research" more generally, or adding a section about research on menstruation into the Menstruation article.

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:Critical Menstrual Studies 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:Critical Menstrual Studies, 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.

Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:22, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CRostvik! 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! Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:22, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Critical Menstrual Studies (May 9)

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

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 organizations and companies). 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.

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I agree with the previous reviewer. This is not yet notable. To show it, you will need substantial 3rd party reliable published sources, not press releases or blogs or postings or mere notices , In addition, the list of researchers and organizations must be limited to thse notable enough for articles in WP.

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:Critical Menstrual Studies 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:Critical Menstrual Studies, 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.

DGG ( talk ) 01:24, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Critical Menstrual Studies

Hello, CRostvik. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Critical Menstrual Studies, 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) 23:03, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Critical Menstrual Studies

Hello, CRostvik. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Critical Menstrual Studies".

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!} 06:01, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

COI notice

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions; however, it appears you may have written a Wikipedia article, or a draft for a Wikipedia article, about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Thank you. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 14:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Camilla Mørk Røstvik (October 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 MurielMary 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.

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:Camilla Mørk Røstvik 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.

MurielMary (talk) 06:47, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I notice that your user name is an abbreviation of the name of the subject of the draft article I just declined. Did you write this draft as an autobiography (about yourself?) If so, please read the following page about autobiographies on Wikipedia and declare a conflict of interests: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Autobiography MurielMary (talk) 06:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]