User talk:DoctorMegan

DoctorMegan, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi DoctorMegan! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

December 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to List of Ghost Hunters episodes, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Do not vandalise sourced information. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 04:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ghost Hunters (TV series). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. The information you are oossible editing out of a conflict of interest is sourced. Get familiar with how Wikipedia works at Wikipedia:MOS and Wikipedia:Sourcing. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 04:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As I have mentioned in other posts - my changes can be sourced and the data listed is incorrect. --DoctorMegan (talk) 18:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest editing.

It is my suspicion that you are using your editing privileges unethically and have a conflict of interest related to Nicholas Caprio and his production of Ghost Hunters (TV series) with Pilgrim Studios. Please read over Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. By the same token, Please do not vandalise sourced information, that is clearly sourced. This can get you blocked from editing. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 04:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your suspicion is unfounded and I take exception to the use of the word unethically, every change I made could be backed up with source material. And I may remind you that correlation does not imply causation. Nonetheless, as I said, my edits can be backed up.--DoctorMegan (talk) 18:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nicholas Caprio for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nicholas Caprio, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas Caprio until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nicholas Caprio (February 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by BuySomeApples 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nicholas Caprio 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:Nicholas Caprio, 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.

BuySomeApples (talk) 06:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]