User talk:Nicky3331

Shoot to Marry

Please note that Wikipedia does not write film articles by separating "positive critical response" and "negative critical response" into distinct "Response" and "Critical response" sections — "critical response" as a Wikipedia headline means response from film critics, and has nothing to do with whether they responded positively or negatively: it means "critical as in by professional critics", not "critical as in negativity". So the format is "all response from film critics goes under 'Critical response'", not "only negative reviews go under 'Critical response' while positive ones get segregated under a different section header".

And also, we don't just indiscriminately quote every film review we can find on the web, to the point that the film reviews are literally taking up five or six times as much space as all the rest of the entire article combined — we only care about reviews that appeared in real established media of record (i.e. daily newspapers and magazines), not reviews that appeared on WordPress or Squarespace blogs. And even then, we still only need a few representative samples, and don't want to comprehensively shoehorn quote after quote from every film reviewer who ever saw the film at all into the article. There is such a thing as going overboard, and we don't want to do it. Bearcat (talk) 13:28, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks well noted. Nicky3331 (talk) 12:50, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pierre Mantha

The article Pierre Mantha has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Successful, but not notable. Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:37, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Hello Nicky3331. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to ShariaPortfolio, 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:Nicky3331. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Nicky3331|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. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:28, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ShariaPortfolio moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, ShariaPortfolio, 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines.

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 ~~~~}}. MER-C 11:33, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:ShariaPortfolio

Hello, Nicky3331. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:ShariaPortfolio, 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) 12:02, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]