User talk:QuincyQueenOfDenmark

Hello QuincyQueenOfDenmark. The nature of your edits 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:QuincyQueenOfDenmark. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=QuincyQueenOfDenmark|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. Theroadislong (talk) 15:46, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not sure if I am doing this correctly or if you will receive this? I hope so. Thank you for your help. I am not paid by said artist for starting a WIKI page. This is not my job and I have never attempted a WIKI page before. I am a little confused by it all to be honest.

You said here [1]] that you were working with Holly Macve. Theroadislong (talk) 15:55, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is your Talk page

Other editors can leave comments for you here. You can reply on your Talk page or on their Talk page. Your Teahouse comment was "work with." It appears you did not mean the literal definition of work, i.e., paid or otherwise compensated. That still means you have a conflict of interest. (see WP:COI). This does not preclude you creating a draft, but you are asked to state on your User page the nature of your connection to the topic of the draft. David notMD (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC) David notMD[reply]

David - can you tell me how I declare a connection with my chosen subject on my page so that I can press ahead with getting my article accepted? I have some edits to make yet and some new citations to include - but obviously I need to declare the fact that although I am not getting paid I am doing this as a favor. I'm sorry I'm asking things that are probably perfectly obvious to you, but I havent used this platform before - so any help is gratefully received. Thanks

Your statement on your User page is sufficient to declare your COI. Given that, you can continue to edit the draft, and then submit. David notMD (talk) 11:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff to work on

Early life is a too-close paraphrase to the reference, hence my comment. If you revise it, I will remove the comment.
If you yourself did not take the photo, remove it for now, as its copyright is being disputed
Holly's website cannot be used as a reference. It can be an External link
This may be WP:TOOSOON in her career to warrant an article. But do the best you can and submit Draft:Holly Macve. Be aware that there is a backlog of >5,000 drafts and the system is not a queue. That means a review could happen in days, weeks, or (sadly) months. David notMD (talk) 11:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

David - I'm not entirely sure how to reply to you - but thank you - brilliant advice and help. I am trying to find out who owns the copyright of the picture to ask permission of use. It was available on the WIKI (image?) page so assumed it was one of theirs and would be approved. Otherwise I would prefer to upload another one - but wasnt sure how to do this. On I go... (please keep advising - I need to learn!)

You identified the photo as your own work. If not, getting permission is complicated. There are other photos (not nearly as good in my opinion) at Wikimedia Commons that have been released for general use. My advice is delete the photo for now, then only if you can get the draft approved, add a photo. This will be easiest if you have a photo you took. I did that for several articles. P.S. Wikipedia style is to use colons to indent responses. And remember to 'sign' your comments, even on your own Talk page. David notMD (talk) 14:02, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Having or not having a photo does not affect a reviewer's decision. But having a photo that might be a copyright infringement can. David notMD (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Patience

Now that it is submitted to AfC, can be days, weeks, or (sadly) months before a reviewer picks it of the pile of 5,000+ drafts waiting for a review. Meanwhile, if you think it can be improved, do so. David notMD (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has an unreferenced quote from Bob B. All quotes need refs. David notMD (talk) 10:55, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Holly Macve has been accepted

Holly Macve, 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!

– bradv^🍁 02:55, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]