Thank you for your work on
Nicolina Elrick. Not all topics are
notable (suitable for a stand-alone Wikipedia article). The
Nicolina Elrick article does not
cite sources establishing notability, so it may get deleted. A source shows that the article topic is notable when it:
- contains significant coverage: it addresses the topic directly and in multiple paragraphs of detail. A source with only trivial or off-topic mentions of the subject doesn't count.
- is a reliable source: it has a reliable publication process, or a suitable expert author (look up the reliability of common sources, or discuss). Newspapers and books usually meet this criteria, company and personal websites usually do not.
- is independent of the subject: it isn't produced by the article's subject or someone similarly affiliated with it. For example, these are not independent: the subject's press releases, autobiographies, website, and interviews.
If you can find notability-establishing sources, please add them: more than one is needed unless the applicable subject-specific notability guideline states otherwise. Specific questions can be answered live at the Teahouse help forum. Thank you. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Nicolina Elrick moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Nicolina Elrick, 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). It needs real WP:SECONDARY sources for a BLP. I've sent it to draft where you can work on it, but it can't remain in mainsapce. scope_creep Talk 10:10, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the
Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
Thank you for your work on
Nicolina Elrick. Not all topics are
notable (suitable for a stand-alone Wikipedia article). The
Nicolina Elrick article does not
cite sources establishing notability, so it may get deleted. A source shows that the article topic is notable when it:
- contains significant coverage: it addresses the topic directly and in multiple paragraphs of detail. A source with only trivial or off-topic mentions of the subject doesn't count.
- is a reliable source: it has a reliable publication process, or a suitable expert author (look up the reliability of common sources, or discuss). Newspapers and books usually meet this criteria, company and personal websites usually do not.
- is independent of the subject: it isn't produced by the article's subject or someone similarly affiliated with it. For example, these are not independent: the subject's press releases, autobiographies, website, and interviews.
If you can find notability-establishing sources, please add them: more than one is needed unless the applicable subject-specific notability guideline states otherwise. Specific questions can be answered live at the Teahouse help forum. Thank you. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Nicolina Elrick moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Nicolina Elrick, 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). It needs real WP:SECONDARY sources for a BLP. I've sent it to draft where you can work on it, but it can't remain in mainsapce. scope_creep Talk 10:10, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the
Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.