User talk:Michael John Nicholson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Your question at the Help desk[edit]

 Hello Michael John Nicholson. Replies have been posted to your question at the Help desk. If the problem is solved, please place {{Resolved|1=~~~~}} at the top of the section. Thank you!
Message added on 11:25, 22 March 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{helpdeskreply}} template.

Hi, I seem to be having a lot of difficulties with my proposed listing. I am really sorry about this. Can you please look at NIGEL BUESST, he's a film maker from Melbourne like me. And basically l would like to have a listing like his; he has a list of the films he has made, and not much more. Can you please tell me why this cant be achieved? Regards, Mike. Michael John Nicholson (talk) 11:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article on Nigel Buesst does not meet our standards and I'm going to nominate it for deletion now. Seriously, read the instruction I left you; that's the only guaranteed route to get an article. Don't bother looking for articles similar to what you want because overlooked mistakes don't determine policy. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Eagleash (talk) 11:18, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Liz. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Wikipedia:Teahouse have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 04:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a moment to familiarize yourself with what Wikipedia is and is not. Wikipedia is not a news, forum, blog/webhost, promotional/advertising/directory, or social networking site. It's not a site where you create a profile and write about yourself or your company/organization.

It is, instead, a place for serious, collaborative, scholarly assembly of knowledge about notable subjects into a high-quality encyclopedia, with verifiable references to independent, reliable sources. Many people come here with other expectations and have a difficult time as a result.

You may want to see WP:AUTOBIO and WP:PROUD as well. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages![edit]

Hello, Michael John Nicholson. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Cordless Larry (talk) 08:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

September 2020[edit]

Information icon Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to User:Michael John Nicholson. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 09:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How, how is my appeal going?

Michael John Nicholson (talk)

"Getting on" to Wikipedia[edit]

The following is a standardized recipe for guaranteed articles. It condenses almost all of the policies we have that prevent most articles from being approved. You'll need to use the Steps 0, 8a, and 8b (Starting with "If you are writing about yourself..."). Read it without any preconceptions from elsewhere. Anyone bringing up money is lying or a conman.

If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything that is not you or something you are connected to, here are the steps you should follow:

1) Choose a topic whose notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.
2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find. Google Books is a good resource for this. Also, while search engine results are not sources, they are where you can find sources. Just remember that they need to be professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources.
3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.
4) Summarize those sources left after step 3, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer. Make sure this summary is just bare statement of facts, phrased in a way that even someone who hates the subject can agree with.
5) Combine overlapping summaries where possible (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports), repeating citations as needed.
6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.
7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.
8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 3 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).

Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion.

If you are writing about yourself, or someone or something you are connected with (such as a friend, family member, or your business), the following steps are different:

0) If the subject really was notable, you wouldn't need to write the article. Remember that articles are owned by the Wikipedia community as a whole, not the article subject or the article author. If you do not want other people to write about you, then starting an article about yourself is a bad idea.
8a) If the article is accepted, never edit it again. Instead, make edit requests on the article's talk page.
8b) If the article is rejected, there will be a reason given. Read it carefully and closely. If there are links in the reason, open them and read those pages.

Ian.thomson (talk) 22:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Alternatively, you could find some other topic to edit.
If you continue trying to add an article about yourself without using the steps I've listed above, it's only going to come across as promotional and we'll have to block you. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:59, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Final warning, stop posting that attempt at an article. If you want to try to start an article about yourself, do it properly (with the instructions above). If you want us to write an article about you, then at least find the sources as directed in the instructions above. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

84ad8d8b7ebb04927861b17fc68098a2 Can you please tell me how my appeal is progressing?

As can be seen here, your appeal was declined because you need to make your appeal here. You need to make your appeal here, your appeal needs to show that you understand why you were rightfully blocked, and it must show that you will give up on trying to create an article about yourself. If your appeal includes:
  • anything that might belong in an article on you,
  • anything short of total acknowledgement and agreemeent that we were completely justified in blocking you
  • a failure to indicate that you would like to learn how to properly contribute to 'topics besides yourself
  • irrelevant bullshit like "l'm a keen on line scrabble player,"
... then your appeal will be declined as insipid trolling. You have utterly failed to comprehend anything anyone has told you, which is rather necessary to be an adult who can raise children and have a career. If you continue to refuse to pay attention to the consistent message you've been getting from everyone, we will remove your ability to appeal. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:15, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.
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 ~~~~}}.  Ian.thomson (talk) 12:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All of your actions have been to more or less beg for an article and not pay any attention when people explain matters for you.
If you indicate that you'll work on literally anything besides an article about yourself, I'll unblock you or ask that any other admin do so if I'm not available.
Hell, if you indicate that you want to try using the instructions I've provided, I'll be open to considering unblocking you. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Any attempt at an article must start with the provision of at least the three in-depth, independent, reliable sources that several of us have taken the time to ask and explain the reason for. Anything else is just a waste of everyone's time, including yours. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've removed your ability to email other users as you were using it for purposes other than understanding or appealing your block. Although I have not seen the email, what little I was told about it gives the impression that you're actually doing the opposite of understanding the reason behind it. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:55, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Michael John Nicholson, I was the helper you spoke to via IRC chat. You asked me to review this page because you believed that one of our administrators (@Ian.thomson) had used "bad language".
    You gave the quote "l'm a keen on line scrabble player" as an example of this purportedly bad language. The context of this phrase was an example of what not to say in your block appeal. It appears that you either ignored this advice or misunderstood what he was trying to say.
    You seem to be concerned that Nigel Buesst has a Wikipedia page about him and you do not. Unfortunately that's not something I can help with. Wikipedia has over six million articles and not every article meets our required standard.
    We cannot help you while you are a blocked user. Please see WP:GAB for more information about how to appeal a block. Salimfadhley (talk) 11:49, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Michael_John_Nicholson&oldid=1053842320"