Hello, BhargavKrishna97, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Venus Remedies, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.
Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.
New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! VickKiang (talk) 03:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Draft:Venus Remedies, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. VickKiang (talk) 03:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are two reasons mentioned on the activity log of this draft, about deletion of the article.
1. Your nomination to delete the page without a proper reason mentioned here.
2. Deleting adminstrator who deleted the page saying the current draft is dependent on a old deleted *draft*
This is not fair and I'm certain that this behaviour of moderators and Adminstrators is not how a wiki community works. Please help me understand if I'm missing something. BhargavKrishna97 (talk) 06:30, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, welcome to WP and thanks for your edits. You suggested that my deletion did not have a proper reason, which is wrong as I tagged it under CSD G11 (unambiguous advertising), which you could see from my notice. For more info, see WP: Criteria for Speedy Deletion. The admin, while deleting the page, said that it was due to G11 (which is my previous reason), not that it depended on a previous draft. I tagged it since your article is not neutral and uses a lot of questionable wording. Thanks and I hope this helps. VickKiang (talk) 06:36, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The admin who deleted my submission was a admin named Athaernara and they mentioned that the reason for deletion is G8: page dependent on a deleted or nonexistent page.
I wrote the article for a informative standpoint and I'm confident that the tone or voice of the information shared on the article is not promotional or advertising. BhargavKrishna97 (talk) 06:41, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have gone through the guidelines and I'm sure that the article is not unencyclopedic. The message shared by the deleting adminstrator was G8 and here you have mentioned that it is G11. I request you and the panel of moderators to shed some clarity over this issue. I can share a screenshot for the same as I'm not able to acces the page activity log where they have mentioned that the reason for deletion is G8. BhargavKrishna97 (talk) 07:46, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
While I am not sure which draft you are referring to, on the one we are speaking about I am sure it is G11. Also, I am very likely to assess your article as a promotional advert, and am sure most other editors will also. VickKiang (talk) 08:13, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am talking about the draft which was recently deleted. You have nominated it for G11 and the admin did not go ahead with the same. He mentioned G8 as a reason of deletion. Before you conclude that the article is a promotional advert, please go through organizational articles about various companies. Can you at least please specify which segments of the draft are not right? I'll try to rectify. BhargavKrishna97 (talk) 08:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that what you are suggesting could likely be deliberately incorrect, see the following screenshot. If you are referring to this draft, how is this G8 (the photo clearly says G11)? Also, most sections on the so-called "innovation" of the company could be ads. Also, would it be all right if you explain what you would like for "the panel of moderators to shed some clarity over this issue" due to that as far as I am concerned it is likely a promotional ad? Besides, could you see this link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&user=&page=Draft%3AVenus+Remedies&wpdate=&tagfilter=&subtype=)? Hence, could you please have a more detailed look at the linked pages before creating articles? Cheers. VickKiang (talk) 08:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is the activity log I have received. Please review the attached screenshot. Also, there is not even one single mention of the word "innovation" in the article. I now understand that you have misunderstood the awards names as the main article content which talks about the description of the company. The award that the company has received do have the so-called "innovation" in their titles and it is impossible to change the awards names. Awards belong to various entities and I am no one to change the names. Please don't be too quick to take actions, I have spent a lot of time going through links you have shared and the initial guidelines of Wiki space. BhargavKrishna97 (talk) 08:48, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is a redirecting article to this article we were previously discussed deleting under G11, and I believe that it is reasonable. VickKiang (talk) 08:54, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I write this message with immense disappointment in the ever so decentralised and independent ecosystem of Wiki. The page that I have meticulously crafted while following all the guidelines of Wiki is now deleted saying it is "dependent on a non-existent or deleted page" and this adminstrative move was executed by a admin named "Athaernara".
I request the panel of Wiki admins to delete or erase the old article and retrieve the current draft. The old page was completely out of Wiki guidelines without any proper citations nor references. The current draft DOES NOT depend on the old version and it should never be linked to the old draft.
This is not a valid argument as far as I am aware, I do not know which you refer to by the old article, and the current draft is still out of Wiki guidelines. Furthermore, like mentioned above it is G11, not G8, unless you could provide clear evidence. Cheers. VickKiang (talk) 08:39, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please understand that I am not bullying or anything here. The editor @VickKiang has not been entirely clear about why he believes the article comes off as an advert. Should I remove the awards details and reshare the article? I am helpless in this situation and I was just trying to gather more information from @VickKiangBhargavKrishna97 (talk) 09:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Hello, BhargavKrishna97. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:Venus Remedies, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you: