User talk:Keepitup.sid

August 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Test preparation do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Favonian (talk) 16:08, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for submitting an article to Wikipedia. Your submission has been reviewed and has been put on hold pending clarification or improvements from you or other editors. Please take a look and respond if possible. You can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/askiitians. If there is no response within twenty-four hours the request may be declined; if this happens feel free to continue to work on the article. You can resubmit it (by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article) when you believe the concerns have been addressed. Thank you. Alpha Quadrant ^talk 15:54, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your article submission has been declined, and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/askiitians was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to resubmit once the issues have been addressed. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Chzz ► 13:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for submitting an article to Wikipedia. Your submission has been reviewed and has been put on hold pending clarification or improvements from you or other editors. Please take a look and respond if possible. You can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/askiitians. If there is no response within twenty-four hours the request may be declined; if this happens feel free to continue to work on the article. You can resubmit it (by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article) when you believe the concerns have been addressed. Thank you. Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 09:25, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your article submission has been declined, and Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Transweb was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to resubmit once the issues have been addressed. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Chzz ► 12:02, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation is completed

Blaze, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see what needs to be done to bring it to the next level.
Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping Wikipedia! 110.172.134.170 (talk) 15:00, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Transweb

Hi . I've put a little work into the Transweb article today, removing all of the inappropriate information. A couple of guidelines you might like to read are Wikipedia's guide on mission statements, Wikipedia's guide on external links (specifically: "Normally, only one official link is included"!) and Wikipedia's guide on what makes a reliable source (which a bunch of those on this article were not...). Please feel free contact me if you've any questions, or if you disagree with any of the changes I've made Cheers, Nik thestunned 16:33, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi... I've reverted you again - did you take a look at any of the above? You re-added in multiple websites, you re-added the mission statement, and you also also included a bunch of overly-detailed information. Please read the above before editing the article again. Thanks, Nik thestunned 09:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nik, Apart from Mission statement rest things are fine. Not one but all three websites are official so can't help with that

. There were 3 different pages before and so I merged them here. All details had reliable sources as per wikipedia. For details that had no absolute reference or were not according to guidelines, I've removed them a day before. The details chosen by you are not as per wiki guidelines for a good article. I request you to follow through the references in detail. Cheers!

I've removed it again, please don't edit the article the same way again - your edits are adding no value to the page at the moment. Firstly, only one website is permissible as an official website - one or none. You also need to stop adding puffery to the article - "is an organization that deals in online tutoring and online assistance with homework and assignments" is exactly the same as "is an online tutoring and educational website" - you're adding nothing of value and just making it harder to understand. This isn't about referencing the article properly, this is about it containing good, useful information - just like any other encyclopaedia. Information such as "Website aims to reach the students in the remote areas of India and provide them with a coaching solution" is 1) somewhat badly worded and 2) completely unnecessary. Do you work for Transweb in some capacity? Nik thestunned 16:13, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS, see Acharya Institute of Technology for an example of a good article on Education in India. Cheers, Nik thestunned 16:15, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nik, Please refer Wikipedia Official Link Guidelines. It suggests to use preferably one external official link. But it does not deny to use more under circumstances. To add, when in an article web portals are referred, ideally a encyclopaedic content must have some external links to refer for a reader. Else its incomplete information. Please bring more comprehensive reasons to your suggestions. I no where find it incorrect. I'll refer to the article suggested by you and modify this page if needed.

PS, I happen to know the organization. But, as I've contributed it, I prefer keeping it updated

.

OK, I'll concede that it makes some sense to have the three of those in the "External Links" section - just not in the infobox! I see you've not added them back there or edited the article again with the inappropriate information, so thanks for that.

Also, Wikipedia does not attempt to contain "complete" external linking information by the way - someone reading ABOUT the company can gain a full understanding from Wikipedia without going to the site itself... I'll quote that same policy back at you, where in the second paragraph it says "but it is not Wikipedia's purpose to include a lengthy or comprehensive list of external links related to each topic." Either way, it's looking better now!

Also, as you're associated with the company you should be aware of Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy when editing this article. Cheers, Nik thestunned 09:26, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/askiitians concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/askiitians, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:00, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/askiitians

Hello Keepitup.sid. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "askiitians".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/askiitians}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. - tucoxn\^talk 03:44, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]