User talk:Mightyaighty

Welcome!

Hello, Mightyaighty!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:14, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arjun Sharda (May 2)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ts12rAc was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Arjun Sharda and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Ts12rAc^{talk to me} 17:51, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mightyaighty! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Ts12rAc^{talk to me} 17:51, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arjun Sharda (May 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Greenman were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Why have you removed your WP:COI declaration?

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Arjun Sharda and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Greenman (talk) 09:58, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the conflict of interest, because I plan on Wikipedia to write about more people. I didn't clearly understand what the conflict of interest was. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia so apologies, if I am doing things by mistake.

I'll rewrite the submission, but can you help clarify what in specific for the submission references? Mightyaighty (talk) 12:42, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arjun Sharda (May 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Pythoncoder was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Arjun Sharda and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 04:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sharda and Arjun

Hello. Your recent edit appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. Leschnei (talk) 12:20, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arjun Sharda (September 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I should probably be rejecting this outright, but let's give it one more chance to demonstrate notability. Of which there is currently no evidence.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Arjun Sharda and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:27, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of TLEEM

Hello Mightyaighty,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged TLEEM for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 00:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 02:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Mightyaighty (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I apologize for the actions on my behalf that were unreasonable and unjustifiable. I originally wrote a article about Arjun and TLEEM as Arjun is my friend and given he and his organization is in the news, I wanted to write about him as a first article. As someone new to Wikipedia, I wanted to explore making articles and editing. I've learned from this block that I need to focus more on editing other articles before jumping into action and writing articles, because there aren't many things that are as clear to beginners about the rules and information about how to make Wikipedia Articles. I completely understand Wiki Administration team's suspicion, and i'm just here to clarify. - Mightyaighty Mightyaighty (talk) 11:56 am, 31 January 2024, last Wednesday (3 days ago) (UTC−5)

Accept reason:

"conditional unblock with a WP:topic ban on Arjun Sharda and TLEEM, both broadly construed. User can edit about tech and business." Welcome back. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:24, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You will not be unblocked to edit about TLEEM, Arjun Sharda, or any other subject with which you have a WP:conflict of interest. Please describe what constructive edits you would make. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can make edits for articles in various different categories, however I would like to focus on editing more of technology-related and business-related articles, by doing things like contributing new information to articles and updating outdated articles. Once again, I apologize for any damage caused from my actions. Mightyaighty (talk) 02:26, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks OK to me, but I'd like a double check by another admin. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk and Ohnoitsjamie: Double check on unblock request, please. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:14, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm OK with unblocking, though I will be happy to reblock if they attempt to write about either topic again, regardless of how many edits they make in the interim. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: I'm OK with a conditional unblock that includes a topic ban on Arjun Sharda and TLEEM, both broadly construed. User says that they can edit about tech and business; might as well give them some WP:ROPE. That being said, does Bbb23, the blocking admin, have any objection that I'm missing? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not as confident as others, but I'll defer to the apparent consensus. The topic ban should be a condition of the unblock.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra You didn't unblock the user.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Arjun Sharda

Hello, Mightyaighty. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Arjun Sharda, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]