User talk:NAUser0001

This is NAUser0001's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Squint Neon (November 2)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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.

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:Squint Neon 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.

CoconutOctopus talk 08:05, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HindutvaWarriors! 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! CoconutOctopus talk 08:05, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Hello, I'm Kovcszaln6. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Rana Ayyub, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Kovcszaln6 (talk) 16:41, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Muhammad Yunus. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Add information with proper independent and reliable sources not only indian and don't push your POV. NPOV is the main in Wikipedia. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 15:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are a biased, leftist writer attempting to whitewash Yunus's image. The world is aware of what I have written. I have also included reliable sources to support my claims. NAUser0001 (talk) 07:38, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indian media sources can't be considered reliable and independent in controversial issues. Add independent media sources like BBC, The New York Post, The Washington Post, DW, Al Jazeera, etc international media sources for your claim. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 08:04, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did at Muhammad Yunus. Indian media sources can't be considered reliable and independent in controversial issues. Add independent media sources like BBC, The New York Post, The Washington Post, DW, Al Jazeera, etc international media sources for your claim. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 08:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I include independent media sources, as you mentioned above, can I add content? NAUser0001 (talk) 11:12, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

salute

Jai Shree Ram bhai 2409:40C4:F8:DBE5:50EA:82FF:FE81:2F6B (talk) 18:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks bhai 🥶 NAUser0001 (talk) 03:06, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Manoj Kumar Sah (December 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jamiebuba 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:Manoj Kumar Sah 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.

Jamiebuba (talk) 01:39, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a minor edit

Hi NAUser0001! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Muhammad Yunus that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:25, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Yunus article

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding revert issue. The thread is Muhammad Yunus article. The discussion is about the topic Muhammad Yunus. Thank you. — Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 08:26, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indian media is the best in the world 🌎🙌 Jai Sri raam. 119.30.45.68 (talk) 09:14, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

You have been blocked from editing certain pages (Muhammad Yunus) for BLP violations. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Black Kite (talk) 09:54, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gamer Robot Inc (December 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 DoubleGrazing were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Gamer Robot Inc 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) 13:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

Hi - I'm Girth Summit, an administrator here. I've come to talk to you about our sourcing guidelines, and how important it is that assertions in articles are supported by reliable sources. I took a look at a few of the edits you made today, and I've reverted some of them.

This edit to Electric power transmission added a source which might be valid in some curcumstances - it is a blog (WP:SPS), but it is maintained by an academic expert at a legitimate institution, and so may meet the expectations of an expert SPS which may be used to support non-controversial claims. However, the assertions you attached the citation to were not, in fact, supported by the source. Remember that the purpose of a citation is not just to add a link to a potentially helpful website, but to support the specific assertion directly preceding the citation. There is nothing at the URL you targets discussing either the liberalisation of energy markets in the 1990s, or blackouts in North America. Hence, it cannot be a valid citation to support those assertions.
This edit to Rina Dhaka is rather promotional in its tone, and the source you cited was the subject's own personal website. That falls foul of WP:SPS - we look for independent sources. WP:INDEPENDENT discusses this in more detail.
This edit to Yogic marriage was somewhat ungrammatical, and it cited Yogipedia, which also appears to be self-published - kind of like a blog for Yoga practioners, as far as I can tell. Again, this is not the sort of source we should be using to support content (although I recognise that the article as it currently stands is entirely unsourced - also not ideal).
This edit to Patcheeswarar temple is also unsourced, despite your assertion in your edit summary which said you were adding references. I've let it stand, since the text seemed clear enough, although I would not generally recommend putting the opening times for places into articles - they are subject to change, and WP:NOTGUIDE. If you can find some solid sources to support the assertions you've added to that (also entirely unsourced) article, that would be a good thing.

I hope this is helpful. Girth Summit _(blether) 15:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Manoj Kumar Sah

In no way is this article ready for mainspace. Please submit it through WP:AFC. Black Kite (talk) 17:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2024 Nepal earthquake (January 1)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Dora the Axe-plorer was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 15:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

I'd suggest not adding false topicons to your userpage as it they automatically add it to incorrect categories, which could potentially be confusing to a new user.

Best, CoconutOctopus talk 16:50, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A7 on Ved Prakash Upadhyay

Hello NAUser0001 -- I've declined this speedy request as there's clear evidence of notability in the article, including a blue-linked book and multiple awards. Please read WP:A7 before tagging articles for deletion under this criterion again. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 16:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Hey NAUser0001 -- You had removed all the disambigution links from the page -- Floods in Oman, which I had restored can u give out reasons to remove them so that we together improve the article, Thanks JesusisGreat7 (talk) 06:50, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think there has been some malfunction, I added the Uncategorized template but it seems we both made the edit at same time and my edit was published while yours was reverted. Sorry for the inconvenience. NAUser0001 (talk) 07:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

NAUser0001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I accept that I made mistake, I was newbie in wikipedia. I cited unreliable sources and kept adding my edit even though the author continously warned me NAUser0001 (talk) 07:51, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I accept that I made mistake, I was newbie in wikipedia. I cited unreliable sources and kept adding my edit even though the author continously warned me [[User:NAUser0001|NAUser0001]] ([[User talk:NAUser0001#top|talk]]) 07:51, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I accept that I made mistake, I was newbie in wikipedia. I cited unreliable sources and kept adding my edit even though the author continously warned me [[User:NAUser0001|NAUser0001]] ([[User talk:NAUser0001#top|talk]]) 07:51, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I accept that I made mistake, I was newbie in wikipedia. I cited unreliable sources and kept adding my edit even though the author continously warned me [[User:NAUser0001|NAUser0001]] ([[User talk:NAUser0001#top|talk]]) 07:51, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Reviewing drafts

Hi NAUser0001, it looks like you manually added an AfC rejection template to Draft:36017 (1999 ND43). I have reverted your edits because I disagree with the rationales (in particular with the "contrary to Wikipedia's purposes" rationale which I can't understand at all), and have instead declined it using the AfC helper script. Please don't add decline/reject AfC reviewer templates manually to drafts. It gives the incorrect impression that the draft has been through an AfC review, and it doesn't do any of the other things the script does such as logging the review or informing the draft creator. Once you have a bit more experience of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines you can apply to be an AfC reviewer if you want to help with that side of things. Regards --bonadea contributions talk 08:03, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bharatpol

Hello NAUser0001,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Bharatpol for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to a namespace that's not for articles.

If you don't want Bharatpol to be deleted, 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.

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 09:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect tags

In Loolo Dinebari, you added tags that are incorrect. The subject passes the notability guideline for politicians, and there are no sourcing issues present, hence why I reverted your edit. Please, be more careful next time and happy editing! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok than you so much! I will be careful next time. NAUser0001 (talk) 12:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can also see that you added an orphan tag incorrectly here, which has been undone by Wikishovel. You also slapped 4 tags to Tatiana Dettlaff, one is {{More citations needed}} with a "biography" parameter, and another is {{BLP sources}}. I don't think these two tags needs to be used at the same time in an article. Be careful and please reach out whenever you're unsure of anything. You could visit the teahouse for assistance and questions. Happy editing! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Bharatpol

A tag has been placed on Category:Bharatpol indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:41, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]