User talk:Radadiyageet

This is Radadiyageet'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: Thordi has been accepted

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

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 00:40, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Narayanprasaddasji Swami has been accepted

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

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 04:46, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Bhiyal) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Bhiyal, Radadiyageet!

Wikipedia editor Nick Moyes just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please do not cite wiki's as reliable sources as you are doing in this suite of articles. Wikis are user-edited and not reliable. If in doubt, leave it out.

To reply, leave a comment on Nick Moyes's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Nick Moyes (talk) 14:50, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shu Thayu? for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shu Thayu? is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shu Thayu? until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Strikerforce^Talk 15:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Seetharama Kalyana

The article Seetharama Kalyana has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

per WP:NFF, "films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BOVINEBOY2008 11:48, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear BOVINEBOY,

The Banner/Production of the Film does not have a Wikipedia Page and it doesn't mean that it is not notable. You are requested to check the Starcats', Director's, Music Director's and Producer's Wiki Page to know about the Notability of the film. Also, Check the Daily Article Read Count from the below Tool-link which shows it quite High: https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range=latest-10&pages=Seetharama_Kalyana

You are suggested to remove the Deletion Tag from the Top of the Article

Thanks

Radadiyageet (talk) 12:13, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The notability of the people involved does not mean this film is notable. Notability is not inherited. You need to find some independent reliable sources to show notability of the production of the film. Thanks! BOVINEBOY2008 12:15, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shu Thayu (film) Poster.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:19, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mota Varachha listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mota Varachha. Since you had some involvement with the Mota Varachha redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. PamD 23:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Jigardan Gadhavi

Thanks for creating Jigardan Gadhavi.

A New Page Patroller Rosguill just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

Please be aware that some of the cited sources, such as IMDb, are not considered reliable and should be replaced with citations to better sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

_signed,Rosguill ^talk 16:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Akash Ambani has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Akash Ambani. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 20:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Akash Ambani (March 6)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. 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 Robert McClenon was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akash Ambani. This draft does not present any information that has not already been addressed in the deletion discussion. Notability is not inherited.

To present a case for notability, you may request Deletion Review.

Robert McClenon (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Radadiyageet! Having an article 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Radadiyageet - If you wish to present a case for the notability of Akash Ambani, you may request Deletion Review. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:55, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Manan Shah has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Manan Shah. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 19:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#Shuchir Suri. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. The canvassing I saw was at User talk:Exploreandwrite#Save the Article Shuchir Suri. Cabayi (talk) 06:14, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Puneeth JH moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Puneeth JH, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. GSS (talk|c|em) 12:27, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear GSS, Thanks for updating me. As I can see, Sources seems enough for what is written in Article. Prajavani, Star of Mysore, Deccan Chronicle and Deccan Herald are one of the highly local reliable sources from the state Karnataka. for Author's Books' details, www.goodreads.com and Amazon are also considered as good sources in many Authors' Articles. So let the Article be at Article Space. Thank You ! Radadiyageet (talk) 13:04, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

None of them support notability. See WP:GNG, WP:AUTHOR and WP:IV. Also, can you please explain where did you get this image from? Thank you GSS (talk|c|em) 13:15, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That means Prajavani, Star of Mysore, Deccan Chronicle and Deccan Herald are not from reliable sources, right? Dear, it clearly supports WP:AUTHOR, WP:GNG. Only thing is it needs to improve instead of putting Article to a draft space.

I am not questioning their reliability. You need to provide sources that talk about the subject, not his work. You can submit the draft for a review if you wish. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:11, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Manan Shah (May 31)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Nothing better since it was last deleted @ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manan Shah (Ethical Hacker). The draft is also a victim of WP:REFBOMB.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Manan Shah and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Manan Shah, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

GSS (talk) 12:40, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear GSS,

How you can say that Nothing better since it was last deleted @ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manan Shah (Ethical Hacker). You please check the date when the article was deleted. It was deleted in 2016 and now, It is recreated by me with India's most highly reliable sources with the name of Manan Shah in the title of their news article. Which clearly shows that the notability of the Subject 'Manan Shah' is very high. You check the list of references at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manan Shah (Ethical Hacker) which are used in the deleted article, which were not enough and reliable and there for only, the Article was previously been deleted.

You are also advised to check the Trishneet Arora and Ankit Fadia as they both are in the same type of work, so how their article are live in Wikipedia?

Deleted many times in the past does not mean that the notability of the subject 'Manan Shah' is not enough. Recreated Draft is much different with new Sources, So re-check the Draft again with Sources and make the decision accordingly or let the other reviewer decide. Radadiyageet (talk) 14:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (TV9 Bharatvarsh) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating TV9 Bharatvarsh.

User:Lapablo while reviewing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

Thanks for creating this page. Well done

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Lapablo}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

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

Lapablo (talk) 10:51, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for continuing to make undisclosed paid edits in violation of the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of use, for deliberately trying to obfuscate your conflicts of interest, and for using Wikipedia for advertising or promotion.

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 ~~~~}}. User:Yunshui (talk) 12:23, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Manan Shah (June 5)

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

Resubmitting a declined draft without making any changes to its content to address the reasons for its decline serves no useful purpose, and takes up time of reviewers who could have sent the same time on more productive work.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Manan Shah and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Manan Shah, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

JamesBWatson (talk) 19:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear JamesBWatson, I want you to read my last comment Draft:Manan Shah. The Draft is already a new then it was as in 2016 which was deleted at that time. But the current Draft is totally different based on multiple highly reliable sources. and GSS has declined submission telling that the draft is same of 2016. I am confident that GSS has mistaken in reviewing new submitted draft. And you again declined the draft by giving a reason that there are nothing new updations in it. In Short, You just recheck the current draft with the old one that you will get to know the facts. you are also requested to check the Info about Hacker Manan Shah in google news and then make the decision accordingly. Thank You ! Radadiyageet (talk) 12:12, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the draft as it was when your last submission but one was declined. Here is the draft as it was the next time you submitted it. Here is the difference beetween the two, that is to say the changes you made between one submission and the next. There are just two changes: you added a rant about how wrong you think the reviewers who had rejected your submissions were, and you added a new submission banner. You made no changes whatever to the actual text of the draft. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:45, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear JamesBWatson, I totally agree with your above lines. But i am not talking about it. I want you to understand is, I have published the Draft:Manan Shah on 22 May 2019 which was published earlier by other wikipedian in 2016 and at that time, almost three years ago it was deleted. see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manan Shah (Ethical Hacker). But when i published it again in 2019 with major changes, GSS has declined submission (on 31 June 2019) saying that the Article is same as of 2016. After, you declined the resubmission saying that there's no change after 31 June 2019 (After first rejection of draft). So i want you have look at the current draft and compare it with old draft which was deleted in 2016 as it is already a new draft. Therefor it is not needed to make any changes. My intension is not to waste the time of reviwers, Only things i want you to do is, Just recheck the current draft independently. Being an experienced wikipedian having published 60-70 Articles, I can say that the Draft:Manan Shah is completely eligible to go on Article Space. Because, there's not only mentions of Manan Shah in media coverages, They put his Complete Independent Story/Articles (Not an Interview) which shows that the subject Manan Shah is completely a notable. Thank You !

First of all you need to re-read my comment that say Nothing better since it was last deleted @ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manan Shah (Ethical Hacker). The draft is also a victim of WP:REFBOMB. I didn't say "the article is same". The article was previously deleted due to notability and I'm not seeing anything new (better) that warrant a stand-alone article, and many of your sources are "advertorials". You also WP:REFBOMB by including too many references for single facts. You should use one, maybe two, references per fact. Otherwise, the article is deemed to be pushing a promotional tone. In addition, you must disclose your paid status and employer per WP:PAID. Thank you GSS (talk|c|em) 08:26, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear GSS, Thanks for you attention. Yes it is a victim of WP:REFBOMB, but it was intended only to put your or other reviewers' attention to check the facts. We can delete extra sources once you review it completely and i am sure that after reading all these sources listed in draft, you will not have a single doubts on the notablity of the subject. Also there are numbers of Independent News Artcles have been published on reliable media platforms after 2016 in a better way. Some of sources may be "advertorials" but We have to believe that there are numbers of Independent Articles too which we should not ignore. The sources like Aaj Tak, Dainik Bhaskar, The Economic Times, GQ India, Forbes, ABP News, Amar Ujala, National Herald, Outlook, The New Indian Express, Mid Day, Madhyamam Daily and Deccan Chronicle have published the Article on Manan Shah which i think very enough to consider him a notable. They have not just mentioned Manan, They published the full aricle on him. I also disclosed my paid status in my unblock request and request you to unblock me, so that i can start contributing. Radadiyageet (talk) 09:50, 8 June 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Dear GSS and JamesBWatson, Below are the recent Article published as Raj Kundra Partners with Manan Shah,

I also would like to invite Gujarati Wikipedian Nizil Shah to give his inputs on Draft:Manan Shah. Radadiyageet (talk) 06:30, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Five sources for one claim not going to change anything please see WP:REFBOMB and WP:NOTINHERITED. In your unblock request above you denied paid editing and on the other side, you failed to disclose your connection with Mukesh Patel. GSS (talk|c|em) 06:59, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear GSS, Thanks for the reply. I clearly understand the WP:REFBOMB and WP:NOTINHERITED, And also agree that Five sources for one claim not going to change anything but generally, it can increase the reliablity of the facts in readers mind. As far as Mukesh Patel is concern, I have no any connections with him. I tried to make article of him only because he was in limelight during Patidar reservation agitation and PM Modi's Suit Auction in Surat but that doesnt mean that i am in connection with Mukesh Patel. I also published Draft:Akash Ambani, So does it mean that i have connection with Akash Ambani? I only make Article for whom i think notable as per Wikipedia Policy. see my last 5 published Articles,

TV9 Bharatvarsh
Gitaben Rathva
Ratansinh Rathod
Mahendra Munjapara
Hasmukh Patel
More than 40 Artcles published of villages of Gir Gadhada Taluka

Dear GSS, This will increase your trust on me that what i am intended to do in Wikipedia and Still i am learning wikipedia to edit more correctly so that Admins like you will not need to waste your time to correct me. in Futute, I will surely disclose my connction as per your suggestion if i'll make such type of Article. But Trust me that i did'nt published paid article yet. Thank You ! Radadiyageet (talk) 08:13, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have enough evidence with me that I can't post here per WP:OUTING, but I'll be happy to answer an email. Radadiyageet, you also need to disclose your relationship with Jagdish Patel. GSS (talk|c|em) 09:14, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dear GSS, I don't know what evidence you have which shows that i was paid. Jagdish Patel is a Mayor of my city Surat who comes from Bharatiya Janata Party. I am also Locally Social Media Handler, working as volunteer for People, Company or NGOs and guiding them on use of Social Media. Jagdish Patel has a team of IT Volunteer whom i guided earlier. I got this image (Metadata availabe) from them. Even i have a legel rights to use his photos and can share copy of it with you. but that does'nt mean that the Jagdish Patel has paid me. You must be knowing that the politions or Celebrities have their Volunteer who takes care of them on digital platforms. The same way I am working in Wikipedia as a volunteer which can be seen in above listed Articles. I also published Articles like Surat City Police, Vadodara City Police and you must believe that these government law Agencies never pay for such work. Once you unblock me I'll also have the plan to publish Articles on Mayors of Rajkot and Vadodara. There is no COI, If you feel it' is not eligible, You have rights to delete the Article, But as per my opinion he is completely notable. It's only intended to share Local Knowledge and Facts to International Plateforms like Wikipedia. Many Thanks ! Radadiyageet (talk) 11:04, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you think this is not the correct way to publish Articles for such People, I welcome you to guide me ! Radadiyageet (talk) 11:10, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is not "five sources for one claim": it is one source, copied five times in different places. What is more, that one source does not give substantial coverage to the subject of the draft, and it is a promotional press release, originating from BusinessWire India. If you really really can't understand why that does not constitute suitable sourcing after the amount of editing you have done here then it is unlikely that you will ever be able to edit in conformity with Wikipedia's requirements, giving further reason why you should remain blocked. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:18, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Dr. Jagdish Patel Mayor Surat Municipal Corporation.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Dr. Jagdish Patel Mayor Surat Municipal Corporation.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. GSS (talk|c|em) 15:14, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear GSS, Thank for the guidance. Permission problem of this image file has been resolved. You are requested to unblock me so that i can start contributuing more correcrtly. Radadiyageet (talk) 06:31, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Dear Administrator, This really sounds bad for me. No Paid Articles or edits has been made from my side. If I made mistakes in Edits, You are welcome to correct me. but Blocking is not the way, I am editing Wikipedia only for people whom I think notable as per Wikipedia Policy, And there are numbers of My Wikipedia Articles are live. Also, see my recent published Articles and just think that can they pay for that? absolutely not. You think that I am getting paid only because I publish Articles as big as possible in terms of size of an Articles made by me, But it's completely wrong, I Publish big sized Articles only because Readers can get complete details about Subject or Name of Article and it doesn't mean that they are paying for it. I am also not making Articles for advertising or promotion, This is a really wrong accusation, and such steps demotivate the Wikipedians like me. So please unblock me so that I can start contributing as regular. Thank You ! Radadiyageet (talk) 08:15, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have been editing in unambiguously promotional ways, whether you have been paid for doing so or not. It is clear from what you have said on this page during the block that you will not or cannot accept that you have been doing so, and therefore that you are unlikely to change your ways. It is also clear that you have denied connections to people that you do indeed have connections to, so that you cannot be trusted. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:09, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Dear Yunshui Please go through my unblock request and do the necessary as there are many pending edits which need to be complete as soon as possible.Radadiyageet (talk) 06:25, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Yunshui, Please unblock me.

I have reviewed the block and the subsequent discussion of your talk page. Even though you are not being paid, it is clear that you have connections to the people you are writing about including volunteering to help their teams on social media. To move forward, I need you to read through WP:COI, WP:DISCLOSE and WP:NPOV and explain to me how those policies will inform what articles you work on going forward and how you work on them. Additionally, I also need you to show some understanding and ability to accept that when consensus is against you, that you will accept that your contributions may not be considered appropriate for Wikipedia and that you do not WP:OWN articles. Sasquatch t|c 18:18, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible that you genuinely don't understand why your editing is regarded as promotional, because for some reason or other in India publishing for promotion is such an integral part of life that Indian editors of Wikipedia really don't seem to understand why the word "promotional" is used in relation to editing that to people from literally every other country of the world looks like blatant PR. However, it is difficult to understand how you can fail to see that "I am also Locally Social Media Handler, working as volunteer for People, Company or NGOs and guiding them on use of Social Media. Jagdish Patel has a team of IT Volunteer whom i guided earlier. I got this image (Metadata availabe) from them" and "You must be knowing that the politions or Celebrities have their Volunteer who takes care of them on digital platforms" means that you are acting on behalf of those people, thus falling under Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:36, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear JamesBWatson, I got your all point. I told all the truth here. I am working as a Volunteer for Social Media only, Not for Wikipedia. I have published the Article Jagdish Patel first then I uploaded an image after a long time which was received from Volunteer of Jagdish Patel. But trust me that I have no connection with Jagdish Patel. I know about him only due to I come from the same city Surat. I published his Article on Neutral point of view, Not Promotional, Please do check it. This is only why you think that I failed under Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. After reading many Articles of Wikipedia about editing it correctly and with the help of Wikipedians like you, I assure you that you will not find such mistakes again. All these mistakes occurred due to the lack of Knowledge. Please unblock and allow me to contribute more in a correct way and repair my last edits too. Many Thanks ! Radadiyageet (talk) 08:31, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear JamesBWatson, Can you review my unblock request as I want to start contributing more correctly. Thanks. Radadiyageet (talk) 07:04, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear JamesBWatson, Can you please review my unblock request as I want to start contributing? I learned so much in the last few days that how to edit Wikipedia more correctly. I also assure you that what happened in the past will not be repeated again. Thanks. Radadiyageet (talk) 07:09, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Can you please review my unblock request as I want to start contributing? I learned so much in the last few days after getting blocked for more than 2 month that how to edit Wikipedia more correctly. I also understand that for what I was blocked for. I assure you that what happened in the past will not be repeated again and will make productive contributions. Thanks. Radadiyageet (talk) 12:15, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 13:45, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Speedy deletion of File:Arvind Barot.jpg

The page File:Arvind Barot.jpg has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image was an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links were updated.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:06, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Can you please review my unblock request as I want to start contributing for wikipedia again? I am blocked since last 3 Months, In this time, I learned so much rergading how to edit Wikipedia more correctly. I also understand that for what i was blocked for. I assure you that what happened in the past will not be repeated again and will make productive contributions instead. I also found many wrong information on WIkipedia which i can correct once you unblock me from the editing wikipedia. Thanks.

Decline reason:

I have withdrawn your ability to make further appeals for recycling your previous, inadequate, appeal. MER-C 18:34, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Puneeth JH (October 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dee03 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Puneeth JH and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Puneeth JH, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

Dee 03 13:50, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Manan Shah concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Manan Shah, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 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) 01:34, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Manan Shah

Hello, Radadiyageet. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Manan Shah".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! HasteurBot (talk) 10:01, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Puneeth JH concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Puneeth JH, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 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) 01:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Puneeth JH

Hello, Radadiyageet. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Puneeth JH".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of TV9 Bharatvarsh

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on TV9 Bharatvarsh requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://24x7livenewz.com/abp-news/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:53, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Akash Ambani for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Akash Ambani is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akash Ambani (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Srijanx22 (talk) 03:28, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:India MPs 2019–present has been nominated for renaming

Category:India MPs 2019–present has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]