User talk:Sanjeev.08

Welcome!

Hello, Sanjeev.08, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome!

Please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Deb (talk) 09:33, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

Edit summaries

Hi there.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you.--220 of ^Borg 09:47, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok... I will take care of this.Sanjeev.08 (talk) 08:36, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Dr Vikram I Shah.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Dr Vikram I Shah.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 09:14, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Shalby hospital

Hi, I'm Kudpung. Sanjeev.08, thanks for creating Shalby hospital!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please remove the promtional tone. This may require a re-write into standard English.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:14, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikiaccnt1234. Thank you. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:37, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am unable to understand what you are talking about. Kindly tell me clear why you suspect me.Sanjeev.08 (talk) 06:47, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There have been several people coming on to articles about Raheja Developers and its employees and removing anything about the recent controversies in the media. Since this does seem to be a concentrated effort by multiple accounts I am concerned that you are either one person operating under several accounts or you are several people that were brought here with one purpose: to make the article for Raheja Developers as positive and promotional as possible. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you think we are paid editors for the company, You can take any action against this page. Atleast I do not have any issue for this. And I want to ask you one thing, why you are supporting leoaugust to write only negative. Are you being paid by this user?

What kind of controversies that leoaugust is talking about?

No, but Leoaugust is backing up his information with posts in the media. You've given no real reason as to why you are removing any and all negative coverage about the company. In most cases where people have done this the reason is that the users in question were part of a marketing agency that was hired to post promotional/positive material about the company on the Internet, sometimes in order to do damage control for a company or person that has recently received negative media attention. I've brought this to ANI now, so you can feel free to post there. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But as I monitored in this article, there was a lot of content that you removed even though the content was having ref links. While you allowed only leoaugust to post. You said you allows neutral content but leoaugust was posting only negative content. And you have not replied my question, are you paid by or in collaboration with leoaugust.Sanjeev.08 (talk) 06:16, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Please stop reverting the material. The thing about all of this is that the controversies have been in the media. Removing them from the Wikipedia article is generally seen as unhelpful because ultimately this has been in the media enough to warrant it being mentioned somewhere. If you want to help propose different solutions to how to phrase it then that's fine- suggest alternatives on the talk page. However since there has been a documented history of people trying to use the page for promotion for the company removing anything about controversies makes it appear as if you are trying to whitewash the article, which is troublesome since it could be perceived as censorship. If something unpleasant has been documented in the press then it should be added. Wikipedia tries to cover all angles of its subjects - we cannot cover just the positive material. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for a period of indefinite for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikiaccnt1234. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:27, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Brianhe (talk) 19:22, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Shelby Hospital Logo.png

The file File:Shelby Hospital Logo.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]