User talk:Shrn1611

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo manipal.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo manipal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:29, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use of File:Logo manipal.png

Thank you for uploading File:Logo manipal.png. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ntx61 (talk) 06:28, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Alaya Furniturewalla

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 Alaya Furniturewalla requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Celestina007 (talk) 08:13, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Alaya Furniturewalla.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Alaya Furniturewalla.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 08:46, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alaya Furniturewalla moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Alaya Furniturewalla, 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. Celestina007 (talk) 12:12, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

Information icon Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. ∯WBGconverse 12:54, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Information icon Hello, Shrn1611. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page The Quint, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

  • avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
  • propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
  • disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
  • avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
  • do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Harshil want to talk? 10:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

As you are clearly violating WP:SOCK, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO, I have blocked this account indefinitely. --Yamla (talk) 11:20, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yamla, I went through these terms as you have mentioned and I would like to address it to you that I've maintained my lines by not violating any of these. This is only account which I have, secondly the pages which I've edited are either trending in news or I've came across them while researching on them. There is no conflict of interest. I like to work on independent basis and would love doing that. Would request you to unblock me so I can keep my contribution going. Thank you Shrn1611 (talk) 11:30, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is not plausible. I have off-wiki evidence that you work for a PR company, but see nowhere where you declared this. You've made edits which clearly violate WP:PROMO. You essentially copied content from here, in violation of WP:COPYRIGHT (and good taste). And you've used blatantly inappropriate marketing links to "source" your changes. --Yamla (talk) 11:36, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I used to work for a PR company from which I have exited a year back. Currently I work with a creative agency which has no ties with such kind of work. Also, thank you for highlighting these errors which I have made. I shall go through these links to avoid such mistakes in future. I would request you to unblock me to continue the work I was doing with Wikipedia. It gives me a great pleasure in making these edits and I simply love it. Shrn1611 (talk) 11:51, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will not unblock you. You were making blatantly promotional edits, copying content from marketing material, on an article for a subject known for illicitly soliciting editors to edit in violation of WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO. And you admittedly still have not disclosed your prior conflict of interest. WP:GAB explains how to request an unblock. --Yamla (talk) 11:54, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I ensure that such errors wouldn't happen again and I would take the time to read through the norms of Wikipedia before I start the editing process again i.e [1] [2].[3] I have already placed a request once I was blocked by you. Let me know if it has been received or do I need to place it again. On the COI part, I have never edited for someone else apart from myself and for the urge to understand this platform. Though I've worked many digital agencies none of them have ever been of my venture of Wikipedia nor I took any such projects. My only effort has been to be a part of this community and understand the processes it takes to become an editor. Shrn1611 (talk) 12:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC) 12:18, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is a transparent lie that you have never violated WP:COI. Any admin is free to contact me and I will share off-wiki evidence about your conflict of interest and show you editing an article about that company. You have also not made any unblock request yet; WP:GAB explains how to do so. --Yamla (talk) 12:20, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your guidance. Will add all the necessary elements which is required and will also submit the unblock request. Prior to which would require few days to go through the Wikipedia norms and policies so that this instance doesn't occur again. Would require your assistance if I have missed out anything which needs to be also focused apart from the above mentioned. Shrn1611 (talk) 13:54, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yamla, I am not admin but I am involved. Can I ask how this person is same as of Sumesh Dugar and User:Prakash pandey07? Because I found that these three people are inherently different off-Wiki. Last one is employee which we caught and these two are different. Asking for the sake of curiosity. Should we protect this for ECP as blatant socks are coming?-- Harshil want to talk? 14:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This account has been violating WP:COI, similarly to the other account. This account edited The Quint with blatantly inappropriate content, similarly to the other account. Note that I believe this to be a case of WP:MEAT rather than the same person operating both accounts. Basically, we know The Quint is inappropriately soliciting users to edit on their behalf, so anyone who does so is violating WP:MEAT (and, often but not always, WP:COI, WP:PROMO, and WP:PAID). --Yamla (talk) 14:44, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify to both of you, I'm completely unaware of the other two profile's action. I came across this page and found that this page has content which is abruptly written. I just wanted to add more relevant content which I guess I failed in complying with Wikipedia's policy. I'll be more careful about it. However, I still want to organise the article maybe now in a proper manner that is within the Wikipedia's norms. I shall look into all the policies and will try to follow them in future. Don't want to leave my hard work behind which I have been taking in building this profile. Thank you for highlighting the violation done from my end for my future reference. Shrn1611 (talk) 20:02, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yamla,I went through all the edits these two accounts User:Sumesh Dugar and User:Prakash pandey07 have made in the past. They were removing a piece of content from the article which they felt was misleading the readers about the brand and my actions were different from that. All I did was added content to this page. However, my intentions were completely different from these two. Would like to understand how am I violating [[WP:COI],WP:MEAT,WP:PROMO, and WP:PAID). Apart from this how to I disclose which company I'm currently working for and the past companies in which I've worked so that any admin can review my work accordingly. Shrn1611 (talk) 20:51, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot reveal the specific problematic edit where you violated WP:COI until you disclose the companies you have worked for, unless you specifically waive your right to privacy in this single regard. --Yamla (talk) 21:06, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You have now revealed that you have a conflict of interest with regard to Wunderman Thompson. You edited that article on 2020-01-12, moving both the article and the talk page. This is in direct conflict to your false claim "There is no conflict of interest" and "On the COI part, I have never edited for someone else apart from myself". That makes it hard to trust other statements you have made. --Yamla (talk) 10:50, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the changes were made in my personal interest. If you see the changes and the comments mentioned while making the changes it clearly denotes my personal belief that there should be a separate article for the brand but later moved it back to it's original article as there will be sentiments attached to the brand that will play a huge factor while creating the new page and which might effect the credibility of my edits. Hence, keeping these pages away from my interest. Shrn1611 (talk) 12:46, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for admitting you lied. That's a step toward being unblocked. A small step, though; you will find it hard to earn back the trust of the community, given how strongly you stuck to your lie initially. --Yamla (talk) 12:52, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You blocked me because you for my actions for some other page that you thought I was associated with which I was not and I'm still not. I don't know why do you have a problem with me, is this how the community treats new comers? I guess everyone makes mistakes and then tries to fix it and that's my case for the company I work for but you blocked me while was try my hands on an article which I'm not associated with it. However, I did whatever you asked me to do to start my journey again and learn from the mistakes highlighted by the community. Stil, why? Shrn1611 (talk) 13:02, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yamla, adding to this it wasn't a lie when I stated that statement. All my edits are done by will no one has ever approached me or asked me to edit for them. I take full ownership for my edits. And I believe I do deserve the chance to start with work again for the platform. Shrn1611 (talk) 13:18, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As you are now contradicting yourself, I'm done; I will not respond to you any further. You've strongly denied, then admitted, then walked back your admission of violating WP:COI. It's going to be hard for anyone to trust your word going forward. You are free to request an unblock and another admin will review it, but given your repeated attempts to mislead us, I strongly oppose unblocking this account. --Yamla (talk) 13:31, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yamla, isn't this your statement for blocking me "As you are clearly violating WP:SOCK, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO, I have blocked this account indefinitely." And have not been doing whatever is asked by you to clear myself of everything? It's you who has been contradicting statements and not me. See the only thing I want is to go back to the editing space again. But those were some strong words used by you in your later comments which I would like deny and will keep answering whenever you raise them. I have resubmitted my request and would make as much attempts it takes me to get back. Shrn1611 (talk) 13:53, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alaya Furniturewalla (January 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MurielMary 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.
MurielMary (talk) 09:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Shrn1611! 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! MurielMary (talk) 09:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This user has publicly declared that they have a conflict of interest regarding these Wikipedia articles:
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).

Shrn1611 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear Admin, as my edits were not as per the Wikipedia content standards which I'm now completely aware of(Lines which sounded promotional and violated the guidelines). I fully take responsibility of my actions and will be more careful that such instance doesn't take place again. Will be more careful with all the guidelines. There has been a slight confusion with my actions with those who have randomly made edits to the page. While my intentions were to make the page more accurate and relevant, I have been seen as an account who is trying to violate by conflicting with the brand. I request you to unblock my profile as I would like to resume the work I've been doing with Wikipedia. I've also added the pages with which I've conflict with and if I edit these pages will follow the protocol set by Wikipedia. Hoping to resume the work I've doing with Wikipedia. Shrn1611 (talk) 08:46, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

First, you need to return to your original account to request unblock. Once you do, you won't be allowed to edit about your clients or anything related to your conflict of interest. You'll need to tell what you will edit about instead. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 25 January 2020 (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.

  • 331dot This is my only account. I don't have any other accounts with Wikipedia. Shrn1611 (talk) 09:55, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The blocking administrator thinks that you do. If you don't, you will need to address the claim of block evasion in any request you make. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you need to make a new unblock request for it to be considered. Someone else will review it. 331dot (talk) 13:25, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you 331dot. Shrn1611 (talk) 13:41, 25 January 2020 (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).

Shrn1611 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear admin, I'm fully aware of the violations done from my end and it wouldn't happen again. I would like to clarify that this account is the only sole account which I have and I don't have any connections with Sumesh Dugar. I would request you to unblock me to continue my contribution towards the platform. Shrn1611 (talk) 13:41, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Behavioural and/or technical evidence strongly suggests that this account is a sockpuppet. Simple denial is not considered a sufficient reason to unblock the account. In order to be unblocked, you will need to convince the reviewing administrator that there is a better explanation for this apparent connection than the abuse of multiple accounts. Yunshui 雲水 10:07, 27 January 2020 (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.

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

Shrn1611 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear Admin, I went through the allegation on me on which I would like to highlight that this account is not a sockpuppet of Sumesh Dugar. The edits which were made by the user is completely different than what I have made on the page. Please see through the contribution of both the profiles to understand that this is my own account and I request you to unblock me as there is a complete misunderstanding. I take full responsibility of the edits which sounded promotional. I'll ensure that such instance doesn't occur again and will be more careful with my edits. As you can see that this is the third time I'm appealing to unblock my account shows that I really want my account back. Kindly consider my request. Shrn1611 (talk) 19:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I'm willing to extend the benefit of the doubt here. Although you've previously violated WP:COI, you've taken steps to correct that. Although the particular article in question suffered from extensive violations of WP:COI and WP:PAID and WP:PROMO, I'm willing to accept your claim that you weren't involved with that. Therefore, I unblock you with my apologies. Please copy your COI declaration over to your user page. If you are uncertain how to do so, please ping me and I'll be happy to do so on your behalf. Welcome back, and thanks for waiting during this very slow process. Yamla (talk) 16:11, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yamla, first of all thanks a ton for activating my account. I almost lost hope of getting this account back. Just had a query regarding the WP:COI. If I quit the company do I still have WP:COI with that company?

Also, I have mentioned above the WP:COI do I need to add a separate section for that? Shrn1611 (talk) 18:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In general, you should assume you still have a conflict of interest. It's better to be safe than sorry, so you should declare it. You can note that you no longer work at the company. WP:COI notes that you should do the declaration on your user page (this is your user talk page). If this doesn't fully answer your question, I'm happy to go into more detail! --Yamla (talk) 22:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chandan Saxena (March 12)

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 Brihaspati was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.
Brihaspati (talk) 10:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo manipal.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo manipal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (February 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Timtrent were:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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 organizations and companies). 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:
This is a well disguised advert. Many of the references are regurgitated press releases and PR material. This is WP:BOMBARD If it can be rescued, so be it, but adverts have no place on 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.
Fiddle Faddle 13:34, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Information icon

Hello Shrn1611. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:ManipalCigna Health Insurance, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Shrn1611. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Shrn1611|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. I see you have declared on your user talk page, not your user page, a COI with an organisation. Please explain your relationship with ManipalCigna Health Insurance.

Please make declarations of COI or Paid Editing on your User page Fiddle Faddle 13:40, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Timtrent, thank you for the inputs shared on the ManipalCigna Health Insurance article. This is my second attempt on writing an article on Wikipedia. I have been off Wikipedia since the time I was blocked earlier for violation of norms. It was rough a phase since I was enjoying my time here on editing articles while the norms were something I was still understanding with each edits which were being made. To get back on the topic of this conversation, this article has been my attempt and there are no paid aspect to it. I have already disclosed my employer details to Wikipedia to avoid this any complications with Wikipedia. This is something I do as a passion and contribute to Wikipedia community. I have gone through the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements to understand what should not be done. I'll be re-writing the article based on your feedback as I want to attempt to write articles. It would be a great help if you can help in any way to take assist in this initial stage from other editors who are well versed in page creation.

I hope this justifies my case and I re-ensure you that there is no affiliation with the company. All my edits are based on the new developments which occurs. My attempt to publish article on Alaya Furniturewalla was also not successful and later was published by another editor. Through this article I want to successfully start write articles for Wikipedia.

I rest my case here. Shrn1611 (talk) 15:54, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Alaya Furniturewalla

Hello, Shrn1611. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Alaya Furniturewalla".

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) 15:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Wikipedia content guidelines
  2. ^ Understanding Wikipedia's content standards
  3. ^ Policies and guidelines
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Shrn1611"