hai sir you post a speedy deletation on Abhijith p page.he is a well known web devoloper, Idependent Web Security Researcher, Front End Web Developer, Speaker, Cyber Security Researcher and CTM of hacker day kerala chapter. what i want to do for this case, please consider me , what modification i want to do in page . I Hope you take neccessey actions...with regards Amith — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amithvpurushothaman (talk • contribs) 10:13, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, simply being everything you claim Mr Abhijith to be is not enough to have a Wikipedia page dedicated to him. The article is very promotional, almost like an embellished cover letter and all the sources (Twitter, GitHub, LinkedIn) are unacceptable when it comes to establishing notability of a subject for inclusion in Wikipedia. SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉10:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I was creating a page from where I studied. A government school under MHRD and no promotional content. Request to have a look on other Kendriya Vidyalaya Wikipedia webpages like similar content.
Kendriya Vidyalaya is a Central Government school, no donation, all government staff. The content was related to school.
Request to Editor Sir, have a look and provide proper guidelines so that Government funded school, have a Wikipedia page created by students or School authority.
Have a look and hope a positive response
Hi and thank you for your message! Unfortunately, I do not remember much about the deleted article, so I cannot reread it and give you specific pointers on how to improve it. While your school may be "no donation", the way you wrote the article was probably in a promotional tone, leading to me tagging it for speedy deletion (the fact that an administrator deleted it shows that at least one more person agreed with my assessment). If you believe your school meets the Wikipedia notability guidelines at WP:NOTE, you can request for the administrator who deleted the article to restore its contents in your sandbox, where you can improve on it. I suggest that you read WP:SCHOOLS to get an idea of how to write good school articles. Good luck! SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉17:28, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi SorryNotSorry,
I am writing with reference to the deletion of Bharat Wire Wikipedia page. The article was just meant to enlighten audiences about the start of one of world's largest wire rope manufacturing facilities...Could you please make it active again? I'll make necessary changes to make it more informative Ganganpati (talk) 07:32, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, unfortunately, I am not the admin who deleted your page, so I can't retrieve it for you. Perhaps you could contact them instead? Best of luck! SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉09:05, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I was writing about the history and achievement of a company. How is that considered advertising? Please help me out as I really am still confuse on how not to sound promoting with my first article. Thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsaqilamazlan (talk • contribs) 03:11, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I am not an administrator (nor the one who deleted your article), so I cannot review its contents and tell you why I nominated it for speedy deletion in the first place. Your best bet may be to ask the administrator involved. Good luck! SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉13:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, while I am certainly no expert in racing, as far as I can recall, the language used in the article was very promotional (something such as "best racing driver in Lithuania" if I recall? and several other phrases). I cannot say for sure if Mr Jonusis is in fact Lithuania's greatest racing superstar (since I cannot find reliable English sources on him), but you have to word such claims very carefully to avoid a promotional tone and also provide sufficient in-line citations and references to the claims. Maybe reading WP:YFA will help :) Cheers! SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉14:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, as stated in the BLPPROD I put on the article, "All biographies of living people created after March 2010 must have at least one reference to a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article.". Until you put in at least one reference as required, please do not remove the BLPPROD tag. Thanks! SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉11:28, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Some baklava for you!
Thanks for providing your support in my first Wiki Submission. I have been busy revising please don't delete me help me! Thanks
Hello SorryNotSorry. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that there is consensus that we shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created, as you did at Guidesindia. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course still be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 16:39, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Swapped out your prod
Hey I swapped out your prod on that ridiculous essay because it was promo (took me a while to see it) but it was promoting some ridiculous website that was linked at the bottom and the username was also the same (technetgr). Hope you don't mind! Also come back to IRC! Chrissymad❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thanks for noticing that! My mind just blanked out by the time I got past the first paragraph and I just PROD-ed it. Glad that terrible essay was removed either way! There was something funky going on with Kiwi IRC last week so I sort of gave up. Since it seems like it has cleared up, will hop by more often :p SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉15:48, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi SorryNotSorry,
I was not writing a piece about a webpage but about Ecommerce Software called Usercart. I placed it in the correct section and it was not blatant advertising.
Many Thanks
Steve
Hi, I'm pretty sure "an e-commerce and online store-management software" falls under web content, which is included in the CSD category. If I happen to be wrong, the reviewing administrator should fix things up :) SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉15:33, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted your edit to Luxo Jr. because frankly, the addition to the plot summary was barely comprehensible. I do not wish to be mean, but you have had many, many warnings from different editors regarding your edits to Wikipedia that do not make sense. Your comments are a jumbled mess of copy paste of other editors' comments that do not show your understanding of Wikipedia policy. Perhaps English is not your strong point? We require additions in the English Wikipedia to be written in proper, understandable English with appropriate references, so if your grasp of the language is not to the point where you can contribute positively to the encyclopedia, you should consider honing your language skills before editing further to avoid incidents like this and the numerous deletions of your created articles. SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉01:08, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
TokyoGirl blocked this editor indefinitely, although I would have if she hadn't beaten me to it. Also had to revoked talk page access because his response was just more nonsense. Doug Wellertalk10:15, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Although I have a page, this is my first attempt to add a page regarding someone else. I was the editor for one of Mr. Lumpkin's books. Recently that book became a bestseller on Amazon. It occurred to me that he might deserve a page. I was told that the more links within the Wiki page the better for verification. Apparently this is not true. Please view the page and let me if simply listing the books and authors without links would conform to the rules. If not, please suggest another approach. Any advice is appreciated.
Hi, unfortunately, I am not the deleting administrator and I cannot precisely recall the page's contents, so I will be unable to give specific pointers on linking and such. However, by your admission, you were Mr Lumpkin's editor and thus you have a conflict of interest with the subject and would be strongly discouraged from creating and editing articles involving him. SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉18:33, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, SorryNotSorry. You have new messages at Talk:Aphmau. Message added 06:42, 31 March 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, SorryNotSorry. You have new messages at Talk:Aphmau. Message added 06:48, 31 March 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello SorryNotSorry. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of MyDramaList, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: being one of the Top 5000 webpages in the world indicates signficance. Thank you. SoWhy10:20, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dear sir you post a speedy deletation on my Shringesh Kumar Dixit page.it is a well known web Movie Director, Filmmaker, Producer, and the Founder And CEO Entertainment Production Company Shringesh Films. what i want to do for this case, please consider me , what modification i want to do in page . How can i get again wrote article in this page. I Hope you take neccessey actions. help me plzz sir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urvil Dixit (talk • contribs) 11:14, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot comment on the contents of the deleted article as I cannot remember it exactly, but most articles that get deleted by CSD:A7 are because they do not make a credible claim of significance. It is easy for you to state that this man is a "well known web movie director" etc., but you need to back these claims up with reliable, independent sources (like newspaper articles). Bear in mind personal websites are not good enough, there must be at least some coverage from other sources, or the article would get deleted through other means anyway. Besides, filmmakers are a dime a dozen. What makes this particular filmmaker special? Did he produce a movie that broke box office records? Did he win any notable awards? Did he introduce revolutionary film-making techniques? If you can prove that he stands apart from the crowd, the chances of the article not being tagged for deletion will be higher. SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉16:59, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I can Prove That this Shringesh Kumar Dixit is a Indian movie maker. i am also attached newspapper link websites links etc. i can also prove that from cutting of newspapper. this filmmaker deserve our Wikipedia Page. Give me a exact Solution. tell me exact what can I do?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urvil Dixit (talk • contribs) 01:33, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that you read through these guidelines on how to create your first article. If you still believe that your article meets the notability standards required of Wikipedia, you can start creating your article here and then submit it for review. Good luck! SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉15:58, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly justify the speedy deletion as I will be forced to remove it. I have already posted on the relevant talk page about PrimoPrint https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primoprint and you have failed to reply there at all. As per Wikipedia rules you will have to counter contest my contest to speedy deletion, if you still warrant it's deletion. The content of the page on Primoprint is extremely similar to an existing page about vistaprint which has been approved, so unless you can clearly annotate which difference between the existing and approved page on vistaprint is promotional on Primoprints page as per your opinion then as per Wikipedia rules this does not qualify for speedy deletion and adding such notices to disrupt my work is disruptive editing
It is considered disruptive editing because you, as the article's creator, cannot remove CSD notices from the article. If you read the CSD notices posted on your talk page before removing them, you'd see "Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself" stated clearly there. I was not the one who first nominated Primoprint for deletion, I merely restored the CSD tag that was wrongly removed by you twice. Even if I did nominate it, I am not required to counter your contest to speedy deletion on the talk page. If you believe that I'm wrong, kindly link the Wikipedia guidelines that prove your point. As for the supposed promotional tone of the article, as I've stated, I was not the one who nominated it for speedy deletion under WP:G11, I merely restored that part of the template put by another editor, while adding WP:A7 because the article does not make any credible claim of significance separating Primoprint from other printing companies. SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉19:44, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
1) WP:A7 Only requires a credible claim of significance, not a credible claim of significance separating it from other competitors.
2) Nor are you absolutely required to restore a speedy deletion tag without stating a counter to contest, if so please link the Wikipedia page guidelines where you are required to do so and if none, this is your personal intention without basis on Wikipedia guidelines and therefore disruptive editing even though you have an opportunity to add a notice this does not mean you should. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AABBGUN (talk • contribs) 20:35, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I only put "separating it from other printing companies" to illustrate how it may be significant enough for inclusion into Wikipedia. Winning awards, having significant coverage in reliable sources, inventing new technologies would give the company a credible claim of significance because it separates it from your run of the mill company, or Wikipedia would be flooded with every little company that thinks it should have a page. And yes, I am not required to restore a speedy deletion tag, but if you were to look at WP:WARNING, Removing speedy deletion templates from self-created articles is under Unaccepted practices, unilateral action against policies or guidelines and if you check the Level 3 template which I used on your talk page, you will see that your actions are considered disruptive editing and under WP:DDE, I can revert your edits, which in this case was the removal of the speedy deletion tag. Meanwhile, you have not backed up your claims of my own disruptive editing with Wikipedia policies. SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉06:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! The CSD I first used was G11 because it used ridiculous language to describe him. Something about deadly earth-shattering kicks..? Then an administrator deleted it as A7.. So when the exact same article was recreated, I used both A7 and G11, but the administrator deleted it as just A7 again.. When it was submitted for the third time, that promotional language was gone so I didn't bother with CSDs anymore, yet the same administrator deleted and protected the page..? I'm not too sure what's going on myself! SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉05:32, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't it have been simpler to place the connected contributor tag in the article than request a speedy deletion? You requested a speedy deletion of my article as though it is for forbidden to write an article in which one is in some way related to. Did you read the guidelines of the COI yourself? 2gbeh (talk) 11:28, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
About the deletion of the Franklin Azzi english page
Hello,
First of all, sorry for my response time, I haven't been active on WP lately and just found your message. I know the page has been nominated for speedy deletion, as it is presenting a lot of flaws concerning advertising WP policies. However, I truly believe, looking through the recent deletion discussions for other architects, that this page can be improved, rather than deleted.
As I understood from reading the WP:G11 section, « If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text that complies with neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion » : I may have failed, so far, in producing a fully encyclopedic page : yet, I would like to try and rewrite it, according to the WP standards and methods. I am quite new on Wikipedia, and specially on the English one: but this risk of deletion could help me learn once and for all the standards of the english WP!
As for the notability matter, I noticed by reading the WP:CREATIVE section that the notability standards regarding living architects are very close to the ones we use in the french WP. Azzi was already regarded as an important figure by peers before september ; but since he was nominated to to rebuild one of the most famous buildings in Paris, namely the Tour Montparnasse, I figured this was the rightful moment for him to have a page on the english WP, and not just the french one.
By reading the different policies and guidelines for new articles, and getting some advice by experienced wikipedians, I truly believe I am able to rectify the page, rewriting it thoroughly and rigorously, in order to obtain an actual encyclopedic page.
Could I ask you to verify the page once I have rewritten it, and tell me if you are still in favor of its deletion?
Hello, SorryNotSorry. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, SorryNotSorry. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
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.
