User talk:Adityamilyin
Welcome!
Hi Adityamilyin, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:45, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
January 2021[edit]
Hi Adityamilyin! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at High-dynamic-range video that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:45, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
March 2021[edit]
Hello, I'm WikiHannibal. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. WikiHannibal (talk) 17:10, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
July 2021[edit]
Please stop adding links to your blog, especially to support material for biographies. You can read our policy on this at WP:BLP or WP:RS. Thanks. Kuru (talk) 13:08, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- milyin.com: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C Cross-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Local - COIBot-XWiki - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • Live link: http://spam.milyin.com
- @Kuru: Hi I am new to Wikipedia, so please forgive me if this wasnt the right way to reply. Anyways, I believe you are referring to Bill Gates Bio. We make mistakes, and being a new user I might have made a mistake too. We can discuss it, and I would be more than happy to correct my mistake with your advice. I would like to clarify that the blog you mentioned isnt owned by me. I am NOT trying to market my article on that site with these cheap tricks. I considered it valuable material. I have in my other Wikipedia edits used other links too, including sites like Canva, Wikipedia's own articles and CNET. All I tried to do was add information. I am a book writer and I had written a book about Steve Jobs life. I had a lot of knowledge about the whole incident of Steve Jobs's accusations about Bill Gates stealing his idea. I wanted to put link of my book on Amazon, but I thought it would be wrong to ask people to pay $3 to be able get the information from citation. So I took the information published it on that site, and put the link.
Adityamilyin (talk) 13:24, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Your "book" is also not a reliable source. It is self-published material and no different than a blog - other than the fact that you've attempted to directly monetize it. I want to be clear here, since it looks like you're going to play the boundary-probing game: do not add any more links to material that you have a conflict of interest with, or this account will be blocked. Kuru (talk) 14:21, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hey there, Thanks for reply, I promise to not put any more links that have direct/indirect relation with me. But as I said that I had added lot of information added through my wikipedia edits. Some of these information was from reliable YT sources, others from sites like Canva, and others were general facts like the lastest version of Windows being Windows 11. I promise to not include any links involving me in future. But please allow me to have the valuable information benefitial to all wikipedia users be available again.
Adityamilyin (talk) 14:50, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Some startup's content marketing blog is not really a reliable source; frankly the material is cursory, has no authorship, and ends with a pitch for their product. I'm sure you can find material published with editorial oversight and a reputation for fact checking. We generally avoid YouTube videos unless they're backed by reliable organizations with the same reputation. "General facts" should also be supported by reliable sources. In that instance, the latest release is still 10. Again, please carefully read those two links I gave you above. Kuru (talk) 18:00, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
August 2021[edit]
