User talk:Mayurchanakya

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Mayurchanakya! I am Anishviswa and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out Wikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome!

Anish Viswa 04:50, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Mayuri Kango

I verified that none of the films done by Mayoori are in the list of films by Mayuri Kango. Mayuri Kango did act in some Telugu fims including Vamsi. Also, there was no confusion over Mayoori's suicide with Mayuri Kango. The only question still unanswered is the reason for her suicide. About the TV Serials Mauri Kango acted, I have no idea.
Anish Viswa 04:54, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Such discussions please put in the Talk page of the article only and not on the main article as it will not be deemed encyclopedic. CHEERS !!!
Anish Viswa 05:19, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Madan Deodhar for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Madan Deodhar 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/Madan Deodhar until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. j⚛e decker^talk 14:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Red Bull

Your edit here states that no reason was given. That is incorrect, if you read the edit summary from the previous edit here you will see that 'no source provided' was clearly stated.

When something you add to an article is removed, with the reason given being that it was "unsourced" -- i.e., it has no citation from a reliable source so that the information could be verified -- and was "POV", i.e. showed a "point of view" or opinion (see WP:NPOV), then do not simply restore it without fixing the problems. That is called edit warring and it can get you blocked from editing. So, do not re-add that information unless it has a citation from a reliable source to support it, and make sure that it is written in a neutral way. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 16:16, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Again, you have merely restored the previously removed text without adding a source. The sentence before your addition reads A review published in 2008 found no documented reports of negative or positive health effects associated with the amount of taurine used in energy drinks, including Red Bull. Caffeine and sugar levels in Red Bull are comparable to coffee and fruit juices respectively, and this sentence is referenced. Your addition (but have known to cause a variety of adverse health effects), which was inserted between the previous sentence and the reference, is at odds with the pre-existing content and thus also with the reference. (It is also ungrammatical).

Further, you have gone on to add information which is referenced to a source (Daily Mail) no longer acceptable on Wikipedia. See discussion here. The content will almost certainly be removed; please do not add it again or it will probably be considered edit warring. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 18:48, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sunday Evening Quiz Club

Hello Mayurchanakya,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Sunday Evening Quiz Club for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

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

John B123 (talk) 08:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Shivani Rangole for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shivani Rangole 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/Shivani Rangole (3rd 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. Zoodino (talk) 12:11, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Your baseless accusations at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shivani Rangole (3rd nomination)

Here are some few points, Hope you read them (unlike Wikipedia policies):

1. The only reason I preformed the exhaustive analysis of the 18 sources, is because of the nomination history of the article (it was the third nomination). The article was created every-time with a bunch of useless refs, claiming that it passes GNG, but it does not.
2. I listed all the 18 references that were part of the article in my analysis. I may not know Marathi, but I know Google Translate, used it to see every ref, including the Marathi ones. And on the nomination page you are accusing me for Systemic bias. (Really ?) You just ignored my good faith, from the next time maybe I should ask for WP:THREE, instead of doing all the handwork myself.
3. I don't know what do you understand by independent and trivial, but please read about the Wikipedia policies about them.
4. You were continuously bashing my analysis, but didn't even try to rebut anything specific using logic/policy. Just keep bashing me personally, without any reason.

Please don't personally attack any other editor. Happy Editing ! Zoodino (talk) 08:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I still feel arranging your personal opinions in a box doesn't constitute a analysis, you yourself mention that you dont speak marathi, a language the subject primarily worked in and still go on to nominate articles for deletion citing notability, for me thats Systemic bias. Anyway the article has been deleted and i dont see the point of you ranting on the talk pages of users who disagreed with you on the deletion. i see that as a personal attack on me. Happy editing to you too! Mayurchanakya (talk) 14:29, 27 August 2020 (UTC)