User talk:Rajlaxmi2

Hi, My Name is Ajay Singh and i love travel and write poems and now i want to start wikipedia edit. kindly educate and help me to get batter understanding on this awesome platform.

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).

Rajlaxmi2 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I already told that i found these images via local groups and community i also involved in film making and have connection with some industry people and they send images via whatsapp email and other things i also creating a website filmiline which aim to provide artist actor director and films information so i usually collect the pics. if you unblock me i will help in contribute in entertainment articles. Thank you for your valuable time Rajlaxmi ^Talk? 19:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I can't understand that stream-of-consciousness run-on sentence. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:41, 20 January 2021 (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.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kavita Joshi (October 12)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Hatchens 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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kavita Joshi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Kavita Joshi, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hatchens (talk) 15:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rajlaxmi2! 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! Hatchens (talk) 15:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kavita Joshi (November 17)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KartikeyaS343 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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kavita Joshi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Kavita Joshi, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KartikeyaS (talk) 07:14, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kavita Joshi (January 12)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by GSS 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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kavita Joshi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Kavita Joshi, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

GSS ^💬 08:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021[edit]

Hello Rajlaxmi2. The nature of your edits 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:Rajlaxmi2. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Rajlaxmi2|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. GSS ^💬 13:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Rajlaxmi2, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Rajlaxmi2|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. GSS ^💬 17:14, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GSS, I just started my editing and found a subject and thought to create a article. I usually watch dehati films which make me feel good so i choose Draft:Kavita Joshi and process it declined about 3 month ago and i thought she have enough media coverage that is the reason I keep Searching for more resources to make it better. If this is not enough to convince you that I am not a paid for this and its my hobby to write biographies about living person. if you think i'm continuously extending the article so i will stop it and pick another subject or person to pursuing my interest. lets me know I should improve this and start another article creation. --Rajlaxmi2 (talk) 17:23, 12 January 2021 (UTC)Raj[reply]

Thank you for replying. Can you please explain how you own these images and what is your connection with these people? GSS ^💬 17:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I found these images via internet and facebook. I joined some groups which shared photos of Dehati film celebrities. --Rajlaxmi2 (talk) 17:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I tried but can't find these images anywhere so can you provide a link to those web pages? GSS ^💬 17:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I found this image via a whatsapp group so no link available. Thanks for asking interested question about images. -- Rajlaxmi ^Talk? 17:51, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that you misrepresented where you got those images from. That destroys the credibility of everything else you have said above. Therefore:

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. MER-C 18:33, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What should I do about Draft:Kavita Joshi which they submitted for review? Eyebeller 18:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Eyebeller: the subject is not notable so it can be rejected. GSS ^💬 18:49, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done Eyebeller 19:10, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not paid edit and subject is very notable. Must see source which required and her work on YouTube.

 Rajlaxmi  ^Talk? 03:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kavita Joshi is a top actress in North India. Her views on her youtube videos very highly and main media stream publish article for the same topic. So need to re think about it. Thank you Rajlaxmi ^Talk? 03:16, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kavita Joshi (January 12)[edit]

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 Eyebeller was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Eyebeller 19:09, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, [user:Eyeballed] As you recently declined my draft to get approved but I request you kindly rethink about it. Kavita Joshi is very popular actress in North Indian Cinema and she also work more than 28 regional film with north Indian superstar [Uttar Kumar] and also play devi seeta in historical Ayodhya ki Ramleela in Ayodhya along with so many bollywood actors.

Over the Internet main media publish so mang article for her notable work and views over her films and video songs crossed millions of views.

So I think this person deserve to article on wikipedia. Thank you Rajlaxmi ^Talk? 03:25, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why this article disqualified[edit]

Hi, I'm trying to publish this article since 3 to 4 months but administrator of Wikipedia not looking for it. If you not supported right person to get approved it's kind of thing not good for wikipedia. Please give me your valuable suggestions. Rajlaxmi ^Talk? 03:01, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, [User:Eyebeller]] I would like to request you please seen views on her youtube videos and media article. Than decide this article notable ty o not. Wikipedia war for paid edit is out of mind. If a person is genius and working hard and deserve recognized its must happen. If you think I paid for this I should vanish. Please re think about your decision. Thank you Rajlaxmi ^Talk? 03:31, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]