Talk:Neelam Saxena Chandra

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... (the links given at present are all verifiable. Moreover, a few more links were added a few minutes back to verify) --Nikitasaxena (talk) 06:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC) still editing it. The About section will be changed in a few minutes

the links given at present are all verifiable. Moreover, a few more links were added a few minutes back to verify in the last edit on 18/7/14 at 19:50 hours

Nikitasaxena

The notice appearing on the page says

[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. (July 2014) This article uses bare URLs for citations, which may be threatened by link rot. (July 2014)

I have added further links for this well known author. A few more links were added a few minutes back to verify in the last edit on 18/7/14 at 19:50 hours. How do I further improve it?

Nikitasaxena — Preceding undated comment added 05:20, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Publications section
I have deleted the entire publications section. Ignoring the COI issue, many of the works seems to be published by "renowned publishers" such as "Petals Publishers & Distributors" who feature a quote by the subject flogging their services. Publications should be added only if they come from a reputable non pay-to-print publisher or have independent reviews. --Neil N  talk to me 16:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Neil N , I doubt that the publication section is removed while books of the section were cited primary sources, mentioning the title of the books does not fall under Notability (books). As the rule, "In some situations— for example, if a given book itself does not appear to fit the established criteria for notability but the author is notable and has an article in Wikipedia— it may be more appropriate to feature material about the book in the author's article rather than creating a separate article for that book." I had taken a glance on the sources, there were reviews on some books, removing the whole section, I think is not legitimate. I hope this helps. Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 17:30, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi . I hear what you're saying but I'm asking for more than "it exists" as an inclusion criteria. A decent publisher at least. Otherwise, the conflict of interest editor will turn this article into an advertisement as was attempted before. I will restore the section but heavily trim it. --Neil N  talk to me 17:45, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced about "Authorspress" as a publisher but I've left the books published by it. --Neil N  talk to me 17:59, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks Neil N , I knew your concerns, you are surly right in this regard as I know too that part of the world, we have to bear such kind of subjects and remain working, reverting until some new rules come.Justice007 (talk) 18:30, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --164.100.1.207 (talk) 10:02, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

There is no advertisement in page. Links have been provided for all the statements. It was marked for deletion earlier also, but kept for reasons already stated.