User talk:BangJan1999/Archives/2022/November

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Bharath Reddy Thella
Hello BangJan1999. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Bharath Reddy Thella, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Modussiccandi (talk) 17:59, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * To expand on the template message: I declined this G11 request because I didn't think the article's one sentence ("I born in 1995") promoted its subject in any way. The criteria should be applied narrowly. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 18:01, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

November 2022


Hello, BangJan1999. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. The page Draft:Swabhiman Samiti has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

This article needs to be rewritten from scratch from reliable, third party sources unconnected to the subject. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not an outlet for promotion, advocacy, or advertising.

Information on content and common pitfalls to avoid can be located here and here, however be aware that this is not an exhaustive list. Pages can sometimes avoid these pitfalls and still be seen as an ad copy or unambiguously promotional, particularly if the editor appears to be a paid editor or has some other conflict of interest. Please review these policies, including the FAQ page on organizations to determine if this applies to you.

Common mistakes or beliefs about promotional editing center on the assumption that promotional editing only applies to promotion for commercial gain. Some tags or G11 nominations are met with confusion by creators, particularly if they spend much time reading or creating corporate documents, mission/vision statements, or similar copy for their organization. The frequent exposure to promotional tone may make it difficult to notice non-neutral phrases or styles, as the editor has grown accustomed to seeing it as everyday writing or speech. This can be difficult, but not impossible, to unlearn.

Another common assumption is that the prohibition against promotional editing applies only to businesses or organizations. Anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc. and CV/resumé's are by their nature promotional.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources that are  unconnected with the subject and providing verifiable information. '''That generally means someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. ''' Please see this page on citing sources. This page has templates you can use in citing your sources. Place the template at the bottom of the page, and references cited in the text will appear there. New article creation can be difficult, but the Article Wizard can help you. The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems. You can also ask for help at the TEAHOUSE and on IRC chat.

New article creation can be difficult and frustrating. Sometimes it is better to first gain experience by fixing and helping maintain existing articles. Community portal/Opentask contains links to things that badly need doing, if you are so inclined.

-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Template
Don't get involved in what doesn't concern you. The template is not worth opening a discussion about. Sakiv (talk) 01:14, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Please do not tag any more pages for speedy deletion until you've read and understood the criteria for speedy deletion. If you've done so, you'll know that WP:CRYSTAL is not a valid speedy deletion criteria (as well as anything else on what Wikipedia is not for that matter). BangJan1999 01:23, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * What I know is that you are not entitled to remove the template for any reason. Have an administrator take a look at it. You need to stop immediately and reinstate the template.--Sakiv (talk) 01:25, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I will report you if you don't restore the template.--Sakiv (talk) 01:38, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Could you please show me the policy that says that only admins can remove speedy templates? Because last time I checked, the only person who is not entitled to remove speedy templates is the page's creator (which is not I in this case). Something you would know if you actually bothered to read the official criteria. Here's a quote from it:
 * "If an editor other than the creator removes a speedy deletion tag in good faith, it should be taken as a sign that the deletion is controversial and another deletion process should be used."
 * Note the use of the word editor above, which may include, but does not specifically relate to, admins. As I did not create the template in question, I am fully entitled to remove the speedy template. And I am assuming good faith because WP:CRYSTAL is not a valid speedy criteria despite your insistence that it is. BangJan1999 01:44, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I do not object to the existence of the article as you imply. I object to creating a template for a group stage for a competition that will not be played before 3+ years. This is one of the strangest things I've seen here. I purposely did not use a clear criterion for speedy deletion ( Custom rationale using template ). As for you, you deleted the template without even knowing the reason. Sakiv (talk) 01:56, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed the template because WP:CRYSTAL is not a valid criteria for speedy deletion, what part of that do you not understand? Custom rationale is not a catch-all for stuff that doesn't fit into the criteria, it's for when the reason for speedy deletion requires explanation beyond what's on the default template, and even then, you still needs to specify which criteria it falls under. It even says so on Template:Db. BangJan1999 02:12, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Let the template be so that the administrator can decide, and do not act yourself. WP:CRYSTAL does not mention anything about such templates.--Sakiv (talk) 02:18, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)