User talk:Bonadea/Archive 30

For your enjoyment
. I was actually looking for a differnt theory by Anne Elk (miss), but the original doesn't seem to be on YT atm. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 48
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 48, November – December 2021 
 * 1Lib1Ref 2022
 * Wikipedia Library notifications deployed

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Bypassing AfC by paid editors
who has declared themselves as being WP:PAID per and are  subject to WP:COI by actor Jeet (actor) moved Raavan (2022 film) from draftspace submitted for WP:AFC per. It can be a possibility that are  are involved in some kind of sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry since both are involved in creation/submission/movement from draftspace to mainspace of Raavan (2022 film) and Draft:First HelpCare per. This must stop as its a kind of violation. 2402:3A80:1C46:D09C:196C:D08C:3137:2E88 (talk) 13:35, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Creation Draft:Ray Strachan
hello i have been editing Ray Strachans page for a long time now and i need help getting it created i have followed every single guide line that wiki has put in place can you please approve it or help in improve it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.6.192 (talk) 22:25, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse
I am very sorry to see you have decided to remove your name from the Teahouse host list, but I hope this doesn't mean we will lose your valuable contributions at the Q&A forum itself? With 1,161 contributions there, as at Dec 2021, you have been the 13th most active contributor there since its inception and one of the stalwarts. As you can guess, far and away outdoes all the rest of us! If the wording I used at WT:TH in my attempts to inform and encourage everyone to ensure they're up-to-date with the latest developments that new users are going to see soon has been the cause of this, then I would like to sincerely apologise. That certainly wasn't my intention. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:25, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Gaya3em
A mess. Engvar changes, capitalizing a refname, changing "The ceremonies here held outside" to "The ceremonies here held outside" when there was no "here", that was a typo foe "were". A few good changes but not enough. Doug Weller talk 08:18, 16 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Blocked but I'm going to ANI to ask for a review and help. Please chime in when I do. Doug Weller  talk 08:30, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper News
Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest. Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
 * The template db-afc-move has been created - this template is similar to db-move when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Regarding Talk:Ayan Nayak
I have filled a new report at Sockpuppet investigations/AnonymousIndiaz based on the observations and evidence presented and on suggestion from SPI clerk. Thank you 2402:3A80:6BE:CA37:AE63:22F4:F2FD:E2DA (talk) 05:02, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Above LTA IP is User:Amkgp see this SPI Archives there clearly mentioned about this LTA IP.

Thanks
aka २ तकर पेप्सी along with is CU confirmed and blocked for sockpuppetry per 22 Feb. 2022 Sockpuppet investigations/AnonymousIndiaz. Thanks for helping out for which I was able to file the SPI case by providing evidences at Talk:Ayan Nayak. I am sure that Ayan Nayak is some kind of rising/junior artist who is trying to create articles through brand agencies for WP:PROMOTION. Their social media links makes it more of a strong case. Anyways, Ayan Nayak is fully protected and since evidences are present at the talk page I think we need to worry but need to be vigilant as they may come back soon. 2402:3A80:6BE:DC75:B4BC:35B3:B6FC:9A5A (talk) 17:36, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Draft:Philipp_Hochmair

Hello Bonadea, I am sorry if it seems that I have a conflict of interest. I don't know the actor personally, but I am enthusiastic about his films and projects. That's why I started to add missing information in the German article. Since I am interested in the work of Wikipedia, I wanted to try to create the English version and then found that there is already a draft, which I then revised. Since I was rejected again and again, I am now somewhat at a loss and therefore very much hope that I now meet all the criteria and finally understand the work of Wikipedia. Many thanks for the support and many greetings Emmy1707 (talk) 14:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Philipp_Hochmair
Thank you for your detailed feedback. I will revise the article accordingly. However, I have one last question: There was a TV broadcast for Brandauer's 78th birthday to which only Hochmair was invited and in which their friendship becomes clear. But it is no longer available and could at most appear on YouTube. YouTube, however, is unfortunately not a reliable source. There is only the reference to this broadcast in the net: https://tv.orf.at/program/orf2/ausdemarch106.html. Therefore I must look then probably further.Emmy1707 (talk) 11:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Dear Bonadea I have now revised the article according to your completely justified criticism and - hopefully - found reliable sources. I hope that everything is now correct. Thank you very much.Emmy1707 (talk) 08:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft: Shrimad rajchandra love and care draft page
Hello, I am an unpaid volunteer, working with other unpaid volunteers to edit the page of Shrimad rajchandra love and care. An organisation that is well-known to Indians primarily due to its nationwide/worldwide charitable activities. The organisation is the highest fundraising NGO for Asia's biggest marathon, the Mumbai Marathon for the past 11 years.

It is well-known to the public, celebrities, and leaders such as the Prime Minister of India and various state and federal politicians in countries around the world. The page currently reads factually, without embellishments.

Please re-read or point out specific sections that need to be edited for neutrality and I'll gladly rework it to make it like other NGO pages (which were referenced heavily prior to starting this draft). This page currently reads more neutral than several other existing ones.

Please help me make this page rich with detailed information because it is truly noteworthy.

Also wanted to know how the page's title case can be improved to Shrimad Rajchandra Love and Care. Dmehta81 (talk) 05:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

What
I am not promoting any website, that you are saying, sportskeeda I have many other website to add link. And you are saying you block me, I can also block you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ripomobo11 (talk • contribs) 08:09, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I did not say you were promoting a website. I said that you needed to stop adding promotional content, especially when you restored such content after it had been removed. I also didn't say that I would block you (I couldn't do that, since I am not an administrator – and if I were an admin I wouldn't block someone I had been in a content dispute with), but that if you keep making promotional edits you might eventually be blocked. --bonadea contributions talk 09:53, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

OK dude sorry Ripomobo11 (talk) 10:05, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Virat kohli
You are saying this is not look fan based but when I add such words like well regarded, one of the greatest etc in Ms dhoni page an editor is saying there is not needed to add, it is fan based, you can't decide who is worst or who is greatest by your words despite I have reference of website like ESPN, ICC,  Hindustan times etc so I will consider your edit also as a fan based Ripomobo11 (talk) 08:49, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * you misunderstand the problem here, and I think the main issue is really the fact that you don't quite understand the policies involved. You are absolutely right when you say that Wikipedia editors can't decide who is "worst" or "greatest", and it is important that Wikipedia articles don't make such claims in Wikipedia's voice. What Wikipedia can do is present a neutrally written summary of what reliable and independent sources say. This should not be ridiculously detailed and shouldn't repeat every opinion by every critic in every newspaper. If editors disagree about which information is relevant and which is undue detail, they should discuss that on the article talk page.


 * In other words, a Wikipedia article can't say "She is the best fielder of all time", but it could be perfectly fine to say "She has been regarded as one of the best fielders of all time". In the case of Virat Kohli, I think you refer to my edit here. I restored the text "He is often considered one of the best batsmen of his era and some critics believe him to be one of the best limited-overs batsmen in history." Note how it says "often considered one of the best", and "some critics believe him to be one of the best"? That is very different from saying "He is the best"! And importantly, there are multiple sources – nine, in fact – quoting experts and other cricketers in several countries. If you believe the wording to be too strong, or if you think that one or more of the individual sources is inadequate, by all means bring that up at Talk:Virat Kohli. But you would have to explain what you mean by "fan based" (I used that phrase because that's what you used in your edit summary when you removed the text, but I honestly don't understand what it refers to!)  The edit history of MS Dhoni is a mess and quite honestly that article should be thoroughly revised – I won't try to dig out relevant diffs there, but in Rahul Chaudhari, this could be an example. Your phrasing "who has played as a defender and later became one of the most successful raiders" is written in Wikipedia's voice, and had no reliable source and no context as to what "later" means. Again, if you think that kind of information would be valuable and relevant, Talk:Rahul Chaudhari is the place to discuss it. --bonadea contributions talk 11:43, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@bonadea I also added one of the greatest not the greatest. Despite of this they said you can't write it. I have reference of website like ESPN, ICC etc but they revert my every true edit. If you able to add this that he is one of well regarded wicket keeper batsman in the cricket, I will be your thankfull because If I do so they eventually revert it.if you wanted I will provide all the resources of reliable and renowned website to proof or refer it Ripomobo11 (talk) 12:00, 17 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Here is what you need to do: go to the talk page of whichever article it is you want to add that text to. (Maybe Talk:MS Dhoni?) Start a new section at the bottom of the talk page.  Be really clear about what you suggest, like so: "I think this text should be added after the second sentence: the exact sentence you would like to add". Do not say anything about other Wikipedia articles, or about other editors being unfair, and remember that your command of English is not that strong which can make some of the things you say sound less polite than you intended.  Focus only on the specific information you want to add to that specific article.  Then, provide the references you want to use to support the text. Not just links, but formatted references, like multiple editors have demonstrated on your user talk page.  And then you wait for other editors to weigh in. You should not start editing the article after a few hours because nobody has responded.


 * What you need to stop doing is indiscriminately removing text and sources from articles about cricket players, with odd edit summaries that have no basis in Wikipedia policy (and are sometimes pretty difficult to understand):, , , , , .... maybe some of these are appropriate, maybe not, but it really looks like you are removing individual words and phrases without making an effort to understand the context or whether they are supported by sources or not.  Especially since you have edited at least 14 different cricket biographies today, with no more than two edits to any of them. ––bonadea contributions talk 16:28, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

ItsKesha
Hi I am coming to you for help since I have seen you have been arguing with this user a well - well I started a little one with her on the article of Scott Hall. It started since User:FæɹHaad made this edit on the page - in which he combined both sections, death and personal life, however as I have seen in all of other Wikipedia articles, this two sections are separated in every single one of them, so I undid the edition. Then User:ItsKesha came and undid it - she provided me with the article of Kirk Douglas, in which the death and personal life sections are separated as well... so I undid the edition -, later the user undid it again by just saying "His death was part of his personal life, that's how it works" -  and I came back to undid the revision by asking it politely to provide me with an article where it was stated that it should go like that "No it does not, show me a guide style article where is claimed that it workd like that, all of the articles on Wikipedia have their Death and Personal life sections separated, even the one you send me to check was the same. Provide me a good source where it says it should go as you are claiming." - . Finally she approached to my talk page and send me the edit warring thing - I feel this is like a kind of abuse of power for the side of this user, plus also a little bit childish since all I asked for was for an article, guide style, where I could checked that what he or she was doing was the correct thing. I also wrote her back -  "Well the edit war shall stop if you just provde me with what I was asking for, you just told me that it was as it was, but who actually claims that? If there is an article saying that those sections should be merged just give it to me, this is a childish move by your side If you ask me." So I have also seen this user is problematic in this kind of terms, that is why I am approaching you to remedy this situation and not cause me problems. Greetings, and I await for your comments fella. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 21:00, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Update, I have read the Manual of Style/Layout, "Body sections" part, there I found that usually sections with very few portions of text are the ones that should not have their own subsection, and this is not the case, plus it says nothing on separating death and personal life, I see the user argue about how the health problems of Hall were part of his death and that was the reason of the combining, but actually not even his health problems had something to do with it since his main problem was the alcholism, and he died following complications of a hip surgery after breaking it on a fall. So it made no sense for her/he on doing this. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 00:16, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Update 2, response from ItsKesha after she reverted my approaching to him/her - "you said all articles were like that, I found one instantly that proved you wrong, go away" the article she provided me with was this - Kirk Douglas, which actually has his own "Personal life", and "Death" sextion separated as seen Personal life, Health problems and death maybe she provided me with this because of the section saying "Health problems", which could of been translated to "Illness and death" used in articles such as José José - Illness and death, or Edith González, Illness and death. And yet again, the health problems of Scott Hall had nothing to do with his death. I could of just left this situation behind, but what he or she did was to send me an "edit warring" thing without even trying to investigate a little bit further, which may cause Wikipedia to lose faith on me or thinking I am doing bad-faith edits, which I am not doing. I do not feel this correct from the part of the user, and for what I could see on his/her talk page, she is an user doing this edit warrings most of the time. I woould not like to stay with cross arms watching how she/he discredits me as an editor. Greetings fella, I await for some feedback. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 00:35, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Twinkle Khanna
This page says in infobox & short description that she is a columnist, interior designer without reliable citations and in the lead. The below section don't have info about her this profession and Refrences section also don't have any reliable sources, who back this claim. I suggest to remove it immediately as per WP: BLP I red in talk page that someone wrote that she is a bestsellers author of India but it's a false thing, she have little recognition 'cause she is a retired actress. Success think (talk) 20:13, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 49
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 49, January – February 2022 
 * New library collections
 * Blog post published detailing technical improvements

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

E-Daakhil
Hi Bonadea. Thanks a lot for reviewing this article. However it was reviewed and reinstated earlier after meeting Wikipedia policies as the article is needed as iinformative platform for raising consumer complaints. Request you to revert your earlier comments. Thanking in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 01:04, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * No, it was restored as a draft. The text was unambiguous spam, and that is why it was deleted in the first place. You moved it back to mainspace yourself with minimal changes, ignoring the information from the admin who restored it. I am not an administrator so it was not I who deleted it, nor would I be able to restore it even if I wanted to. --bonadea contributions talk 08:48, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Heartfulness – Experience Life’s Potential(HELP)
Hi Bonadea. Thanks for your time and efforts for reviewing this article. However as I checked all the secondary sources and observed that they meet Wikipedia policies for having them in this article. Request you to suggest suitable additions to make improve it for the main space. Thanks in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 01:16, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Which secondary sources, and which policy? It is against Wikipedia policy to make the kind of claims that were in the article before I edited it down. There are no secondary sources in the draft, and no independent sources – just two press releases and a journal article by an author affiliated with the organisation, who interviewed heartfulness practitioners and found that they all thought heartfulness was good. The sources I removed were multiple copies of one of the two PRs in the draft, and another PR which only mentioned the programme in passing. It could possibly be mentioned in the article about Shri Ram Chandra Mission if there was an independent and secondary source, but there is no sign of it being independently notable. I am getting pretty tired of the heartfulness institute trying to use Wikipedia as a marketing / proselytising tool. --bonadea contributions talk 09:51, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bonadea. Thanks for your reply. Really appreciate of your time and efforts to improve this article and will be thankful. However will share below points as my opinion on this article.

1. I write articles to promote Wikipedia platform in public and all of them are not related to any particular organisation.

2. The programme in special I observed was being conducted across India and some countries.

3. It has really helped students in removing stress and pressure.

4. I dont know the history of Heartfulness or Shri Ram Chandra Mission either as Organisations or they using Wikipedia as marketing / proselytising tool.

As I gave considerable time and efforts building this article I hope you will help me to share suggestions to get this to main space. Thanking you in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 02:25, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bonadea. Hope you are keeping well. I added two more references to the article to make it notable as per Wikipedia policies. Kindly review and share your opinion. Thanks in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 06:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello Gardenkur, thank you for your message. In this edit you added a misleading statement ("A study conducted showed that Heartfulness Experience of Life's potential programme has positive impact on students"). The authors of the study are practitioners of heartfulness meditation, and the article was published in a predatory journal.


 * The source you included,, is a press release from the Heartfulness institute. Press releases are not independent, not secondary, and do not indicate notability. Besides, that press release was already in the article, published by a different outlet, , and the version you added had already been removed from the draft, together with several other copies of the same press release. A press release is produced by an organisation and is usually sent to a number of publications, or to a central news agency which other publications can then reprint. And a press release published in multiple places is still only one source. The source you added today, , is also a copy of that same press release, and you added it after a claim that already had a source, and was not verified by the source you added. So I'm afraid nothing has changed – the programme is still not shown to be notable. I replaced the copy of the PR that was in the draft with the copy you added today, which was published a few days earlier. --bonadea contributions talk 10:14, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bonadea. Thanks for your reply. As lot of efforts goes in preparing any article, hence request you to keep me guiding on making an article complete with reliable and independent secondary sources. Will get back whenever I add more references. Gardenkur (talk) 04:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bonadea. Thanks for your reply. Hope you are well. Is there a way to find out that the authors of this study are practitioners of Heartfulness meditation and it was published in predatory journal. Can you guide me how can we make out from published articles, if they are press releases. Additionally how this published article came from same press release.

Would like to learn from your long time experience in Wikipedia. Thanks in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 01:29, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * It is trivially easy to see that, , and are identical. Surely you must have seen that the text, images, and even the headline are the same in the PNI and biznewsconnect sources? The UNI source uses slightly different phrasing but the content is 100% identical – and UNI, like PNI, is a news agency, their entire business model is to publish press releases.


 * The International Journal of Current Research is listed in Beall's List and discussed in this paper and this list (which is more recent than either of the others). And none of the authors tries to hide their affiliation with the heartfulness foundation. The paper is not quite as horribly unscientific as the paper from Research Reinforcement. that's already cited in the draft – that one raises a lot of red flags. But the IJCR paper does not show that the programme has "a positive impact" on students. --bonadea contributions talk 18:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Let me be clear: there is not the slightest trace of independent, secondary sources talking about the programme in detail. I suggest that you stop trying to create an article about it. --bonadea contributions talk 18:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bonadea. Hope you are keeping well. I have added few more secondary sources in this article. I have been working on this and other articles in my draft space to move them to main space as per Wikipedia policies. Request you to kindly review and guide me accordingly. Thanking you in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 03:23, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Article Discussion
Hello, I want to discuss Draft:Ramesh Dahal like Articles for deletion/Sushma Adhikari (2nd nomination)

How Can I do that. Endrabcwizart (talk) 06:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Do you mean that you want the draft to be deleted? --bonadea contributions talk 06:48, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It makes me clear that, article needs to publish or reject last time. It take long time contribution. Now I'm going to move article draft to main space. Endrabcwizart (talk) 11:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Sujata Parashar Publishing Issue
Sir, we want to publish the page for Sujata Parashar as she is an award-winning Indian author. We have already edited the content regarding formal tone, and the sources available added are all authenticate, independent, reliable, published sources. Please help us to figure this out and specify the issue we need to focus or edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sneha-SIPL (talk • contribs) 10:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * thank you for your message. When you say "we" and "us", what does that mean? Who are the "we" that want to publish the article? --bonadea contributions talk 11:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This was a typo mistake. I have already edited the content before in respect to formal tone also the sources given are authenticate and reliable. I request you to specify the errors/issue to publish & improve the article in main space.
 * Page link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sujata_Parashar
 * Thanks in advance. Sneha-SIPL (talk) 12:51, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Please help & update on this. As I'm looking to improve the content part and any other changes that need to be done to get it published.
 * Thanks in advance. Sneha-SIPL (talk) 09:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I already explained what the issues are. The tone is promotional – it's not a question of a few isolated expressions or sentences, but of the overall style of the text. The sources are for the most part interviews and other non-secondary sources, with no independent in-depth coverage. I also want to ask again about your use of "we" and "us". What is your connection to Sagar Informatics Pvt. Ltd, the online marketing company that showcases Sujata Parashar's website on its "portfolio" page?  Your user name seems to indicate that you are in fact a representative of that company. --bonadea contributions talk 14:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This does not leave much room for doubt. --bonadea contributions talk 16:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This is in regarding to your reply and the connection with Sagar Informatics Pvt Ltd, I'm a representative of SIPL the company who works for their clients as service provider of Wikipedia article creation or modification, as a newbie I am unaware of some policy, I never tried to hide my identity intentionally or mentioned anywhere that I am working independently for any of the article. I am trying to learn and coping with Wiki policies as much I can. I appreciate your criticism & correction given by you; I have also added the paid contributor tag on my user page.
 * Thanks for understanding, right suggestions are always welcome to improve the quality of my work. Sneha-SIPL (talk) 06:50, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Article moved to mainspace after draft declined
Hello Bonadea. Recently you reviewed the draft of Ganesh Bala and found it currently unsuitable for publication, which I agree with. Unfortunately its SPA author has now moved it to mainspace anyway. Could you please suggest what can be done here? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:18, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh dear. Thanks for the heads-up. Have to leave the computer for a bit now so I can't double check sources etc, but I think an AfD might be called for. --bonadea contributions talk 14:45, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi
Hi! Please look at my draft. Thank you very much!31.40.143.16 (talk) 10:24, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi IP user, you have correctly submitted the draft for review, so it will be reviewed in due time. --bonadea contributions talk 11:17, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Draft: Christian Lavernier
Dear Bonadea, thank you for answering me, I'm asking you for help to understand if this entry can be included and how I can fix it. I tried not to use a promotional language "this is not my intention" and I'm asking for your advice to know whether to continue this entry or delete it. I really don't know how to make it more suitable and encyclopedic. Thank you if you can help and advise me. Obviously if you think it is not suitable I will delete it to avoid wasting time in its revision. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Christian_Lavernier i hope you can help me thanks --Kastalia81 (talk) 16:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Dear Bonadea,

I make some changes as you suggested. I improved the language by eliminating the advertising slang. I hope my changes are correct and useful. If you have any other suggestion, please let me know. Here the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Christian_Lavernier

Thanks --Kastalia81 (talk) 10:23, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Jolly Joe Timmer Article Question
Joe died in 2015, therefore it is impossible to be an advertisement. His businesses are either shuttered or sold off. I disagree, respectfully, with your decision to not allow this post. It is supported by newspaper sources and he was a major personality in the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania who has a legacy that will last for decades. It would be appropriate for him to have a page on wikipedia that can be hooked into Lehigh Valley related pages. I would also like guidance as to what you feel is inappropriately written. Having been in journalism for twenty years, I see nothing wrong with the piece. It is entirely factual and supporting wording to describe his impact in the community is important to the piece. If you advise changes, I will gladly consider making them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RadioHistorian528 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

concern about removal of the audit to audio book article with comments from your end like : Promotional text and linkspam) Tags: Twinkle Undo
hello, As per understanding Wikipedia is the place where we can add more and more information which is useful for people from all walk of life. On this belief i added name of few organizations which are actively now involved in hiring and producing good audio books. To make this information reliable i also added link to a US blog site which shared such data and per my research to mentioned companies are doing well. So in my view it was not good and really saddened to see that my shared link considered as a "spam". That is not right and the link was legit and you can see here as we — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leftovergoes (talk • contribs) 11:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I've removed the spam link from this message and warned Leftovergoes on their talkpage.  Acroterion   (talk)   12:11, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Dear Bonadea (i am not trying to spam this valuable resource)
please help me to know how to add good resources to wiki posts and also I am not trying to spam this valuable resource. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasunasirisl (talk • contribs) 16:38, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Citations Removed
Hi, Can you please guide me on why the citation link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nichar and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karivedu has been removed? The Wikipedia Pages were asking for citations needed, that's why I had added and the articles were relevant as per the provided link. I think I have not done any mistakes and contributed to the encyclopedia as you are doing. I am also aware the links are nofollow, but they are not garbage links. Check once properly before giving threats to any user or contributor. Hope you Understand — Preceding unsigned comment added by Datawithinfo (talk • contribs) 21:08, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

No good deed goes unpunished
We both tried to offer advice, but I do not understand the editor's responses at all. I suspect that they write in Tamil and submit the machine translated version to WP 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:25, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Anna Faktorovich
What is your evidence she's not a subject-matter expert? What subject matter is she not an expert in that she should be? Daniel Case (talk) 20:02, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't believe a "Further reading" section should list self-published sources unless there is a particularly strong reason to do so; even though WP:SPS doesn't say anything about Further reading, it makes no sense to me to include an entry that would be clearly inappropriate as a source. If you think that the essay adds anything to the rest of the FR entries, the onus is on you to make the case for it on the article talk page, as you know. I don't see it, after reading the essay, but YMMV. Anna Faktorovich herself provided plenty of evidence that she has no expertise in literary criticism or analysis, or any related field, when she attempted to promote her personal belief about the Shakespeare authorship question: discussions here (Drmies' analysis in particular is relevant, as is AF's responses), here, and here. --bonadea contributions talk 12:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)