User talk:Deepak Vidyarthi

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Deepak Vidyarthi/sandbox


A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Deepak Vidyarthi/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be blatant advertising which only promotes or publicises a company, product, group or service. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. — I B  [ Poke  ] 08:06, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

June 2017
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  05:45, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. I deleted your article because
 * it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to you or the vanity publishing company, press releases, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what you claim or interviewing you.
 * You had no such references, but more to the point it seems unlikely that a vanity press publication from last month would meet the notability criteria I've linked. You have no facts about the book other than what it is about and a plot summary
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: It is a first of its kind... a contemporary and hip feel to the readers.
 * You have a conflict of interest when writing this article. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your book is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.
 * Why am I getting my page deleted again and again&mdash; it's not your page, it's our page about your book
 * Before attempting to write an article about anything again, please read this guidance, but in any case stop trying to promote your book here. There is no way that it possibly meets the notability criteria, and in view of your COI, persistent recreating will only create problems for you

Jimfbleak - talk to me?  15:49, 26 June 2017 (UTC)