User talk:Gazelle Internet

April 2021
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Oyo Rooms. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. ''The content is sourced using reliable references. You are unnecessarily promoting "https://dackeree.com/", which is an unreliable social media source. DO not continue doing it. See WP:PROMO.'' Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

We were the first to come up with this information based on OYO owner tweets. Subsequently you have let others high-jack this early response. There is a lot of fake news circulating in "so called reliable sources of yours" and you just let it happen : Dackeree


 * That social media link is not a reliable source, even if you happen to be the first guys to report the owner's tweets. Besides, tweets coming from the party involved will be considered unreliable per WP:SPS policy. It needs to get verified by mainstream reliable media. Go through WP:RS and WP:RSP on the list of reliable and unreliable sources. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

The mainstream "reliable" media is themselves quoting the tweet (which to quote you "tweets coming from the party involved will be considered unreliable per WP:SPS policy" because at that date the owner did not give any interview to anyone, anyways very well: Dackeree

May I suggest to read articles properly before approving/disapproving. Also get some kind of domain authority check before allowing people to post so you don't waste anyone's time and most of all your own time. This whole conversation could have been avoided altogether: Dackeree


 * That's what I said, the tweets are WP:PRIMARY WP:SPS sources. Wikipedia content relies on WP:SECONDARY RELIABLE sources, emphasis on "reliable", that quotes the primary. The News18, DNA and Times of India are considered reliable mainstream secondary sources in Wikipedia. Your social media link is obviously not per WP:UGC. I rest my case. You can try asking at WP:RSN whether your link is reliable. I'm sure the community will disapprove considering well known media like The Sun and Daily Mail had been deprecated for being unreliable in Wikipedia. Another thing, promoting an unreliable source in Wikipedia is a waste of everybody's time. Regards!. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

My apologies to you. Hope you accept them. You are right we were in contravention of your well published policy, which we did not read and acted rashly on your forum.


 * That's fine. Happy editing . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:47, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Sir for being grandly forgiving. :)