User talk:Prinshukr/Vivekanand Jha

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because... I would earnestly request Wikipedia admin that the editor who has recommended this article for deletion should not review my article nowonwards as he has been targeting my article on account of bite, witch hunt, aggression and vandalism. Certainly i am a new editor to wikipedia and i have received no co-operation at all from this experienced editor. The article under discussion was accepted for publication on 06 Jan 2015. Since then and till 04 Mar 16, not a single question is raised against this article. On 04 Mar 16 he recommended it to speedy deletion. I contested this speedy deletion and one admin declined its speedy deletion. Again same editor who recommended its speedy deletion, mobilize AfD. My question is that if this article was so much full of flaw and fallacies why anyone could not pay attention for one and more than year. Is article accepted for publication without any scrutiny? Is the speedy deletion is declined without any reason and investigation? Still I have tried utmost to address the grievances raised by the nominating and other editors. Moreover the article was on my user page only and i have not submitted even for the review --Prinshukr (talk) 11:44, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep, articles are "accepted" for publication without much scrutiny. In fact, articles are not "accepted for publication" at all. They are published and then eventually somebody may come along and notice a problem. There are now over 5 million articles on WP and it is unavoidable that a portion of those do not meet our inclusion criteria. The mere fact that something has been around for some time does not mean that it now automatically is considered to meet our standards. As for the previous deletion, I proposed this for speedy deletion as being too promotional (see WP:CSD). The reviewing admin did not think it was promotional enough to fall under this criterion, but that does not mean that they thought this article was without any problems. The AFD discussion is exactly that: a discussion and I would like to note that several participants argued for deletion of the article, with you yourself being the only exception. Re-creating a deleted article, even in your own userspace, is considered disruptive editing nd may get you blocked. If you disagree with the AfD, you can go to deletion review. Please note, however, that this has only a chance of success if either you can show that the closing admin wrongly evaluated the consensus of the AfD (that probability is basically zero) or if you can show good, independent, reliable sources that provide an in-depth discussion of the subject. Hope this explains and helps. --Randykitty (talk) 13:42, 15 March 2016 (UTC)