User talk:Rahuljoshi9996

January 2023
Hello, I'm 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Health care have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:14, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it.  MrOllie (talk) 13:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

February 2023
This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, as you did at Green coffee extract, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ''This is a commercial website you have been inserting into different articles. It is not a WP:RS source.'' Zefr (talk) 06:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi Zefr,
 * I am just trying to share some valuable insights through my knowledge of the different markets. I have no intentions of promoting or advertising for any kind of commercial websites. Let me know how do I verify my sources to comply with Wikipedia guidelines. Rahuljoshi9996 (talk) 07:35, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Use secondary, peer-reviewed sources, WP:RS, preferably reviews published in reputable journals or textbooks. Zefr (talk) 16:31, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * www.growthmarketreports.com is a reputable source and I generally find their content very useful and informational. Reputable names such as prnewswire.com (https://www.prnewswire.com/news/growth-market-reports/?page=1&pagesize=100) or yahoo.com (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/global-naringenin-neohesperidin-dc-phloretin-150500973.html) trust them as their content source. I am a big market enthusiast and love to read market related articles anywhere. When I do find Wikipedia articles on any industry or market and I feel like I can add on to them (which is literally the best part of wikipedia) I go for it. No intention of promoting or advertising anything or anyone. Rahuljoshi9996 (talk) 12:56, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * No, it is not a 'reputable source', It has been spammed by multiple accounts. If we see this continue it will be placed on Wikipedia's spam blacklist. That they paid to have some of their content reposted on a press release service (which posts anything they are paid to post) proves nothing. MrOllie (talk) 14:06, 17 February 2023 (UTC)