User talk:Roli Sinha

February 2017
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Aashif Sheikh has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:47, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Aashif Sheikh was changed by Roli Sinha (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.921426 on 2017-02-04T15:47:15+00:00.

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Aashif Sheikh. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Justeditingtoday (talk) 18:17, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Aashif Sheikh. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. ''Diffs: Content should not be written from a fan's point of view, and we should not be drooling with admiration at the subject's feet. A statement like "At 52 years of age, Aasif doesnt look a day above 25, he looks absolutely a handsome hunk and has a huge female following who are falling for him like nine pins left, right and center" is so absurd, it is indistinguishable from vandalism.'' Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:27, 4 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Additionally, other aspects of these edits introduced unsourced content about the subject's life. That's not acceptable at Wikipedia. All content about living people must be impeccably sourced. See WP:BLP. Unsourced content will be removed. Please also familiarise yourself with our guidelines on reliable sources. Blogs and other random websites are not suitable. We're only interested in what sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say about anything. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:33, 4 February 2017 (UTC)