User talk:Sonal.kulk

Speedy deletion nomination of Cycle day
Hello Sonal.kulk,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Cycle day for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Robert G. (talk) 18:30, 12 August 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 the organisation, 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 the organisation claims or interviewing its management. You gave no references at all. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.
 * there is no evidence to suggest notability. No verifiable figures on participation, nothing on funding or organisation, no research on impact, just promotion for the scheme.
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Your article was a fact-free mission statement. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: to make cycling mainstream in Bengaluru... bring about an increase in the usage of cycling... To make Bengaluru a healthier and greener city... and so on
 * there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. that's particularly the case when they are spamlinks to affiliated sites.
 * You first user name and we will focus make it obvious that you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, and you must declare it. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation 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 guidance for editors with conflicts of interest.
 * If you work directly or indirectly for the organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly. Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:     . If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

You said Why are the wikipedia pages of all actors/personalities allowed whereas a page about an initiative that has helped a city grow sustainably not allowed? It's because they read and followed our rules, you didn't. See other stuff exists.

Before attempting to write an article again, please check that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read this important guidance. You must also reply to the COI request above. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:12, 15 August 2017 (UTC)