User talk:Heena jatania

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Heena jatania, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing four tildes (~~~~); our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

We're so glad you're here! Meatsgains (talk) 02:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Raghav Podar[edit]

Hello Heena jatania,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Raghav Podar for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

Hi, I'm replying in response to your posting at User talk:Cwmhiraeth#Clarification on Nomination for speedy deletion of article Raghav Podar. If you post an article it will be assessed as it stands. If you don't want that to happen, you should write it as a draft.

it did not provide adequate independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. It is now Wikipedia policy that biographical articles about living people must have independent verifiable references, as defined in the link, or they will be deleted. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the him or his company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, 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 company claims or interviewing him or its management. Although you provided references, many were clearly not independent third-party sources, such as those associated with his business, or the Bett Asia piece, which is just a puff for him of almost saccharine sweetness. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.
it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.

Examples of unsourced or self-sourced claims presented as fact include: contribution to the field of education and society has been recognized and bestowed with many awards... he makes a strong distinction between... He is committed to giving the children only the best... He is a thought leader... keenly sought after across Asia and UK...his notable presentations...– and so on, it's a hagiography, we need facts, not your (or his) opinions
You list supposed awards, all sourced to his own company, rather than independent sources, but find no room for any criticism of him or his company.
What's the point of the list of his quotes? They have no context, and appear to be just promotional in intent.
If you think his articles are notable, put them in a bibliography section at the end, with references not direct links. 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 links to his own work.

the article was substantially a copyright violation. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial but there is no indication that the copied site allows free use. Text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient. But in any case the copyrighted text is far too promotional to be useful for Wikipedia's purposes, so there would not be any point in your jumping through all the hoops that are required. You identified the text that had been copied from the Bett Asia page, I didn't check whether anything else in the article was copied from other sources.
If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that he 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 Wikipedia:Requested articles for the article to be created. See also guidance for editors with conflicts of interest.
If you work directly or indirectly for him or his organisation, or otherwise are acting on his 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 him or his organisation, 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:Heena jatania. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Heena jatania|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. 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.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure 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? 07:04, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More[edit]

You can rewrite as long as you follow all the guidelines above, and you should do so as a draft initially. You cannot use the image though. It's not your own work, and as I said above, just stating that you have permission to use the image isn't sufficient. If the copyright owners wish to release the image to be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial, we need to be able to verify that through the OTRS system, see here, section headed "Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS?" Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:50, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Raghav Podar moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Raghav Podar, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the confirms on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. Dial911 (talk) 07:45, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Raghav Podar (April 12)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dial911 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Raghav Podar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Raghav Podar, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dial911 (talk) 07:46, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Heena jatania! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Dial911 (talk) 07:46, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]