User talk:Accesscrawl

Tagging

Further to the section above:

1. Nimbhi jodhan was already tagged with {{unreferenced}} when you added {{refimprove}} in Special:Diff/844999228. Refimprove is redundant when the article is unreferenced and tagged as such. It is a good idea to read the individual template's documentation, others are not quite as intuitive as these. Better than tagging for refs is to go find some sources. Also, since this is a proper name, do you think we should move the article to Nimbhi Jodhan? Or would Nimhi Jodhan be a better choice? If yes, why? (Hint: search for sources, compare with WP:COMMONNAME)

2. Calling for updates (26 bytes edits): in a, b, c, d, e, and f you tag with {{update|date=June 2018}} without a |reason= parameter. Take the first, Kevin L. Evans, what is it you think should be updated and why don't you just do it? Sam Sailor 17:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Since a reply is lacking here, I have undone your remaining additions of {{update|date=June 2018}}. If we wanted articles updated every X months, we would assign a bot to smack {{update}} on them. Please revisit WP:DRIVEBY that The Mighty Glen posted above and discontinue the practice.

Point no. 1 above offers you an opportunity to both get to know our naming conventions and to search for sources. It is a worthwhile exercise, and will be beneficial for arguing the RM you filed at Talk:Rajneesh (permalink). Sam Sailor 09:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your information. Accesscrawl (talk) 09:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome, but it would be even better if you try to figure out what to do with Nimbhi jodhan. I have pretty much served the case on a silver platter for you, without directly telling you what to do. It does entail that you start reading the links in project space that we post. I have indented your reply again, please now read WP:THREAD and MOS:LISTGAP. Sam Sailor 10:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sam, the page is supposed to be Nimbi Jodha. U could not understand what to do

Page move? Accesscrawl (talk) 11:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Now we have (at least) three different suggestions on the table

• Nimbhi Jodhan
• Nimhi Jodhan, and
• Nimbi Jodha

Which one do you think is best based on your understanding of WP:TITLE, a policy, and WP:NCIN, a guideline? Sam Sailor 11:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Nimbi Jodha Accesscrawl (talk) 12:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Why? Sam Sailor 12:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I'll get back with the reason. Accesscrawl (talk) 15:49, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I forgot this one, sorry. So, why should it be Nimbi Jodha? Sam Sailor 07:37, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm looking out for genuine reasons to support. Accesscrawl (talk) 08:01, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I moved the article to Nimbi Jodha, deprodded it, and added a few references and an infobox. Do you want to follow up? Ask, if you have any questions. Sam Sailor 16:46, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

thanks sam, I'll get back if i have any query Accesscrawl (talk) 18:23, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Ankit Arora (cyclist) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ankit Arora (cyclist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ankit Arora (cyclist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sam Sailor 05:24, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

COI editing

Hello Accesscrawl. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Talk:Rajneesh, and that you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, 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 receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, 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:Accesscrawl. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Accesscrawl|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. I believe this edit originated from a request posted on a freelance job websiteTemplate:Z159

I have no COI with Rajneesh whatsoever. If any edits feels like COI is possible it is mere coincidence. I have read Rajneesh books many a times and have a impression that the name should be osho. If that comes under COI that it can be a possible case of COI. Otherwise, thanks for visiting my talk page. Accesscrawl (talk) 08:15, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

This may just be a coincidence, however, may I be blunt and ask if you use Upwork? There has been a job on this platform to request a move discussion for this article. This was at just about the same time as the discussion was initiated. There are some additional examples. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 08:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jake Brockman: sir i do not use upwork. I have initiated the talk discussion on my own. I'm a Rajneesh Reader and believe that name should be osho. Can you send me the link of the job post? Accesscrawl (talk) 08:44, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I won't be promoting Upwork. The job has incidentally just been re-posted within the hour. It should be easy to find. If you are a reader of Osho you may also have a conflict, depending on your involvement. Please bear this in mind and familiarise yourself with the COI policy and WP:NPOV. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 09:56, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jake Brockman: I created move requested on 11 June. When was the first job post requested? I read many authors, including osho,does that make me COI to all? Don't give me unwanted suggestions. Please stick to your primary allegations. Prove COI if you can. Thanks. Accesscrawl (talk) 10:05, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

• Accesscrawl, can you explain the source for this information you added to the Ankit Arora (cyclist) article? I didn't find it in any listed references on the page and, given the COI concern expressed above, I have to ask if you created the article on the subject's behalf? Abecedare (talk) 16:06, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Respond @Abecedare: ,most importantly the COI isn't proven yet for Rajneesh. It was just a mere allegation. You being an administrator doesn't suit to draw conclusions. The information I've found for ankit arora is from a personal blog. Now personal blogs doesn't applies as a reliable source that is well known to me. However, few other sources mentions about his job at the BPO, etc and the personal ones draws the corollary. Moreover, this kind of in-depth info is rarely found on well known media. Now, if you say that he isn't well known, so the AfD is already live. Accesscrawl (talk) 02:21, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Accesscrawl, even if you obtain information from a personal blog you need to cite it so others can assess the source. And where exactly did you get the "Till date have covered 12 states and 6 UTs in 310 days and 14000 kms" bit that you added in this edit (it was falsely ascribed to two newspaper articles; the information is not even on the blog)? Abecedare (talk) 02:40, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Abecedare:, [1] [2] one more link is marked with it but it is not getting saved when I edit these are two Hindi resources which mention it. Moreover, I don't know why they are deleted. Please be very sure before you allege someone "Falsely". You are an admin, remember that. Accesscrawl (talk) 02:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Where do they say that? Abecedare (talk) 02:59, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

This info was given in https://m.patrika.com/bikaner-news/welcome-to-bikaner-ankit-which-has-come-out-of-india-tour-on-bicycle-1946447/ but not precise. I got the precise info from social media pages Accesscrawl (talk) 03:06, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Accesscrawl, the information is in none of the three Hindi newspaper articles you have repeatedly listed. Can you point to where on social media, as you now claim, you obtained the information? Abecedare (talk) 03:11, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

[3] this is about 285th day. I can't find for 310th though. But it was there. Accesscrawl (talk) 03:15, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

That is a closed facebook group, and non-public information, which heightens the COI concerns expressed above. At a minimum, it is clear that you mistakenly/falsely claimed that the information came from the Hindi news-sites both on the article page, and repeatedly in our discussion here. It is hard to assume good faith especially for the latter but I am dropping the issue now. I hope you realize though any repetition is likely to be sanctionable. Abecedare (talk) 03:25, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Abecedare: The closed group is not public that was not known to me. I had no intention to fulfil the stub. But when sam sailor msged me on my talk page to improve the article I desperately started looking for information. However, I accept the mistake and find myself responsible for creating content with no honorable references. I'll take care that this doesn't happen again. But there is no COI whatsoever. Otherwise, I would have declared it on the page. Accesscrawl (talk) 03:30, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Accesscrawl: I hope you don't mind if I butt in here and follow up where Abecedare started: Their first question was which source you used in this diff to change the text

from	to
Arora was a journalist for eNews Room, a digital magazine based in Kolkata, India.<ref>https://enewsroom.in/author/ankit-arora/</ref>	Arora worked for Genpact between 2014-16 and later as a journalist for Arbit newspaper , based in Jaipur, India. His last job was as a content writer before he left for the cycling journey. <ref>https://enewsroom.in/author/ankit-arora/</ref>

The enewsroom.in source does support the text in the previous revision. You replace "journalist for eNews Room ..." with "Genpact ... Arbit ...", but that is not supported by the enewsroom.in source. In Wiki-lingo that is called reference hijacking.
Your reply was "the information I've found for ankit arora is from a personal blog", but that link does not, AFAICT, talk about him working for Genpact and Arbit. Abecedere in their reply hints to WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT, and it is always best to stick to reliable sources, or at least sources that are publicly available. (I hate to labour the point, but it is important to read those WP:xxxx pages.)

I also butt in here, because your last message sounds honest and deserves a reply: my gut-feeling is that you have not been paid for proposing the Rajneesh RM, or for starting the Ankit Arora article, and you do the right thing when you accept the mistakes and take responsibility. It also gives me some confidence that you are simply making good-faith beginner's mistakes, when a long-term editor like Gpkp says he knows you in person. But finally – and please don't take this in any way belittling or discouraging – would a journalist like Arora pay for this 1-liner? Wouldn't he rather write a neutral autobiography with more substance, and then pay a seasoned SPA for sourcing, wikifying and publishing? I think so. Kind regards, Sam Sailor 05:52, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: I understand that you want me to read wp:xxxx, is that correct? This is what you meant in nutshell? Accesscrawl (talk) 05:44, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

No, the nutshell was that I find it unlikely that you are a paid editor. The remark about project pages, those that start with the "Wikipedia:" prefix or the shortcut prefix "WP:", was parenthetical. Speaking for myself, not a day goes by without looking something up and learning something new. Sam Sailor 06:54, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: thanks for trusting me. Even my day doesn't go without checking the wp:xx. I am a beginner and have come a long way by help from seasoned editors and their suggestions. However, jumping to a conclusion doesn't looks great for a seasoned editor, It also makes me lose my morale and trust. Like with no proof Jake Brockman jumped on me with allegations and when his argument were fainting he asked me to read wp:xxx. Similarly as you've mentioned why would someone pay me to create a trivial one line article for ankit arora. I accept my mistakes, but that comes under [citation needed] not COI. Thanks for trusting me. Accesscrawl (talk) 10:41, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I can understand how you feel in a situation like this. It is OK that you vent your frustration. Many of us have made mistakes when we started out on Wikipedia, and the stress of other editor's coming to our talk page pointing out our mistakes can be considerable.
Now ... clear your mind from the thought that others did something wrong. Consider it a deposit in the GF Bank. That frees your mind to evaluate what you did wrong. Perhaps just slow down? Sam Sailor 22:31, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: I'm reading more and more wp:xx and have utterly slowed down. Accesscrawl (talk) 07:39, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Felix Starck for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Felix Starck is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Felix Starck until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 06:48, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Accesscrawl! You created a thread called AfD at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME

Please do not make bogus COMMONNAME claims as you did at Talk:Swami Nithyananda#Requested move 18 July 2018; it literally took under one minute of looking at the real-world sources to disprove that notion. The general "do some homework" advice at WP:BEFORE applies to all WP:XFD-type discussions, including RM. Our consensus decisions are based on facts, not opinion or supposition.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:08, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate your research, however I am not convinced that present title is not a common name because mainstream media do refer him as "Swami Nithyananda". I will withdraw my vote if there is good argument against it. Thanks. Accesscrawl (talk) 09:23, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

The fact that it's disproven is a good argument against it. Please read WP:COMMONNAME, carefully. It does not mean "insist on a name you like if it happens to be somewhat common"; it calls for the single most common name to be used, and it is utterly impossible for that to be "Swami Nithyananda". Virtually the only time time it is used in reliable sources about him is mockingly. It doesn't even qualify as "somewhat common" for Nithyananda, except as a "scare-quoted" attack. Further, COMMONNAME does not apply to prefixed titles anyway. If it did, we would have to move the articles of hundreds of thousands of academics and medical professionals to new article names with "Dr." or "Prof." in front of them, and move all nobility and peerage articles to titles with "Sir", "Dame", "Lord", "Baroness", etc., etc., in front of them, except for the minority who are commonly known without them (mostly actors). And all military bios would have to move to include their rank. And all Roman Catholic saints would have to move to titles that prefix "St." on them. But we don't do any of these things; they all just exist as redirects. I find it rather mystifying that you don't already know and understand this, given that you've been here for something like 7 or 8 months.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:58, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Accesscrawl. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 345 18:38, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: please investigate this user(claiming to be a old editor) prodding articles. Alleging me for COI. Also check if Draft:Ankit Chadha is notable enough or no. Proposed drafting by same userAccesscrawl (talk) 11:50, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Shikha Makan

The article Shikha Makan has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 345 18:58, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Expedition Happiness

Hello, Accesscrawl,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Expedition Happiness should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Expedition Happiness .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:33, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Reverts on Druze page

Hello Accesscrawl, thank you for monitoring the druze page , I've noticed that you had been reverting my edits to the page and your reverts look to be in goodwill.

As a Druze myself with deep knowledge of the faith , I don't see that my edits had been controversial or that the version its being reverted to is more informative or accurate .

Please can we discuss the points you don't want to be removed from the page so we can reach a common ground rather than reverting all my edits.

Thank you and looking forward to hear from you. « Hiram111^{ΔTalK Δ} 05:11, 28 July 2018 (UTC)