User talk:Anupmehra

This talk page may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as an article about a website, blog, web forum, webcomic, podcast, browser game, or similar web content that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject. See CSD A7.

If this talk page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page and you disagree with the given reason for deletion, you can click the button below and leave a message explaining why you believe it should not be deleted. You can check back later to see if you have received a response to your message.

Note that this talk page may be deleted at any time if it unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria, or if an explanation added below this notice is found to be insufficient.

Nominator: Please consider placing the template:

{{subst:db-significance-notice|User talk:Anupmehra|header=1}} ~~~~

on the talk page of the author.

Administrators: check links, talk, history (last), and logs before deletion. Consider checking Google.
This page was last edited by Yasmister (contribs | logs) at 08:19, 18 August 2014 (UTC) (9 years ago)[reply]

Anupmehra

Contribs —— Home —— Talk —— Email —— Identity —— Usercheck

Status: Offline

User:Anupmehra/Break

SummerSlam (2014)

I am truly sorry but I was trying to help actually. Yesterday when I opened Summerslam 2014 on Wikipedia, some of the match cards were vandalised e.g instead of John Cena vs Brock Lesnar it was Cena vs Batista and even a completely absurd match up featuring CM Punk taking on Daniel Bryan. I corrected all this but after I corrected Rusev vs Jack Swagger, I couldn't put "Flag match" in a the stipulation side so I mistakenly erased it all, hoping that someone would correct it. Thank you anyways for notifying me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farrukhsalar16 (talk • contribs) 07:42, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Farrukhsalar16 - It is okay. I just undid your changes because a significant portion of the article was removed without any explanation in edit summary. I can understand that you were trying to help. In my message on your talk page, I've left you few help links, that may help you further while contributing to Wikipedia. You are advised to be bold while correcting/updating encyclopedia, and requested to make your changes to conform Wikipedia guidelines. You may also take a look at our Welcome page. Happy editing! Anupmehra -Let's talk! 15:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Crown Group (Crown Group Holdings Pty Ltd) (August 15)

Hi Anupmehra, I was hoping you might be able to assist me to ensure my Wikipedia article is accepted. You declined my submission at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Crown_Group_(Crown_Group_Holdings_Pty_Ltd) Are you able to assist me to ensure it is accepted and demonstrates a more neutral tone. Thanks, Dominique August 18 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominique Kuhne (talk • contribs) 22:59, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dominique - Yes, I certainly will. The subject appears to be notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. There at present I find only two problem with the draft, one is -promotional tone and the other, original research. Wikipedia neutral point of view guideline explains in detail how should a Wikipedia article ideally be written about. In short, it says..articles should be written without biases presenting significant views published in multiple reliable sources. As a fix, I'd suggest you to start from scratch and re-write only what has been published in reliable sources not what do you personally think of subject. I may edit the draft to write a section or two to illustrate what do really Wikipedia expects for. In the meanwhile, you may continue improving the draft. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 04:13, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anupmehra,

Thank you for the quick response. If you could edit some of the draft as an example that would be fantastic.

In the meantime, I will continue to work on it.

In terms of the original research, I have have presented mainstream newspapers - considered a reliable source by Wikipedia.

There are no peer reviewed, or other academic sources otherwise to note on this topic.

If I referenced more of the information would I be more likely to have this piece accepted?

Thank you very much for your assistance - I am a first-time contributor. Thanks, Dominique

@Dominique Kuhne: - I need some time to read sources, so I could write a paragraph or two, because -information present in Wikipedia articles must be based on information present in secondary, independent and reliable sources. Let me make it clear what Wikipedia meant by original research, -"if one reliable source says A, and another reliable source says B, do not join A and B together to imply a conclusion C that is not mentioned by either of the sources". Also, please note that, -despite the need to attribute content to reliable sources, you must not copy-paste because doing would be a copyright violation and may constitue plagiarism. Articles should be written in your own words while substantially retaining the meaning of the source material. Hope, it does help.

As a side note, when you leave a reply to a message on a talk page, please edit the section header rather than making a new section (click "edit" that appears on right hand side). And remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). It'd generate your signature with date and time. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 04:54, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]