User talk:Disarjun

December 2017

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Necklace. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:55, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: HighSpark (January 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SeraphWiki 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 organizations and companies, 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please add more independent reliable sources to establish notability.

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:HighSpark 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:HighSpark, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
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.

SeraphWiki (talk) 02:16, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Disarjun, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! SeraphWiki (talk) 02:16, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: HighSpark (February 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by The Drover's Wife 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 organizations and companies, 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:HighSpark 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:HighSpark, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
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.

The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Eugene Cheng You Jin

The article Eugene Cheng You Jin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Propose to delete due to lack of notability. Subject only has passing coverage in local media as a millenial entrepreneur for HighSpark. HighSpark article contributed by you was also rejected for lack of notability.

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. NoCringe (talk) 07:28, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Whitney White (March 6)

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Lots of peacock verbiage about how she's "famous" and "popular", as if it were written by a promoter. Press mentions should not be a list. Awards are not notable and need to be linked. Infobox needs to change to youtuber and info about how she gets millions of views daily needs to be sourced.

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:Whitney White 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:Whitney White, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
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.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:55, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Whitney White (March 17)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Totally inappropriate tone stuffed with peacockery "She is a loving wife and a caring mother ", "her hair tutorials were loved by many", " an inspiration for women who have the same or similar hair type", " her great videos and helpful hair tutorials" "Whitney is getting into the hearts of millions"

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:Whitney White 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:Whitney White, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
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.

Theroadislong (talk) 19:33, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Whitney White has been accepted

Whitney White, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 03:43, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. SmartSE (talk) 10:40, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Disarjun (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello SmartSE, I respect Wikipedia editing policy and I understand what wrong I did :-( By the way, when I go through All India Management Association page; I feel this page can be improved that is why I edit as I indepently do. This edit goes wrong and I abused Wikipedia editing policy without my knowledge which I admit. Could you please guide me how can I get back my account as previous? Disarjun (talk) 17:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are not eligible for unblock consideration here, as you are the same person as Dhratik (talk · contribs) or Gabriela Costa (talk · contribs). All unblock requests must be made on your original account. Yamla (talk) 17:33, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Hello Yamla, Could you please investigate properly, I don't know who they are. If you need my IP address I can share with you.

There is nothing more I can do for you. You are welcome to request another admin review your block, by placing another unblock request. --Yamla (talk) 17:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Disarjun (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello admin, I respect Wikipedia editing policy as I editing Wikipedia last four month and I understand what wrong I did this time :-( By the way, when I go through All India Management Association page; I feel this page can be improved that is why I edit as I indepently do. This edit goes wrong and I abused Wikipedia editing policy without my knowledge which I admit. Could anyone please guide me how can I get back my account as previous? I don't have any connection with any other Wikipedia user and I am open to help admin to do investigate properly Disarjun (talk) 17:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Hello admin, I respect Wikipedia editing policy as I editing Wikipedia last four month and I understand what wrong I did this time :-( By the way, when I go through [[All India Management Association]] page; I feel this page can be improved that is why I edit as I indepently do. This edit goes wrong and I abused Wikipedia editing policy without my knowledge which I admit. Could anyone please guide me how can I get back my account as previous? I don't have any connection with any other Wikipedia user and I am open to help admin to do investigate properly [[User:Disarjun|Disarjun]] ([[User talk:Disarjun#top|talk]]) 17:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Hello admin, I respect Wikipedia editing policy as I editing Wikipedia last four month and I understand what wrong I did this time :-( By the way, when I go through [[All India Management Association]] page; I feel this page can be improved that is why I edit as I indepently do. This edit goes wrong and I abused Wikipedia editing policy without my knowledge which I admit. Could anyone please guide me how can I get back my account as previous? I don't have any connection with any other Wikipedia user and I am open to help admin to do investigate properly [[User:Disarjun|Disarjun]] ([[User talk:Disarjun#top|talk]]) 17:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Hello admin, I respect Wikipedia editing policy as I editing Wikipedia last four month and I understand what wrong I did this time :-( By the way, when I go through [[All India Management Association]] page; I feel this page can be improved that is why I edit as I indepently do. This edit goes wrong and I abused Wikipedia editing policy without my knowledge which I admit. Could anyone please guide me how can I get back my account as previous? I don't have any connection with any other Wikipedia user and I am open to help admin to do investigate properly [[User:Disarjun|Disarjun]] ([[User talk:Disarjun#top|talk]]) 17:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

To reviewer: Please email me before considering an unblock. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 17:58, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SmartSE I emailed you. Thanks Disarjun (talk) 02:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]