User talk:Ganeshrajv
November 2020
Hello Ganeshrajv. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.
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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely 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 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:Ganeshrajv. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Ganeshrajv|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, do not edit further until you answer this message. Template:Z159 Blablubbs|talk 13:18, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- I am working in an governmental organization and the person I am creating the page, heads the governmental organization, who is very senior officer. I have given required citations & links as a proof to the credibility of the information on the person. I am new to wikipedia, trying to learn how it works. I'll add the mandatory disclosure to user page of mine, since I am indirectly compensated as being an employee of the organization. Thanks. Ganeshrajv (talk) 05:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Ganeshrajv, you are invited to the Teahouse!
|
Hi Ganeshrajv! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:15, 30 November 2020 (UTC) |
Hello Ganeshrajv. Please will you take a little while to discover the way we do things; your insistence, for example, on using "Dr." with Mittal's name is not correct according to our manual of style, nor is the repetition of his first name each time he is mentioned. These style points have been corrected at least twice (by me and by someone else), and you have changed them back; the fact that your edits are being changed should perhaps be an indication to you that something is not quite right. If i can help you, please feel free to ask, here or on my talk page, because i wouldn't want the fact that i am about to undo what you have done to be off-putting to you. Thanks; happy days, LindsayHello 00:21, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello LindsayH. I am quite new to wikipedia. This article is on a very senior bureaucrat of Government of India, and I presently work under him. This article gives a clear detail on his PhD in Economics/MIS from Fisher College of Business, Ohio State University, USA. So I felt the need to add prefix to his name "Dr.". Since I am new to wikipedia I don't know much about the policies of the article creation. If you don't mind can I use the prefix only once at the beginning of the article, since most of the news articles cited have used the prefix, so that I can maintain consistency across web.Ganeshrajv (talk) 05:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- I recognise that you're new, so i do want to make sure you feel welcome ~ have you visited the Teahouse, which i think is mentioned in the section above this one? It's a good place for newcomers to start to get a handle on what happens here.
- I should point out that you want to "maintain consistency across web", but that's not what we're about; we are here to collate knowledge which we find in reliable sources and present in line with our own style. As far as the particular point of using "Dr." goes, the article already states that Mittal has a PhD, which implies that the honorific is used, so we really don't need to make it any more explicit.
- Same goes for the style of his name ~ "Mittal" is sufficient, after the first time he is introduced. We do this because we aren't writing a story, nor an essay, nor a personal reflection; we are presenting information and we've already given the information what his name is, so we refer to him by name after that only to make it clear whom we are speaking of, and the last name is good enough for that.
- Again, if i can help you or answer any questions, please feel free to ask; happy days, LindsayHello 09:13, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for the information, LindsayH Ganeshrajv (talk) 14:26, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of S. Nagarajan for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S. Nagarajan 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.