User talk:Dhruvpb

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Dhruvpb, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Dhruvpb/sandbox, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Sulfurboy (talk) 08:15, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Dhruvpb/sandbox[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:Dhruvpb/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Sulfurboy (talk) 08:15, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 18)[edit]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reasons left by Sulfurboy were: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

Sulfurboy (talk) 08:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dhruvpb! 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 08:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, as you did at User:Dhruvpb/sandbox, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Sulfurboy (talk) 08:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm Newslinger. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Times Now, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 14:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

— Newslinger talk 14:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page United States Senate has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 06:21, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But why what's inaccurate? I have provided a link too! The Vice President casts a Tie Breaker vote. it's confusing for people to understand why the Dems have a Majority with specifying the Extra Vote! Pls retrieve my edit🙄🙄🙄 Dhruvpb (talk) 06:58, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dhruvpb, your edit summary was "fixed typo". I fail to see how that is an accurate description of your edit. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 21:00, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ok I'll re-edit and give a detailed explanation 😑 Dhruvpb (talk) 01:46, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023[edit]

Hi. Don't go around using unverified twitter accounts as "news" to suggest someone's death on their BLP. You can be blocked for this behaviour. -- Tytrox (talk) 10:22, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is literally no chance at this point

Its over Dhruvpb (talk) 10:34, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And that's literally not the point. Don't make edits without verification. I suggest you have a read of Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not -- Tytrox (talk) 10:46, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]