User talk:Holland Tok

HPT Arts and RYK Science College moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, HPT Arts and RYK Science College, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. MB 18:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright Holland Tok (talk) 18:32, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: HPT Arts and RYK Science College (December 22)[edit]

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:HPT Arts and RYK Science College 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:HPT Arts and RYK Science College, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 19:35, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Holland Tok! 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! Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 19:35, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sayali[edit]

Do not add such unsourced gossip to even talk pages, See WP:TALK. Also the wikiproject sections you're adding are wrong, those pages already have wikiprojects linked. Hemanthah (talk) 14:19, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And per WP:ELMIN, keep external links minimum. There's no need to add every social media profile there. Instagram in particular is useless; especially for sports-persons. Hemanthah (talk) 14:21, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Insta official account link is inappropriate ? I saw twitter, so added Insta, beacuse Insta seems more popular now. But if there is any wp regulation present, which prohibits to add Insta link I will refrain to write it. Holland Tok (talk) 14:27, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Holland Tok, if you click on that link, WP:ELMIN, it says "Wikipedia does not attempt to ... provide readers with a handy list of all social networking sites". One official link is almost always enough. Hemanthah (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is clearly explained in WP:NOSOCIAL - just the primary website. Also, you have been adding portals to many articles. You added a lot of portals that don't exist - you should verify that there is a portal before you link to it. You have also added a second portal template to articles that already had one. All portals should be in the same template. MB 04:14, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to check portal exist or not? I added Portals to too many articles means? To which articles I can add or which articles I should not add? Clarify. Holland Tok (talk) 06:57, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Holland Tok, Don't act as if you don't know. If you don't understand something, don't do it. First read up on it, try searching for related policy/guidelines and only when you understand it, do it.

This expectation that others will cleanup your mistakes is absolutely not in the spirit of things here and reminds me of a sock that was blocked recently. As a newcomer, please spend more time reading about how things work here than doing it irresponsibly. Hemanthah (talk) 08:33, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See I am naive to this thing, I am in reading and learning process, I hope you can understand, found portal templet, I found it helpful in US articles, which is point of interest, I did not found this, Portal templet in Indian articles so thaught it will improve the quality and reading experience of Indian articles so tried to create it. Holland Tok (talk) 08:54, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, don't say "I didn't know". I asked you to stop adding social media links, gave a link to the policy and yet you continued with no regard. From now onward, only do things you completely understand and you're 100% sure won't be disruptive. And I mean that strictly: if you have doubts about something, don't do it.

You can use sandboxes or preview button to show how pages look with your edit, without actually changing content in the article space. For eg, with sandboxes, copy the article content to your sandbox, change what you wish, save and see how it looks. Read the blue links for more detail. Hemanthah (talk) 11:08, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Holland Tok (talk) 13:43, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are saying completely inappropriate portals to pages, please stop until you know what you are doing. e.g. you agreed a bunch of British portal links to India national cricket team. Spike 'em (talk) 17:27, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indian cricket team was formed in 1926, when India was British colony, that's why I added England in portal but If you say, do not add other countries portal, I will not. Holland Tok (talk) 17:37, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you added every possible related portal to large articles then there would be 100s of them and complete lose the point of adding them. What are you actually hoping to achieve here?Spike 'em (talk) 17:48, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I agree with you, we can't add every possible portal. But try to understand why added more than 3 portals, for example I added more than 3 portals on Cristopher Nolan beacuse he related to 2 countries that is USA and England, Film is obvious portal from that article 'cause he is a film director, he is from UK so I added United Kingdom, London portal but you protested from adding many and "unrelated", I'll add only 2 or 3 portals. And can you answer me, we can add WP:Portal only famous articles, any article or add to no article. Holland Tok (talk) 17:55, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived[edit]

Hi Holland Tok! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Yash Dhull India under 19 Cricket captain, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Akshay Kumar. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.
You may not have known about WP:CSECTION, but after it was explained to you, ignoring it is disruptive editing - Arjayay (talk) 18:37, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Akshay Kumar, you may be blocked from editing. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 19:59, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will not cause any damage, I am highly educated. That controversy section happened by mistake, after that I read WP policy, who said that we as a editor not have to add controversy section in a article and completely agree with that policy so don't worry, I'll never add a controversy section, ok, don't worry sir. I am new, the other editor have me link to the policy, I read it. Holland Tok (talk) 20:05, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important information[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. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 20:03, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand, I don't like disruption and expect other editors also follow the rules. Holland Tok (talk) 20:07, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of Kundan Ravindra Dhayade (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. RegentsPark (comment) 17:35, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sayali Chandsarkar for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sayali Chandsarkar 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/Sayali Chandsarkar 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.

Cinzia007 (talk) 15:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]