User talk:Khannark

Welcome!

Hello, Khannark, 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:Khannark/sandbox, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! AntiDionysius (talk) 15:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Khannark/sandbox

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Khannark/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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. AntiDionysius (talk) 15:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Khannark/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:05, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Khannark! Having an article draft 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:05, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DoubleGrazing,

Thank you for your feedback on my article submission. I appreciate your guidance. I'd like to address the issues raised and improve my article draft. However, I could use some help and clarification on a few points. Could you please provide more specific guidance on what types of references would be considered suitable to establish notability? Also, any advice on maintaining a neutral tone would be highly valuable.

I'm committed to making the necessary changes to meet Wikipedia's standards, and I'm eager to learn. Your assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

Best regards, Khannark Khannark (talk) 11:01, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Khannark/sandbox

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:Khannark/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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:06, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Khannark. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. This is regarding Kasu Prasad Reddy. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:07, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with... Hello There, I am looking for help to create an article of BLP, can any one help in drafting and publishing it. Khannark (talk) 06:22, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you wanting to write about Kasu Prasad Reddy again? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear ‪DoubleGrazing‬,

I would like to create a new article about Dr. Kasu Prasad Reddy on Wikipedia. However, I would greatly appreciate your suggestions and guidance to ensure that the article adheres to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies.

Additionally, I would like to know if anyone else can collaborate on writing this article. I have access to valuable content about Dr. Kasu Prasad Reddy that I'd like to contribute, and I believe that collaborating with experienced Wikipedia editors will help create a comprehensive and well-structured article.

Your insights and recommendations would be highly valuable in this endeavor. Please let me know how I can proceed in accordance with Wikipedia's standards. Khannark (talk) 07:40, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is your relationship with the subject? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:42, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am a healthcare marketing professional, and my connection to the subject, Dr. Kasu Prasad Reddy, is through my professional work. I want to emphasize that Dr. Kasu Prasad Reddy is a notable individual with significant achievements and contributions in the healthcare field.

My intention in creating this article is purely to provide a comprehensive and neutral account of Dr. Reddy's notable work and accomplishments. I am committed to ensuring that any content I contribute to Wikipedia is neutral, verifiable, and in full compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. There is no intention to promote or advertise; rather, the goal is to present information that benefits the Wikipedia community and readers. Khannark (talk) 07:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you been or do you anticipate being paid or otherwise rewarded for writing this article? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:00, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to clarify that I am not, nor do I expect to be, compensated or rewarded in any form of this article. My contributions are entirely voluntary and align with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. Khannark (talk) 08:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. You still have to make a conflict-of-interest (COI) disclosure, on account of your relationship with the subject, even if you're not being paid. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:09, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to reiterate that I do have conflict of interest (COI) due to my professional background and my connection to the subject, Dr Kasu Prasad Reddy. I am committed to fully disclosing this COI, and I intend to collaborate transparently with the Wikipedia community to ensure that any contributions I make are impartial and in accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. Khannark (talk) 08:18, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So you are a healthcare marketing professional, but it does not fall within your job duties (even conceivably) to market Dr. Reddy? I just want to know if that's what you are saying. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a healthcare marketing professional, my job responsibilities do not encompass marketing Dr Reddy or any specific individual. broader healthcare marketing strategies, campaigns, and initiatives.

I want to emphasize that my intent in contributing to the Wikipedia article about Dr. Kasu Prasad Reddy is solely to provide accurate and unbiased information, in accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. I have no promotional or advertising motives in this endeavor. Khannark (talk) 08:30, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay; as noted, you still need to declare a conflict of interest, you should do this on your user page(User:Khannark). See WP:COI for instructions; you should do this fairly soon, thank you. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your guidance. I fully understand the importance of declaring a COI and will proceed to do this promptly. Khannark (talk) 08:45, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have declared COI on my user page. Shall I create an article now Khannark (talk) 09:13, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We usually advise new/inexperienced users to not dive right in to creating articles- the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia- without first gaining some experience and knowledge by editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. It's also a good idea to use the new user tutorial. I realize you are not marketing Dr. Reddy, but many people in the marketing field have great difficulty in changing their writing style and perspective from a marketing one to an encyclopedia one- marketing is different from encyclopedia writing. If you don't first get some experience, you may experience frustration and anger as things are said about and happen to your draft that you do not understand.

However, if you truly feel that you are ready to attempt to create a new article, you may use the Article Wizard to create a draft to submit for review. 331dot (talk) 09:18, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughtful guidance. I appreciate your recommendation to gain more experience and knowledge on Wikipedia by editing existing articles in areas of interest. I understand that creating new articles can be a challenging task, especially without a solid foundation in Wikipedia's operating principles.

I recognize the distinction between marketing and encyclopedia writing, and I am fully committed to adapting to the latter's style and perspective.

I will take your advice to heart and follow your suggestion to use the new user tutorial and gain more editing experience before attempting to create a new article. This will help me understand Wikipedia's processes and expectations better. Khannark (talk) 09:31, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If as you say on your user page "I work in the field of healthcare marketing and have a professional connection to Dr. Kasu Prasad Reddy" it STRONGLY suggests that you ARE being paid and I doubt you will find anyone here to help you in your endeavour. Theroadislong (talk) 08:26, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

understand your concern, and I appreciate your input. My primary goal is to ensure that notable individuals are properly represented on Wikipedia, and I believe Dr. Reddy's contributions to the field of ophthalmology warrant an article. Regardless of my connection with the subject, I believe that the information I aim to provide can be valuable to Wikipedia readers who seek to learn more. I'm committed to adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines and ensuring that any content I contribute meets the necessary standards. Khannark (talk) 08:34, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

National varieties of English

Hello. In a recent edit to the page List of Scream Queens characters, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 08:30, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I understand the importance of respecting different varieties of English on Wikipedia, and I'll make sure to adhere to the appropriate version in my future edits Khannark (talk) 08:45, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Theroadislong, I don't agree. There were numerous small changes in Khannark's editing of the article, and I may have missed some, but the couple of changes of national variety of English that I noticed were changing to US English from non-US forms. Since the article is on a US subject, that is entirely appropriate. On the other hand, Khannark, your edit summary was misleading, as you said that you were correcting spelling, but most of the changes you made were nothing to do with spelling. It's worth being careful to make sure that edit summaries accurately reflect the nature of the editing. JBW (talk) 11:55, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, JBW, for your feedback and for pointing out the specific changes in my edits. I appreciate your clarification about the appropriateness of the English variety in this case, considering the article's subject. I'll make sure to provide more accurate edit summaries in the future to avoid any confusion. Khannark (talk) 14:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia content needs to be written from a neutral point of view

By the time three separate editors had independently nominated your repeatedly created draft for deletion as promotional, and three separate administrators had independently accepted those nominations and deleted the draft, you must have realised that there is a consensus that it is unacceptable, but you created it a fourth time. If you sincerely can't see why your writing is seen as promotional by others, then you it is unlikely that you will be able to avoid making the same mistake again, in which case you should probably not try to contribute to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, if you continue to post promotional material you are likely to be blocked from editing by an administrator. JBW (talk) 17:54, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear JBW,

I apologize for any previous drafts that may have appeared promotional in nature. I will take your comments seriously and make a concerted effort to ensure. that my current draft aligns with Wikipedia's guidelines, particularly in terms of neutrality. If there are any specific areas or aspects of my current draft that you believe need improvement, I am open to your suggestion and guidance. My goal is to contribute constructively to Wikipedia while respecting the community's standards, and I will do my best to learn from past experiences and make necessary adjustments to my current draft Khannark (talk) 18:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

incidentally, people tend to forget to read mos:doctor and mos:honorific, which boil down to "don't", unless pretty much no one has ever referred to them without those credentials

so for example, a draft titled "dr. sigmund connal" will probably not be accepted with that title unless people commonly refer to him as that

it's a nitpick, but one i see a worrisome amount of paid editors conveniently forgetting exists cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 12:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]