User talk:Kingvinvin

AfD nomination of Pakistani Terrorism

An article that you have been involved in editing, Pakistani Terrorism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistani Terrorism. Thank you. Ecoleetage (talk) 15:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Terrorism appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 23:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poojary

Hi Kingvinvin! It seems we were working on prominent Poojary at the same time. I changed the section title from "Prominent personalities" to Notable personalities"; my thinking here is that we don't have a definition of "prominent" so the door is wide open for anyone to be added; on the other hand we do have a definition (or at least a set of guidelines) for "notable" in WP:N, so we should use it. Notability should be confirmed by references to reliable sources so I've started to add some. In addition, we should cite evidence of such people's Poojary origin (if it's not obvious from the surname), and we should bear in mind that many of these people are alive so WP:BLP also applies and requires references to back up what we say about them. What do you think? -- Timberframe (talk) 09:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

India-Kyrgyzstan relations

Another editor nominated the article for deletion, saying:

Hello, at first glance this is a decent article with what could be some interesting information, but it is written in first-person point of view, and doesn't represent the neutrality of voice that is important to WP. I'll be happy to remove this once you have revised the voicing of the article, and provided appropriate references. Thanks for your effort and I look forward to seeing what you can accomplish with this article! Frmatt (talk) 05:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC) but then:[reply]

After further investigation, this article is a blatant copyright violation and has been nominated for speedy deletion. Frmatt (talk) 05:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As reviewing administrator , I see he is correct about the copyvio, and I had to delete the article. Please write an article using it and other sources, and there will be no problem, but it can neither copy nor paraphrase an existing web page or other source. See WP:PLAGIARISM and our guide to writing Wikipedia articles . When you rewrite it, take Frmatt's comments into account. Additionally, please be sure to also have sources from the Kyrgyzstan viewpoint on things if you can--I know they will be somewhat harder to find. Do not rely on a single source. DGG (talk) 12:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a paid editor with a conflict of interest?

Hello Kingvinvin. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

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, and if it does not, 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:Kingvinvin. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Kingvinvin|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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:05, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

paid editor

I am not a paid editor. I got the required infornation fron news articles about prabhu mundkur. I have been watching his movies and i am an avid fan. Kingvinvin (talk) 17:42, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prabhu_Mundkur. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Hello Kingvinvin, This is the 1st level warning to you, Do not remove the UDP and COI templates. NANExcella (talk) 10:01, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. NANExcella (talk) 11:04, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Prabhu Mundkur for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Prabhu Mundkur 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/Prabhu Mundkur 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. PRehse (talk) 10:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]