User talk:MithilaMahadik

June 2017

Hello, I'm Deli nk. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. [1] Deli nk (talk) 11:47, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Adultery. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. PepperBeast (talk) 08:26, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017

But the blog was related to adultery.

October 2017

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Detoxification (alternative medicine). It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. bonadea contributions talk 12:02, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Ok thanks

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 31)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Does not contain any references.

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 User:MithilaMahadik/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:21, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! MithilaMahadik, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:21, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Vantage FX

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 Vantage FX requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Ymblanter (talk) 08:22, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bobble Keyboard for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bobble Keyboard 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/Bobble Keyboard (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 08:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bobble Keyboard

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 Bobble Keyboard, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for Deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discusion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it 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. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 08:56, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:35, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 1

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

MithilaMahadik (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Request you to please unbloack as i was new to wikiepidea and made a mistake by not disclosing the paid edit.

Decline reason:

Yeah. Not so fast. You need to read and heed WP:Paid. You will not be unblocked until follow those instructions. Among them are

you confirm that this account is used by one individual only
you agree to avoid creating or directly editing articles related to any subject for pay. (requested edits will still be permitted/considered)
you indicate what areas of Wikipedia you intend to edit in the future

If you have no interest in editing Wikipedia beyond writing about the organisation with which you have a paid reationship, then you will not be unblocked. If this is the case, I recommend you consider alternative outlets. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 09:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Unblock Conditions Accepted

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

MithilaMahadik (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Conditions accepted

Decline reason:

You have not yet followed the requirements outlined by WP:PAID, nor have you done this: "you indicate what areas of Wikipedia you intend to edit in the future". Yamla (talk) 12:40, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I confirm that this account is used by ME only I agree to avoid creating or directly editing articles related to any subject for pay. (requested edits will still be permitted/considered)

You have not followed WP PAID. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:26, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]