User talk:Sidhari

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Sumitkashyapjha, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Indian coal allocation scam, have removed content without an explanation. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page and how to develop articles
Help pages
Tutorial
Article wizard for creating new articles
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Harsh (talk) 12:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm 7Sidz. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Shivraj Singh Chouhan— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. 7Sidz (talk) 11:40, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Shivraj Singh Chouhan with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. 7Sidz (talk) 11:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Shivraj Singh Chouhan, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Shivraj Singh Chouhan was changed by Sumitkashyapjha (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.956523 on 2015-06-02T11:44:06+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 11:44, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Newsd[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 Newsd, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 removed 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. Gbawden (talk) 09:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Newsd has been reverted.
Your edit here to Newsd was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.facebook.com/GetNewsd/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 10:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mayur Shekhar Jha[edit]

Hello, Sumitkashyapjha. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Mayur Shekhar Jha, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Mayur Shekhar Jha to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, Killer Moff (talk) 11:30, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is totally unfair and malicious. I am a fan of Mayur Shekhar Jha. Every info in the article is verifiable. Please tell me the part you have problem with. Deleting entire fair is grossly unfair.

Speedy deletion nomination of Newsd[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 Newsd, 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 be 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 or person 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/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for 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 removed 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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:56, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mayur Shekhar Jha for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mayur Shekhar Jha 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/Mayur Shekhar Jha 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. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 18:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Sumitkashyapjha. 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 COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 18:06, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016[edit]

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Mayur Shekhar Jha. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 19:03, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you went and removed the articles for deletion notice again. Please do not do that: there is a deletion discussion ongoing, and until it is finished, you cannot remove the notice. This is different from the proposed deletion tag you removed earlier. Once you add a source, you are allowed to remove a BLP proposed deletion because "proposed deletion" is only intended for uncontroversial deletions. Therefore, any editor is allowed to object to the proposed deletion and force a discussion at articles for deletion, which is exactly what happened. Since you disagree with the deletion of Mayur Shekhar Jha, you have to defend the article at its discussion page. Thanks, Altamel (talk) 19:12, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the deletion notice because there is not a single false information on this page. Also, there is nothing controversial on the page. I am simply asking for someone to point out to false info on the page, why is anyone wanting to delete the page? Sumitkashyapjha (talk) 19:22, 24 July 2016 (UTC)Sumitkashyapjha[reply]

Abusing multiple accounts[edit]

You've gone ahead and created Ratnapriyaaggrawal to continue removing the AfD notice. That account has been blocked. As per our policy on using multiple accounts, you can not use multiple accounts in an attempt to edit war or evade scrutiny. Almost all editors are expected to edit from just one account. If you create another account or continue removing the AfD notice, you're likely to be blocked by another admin. You can see why editors have requested deletion of your page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayur Shekhar Jha and provide your input there. Removing the AfD notice does not stop the deletion discussion, so it's somewhat pointless anyway. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 19:29, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have any other account, I just asked a friend to help me on this. So please do not blame me for random things. You are yet to point out to any thing malicious or false on the page. Sumitkashyapjha (talk) 19:33, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting our policy on sockpuppetry, "recruiting new editors to influence decisions on Wikipedia is prohibited." No-one has claimed the page is malicious or false, just that it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Please continue this discussion at the deletion discussion page I linked above, where you're certainly welcome to read why editors have suggested the article be deleted and express your opinion. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 19:37, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To chime in, we are not accusing you of writing anything malicious or false on the article. It is entirely possible that Mayur Shekhar Jha is 100% factually accurate, and nobody is saying your article should be deleted because it contains falsehoods. However, articles can also be deleted for other reasons. Articles on individual persons have to meet the notability criteria—they have to demonstrate why that person is important, and the way to prove somebody is important is to list books, news articles, and other reliable sources about that person. You have listed articles, but they were all written by Mayur Shekhar Jha; they are not articles about him. If you can make a convincing argument at the deletion discussion, there is a good chance you could save the article. Altamel (talk) 19:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to the note you placed on my talk page: I'm not maliciously trying to have your article deleted. I'm just trying to keep the deletion discussion advertised in its usual manner. Removing the notice does not stop the deletion discussion, but it does stop other editors from finding it and commenting on it, which could always result in it being kept. If the community decides the article should be kept, I'd be perfectly fine with that outcome, but the discussion has to run its course. The notice is just that – a notice that a deletion discussion is happening. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 19:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See, I was going to build the page, stitching information one by one. I was going to put more and more stuff about him, available freely on the web. But the moment I started the page, I am busy fighting to save the page.

Removing AfD notices[edit]

Please, just stop removing the deletion tag. An administrator will review the discussion on July 30, and the longest the AfD discussion will run is until August 7. You only have to wait two weeks. You gave your input at the deletion discussion; it is only fair that you give other editors a chance to respond. If you remove the deletion tag again, you could be blocked, which will prevent you from editing any articles on Wikipedia. On the other hand, if you stop removing the deletion tag, the worst that could happen is that Mayur Shekhar Jha is deleted. You would still be free to work on other articles. Thanks, Altamel (talk) 20:28, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sumitkashyapjha reported by User:BU Rob13 (Result: ). Thank you. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 00:05, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of tags at Mayur Shekhar Jha[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for Persistent removal of AfD tags, after being warned. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:

{{unblock|reason=This  is plain bullying, no one is able to point to one info which is incorrect or abusive in nature any manner. It seems only way to get a Wiki page is thru agencies I keep seeing who charge 500$ to get up and running a Wiki page. Normal people are blocked, harassed here for no reason what so ever ;}}

.

The full report is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sumitkashyapjha reported by User:BU Rob13 (Result: Blocked). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:41, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop spamming[edit]

Hi there, please stop spamming Wikipedia with links to non-reliable sources like newsd.in as you've done here and here and here and here and here and here and here and wherever else you've done this. Wikipedia is only interested in what reliable sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say about any given subject, not what random blogs and faceless websites have to say. For a short list of sites that are and are not generally considered reliable in the context of Indian entertainment, see WP:ICTF#Guidelines on sources.

Note also that if you have a close connection to this website, and it appears you do, you would have a clear conflict of interest to add links from this website. That means that it is an ethical no-no for you to do this. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:32, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stop branding anything as spam[edit]

How can you call a news website, verified by Google and Twitter as Spam? How did you reach to the conclusion that is a spam? I like the website, they break many important news and have been around as a credible source since very long time. So stop deleting things because you don't like. Delete when you find something objectionable.

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for File:Dipika singh.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Dipika singh.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 09:46, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gaurie Dwivedi for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gaurie Dwivedi 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/Gaurie Dwivedi 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.

Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 08:23, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gaurie Dwivedi[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 Gaurie Dwivedi 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 discussion, 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. 2A01:4C8:A6:738:8869:2180:568A:89D5 (talk) 08:26, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents Discussion[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 01:53, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite block[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. Look, Sidhari, from 2014-2021, you've made about as many total edits as I, for example, have made yesterday alone. That in itself, is not a problem, of course. But here's what is: so many of these edits are problematic (a lot of work for everyone else). You do not seem to have a firm grasp of the reliable sources and notability guidelines. As well, you are ignoring the consensus reached in deletion discussions (WP:AFD) by immediately recreating your own pages post-deletion (or removing AfD tags outright). Significantly, there are issues that seem to involve promotional editing. You were already asked whether you're a WP:PAID editor or otherwise have a conflict of interest involving any of the pages you've created or contributed to (whatsoever), but you've never responded to this mandatory disclosure. As well, there's the WP:COPYVIO dimension. Finally, all of that is placed within the context of poor communication. So, I'm sorry to say, but if you don't provide assurances where you detail your understanding of these important policies and guidelines, which you are now expected to review closely, then this block is unlikely to be lifted. Thank you.

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 ~~~~}}.

El_C 10:44, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I have not created any propaganda page. I created a page for a personality for whom a Google Panel exist. Her quitting job at NewsX was covered by media agencies. Her book was launched recently by 2 former central ministers and she writes regularly for Times of India and The Pioneer. All the information I have put can be verified publicly. But for some reason I am being blocked. You may be making more daily edits them numbers of edit in my life time but how does that change facts. How does that makes me motivated. How does that makes me wrong. I consume Wikipedia very regularly. I don't pollute it with nonsense. When I like something, I try to put it out there. That is it. It seems, you people want to bully smaller people so that social agencies can keep paying to create Wikipedia page. Let me give you an small example Sudhir Choudhrie is among India's most (in)famous arms dealer, has been named in almost all famous arms cases but check his Wiki, he is clean. You can keep bullying people like me for trying to contribute to Wiki. But its people like me who donate to Wikipedia, who consume wikipedia and who promote wikipedia. Else, Wikipedia will turn into a money making place for Social media agencies. If that is what you intend to do your wish else can you tell me why Gaurie Dwivedi don't deserve a Wiki page.

Decline reason:

This is a bizarre unblock request. Nobody accused you of creating a "propaganda page". You claim you are being bullied, but can't be bothered to address your numerous policy violations. For example, you say, "All the information I have put can be verified publicly" but don't address the problem that this is your responsibility, not ours. Yamla (talk) 10:34, 18 September 2021 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

What exactly did I not answer? 1. Do I have any vested interest? Clear answer is NO. 2. What rules did I violate?

Please include a decline or accept reason.

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.