User talk:SmithaShanmugam

Speedy deletion nomination of KALA SANDESHA PRATHISHTANA[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 KALA SANDESHA PRATHISHTANA 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 an organization or company, 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 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. A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 04:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help me![edit]

Please help me with... I am trying to edit the title. It is in all caps, need to edit. Please help. SmithaShanmugam (talk) 05:37, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved by User:Waggie with this move. --CiaPan (talk) 07:46, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article moved to userspace draft[edit]

On Talk:Kala Sandesha Prathishtana (now User talk:SmithaShanmugam/Kala Sandesha Prathishtana) you asked whether your article could be moved somewhere so that you could continue working on it before it is published, so I have moved the article to User:SmithaShanmugam/Kala Sandesha Prathishtana. You ought to read WP:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you destroy my work on Kala Sandesha Prathishtana draft?[edit]

Why did you destroy my work (external links' list formatting, internal linking to other articles, referencing external source with {{cite news}} template) on Kala Sandesha Prathishtana draft? --CiaPan (talk) 07:42, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I was not aware that others can edit my draft, and certainly dint know you did that modification.

Thanks for the help, but it would have been helpful if you have left a note after that, so that I could have retained your work.

SmithaShanmugam (talk) 08:22, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK. So the next time you edit a Wikipedia article, you can use the 'Show changes' button before you submit your text. This will allow you to review changes and notice if you change more than you intend. You can also verify the history of the page before you attempt to edit – but that is not the ultimate solution, because someone may make and save a minor modification during your work. In that case, however, you'll get a warning from the Wikipedia software about a so-called 'edit conflict' and you are given a possibility to review/compare your version against the one saved in the meantime. You can then deliberately overwrite someone else's work, or get back and start editing again or manually apply or merge your changes on the other editor's version.
Just stay calm, don't get frustrated. And don't hesitate to ask - each of us was once a beginner. Happy editing. :) --CiaPan (talk) 12:41, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did not know CiaPan is the same person as waggie. SmithaShanmugam (talk) 08:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think that CiaPan is the same person as User:waggie? --David Biddulph (talk) 11:02, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I did not know that, either!

CiaPan (talk) 12:46, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, SmithaShanmugam, 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 Kala Sandesha Prathishtana, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! George Ho (talk) 08:58, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Kala Sandesha Prathishtana[edit]

Hi, Thank you, could you please take a look and point out the reason/error in the page which would stop it from publishing.

SmithaShanmugam (talk) 09:03, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's moved to Draft namespace. Please do not remove banners or move it back to mainspace. Let someone else review it. George Ho (talk) 09:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I commented above, you need to read WP:Your first article, and particularly Help:Referencing for beginners. You have a list of bare urls, but a reviewer will hope to see footnotes to show which reference supports which of the text in the draft, with well-formatted references (for example using {{cite web}} to give full information on the reference). --David Biddulph (talk) 11:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Drafts do not go into categories[edit]

Why do you keep trying to put Draft:Kala Sandesha Prathishtana into categories? Drafts do not go into categories, and this error has been repeatedly corrected, but you keep repeating the error. Read the edit summaries which explain why edits have been made, rather than just blindly reverting. Continually doing things that you have been told are wrong is liable to be regarded as disruptive editing and in an extreme could get you blocked from editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:37, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your inputs about the references. I did not know the categories were removed, was trying some editing, which was just trial. What do you suggest now?, shall I remove the categories from the draft? SmithaShanmugam (talk) 18:02, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you, for removing the categories from Draft. Please let me know, if I should correct anything else. SmithaShanmugam (talk) 18:07, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What you need to do, as I have mentioned twice before, is to provide proper referencing. Read the links I gave you earlier. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:16, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop destroying other people's work[edit]

What you did HERE and HERE is a disregard for other editors' efforts to improve the article. --CiaPan (talk) 10:14, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Yesterday someone commented that, drafts should not have categories. Hence deleted it. I am not sure is it okay to keep categories or not.

SmithaShanmugam (talk) 16:17, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A draft must not be placed into a category, but categories can be listed in the draft ready for inclusion when the article is published. This is done by preceding the category link with a colon, as shown at Wikipedia:Categorization#Draft pages. I did so in this edit and again in this one. If you read the edit summaries it tells you why an editor has made the edit. I again added the listing of the categories here, but as you removed them I have rather lost patience with trying to help you, particularly as you have made no attempt to sort out the references as footnotes, despite having been told repeatedly how to do so. As there is no indication which source supports which part of the text, I wouldn't expect any reviewer to accept your draft for publication. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you David Biddulph, for being such a guardian angel. It would be really encouraging to have some kindness towards first timers. I just got confused, and thought you suggested to remove categories. This is a new tool tool me, I am still learning as I started to use it just yesterday. I genuinely thought you are helping me and you were. I did change the citations to the bare URLs after your suggestion, didn't I? You can even suggest or give an example. I am thankful to your suggestions. --SmithaShanmugam (talk) 16:38, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages![edit]

Hello, SmithaShanmugam. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Thank you User:Vchimpanzee User:Mr rnddude User:Gestrid -- SmithaShanmugam (talk) 04:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

I notice that you are adding more and more references to your draft, but many of them do not appear to mention the subject of the draft (for example http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-fridayreview/crisp-performance/article790077.ece which you have recently added). Quantity of references is not likely to help, and might even dissuade a reviewer from checking through so many details (which might explain the delay in your draft being reviewed). What a reviewer is looking for initially is a demonstration of notability, so it would be wise for you to read WP:GNG. In general if further text cannot be verified by one or two references to reliable sources it is unlikely to be helpful to include 6 references for one short sentence. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you David Biddulph. will remove that reference link you have specified. I assumed every point needs a proof, hence started looking for more references than content. Will go through the link WP:GNG. Thank you SmithaShanmugam (talk) 04:47, 27 August 2016 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #16596 was submitted on Sep 26, 2016 05:56:43. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 05:56, 26 September 2016 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #16606 was submitted on Sep 27, 2016 03:46:23. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 03:46, 27 September 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am a new contributor, am very sure, my account is not duplicate or connected to any other accounts. I have used my work place network connection where IP change happens dynamically, it might have looked like some other account. Please take a look, and let me know, is there a way to prove my innocence here?, as that is the fact.

Decline reason:

You may want to comment on what kind of company lets its employees edit Wikipedia from the company computers - and has all of them ending up writing spam. Huon (talk) 23:06, 4 October 2016 (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.