User talk:Vvvishal35

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was: 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:Vvvishal35/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.

Sulfurboy (talk) 03:59, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Vvvishal35, 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 03:59, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• User:Vvvishal35/sandbox may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• 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.

Whispering 04:18, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• User:Vvvishal35/sandbox may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• 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.

David.moreno72 07:54, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

COI

You appear to have a conflict of interest when editing this article and you must declare it. If you work directly or indirectly for an organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. If you are paid directly or indirectly by an organisation you are writing about, 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:Vvvishal35. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Vvvishal35|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

Also, if you just keep dumping copyright and promotional text here, you will be blocked for disruptive editing. Before attempting to write an article again, please read this important guidance. You must also reply to the COI request above. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:44, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. I asked if you have a COI because you have made no edits other than this article, which you keep recreating despite multiple deletions. If you say that you do not have a COI, I'll WP:AGF for now. I deleted your article because

• it did not provide adequate independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to an organisation company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what a company or organisation claims or interviewing their management. Most of your text was unsourced, and the the rest was in-line referenced to just one source, without page numbers, which appears to have no on-line version so we can't see what it says. It's not a requirement that references are viewable on-line, but if you can only find one print reference to support just parts of your text, the topic probably isn't notable. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.
• the article was created in a single edit without wikilinks or references, and Premeditated Chaos identified it as a copyright violation. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial but there is no indication that the copied site allows free use. Text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.
• Your text appears to be promotional in tone. Examples of unsourced or self-sourced claims presented as fact include: The main purpose opting to use FAMA mechanisms is to ensure communication... is maintained as it ensures fixed channels irrespective of usage... needs to must opt for FAMA... To clearly understand the origin... Simplest techniques— and so on.

You seem to have made no effort tto read or follow any of our guidance, despite repeated deletions. Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria I've linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Then follow Wikipedia:Your first article.

If you don't follow our guidelines, and just keep posting the same stuff, it's inevitable that at some stage you will be blocked for disruptive editing Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)