User talk:Alisha3107

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Alisha3107, 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 AYM Syntex Limited, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

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, ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Singularity42 (talk) 17:49, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of AYM Syntex Limited[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 AYM Syntex Limited 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 that 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. Singularity42 (talk) 17:49, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Edmund Hillary Fellowship for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Edmund Hillary Fellowship 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/Edmund Hillary Fellowship 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.

TheLongTone (talk) 15:32, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chitiz Agarwal (March 30)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
reads more like a CV.
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.
Theroadislong (talk) 10:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Alisha3107! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation 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! Theroadislong (talk) 10:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chitiz Agarwal (April 1)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Cabrils was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
The draft may have potential but I agree it currently reads like a CV, which Wikipedia is not! Please familiarise yourself with WP:ANYBIO, WP:PROF and referencing for beginners (all the citations require proper formatting).
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.
Cabrils (talk) 07:20, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

Thanks for message. I can't see a draft for Muscle and Strength India in your contributions, but in any case you should start with a draft at Draft:Muscle and Strength India rather than create the article directly.

You are a relatively inexperienced editor, and writing an article about a company is fraught with difficulties, so please read the following carefully before creating your draft.

If you have a conflict of interest, 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 the 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 Jimfbleak. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Alisha3107|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 read the following regarding writing an article:

  • you must provide 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 the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls
  • The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:
  1. significant coverage in
  2. independent,
  3. multiple,
  4. reliable,
  5. secondary sources.
Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.
Note also that the article should be more than just what they sell, and could include, for example, the number of employees, turnover or profits .
  • You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews. The notability doesn't depend on what people think of their products, or the fame of their investors
  • There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
  • You must not copy text from elsewhere. 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; 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.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. Let me know when you want me to look at your draft. You must also reply to the COI request above. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:28, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for your reply and all the great suggestions. I will start writing accordingly and share a draft. As for conflict of interest, there is none to declare at the moment. I am a business student and I am interested in writing on such topics. But I will keep it in mind in the future if any conflict arises to declare it as per the Wiki guidelines :) Look forward to hearing your feedback on my draft. Thank you! Alisha3107 (talk) 04:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I have created the Muscle and Strength India draft as per your suggestions. I have kept it simple, factual, non-promotional and linked it to high-quality references that are unrelated to the company. Would be great if you can take a look at it whenever you are free :). I hope to receive a positive reply from you and allow me to publish this page. Thank you so much in advance! Alisha3107 (talk) 04:30, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Forbes Technology Council moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Forbes Technology Council, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DMySon (talk) 12:31, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ok noted. I will add more information to it. Thank you! Alisha3107 (talk) 07:58, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with your editing[edit]

For starters, never just copy and paste a draft to an article, it must be moved so it will preserve the history. Our license requires this. Second, I get the feeling you have a conflict of interest / paid editing, and you haven't declared it. That can get you blocked and your contributions deleted if you don't declare your connection. See WP:PAIDEDITING. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 17:41, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I am new and I didnt know how to move from draft to a page. As for the conflict of interest accusation, I don't know what to say. But thanks for the heads up, I will make sure to declare any conflicting interests if they do exist in the future. Alisha3107 (talk) 17:45, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any conflict of interest, getting paid, employed by anyone wanting these edits? We start with that. Your answer is kind of vague. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 18:27, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Dennis Brown no I do not. Firstly, you hadn't asked me a question. You said it's a "feeling" you have. I am not obliged to respond to your "feelings". secondly, if I had a conflict of interest, I would have declared it. There is no need for you to be so rude about it and go with "we start with that". I understand you are an admin and it's your job to protect Wikipedia but there is no reason to try to intimidate new people trying to build something. I hope I have sufficiently replied to you. thank you for your time. Alisha3107 (talk) 19:02, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

I've already posted guidance on writing articles further up this page. Some obvious problems

  • All your refs are bare urls, and need formatting as cite web, cite journal or whatever
  • Some of your text is unreferenced, and many of the refs you have used are not independent third-party refs, but are press releases or sources quoting or interviewing members of the organisations concerned
  • There are hardly any wikilinks in the whole article. What is a CIO? What is a CTO? What is technology?
  • The text is promotional throughout. Examples are group of leading CIOs, CTOs, and other technology leaders (source is a blog) selected for his business growth metrics, professional achievements, and honors Sourced to the head of FTC saying so, and no indication of what these supposed achievements and honors actually are. global, full-service, cross-industry, infrastructure, and benchmarking specialist. Who says? Just you. as far as I can see
  • Minor points are that the lead shouldn't have a heading, and that headings should be capitalised normally
Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:32, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jimfbleak Thank you for all the guidelines. I will make the changes accordingly. And will go through your old comments too again :) Alisha3107 (talk) 04:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Forbes Technology Council (May 24)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bonadea was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing 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). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
The references are all bare URLs so they provide no information about what the sources are, but it appears that the only independent source is the first one (apr.com), which is also the only one talking about it at any depth. That source (which may or may not be a WP:RS) describes the group as a "scam" and explains why that is – but the draft says nothing about that. Instead, the entire draft is a list of members, sourced by press releases.
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 after they have been resolved.
bonadea contributions talk 06:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Muscle and Strength India moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Muscle and Strength India, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption.

When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Please do not move it to mainspace yourself. bonadea contributions talk 07:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea Hello, thank you for reviewing the page. Every reference for this page is from a leading newspaper in India. And there are multiple such references to the page. Request you to move it back to the mainspace. Alisha3107 (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
None of the references is independent, as they are all press releases. In fact, some of them are the same press release, and, hilariously, they have re-used the same empty text in different PRs, saying in 2021 that they would "expand aggressively", invest Rs 20 crore, and open 100 stores within a year (at the time they had 18 stores); in 2022, they said that they would "expand aggressively", invest Rs 20 crore, and open 100 stores within a year (from their current number of 20 stores). There is no sign of notability, and you are wasting your own time by trying to create an article about them. What made you decide to create this article? --bonadea contributions talk 08:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea I have checked each and very article and none of them are press releases. In fact the previous editor who had blocked this article had the same issue with the references, I made sure all press releases were removed from the links. And the facts like they will launch xyz stores in 2021 are not mentioned in the article. I have avoided anything that is not a fact.
I've been looking at different subjects to create articles on. This was one of them. Alisha3107 (talk) 09:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm afraid all of the references are in fact press releases. Well, not the first one, which is a database listing, and not the last one, which is a mention of the company name in a list of sponsors, but the rest of them: a, b, c, d, e. I didn't mean to imply that you had used the wording from the sources, I was simply pointing out that the company itself uses that wording in different press releases from different years without changing anything; in fact, if you read all the sources, you'll find that all of them are essentially identical. (That in itself tells us something about the company's lack of notability!) So, again, you might do better to forget about this company and write about more notable and relevant topics. --bonadea contributions talk 10:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea I understand what you are saying. But if you see any news these days on the same topic, it's picked up from other news sources. I don't have any attachment to this particular topic but I disagree with you that all the sources are not third-party and from the company. Sure, the newspapers might have picked up information from the press releases and used in their articles. I have checked each one of the news sources and added only the factual information from them. Which is why there is a full page of factual data from 10 different sources. Moreover, I think if a company has 20 stores, has television stars on its board and not only distributes their products but also has its own brand, it's quite notable. I disagree with your decision and feel that this page should be moved back. 🙏 Alisha3107 (talk) 10:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea To describe the references

Zauba corp - Directory of all legitimate businesses Indian Retailer - retail magazine Zee business - national news Channel and website The Statesman - national news website Sports Khabri - sports news 🙏 Alisha3107 (talk) 10:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is the (incontrovertible) fact that they are press releases that makes the sources useless for the purpose of showing notability. A PR published by a major news organisation is still a PR. Look, even if it hadn't been blatantly obvious from the texts themselves, the publishers have identified them as coming from various press bureaus. A less scrupulous publisher might have pretended that they were written by journalists, but we don't have that problem. As for the directory listing and the mention in the list of sponsors, those kinds of sources are also useless for showing notability. Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies are pretty clear on what constitutes notability. Not registering a brand, not having 20 stores that haven't been covered by any independent sources, definitely not having stars on the board. --bonadea contributions talk 15:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea Hi, I'm sorry I do not agree with your point of view. The articles referenced are not press releases. Press releases are by definition something published by an organization itself in the media. If the media think, this information from the press release is newsworthy, they are going to pick it up and publish it. For example, if Elon Musk tweets he wants to buy Twitter, and the media picks up that news and publishes it, it no longer is a communication from Elon but a news that the media has published. In essence, every news about a person or an organization will first come from that person or organisation. Also, all news publications these days flag press releases or advertorials as such. None of my references are in this category. I went through the Wikipedia guidelines about notability of an organization that you linked here. The main source of notability is independent references from quality media. Which in my opinion, this article has. So I genuinely feel this article should be moved to the main space. Thank you :) Alisha3107 (talk) 15:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, all news publications these days flag press releases or advertorials as such. None of my references are in this category. Incorrect on both counts, I'm afraid. Churnalism is very common among less reliable publications, and all five press releases you have used are (more or less) clearly marked as such. That they are press releases is not an opinion or a point of view, it is a description of the type of text: a statement written by the company and submitted to various publishers. Feel free to ask for further input, either at the Teahouse or at the Articles for Creation help desk (but please don't post to both boards, and please don't ask other editors to move the draft to mainspace – though you are of course free to submit it for review). --bonadea contributions talk 16:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 16:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea I shall find other sources as well to satisfy your objection! And then re-submit the page. Ok? Appreciate the healthy debate. I have learnt a few new things today :). Thank you Alisha3107 (talk) 17:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Marashi moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Ali Marashi, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia).

The text also contains some very closely paraphrased sentences.

I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. bonadea contributions talk 13:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea Hi, I have referenced this article to news sources. I don't see the problem here. These are not even press releases. Alisha3107 (talk) 15:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You had included five sources. Two were sales sites, two were copies of the same press release, the fifth is a very brief notice which is probably a press release, but in any case it's definitely trivial coverage. --bonadea contributions talk 15:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea I wish instead of just moving articles to draftspace you would let them be so they can be improved upon by other people as well. Alisha3107 (talk) 15:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Moving it to draftspace is a way of allowing improvements. The alternative would have been deletion, since biographies of living people have to be sourced, not to mention the copyright issues. What is your connection to Marashi? You declare that the photo of him is your own work, which means that you took the picture yourself. Is that correct? --bonadea contributions talk 15:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea yes but I have never seen anyone improve anything in the draftspace. The articles just rot there.
What do you mean by have to be sourced?
I found the picture somewhere online and it had no copyrights attached.
In any case, what is the problem with the references? They are all from news sources?
Thanks. Alisha3107 (talk) 15:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I found the picture somewhere online and it had no copyrights attached. Where, exactly, did you find it, and why did you claim it as your own work? In any case, what is the problem with the references? They are all from news sources? This was explained above. Not sure what you mean by "news sources". And note that you can't take text straight from sources (even when the source is a press release) and add it to an article. That was explained in a notice on 4 April, posted higher up on this page. --bonadea contributions talk 14:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget to declare where you found the photo! It will be deleted from Commons unless the website where you found it has a clear statement that it is not copyrighted. --bonadea contributions talk 06:06, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea It just disheartening that I have put in so much work into these pages and you are removing them instead of trying to improve them. Alisha3107 (talk) 15:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have improved it. I removed quite a bit of unsourced information, as well as two sales sites and a duplicate of one of the sources. --bonadea contributions talk 14:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea Thank you so much! I will also work on it this weekend. I can find more references. Can you move it to the mainspace please? I feel like so many amazing artists who arent in the English music space are not represented enough and I am trying to write about them. Like this guy is a very talented person if you see his videos. Alisha3107 (talk) 14:31, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Simply submit it for review when you believe it is ready to be moved to mainspace! --bonadea contributions talk 04:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea Thank you. Will do. Will find the photo link too. 🙏 Alisha3107 (talk) 06:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I have added new references and a little new information and published the draft. Can you take a look please? Also, deleted the photo as I couldn't locate the source. Thank you! :D Alisha3107 (talk) 10:37, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ali Marashi (May 30)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
not clear how they pass WP:NMUSICIAN?
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 after they have been resolved.
Theroadislong (talk) 10:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi Alisha3107. I'm sorry, as I know you have claimed otherwise, but it is clear that you are engaged in undisclosed paid editing. Paid editing is allowed - but the Wikimedia Foundation and the WP community has decided against permitting it unless it is disclosed. There is a lot that is asked of you as a paid editor, but the main one is to disclose when you are working on articles for which you are or expect to receive some form of payment and to state who you are working for. You can do this in a few places, but the main choices are on your user page and on the talk page of the article concerned. To make it easier there are some templates you can use. Full details are at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. It is difficult to be a paid editor on Wikipedia, but if you abide by the policy it is possible. Never easy, but at least possible. Unfortunately, though, under the Terms of Use you cannot continue to edit in return for payment if you do not disclose when you are being paid and how is paying you. - Bilby (talk) 10:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bilby Hi Bilby, thanks for your message and the information. I wish I was getting paid to edit but I am not. Especially by a page like Forbes, would be more than happy to work for them. Just writing and creating pages that I could not find. Will be sure to disclose any payments if I ever receive them. Thanks. Alisha3107 (talk) 16:31, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are mistaken. I wasn't asking if you were being paid. At this stage you need to decide how to go forward - I'm ok if you want to start disclosing, but if you choose to continue to do paid work without disclosing then I'll need to block the account. If you choose to stop doing paid work that will also be fine, but the terms of use don't give much room to move if you continue to edit and accept payments. Anyway, I can give you some time, so you don't need to decide immediately. - Bilby (talk) 21:46, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bilby As you please. Like I said, I have nothing to disclose at this point. I am editing pages as and when I am finding something interesting to edit. Alisha3107 (talk) 02:46, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.174.89.81.141 (talk) 01:15, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@174.89.81.141 Seems to be some confusion as to why I have been added to this board. I havent "spammed" any article with anyone's books or papers. I merely replaced one link to a paper which was not available for public viewing with another link where an entire paper is available. if anything I have improved the page. You can check and confirm for yourself. Please keep me out of your war against the author. I've nothing to do with it. Alisha3107 (talk) 11:41, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Muscle and Strength India has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Muscle and Strength India. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 12:37, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thanks. I have removed all press releases. But will recheck before submitting in the future. Alisha3107 (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As a matter of fact, you haven't. The five press releases mentioned above are still in the draft, and three additional press releases have been added: [1], [2], [3]. --bonadea contributions talk 15:25, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong 🤔. let me rework and resubmit 🙂 Alisha3107 (talk) 17:44, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are probably wasting your time. Theroadislong (talk) 18:39, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong Ya. Gonna focus on something else for a while now. Whats a good way to find new articles to write? Everyone seems to disapprove all my selections :( Alisha3107 (talk) 04:36, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alisha, I thought of you when I was answering a question at the Teahouse yesterday, so I'll copypaste part of my post here:

It is a little unfortunate that many newly-registered editors seem to believe that the best and only way to contribute to Wikipedia is to add new articles. It's unfortunate for two reasons. First, there are many other editing activities that are as important as (or more important than) creating new articles: for instance adding information to existing articles, updating references, fixing errors, adding links between Wikipedia articles, removing inappropriate text or sources, etc. Many of these things are a bit tricky, and it can be easy to get them wrong by (for instance) adding a source link to a website that is deprecated or adding too many Wikipedia links. But that's usually okay! Every single experienced editor has made a bunch of mistakes along the way (and I suspect all of us still make bloopers from time to time), and very few mistakes are truly egregious. Second, creating a new article is pretty much the hardest thing to do for a new editor – mainly because it involves all the tricky stuff, such as evaluating notability, writing neutrally, using sources responsibly, picking the right sources, formatting the references, including a reasonable amount of detail in the text, etc. Once you have made a couple of thousand edits, most of those things will be much easier. And there will still be no shortage of notable topics to write about! :-)

So that would be my advice to you, as well. It's really no fun having your drafts repeatedly declined, and it would probably be a lot more rewarding to start editing some existing article about something you're interested in. (I'm a bit weird, and I enjoy editing articles in many areas I don't particularly care about, and end up learning unexpected things... but that's just me.)

You might also find it helpful to go through an editing tutorial – this is a good starting point. Or you could try The Wikipedia Adventure, which is an interactive guide – or see any of the resources listed here. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 10:37, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Saklana State[edit]

Information icon Hello, Alisha3107. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Saklana State, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:01, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Saklana State[edit]

Hello, Alisha3107. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Saklana State".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:44, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gelareh Sheibani for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gelareh Sheibani 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/Gelareh Sheibani 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 until the discussion has finished.

DavidEfraim (talk) 07:09, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Ali Marashi[edit]

Information icon Hello, Alisha3107. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ali Marashi, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:01, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Forbes Technology Council[edit]

Information icon Hello, Alisha3107. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Forbes Technology Council, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:02, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Ali Marashi[edit]

Hello, Alisha3107. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ali Marashi".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 01:25, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Muscle and Strength India[edit]

Information icon Hello, Alisha3107. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Muscle and Strength India, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 10:01, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Muscle and Strength India[edit]

Hello, Alisha3107. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Muscle and Strength India".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:04, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alisha3107&oldid=1148841735"