This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Scope creep 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.
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 Draft:Pallab Bhattacharyya and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Pallab Bhattacharyya, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
:* scope_creepTalk, I am damn sure that you are an UPE/COI as you are ignoring Indian government sources and other third-party sources. --NeverTry4Me - TT Page 10:28, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
With apology I have deleted the above. Please pardon me @Scope creep:. --NeverTry4Me - TT Page 05:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
@NeverTry4Me: It needs to have coverage. There is none there. I put the wrong review accidently, the first time around, so I've removed it. Please don't throw that UPE/COI accusation around. scope_creepTalk 10:33, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
@Scope creep: Kindly figure out on the Draft talk page, where I or someone needs to cite more SIGCOV. Do you expect an interview of an Head of Intelligence branch who needsto stay out of public touch by protocol?(If COI/UPE can be imposed against me, why not against you or Onel5969 and others?) I have stopped edits as I am blammed falsely for UPE/COI. --NeverTry4Me - TT Page 10:39, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
I checked the first 10 references. They need to be WP:SECONDARY sources for a BLP and they're not there. scope_creepTalk 11:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
:::@Scope creep: why don't you have a through check of sources? --NeverTry4Me - TT Page 10:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
