User talk:Sujandahal76

This is Sujandahal76's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Classic Tech (September 26)[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 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.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Classic Tech and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 21:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sujandahal76! Having an article draft 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) 21:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Classic Tech (September 27)[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 331dot 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:

This just documents the existence of the company. It does not summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Classic Tech and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

331dot (talk) 09:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/Classic_Tech

Can this link be used to provide notability regarding the company? I previously submitted my article with title "Classic Tech" and got rejected. Sujandahal76 (talk) 11:14, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, that site is clearly noted as a copy of the draft you're trying to source. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:43, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you verify this link whether it satisfies the notability criteria ?

https://www.arthadabali.com/2022/11/03/33199 Sujandahal76 (talk) 09:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Classic Tech (November 14)[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 draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Classic Tech and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 15:03, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Classic Tech[edit]

Hello, Sujandahal76. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Classic Tech, 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) 14:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023[edit]

Hello Sujandahal76. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Classic Tech, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, 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:Sujandahal76. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Sujandahal76|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Usedtobecool, thank you for the review. However, I do not have any links or stakes with the article or the edits I've made to the Draft:Classic Tech. I am a newbie and since this is my first article I am trying hard to provide facts as much as possible. Please guide me if I need to make any changes on the topic. This article is one step towards many more from my side. Sujandahal76 (talk) 13:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Usedtobecool, so I was still waiting for your response. Please let me know if I need to make any changes on the article. Sujandahal76 (talk) 09:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've lost a whole year on this article, Sujan, and there's still no evidence that the subject is Wikipedia notable. I am willing to assist new editors, especially those from Nepal, but I don't do so with articles on companies, products or living people. My advice is that you waste no more time on this. If you need suggestions for what you can do next, I would be willing to help you with that. I recommend you start with making non-complicated improvements to existing articles, but I could be persuaded to suggest topics for new articles as well. Let me know if you are interested. After you've gained sufficient experience, you can revisit this topic with a better idea of whether it is notable of if it is, how to write an article on it that will be accepted. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Usedtobecool, thank you for the helping hands. However, I am an IT student and have gained significant knowledge about situation of ISPs here in Nepal. Like you've said, I've invested quite a huge amount of time in this topic and ISP sector overall. I had taken references from the published articles here in Wikipedia and the references they have taken is same or similar in manner. I am not sure, why this article fails to show the notability.

Also, since there are many ISPs that do not have Wiki page I was hoping to work on another company after finishing this one. Not sure if I'll able to make it work. I can see one article of similar company that was approved on similar time as I first wrote article on this one, that too with similar references. Sujandahal76 (talk) 07:11, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Social Security Fund (Nepal) (January 2)[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 Charsaddian was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Social Security Fund (Nepal) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Charsaddian (talk) 18:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Charsaddian, Are you sure about the reasons you mentioned? I've cited references from Nepal Government official websites along with International Labour Organization. This is not something you'd write about, the fund is the Nepal Government's organization. Further I'll add if any additional sources is available. Sujandahal76 (talk) 04:36, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have used 2 Play Store references which can't be considered as reliable sources. Reference number 5 and 6 is not accessible. Reference number 4 is a primary source and the link takes you to list of "Board of Directors" only. Charsaddian (talk) 21:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Charsaddian, references for Play Store were not significant, I just added it as a link to the Applications (will move it to external links). However, the reference number 5 and 6 are not accessible as they are for the ISSA members (globally recognized organization) and it is their policy. I can do nothing on that, I thought the title itself should have been sufficient.

And for reference no 4, I believe the board of directors (its structure) can only be signified by the company itself. I think it'd be best if I remove the reference for that part. Sujandahal76 (talk) 09:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Social Security Fund (Nepal) (January 4)[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 Chetsford was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Social Security Fund (Nepal) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chetsford (talk) 07:19, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Chetsford, it'd be best if you could provide me the reasons. Sujandahal76 (talk) 09:12, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Classic Tech (January 9)[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 DoubleGrazing was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Classic Tech and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:38, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]