User talk:Canthewikiman

Quick deletion of Jobanjit Singh[change source]

The page you wrote, Jobanjit Singh, has been selected for quick deletion. If you think this page should be kept, please add {{wait}} below the line {{QD}} and say why on the talk page. If the page is already gone, but you think this was an error, you can ask for it to be undeleted. You can find more information about the reason here. Belwine • 💬 • 📜 19:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021[change source]

Please do not remove quick deletion tags from articles, as you did to "Jobanjit Singh", without a good reason. If you think the article should not be deleted, please explain your reason on the article's talk page. Thank you. Belwine • 💬 • 📜 19:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to note that a few of the sources were clearly paid. Inspiration Hub, for example, appeared to be full of advertising, and Hindustan Times was a brand post. If you still think the page shouldn't be deleted, go to the talk page and put {{wait}} on the page, without removing the qd template. To me however, it is very clearly advertising, and a non-notable subject. --Belwine • 💬 • 📜 19:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've mentioned good reason there. Without reading news you're blaming on the basis of google search? There are many notable news source which identify he is notable. Canthewikiman (talk) 19:38, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Times of India, The Statesman and other are paid? How you're so sure? Does your father work there? Canthewikiman (talk) 19:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Statesman (Inspiration Hub) was absolutely paid. Just look at the homepage for inspiration hub. Also, I really can't see how the Times of India article shows notability. It is a very short interview. --Belwine • 💬 • 📜 19:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To let you know for Hindustan Times Brand post doesn't reflect as Brand post it is the post about Brand (eg: VS Records) that why it's on Brand Post and TOI is is notable enough including freepreesjournal, the statesman, deccan chronicles and asianage. Every news are national and mainstream media of India. Canthewikiman (talk) 19:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The freepressjournal source does not even work. And looking through https://www.hindustantimes.com/brand-post, I can see that these brand posts are clearly not just posts about brands, they are just pure advertising. --Belwine • 💬 • 📜 19:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent changes, like those to Jobanjit Singh, are vandalism and are not acceptable on any Wikipedia. Please stop. If you continue vandalizing, you will be blocked from changing pages on Wikipedia. Use the wait template instead of removing QD templates, that is absolutely not allowed. Belwine • 💬 • 📜 19:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have readded the QD template, but I have added a wait template as well. This will show that you believe the page should not be deleted. However, it is quite clear that this article was done for advertising purposes. Belwine • 💬 • 📜 19:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Watch clearly freepreesjournal is working Canthewikiman (talk) 19:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's why you should check everything properly before adding something like QD Canthewikiman (talk) 19:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

404, page not found - I don't think that page is working at all. I can see pretty quickly with my eyes that this article is advertising. I didn't even have to go through the sources, because even if there were reliable sources, it is clearly advertising. Whilst you may say I should check sources, it is saving a bit of time for myself so I can contribute in other ways to the encyclopedia.
Anyway, I have now checked all the sources and my view is exactly the same: it's clearly advertising, and the sources are just advertisements too. --Belwine • 💬 • 📜 19:57, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move it to admin let the admin decide till than i feel like you're attacking personally on to me and my edit. I'll remove if you add it and warn you too. Canthewikiman (talk) 19:57, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent changes are vandalism, and this shows that you want to harm Wikipedia. This is your last warning. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from changing Wikipedia. If you remove the QD tag again, you will be blocked from changing Wikipedia. --IWI (talk) 20:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh i see can you elaborate Canthewikiman (talk) 20:37, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No elaboration required. An admin will decide whether to delete the page. If you remove the tag again I will report you for vandalism. Best, --IWI (talk) 20:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So who are you to decide that I'll get blocked. If you add this again I'll warn you as final warning ⚠️ Canthewikiman (talk) 20:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will not decide; an administrator will. --IWI (talk) 20:41, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of Jobanjit Singh[change source]

An editor has requested deletion of Jobanjit Singh, an article you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Please comment on the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/Jobanjit Singh and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also change the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. Eptalon (talk) 20:44, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of Ch Moazzam Ishaq[change source]

An editor has requested deletion of Ch Moazzam Ishaq, an article you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Please comment on the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/Ch Moazzam Ishaq and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also change the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. Belwine • 💬 • 📜 22:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from changing Wikipedia in line with Wikipedia's blocking policy for making personal attacks. If you think this block is unfair, you may ask to be unblocked by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. If you cannot do this or the reason is private, please send an e-mail to simple-admins-l@lists.wikimedia.org and an administrator will look at your reason and reply. You may want to read our guide to unblock requests before asking to be unblocked. Operator873^talkconnect 23:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]