User talk:AranyaPathak
AfC notification: Draft:Elbst has a new comment[edit]
- You asked me to give you a solid analysis of the draft, and I think I have done so. I am pretty sure you will have questions about what I have said, and also may have corrections to what I have said that you woudl like to raise with me.
- What I have tried hard to do is to give you a completeoy unbiased opinion of the draft, and to show you the difficult areas. As a reviewer at WP:AFC I woudl be unable to accept it as an article for all the reasons I've said. There is a differences between those who revoew with a view to accepting and those who look with a view, at AfD, to deciding whether an article ought to be kept.
- That difference is to do with time spent within the article. A reviewer has a particuel instruction. If in the reviewer's opinion the draft stands a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process then they should accept it. I usually aim for 60%.
- Deletion is different. Anyone may offer an opinion, and often those opinions can be lazy opinions. There is no commitment to spending time in the article, Some do, some do not. It is a more casual and more brutal process
- New editors can take years to undersand that the less said in defence of their 'first born article' the better chance it has of surviving. New ediotrs defend and defend and defend. The community gets bored with them and reacts, sometimes poorly. The new editor gets caught up in an escalating mess of righteous indignation and everything goes wrong for them.
- That seems to be what happened to you, I htink? Enough of my voice for now. The questiin is "Does this sound familiar?" Fiddle Faddle 22:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
case request declined[edit]
The case request "Seeking Insulation from Administrative ‘Attack’ for Contribution" that you were a party to has been declined by the committee after a absolute majority of arbitrators voted to decline the case request.
The case request has been removed from Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case. A permanent link to the declined case can be accessed through this wikilink.
For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 08:41, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Block notice[edit]
I have been looking at your recent editing, which consists almost entirely of creating drafts. I checked a number of those drafts, and in every one that I looked at I found content which had been copied from other sources. In some cases I found the copied source immediately, in other cases it took a little searching, because you had made trivial changes in wording, or fragmented quoted material into separate pieces so that it wasn't word for word identical to the original, but it was still clearly essentially a copy. You have been told about copyright a number of times before. I suspect that you are continuing to infringe copyright because you don't fully understand the issue, rather than because of malicious intention. That, unfortunately, makes it less likely that you can easily stop, which you could if you understood better what you are doing.
One fact which made it easier to find your copyright infringements than it otherwise might have been is the fact that where you have copied material it is mostly in coherent English, contrasting with text which you appear to have written yourself, which frequently is written in English words but not English syntax or not in English idiom. That raises the question of how well you could actually contribute to an English language if you wrote everything in your own words.
As you must be aware, a number of experienced editors, including several administrators, have indicated that they think it may be necessary for you to be indefinitely blocked, because the problems with your editing seem to be incapable of solution. Drmies, one of the most experienced administrators on the project, said that they wondered why you hadn't already been blocked. I think the answer to that is that everyone involved accepts that you are a good faith editor, really trying to do right, and all of us are reluctant to take action against someone with good intentions. However, there is also another side to the matter, which has been mentioned by at least two administrators. Valereee suggested that it might "be a kindness to block you indefinitely now so you can go find some other hobby", and RexxS said almost the same thing: "it may be kindest to simply bid them farewell sooner rather than later". Their point is that although blocking a good faith editor from the project might seem unfriendly, it is in fact a kinder thing to do than to let that good faith editor struggle and come across frustrations and problems for a long time, and eventually either be blocked or give up and go away frustrated and annoyed. I have, with great reluctance, come to the conclusion that we have reached the stage where that message applies, and so I am going to block your account from editing, indefinitely.
Like most administrators, when I block an editor from editing I usually post a pre-written block notice, which takes me a few seconds, or a minute or so if I decide to make slight customisation to fit the particular circumstances. This time I have put a very considerable amount of my time into composing this fairly long message, because I do recognise that you have been editing in good faith, and you deserve to understand that the block is no reflection on your intentions. It is, however, a reflection on your ability to become a constructive editor. Your continuing copyright infringements after being warned, on their own might have led me to block for a couple of days or so, but it is not only that: it is a continuing pattern of many problems, most if not all of which seem to stem from an inability to understand what the problems are, or to understand what you are told by others. Problems due to difficulties in understanding, or limited competence in English or in other matters, may be impossible to put right, no matter how sincerely you wish to put them right.
An indefinite block does not mean a block for ever: it means a block with no definite time limit set, and you can request an unblock if you wish to. However, my personal advice is that, as suggested above, it would not be in your own interests to do so, because if you were unblocked you would merely encounter further problems and frustrations. That is advice, not instruction, and if you do decide to request an unblock then first read the guide to appealing blocks, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of this page, replacing the words "Your reason here" with your statement as to why you think it would be a good idea for your account to be unblocked. JBW (talk) 21:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
@Drmies, Valereee, and RexxS: If you saw my message above as a result of my mentioning you, you may also be interested in seeing the following postscript to it. If you aren't interested, then my apologies for taking up your time with this ping. JBW (talk) 22:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Note: As I said in my message above, I put some considerable time into writing the above message, because I believed you had been acting entirely in good faith. I might have put much less time into explaining the thought processes behind the block if I had already seen the following, which I have now seen. Following the deletion of Elbst at a deletion discussion, you posted Draft:Elbst. At Draft talk:Elbst you wrote that the draft was not subject to a G4 deletion because "The article has been improved significantly from what it was previously". In fact, the texts of the draft was identical to that of the original article except for a correction of one spelling mistake. You also gave different categories (none of which, incidentally, should have been in a draft) and you introduced a couple of mistakes by missing out <ref> tags which should have been there, removed a couple of spaces in front of ref tags, and in one place moved two references, putting them before a sentence instead of after it. Those were the only changes you made. You cannot possibly have honestly thought that "The article has been improved significantly from what it was previously". It becomes difficult to continue to assume good faith after that observation. Did you think that nobody would be able to see the original and compare it with the copy you posted? JBW (talk) 22:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- JBW, thank you for taking the time to write all this up. Your PS reminds me of the many times I gave a student the opportunity to improve on a paper, a paper where I offered numerous suggestions for improvement to find that all the student did was change one comma. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 22:12, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- JBW, I am afraid that you are correct. I have committed to work with this editor, should he still so wish, to help him understand how to approach editing here. I will now work with him, again should he wish to do so, when he chooses to appeal his block in helping him to understand how that might be approached. I will counsel delay and a period of quiet reflection. At this point a speedy appeal will send all sorts of incorrect messages to those reviewing it. I am a firm believer in transparency and will work openly on this talk page. I do not do behind the scenes mentoring by email . I'm heartened that you have given him wise counsel rather than discarding him. Thank you. When I commented upon the Elbst draft I had not seen the original. Lacking admin goggles I took it as I found it. I had not done the work that you have done in seeking out copyright violations, concentrating instead on other matters, as inspection of the deleted copy will have shown you Fiddle Faddle 23:18, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Maipolina[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Maipolina".
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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 23:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Irizima (creature)[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Irizima".
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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:31, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Ellengassen[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Ellengassen, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 22:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Nayanezgani[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Nayanezgani, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 22:37, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Mukunga-mbura[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Mukunga-mbura, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 22:37, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Mitla (creature)[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Mitla (creature), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 23:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Mukunga-mbura[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mukunga-mbura".
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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! ƏXPLICIT 13:19, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Mitla (creature)[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mitla".
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! 01:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Succarath[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Succarath, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Tobadzistsini[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tobadzistsini, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Succarath[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Succarath".
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! 19:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Tobadzistsini[edit]
Hello, AranyaPathak. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Tobadzistsini".
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! 19:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circhos 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.
QueenofBithynia (talk) 13:41, 23 March 2022 (UTC)