User talk:Myleadingcampus

This is Myleadingcampus'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: sandbox (May 16)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

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.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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 User:Myleadingcampus/sandbox 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) 11:29, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Myleadingcampus! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:29, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 18)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

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.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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 User:Myleadingcampus/sandbox 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) 06:28, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to follow up on our discussion at IRC. Adding material without citing sources is just making the draft worse, not better. Learn how to qualify your sources - brief mentions and quotes from Datta in news media are not helpful in establishing notability. And for a biographical article, inline citations are mandatory. You cannot get a draft accepted by going in this direction. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:08, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 20)[edit]

{{subst:Afc decline|full=User:Myleadingcampus/sandbox|cv=no|reason=v|details=|reason2=|details2=|comment=We require in-line citations with full references. Every statement, starting with the date of birth, must have an in-line citation with a full reference. Please see the tutorial at [[WP:INTREFVE]. Convert all your citations to in-line citations please.

You also have far too many External Links, which should be max 1 or 2, see WP:EXTERNAL. Also remove any external links from the body of the text.|sig=yes}}

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Myleadingcampus/sandbox[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 User:Myleadingcampus/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. GPL93 (talk) 16:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I declined the speedy deletion, but that does not mean the article does not have a promoitonal tone. I've removed the excessive list of externals links. -- Whpq (talk) 17:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:

Virtually unreferenced, with zero evidence of notability.

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 User:Myleadingcampus/sandbox 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) 10:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Myleadingcampus. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amitava Dutta is a well-known person in Howrah district. I know him personally as he used to teach my brother in school a few years ago, but I am not getting paid for this work. I believe he deserves a Wikipedia page for his significant contributions in the fields of education and politics. To the best of my knowledge, all the links provided are verified and not spam. The purpose of this page is not for advertising or promotion. I will add a Conflict of Interest (COI) disclosure in my edit, and I request you not to reject my publication. Myleadingcampus (talk) 11:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Myleadingcampus. We need to see proven notability. You need to read WP:NPEOPLE. Only people who meet the criteria set out in that policy merit a Wikipedia article. So far you haven't proven notability with your sources. Qcne (talk) 11:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you know him personally, then you have a conflict of interest, and must disclose it.

Most of the information is unreferenced – where did it all come from?

Whether or not you "believe he deserves a Wikipedia page" isn't what matters here; what matters is whether you can produce sources that establish notability (while also verifying the information in the draft). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]