Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Hatchens/Archive 1) (bot |
→Concern: new section |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
:: I don't understand how you find the article so promotional that you even nominated it for Speedy deletion under G11. You really need to elaborate on how it reads like an advertisement and how the sources I have added to the article are sposored articles. Statesman, IBT, Dainik Bhaskar, and Entrepreneur are some of the well known news outlets and there are more sources available online about the subject. You're seriously claiming Entrepreneur article which was written by a staff, IBT, Dainik Bhaskar, Statesman to be sponsored articles. These articles were posted by their staffs and almost 90% of the articles are published in the same manner in India. I would request you to reconsider your decisions. Thanks.[[User:ShaiksKings|ShaiksKings]] ([[User talk:ShaiksKings|talk]]) 11:26, 11 November 2020 (UTC) |
:: I don't understand how you find the article so promotional that you even nominated it for Speedy deletion under G11. You really need to elaborate on how it reads like an advertisement and how the sources I have added to the article are sposored articles. Statesman, IBT, Dainik Bhaskar, and Entrepreneur are some of the well known news outlets and there are more sources available online about the subject. You're seriously claiming Entrepreneur article which was written by a staff, IBT, Dainik Bhaskar, Statesman to be sponsored articles. These articles were posted by their staffs and almost 90% of the articles are published in the same manner in India. I would request you to reconsider your decisions. Thanks.[[User:ShaiksKings|ShaiksKings]] ([[User talk:ShaiksKings|talk]]) 11:26, 11 November 2020 (UTC) |
||
== Concern == |
|||
Why have you reviewed [[Draft:MyGate]] again? Had you not stated to me, that you were going to be leaving it to another reviewer to review it for an unbiased outcome? then why did you review the page again and keep declining for being promotional? |
|||
Were you not the one who had advised me to expand the page and add more sources when you first reviewed this page? I did as you stated (reworked on the entire page and added more references) even though there were already over seventeen references in the draft (previous version) which were more than enough for one to determine notability of this entity and the page was also meeting the NPOV. |
|||
When all was said and done, you refused to look at it agian stating would leave it for someone else to review. And I see you again declined the page and I could not comprehend what do you want to convey by saying "A desperate attempt to push this entity as a relevant one". Did i force you to review my draft? Please also explain where it reads like an advertisement? |
Revision as of 11:22, 16 November 2020
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Draft Pratik Gauri
Mind specifying how you find this so promotional that you declined it? I don't find it promotional at all. You stated sources do not show significant coverage? You mean articles like [1][2][3][4] which cover him directly and in detail and published by sources like Statesmen, Entrepreneur, International business times, and Dainik Bhaskar do not count as significant coverage? Please double check, there could probably be no sources better than those as they are all secondary reliable sources and talk about the subject in detail. Thank you.ShaiksKings (talk) 12:03, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
- ShaiksKings, The links which you have highlighted... are "sponsored articles" written by "news desks" (i.e, not by "staff writers"). For better clarity, read WP:SPONSORED. No further checks required. Thank you. - Hatchens (talk) 16:28, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
- I don't understand how you find the article so promotional that you even nominated it for Speedy deletion under G11. You really need to elaborate on how it reads like an advertisement and how the sources I have added to the article are sposored articles. Statesman, IBT, Dainik Bhaskar, and Entrepreneur are some of the well known news outlets and there are more sources available online about the subject. You're seriously claiming Entrepreneur article which was written by a staff, IBT, Dainik Bhaskar, Statesman to be sponsored articles. These articles were posted by their staffs and almost 90% of the articles are published in the same manner in India. I would request you to reconsider your decisions. Thanks.ShaiksKings (talk) 11:26, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Concern
Why have you reviewed Draft:MyGate again? Had you not stated to me, that you were going to be leaving it to another reviewer to review it for an unbiased outcome? then why did you review the page again and keep declining for being promotional?
Were you not the one who had advised me to expand the page and add more sources when you first reviewed this page? I did as you stated (reworked on the entire page and added more references) even though there were already over seventeen references in the draft (previous version) which were more than enough for one to determine notability of this entity and the page was also meeting the NPOV.
When all was said and done, you refused to look at it agian stating would leave it for someone else to review. And I see you again declined the page and I could not comprehend what do you want to convey by saying "A desperate attempt to push this entity as a relevant one". Did i force you to review my draft? Please also explain where it reads like an advertisement?