12:53:55, 14 December 2016 review of submission by Abhilashpatil
- Abhilashpatil (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Yogesh Chabria ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I am following this author, Yogesh Chabria but I didnn't find any wikipedia page about him. He is a motivational speaker at many conferences and has best seller investing book series published by CNBC and Netwrok 18. Also, he is an entrepreneur himself.
I think he is really an inspiration for many. Please let me know why his page cannot be published.
Thanks, Abhilash
- Hi. The draft was reviewed by another editor, maybe they can give some guidance. You may to ask them. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 17:46, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
PROD
You seem to be de-prodding quite a few company articles. While the requirements for de-prodding something are intentionally low, this seems like an attempt to de facto make company articles exempt from PROD entirely. For example, can you explain why something you seem to agree should be speedily deleted should be de-prodded except to make a point about process? Huon (talk) 10:54, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
- I don't know what you are trying to say, but whatever your POINT is, I don't understand. Also, you attempts at reading my mind are unwelcome. Good day sir/madam. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 14:56, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
- I asked you to explain your rationale because I don't want to have to rely on mind-reading to understand what you're trying to achieve. The lack of an explanation is noted. Thus I'll have to continue to rely on what it looks like to me from the outside. Huon (talk) 18:37, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
- Have fun! -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 18:39, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Season's Greetings
- Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message
Deletion inquiry
I'm wondering if you'd kindly be interested in assessing Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Heap_(company) (since you participated in a Luxe/Verbling deletion discussion). It seems users DGG and SwisterTwister routinely vote for deletion together without offering analysis, so I wanted to get a third-party involved. I'm not fishing for a keep, but I am looking for a legitimate discussion if possible. Thanks for any consideration. GDWin (talk) GDWin —Preceding undated comment added 18 December 2016 (UTC)
- The issue you raise is part of a long-term disruption, and will require community involvement to solve for the long-term. Looking for legitimate discussion is a fine goal, but not something you're going to see much at AFD while there is this long-term disruption taking place. Don't be baited by the disrupters, they thrive on long, involved discussion threads where they can repeat their baseless claims over, and over, and over again. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 18:17, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
- It's long term disagreement; calling it disruption implies a unchangeable fixed position to which any disagreement is disruptive. The disagreement is about whether WP:NOTDIRECTORY is policy and whether NOTADVERTISING applies to small organizations. I support really well sourced articles for a companies that has done something notable or distinctive, or is a leader in its field. Unfortunately the way we decide is my arguing over the meaning of he adjectives in references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, not press releases or mere announcements, and many cases can be seen in different ways depending on what is desired. I support attempts at quantitative standards about the subjects. DGG ( talk ) 19:13, 18 December 2016 (UTC)