User talk:Bhatti31

This is Bhatti31'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: Ansspvt (August 2)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Umakant Bhalerao 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 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 Draft:Ansspvt and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 04:59, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bhatti31! 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! Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 04:59, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ansspvt (August 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Akevsharma was:

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.

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 Draft:Ansspvt and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

Akevsharma (talk) 00:41, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ansspvt (August 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

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:

This draft, as written, does not appear to indicate that the appropriate notability criterion is satisfied. In particular, this draft does not appear to indicate that WP:NBIO is satisfied. If one of the criteria is satisfied, please revise this draft appropriately, with a reliable source, if necessary stating on the talk page or in AFC comments which criterion is met, and resubmit. It is the responsibility of the submitter to show that a subject satisfies a notability criterion.

You may ask for advice about the notability criteria at the Teahouse.

In particular, see and refer to WP:NBIO for notability, which is the guideline that the subject should be evaluated against.

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 Draft:Ansspvt 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Bhatti31! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Check the notability for a person, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:03, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ans Production Photography for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ans Production Photography is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ans Production Photography 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 until the discussion has finished.

KH-1 (talk) 02:19, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @KH-1 This company has been working in filmography for years; Ans Production Photography works with news channels in Boston like NBC Boston Boston magazine and other media; they are notable in Boston, MA; their article is not much on news websites. Most reports are from Newspapers or magazines. I have confirmed the notability of this page. Would you mind withdrawing this nomination? Bhatti31 (talk) 05:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's not going to happen, I don't see anything in the article that would suggest that it is notable. I recommend that you read WP:NCORP (particularly WP:ORGCRIT section) and make your case at the AfD.-KH-1 (talk) 06:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand this, we are working on the articles. and more social websites notability. Please bear with me Bhatti31 (talk) 06:05, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly suggest that you move the page back to the original title, unless you want an administrator to get involved.-KH-1 (talk) 06:18, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bhatti31. Don't move pages around like that. Start articles in the draft space and get them approved. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 11:37, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

Your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You are asked to cease editing until you respond by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Bhatti31, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Bhatti31|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. – NJD-DE (talk) 21:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ans Ishfaq (September 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

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.

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 Draft:Ans Ishfaq 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 09:09, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Draft:Ans Ishfaq

If this was the first article that you 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.

The page Draft:Ans Ishfaq has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:39, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Leave the Ans production page alone. Editor are sating the sources aren't reliable. You know why? yes absolutely right, but Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information. It is not a good idea to blindly accept whatever I find there. I should fact-check it and consider primary sources whenever possible."

Kindly remove the deletion. Bhatti31 (talk) 15:52, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DatGuy since it’s NOT a reliable source. If you can’t find anything other than Wikipedia to back up your argument, you have no argument. (Not because anyone can edit or tweak an entry, but because it’s not definitive - because the people making the entries aren’t always experts.) Bhatti31 (talk) 19:57, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

“Actually, I followed links at the bottom of the Wikipedia article and I’m quoting from those source documents, not the Wikipedia article itself.” Bhatti31 (talk) 19:59, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bhatti31 I really don't understand what point you're trying to make here. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 20:05, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ans Production Photography Page shouldn't be deleted. Bhatti31 (talk) 20:06, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

i would like you to take off the ip unblock. Thanks Bhatti31 (talk) 20:08, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]