This is an archive of past discussions with User:MH-wiki2025. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MarcGarver 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:
He may be notable, but the references don't demonstrate it yet. In addition, the tone of the article is like a LinkedIn profile. It needs to more neutral. Finally I am concerned that the article for Pinnacle Industries appears to have been written by an undisclosed paid editor. Given this, it is important to establish that there is no conflict of interest in this new draft before accepting it.
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:Dr. Sudhir Mehta 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.
Thank you for taking the time to review my submission and for your valuable feedback. I’d like to address the points you raised:
Notability & References – I acknowledge that the current references may not fully establish Dr. Sudhir Mehta’s notability per Wikipedia’s guidelines. I will work on adding more independent, reliable secondary sources that provide in-depth coverage of his contributions.
Neutral Tone – I understand your concern regarding the tone. I will revise the article to ensure it aligns with Wikipedia’s neutral point of view (NPOV) and avoids sounding like a LinkedIn profile.
Conflict of Interest (COI) – I want to clarify that I am an independent editor, and there is no undisclosed COI regarding this submission. If necessary, I can provide a COI disclosure on the Talk page to ensure full transparency.
Pinnacle Industries Article – I was not involved in the creation of the Pinnacle Industries article. However, I understand the importance of independent contributions and will ensure that this draft is strictly in line with Wikipedia’s editorial standards.
I appreciate your guidance and will make the necessary improvements before resubmitting. Please let me know if there are any specific reference types or structural changes you recommend to strengthen the article. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 20:00, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello, MH-wiki2025!
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! MarcGarver (talk) 11:41, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Significa liberdade was:
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:Lokesh Muni 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.
Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jeraxmoira was:
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:Lokesh Muni 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.
Lokesh Muni, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Drafts are not assessed for quality or importance until they're accepted as articles. Continually re-adding those assessments is disruptive. Please stop. --Sable232 (talk) 03:35, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
An article you recently created, Qaseem Haider, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. NenChemist (talk) 14:42, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RangersRus was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Shree Datta Padmanabh Peeth 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.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanoj mishra 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.
Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Sanoj mishra. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Do not move a page while it is subject to an AfD. This is disruptive, and you should wait for the AfD to close.CycloneYoristalk!07:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
I understand. I apologize for the premature move of the Sanoj mishra page and any disruption it caused. I was attempting to correct the capitalization as per the emerging consensus in the AfD, but I now realize that moving a page during an AfD is inappropriate and against Wikipedia guidelines. I also understand the importance of following naming conventions and avoiding unilateral moves, especially when a discussion is ongoing. I will be sure to review the relevant guidelines you linked to and will refrain from making such moves in the future. I will also use the test Wikipedia for any page title experiments. Thank you for pointing out my mistake and providing the necessary information. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 07:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or edit other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Sanoj mishra. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the AfD discussion page. Thank you. CycloneYoristalk!07:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Understood. I apologize for removing the AfD notice and any perceived editing of comments on the Sanoj Mishra AfD page. I now understand that removing the notice is inappropriate and that I should instead contribute to the discussion on the AfD page itself. I will refrain from removing such notices in the future and will participate constructively in AfD discussions. Thank you for clarifying this. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 07:58, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Rahmatula786 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:
article has promotional information .
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:Shree Datta Padmanabh Peeth 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.
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), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
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.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Shree Datta Padmanabh Peeth 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.
Shree Datta Padmanabh Peeth's leader received the Padma Shri, demonstrating national recognition, and its activities are covered by major Indian publications like Times of India and Indian Express, fulfilling WP:NORG. Government records further confirm its prominence. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 13:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qaseem Haider 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.
Thank you for the notification. I've contributed to the deletion discussion, providing reliable sources that demonstrate the subject's notability per WP:GNGMH-wiki2025 (talk) 03:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Banksathi. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability, you may have a possible Conflict of Interest and Only run-of-the-mill announcements. Draft:BankSathi exists and has been declined as non-notable..
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Acknowledged. I understand the article has been moved to Draft:Banksathi due to concerns regarding notability, sourcing, potential conflict of interest, and the presence of routine announcements.
@Bonadea : I'm confused, I already have an undisclosed connection to Banksathi, overlooked by me. I have now revised Draft:Banksathi with updated sourcing, aimed at achieving notability. Also I have no COI. Given the existence of both Draft:BankSathi (rejected) and Draft:Banksathi (revised), please advise on the preferred draft for review, or abandoned MH-wiki2025 (talk) 16:51, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jamiebuba was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Ahimsa Vishwa Bharti 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.
Hello MH-wiki2025! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Confused about BankSathi Drafts - Seeking Guidance, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gheus 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:Sudhir Mehta 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.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Banksathi 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.
I would like to clarify my past relationship with Banksathi. In 2021, I was a customer of Banksathi and used their services. I have no current professional, financial, or employment relationship with the Company. This disclosure is made for transparency.
I have prepared Draft:Banksathi with better sourcing to make it notable. I recently learned from senior Wikipedia editor @DoubleGrazing that Draft:BankSathi was created in October and declined.I admit my mistake in not searching more thoroughly beforehand.
Can you tell me where you obtained the statement "BankSathi has established a network of financial advisors across India, facilitating the distribution of financial products, particularly in areas with limited access to traditional financial services" which you added to the page? I am hoping you can provide a link to the reference. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:17, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41:The statement is supported by the following references:
I checked these references but I do not see where it specifically states what you wrote on the page. One may assume that is the case (that they established......facilitating the distribution....etc.), but that statement is very company-speak and promotional like something the company would want to say. It gives the impression that you may have a conflict of interest.--CNMall41 (talk) 00:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
I see that another editor shared a concern of COI previously on your talk page. Can you please read WP:COI and WP:PAID and make the appropriate disclosure with all of your editing here on Wikipedia, not just Banksathi?--CNMall41 (talk) 00:15, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Please provide a response to the above. There is a concern from multiple editors that you have a conflict of interest. No response will need to be reported to COIN for further discussion. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:18, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41: Thank you for your message. I understand the concerns raised and appreciate the need for transparency. My contributions to the BankSathi article are based on verifiable, independent sources that establish its notability per WP:NCORP.
If there are specific areas where improvements are needed to ensure neutrality, I am open to constructive feedback and collaboration. I am committed to following Wikipedia’s guidelines and will be happy to make necessary adjustments. Let me know how I can address any concerns to improve the article appropriately. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 08:40, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
You are answering a different question to what is being asked. We want to know your relationship (beyond being an ex-customer) with this BankSathi business. Whether or not the article is written in a neutral or promotional manner, and whether or not the subject is notable, has nothing to do with that. Please answer the question clearly and unambiguously, in your own words. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:45, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Just to be clear again, I don't have any professional ties to Banksathi, financial or otherwise. I was a customer of theirs back in 2021, that's it. I'll admit, when I started editing the article, I made some rookie mistakes because I wasn't fully up to speed on Wikipedia's rules. I'm not a paid editor, never have been, and I'm committed to getting this right and following the guidelines MH-wiki2025 (talk) 08:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
I will assume good faith with your response, although note that your editing gives the strong impression that you have a conflict of interest with regards to your editing on Wikipedia. When you say you are "committed to getting this right and following the guidelines," I hope this means that you also apply this to notability guidelines. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Indira IVF. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because Promotional in tone, bordering on WP:TNT. Full of information on industry awards and unsourced content under "operations" (where did the information come from if there is no source to support?)..
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
I think it has been shown that you are not familiar enough with guidelines to be moving pages to the mainspace. I cannot tell you not to, but would suggest going through AfC. Numerous times pages were moved to draft and you made only minor changes before moving them back. This can be seen as disruptive. Again, do as you will but if you continue to move promotional pages to the mainspace, the editing conduct will be reported. CNMall41 (talk) 23:12, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indira IVF 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.
Thanks for your contributions to Goa Spiritual Festival. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Thanks for editing this as it appeared on my watchlist. Although, it does give the appearance of Wikistalking. If you want to retaliate against me moving your pages to draftspace, ANI would be the best place to do so although take a look at WP:CLEANHANDS. I moved Red Rector to the main space as well. CNMall41 (talk) 17:53, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41 : I appreciate your message. My comment was based on Wikipedia's notability guidelines and the need for significant independent coverage, not personal retaliation. I contribute per policy and editorial standards. Let's keep discussions constructive and focused on content. Thanks MH-wiki2025 (talk) 18:11, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
To a draft.....that has been dormant for months.....and you would have to find through manual searching not just coming across it randomly....created by a user you may not be happy with due to initiating deletion discussions against you. Do as you will, just keep that in mind. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:17, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
I also noticed your AFC comment on the same draft. Inactivity and user history do not imply bias. My comments were solely based on Wikipedia’s editing policies (WP:GNG, WP:V). Let’s keep the focus on content, as my intent was never misplaced. Thank you MH-wiki2025 (talk) 18:46, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
You "noticed" it by searching my edit history, a form of Wikistalking. No one said anything about bias. It does not seem you understand the issue so will likely go to ANI to have it addressed. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Actually, can you tell me how you came across this?
Are you able to answer the question? Coming across a sanbox in userspace after recreating a previously deleted page gives the impression that you have a connection to the topic. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41 Reverting was done solely to maintain factual accuracy, not to conceal anything. If there are concerns, I’m happy to discuss them constructively. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 19:07, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41, I understand your concerns. To clarify, my actions were aimed at ensuring accurate attribution and factual integrity.
Yesterday got notification, 'Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati' article was linked to 'Jagadguru Shankaracharya Avimukteshwaranandah Saraswatee.' During subsequent research, I encountered various drafts and inadvertently accessed a sandbox. I acknowledge this as an error, which I rectified.
I also addressed the perceived duplication issue with @ToadetteEdit and @Whiteismight, providing evidence that my article (March 6th) predates the other (March 7th, from a declined draft). My intent was to maintain Wikipedia's accuracy, not disrupt MH-wiki2025 (talk) 19:30, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41 The revision history clearly shows that the "Jagadguru Shankaracharya Avimukteshwaranandah Saraswatee" article predates the "Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati" article. The "Causes" section was added in August 2024, well before the March 2025 article, making the duplication claim factually incorrect. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 19:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
I have told you over my talk page that redirection is preferred over just speedy deletion, so I am not sure whether you have done that or not. Merging the same content would be fine if the content was different across the two articles. Honestly, it's not a good impression on you with this thread; if you disagree, please discuss as we are doing right now. ToadetteEdit (talk) 19:41, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@Whiteismight; the page in the title isn't indeed deleted, but has been redirected; you can see its page history to view the content before the speedy tagging. Not all duplicates are deleted. Although I am open to defend these actions, I will soon be offline after an hour or so... ToadetteEdit (talk) 20:28, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
(Oops, missed this link), it appears that the page was deleted before being created as a redirect, so without the help of a sysop we couldn't restore it, and I can't verify that the content did duplicate the existing article. ToadetteEdit (talk) 20:40, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@ToadetteEdit @CNMall41 The revision history clearly shows that the "Jagadguru Shankaracharya Avimukteshwaranandah Saraswatee" article predates the "Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati" article. The "Causes" section was added in August 2024, well before the March 2025 article, making the duplication claim factually incorrect. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 19:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC) Whiteismight (talk) 20:42, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
And now you are copying someone else's comment. Sound suspicious... Also I can't verify that the content is the same, will look up to that later. ToadetteEdit (talk) 20:50, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@ToadetteEdit I sent you the link of the comment earlier.
as I had stated the edits done by me in August 2024 were duplicated by the said page in March 2025 and then the page I've been working on for this long was marked as duplicate and deleted.
This is more than enough. When one is creating an article, they should first look for any drafts that might be on the topic that you are writing about. There, one can continue to improve the draft and move it if they see the article content as fit. Otherwise, starting the article without looking at any drafts that may document the subject in question can hurt editor retention, as shown in the comment immediately above. If you did so, then we would not be discussing this right now. And it could get worse if you indeed copy the content of the draft to the content of the article, which I can not prove in the time being. ToadetteEdit (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Certainly appears like a coordinated effort at this point when one editor hasn't edited in a day and then their first edit today is seven minutes after being pinged. If you would like to disclose your affiliation please do so. If not, will need to go to SPI and/or COIN. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:01, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41, I think they do not have some sort of close relations (meatpuppetry), given their slight background. I am not opposed, though, to an SPI or any other thread on a noticeboard. ToadetteEdit (talk) 20:09, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41 I am solely focused on creating spiritual biographies and have no affiliation with the subject. My actions were based on factual accuracy, not coordination.
The article Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati was created on March 6th, while Jagadguru Shankaracharya Avimukteshwaranandah Saraswatee became live on March 7th. The duplication is evident, and my request for review at the Teahouse was made in good faith to address this.
I encourage you to review the page histories for clarity. Let’s focus on resolving the content issue rather than making unfounded assumptions. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41 I welcome further review and discussion, as transparency is essential. I have provided clear evidence regarding the article's creation timeline and duplication issue. If a COIN filing helps clarify the matter objectively, I have no objections. I appreciate a fair and constructive approach to resolving this MH-wiki2025 (talk) 20:16, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
I too cannot see the relation between the editor and the subject in question, though I could not comment in the upcoming thread due to obvious reasons so.... ToadetteEdit (talk) 20:21, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41 I believe there may be some misunderstanding here. The discussion initially stemmed from my comment on a draft, but the focus has now shifted elsewhere. I have provided clear evidence, including the relevant talk page discussions and Teahouse support references, yet they seem to have been overlooked. I acknowledge my mistake and have already reverted it.
@ToadetteEdit I appreciate your objective stance. I have remained transparent throughout and am committed to maintaining factual accuracy on Wikipedia. I trust that a fair resolution will be reached based on the evidence provided. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 20:40, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
Hello MH-wiki2025! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Consolidating Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati Pages, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.
Despite agreeing to use AfC, you moved Sudhir Mehta (entrepreneur) to mainspace after it was declined. I am trying not to escalate to a noticeboard but cannot see another option at this point. What was the reasoning for moving this to mainspace after agreeing to use AfC (based on many of your creations not being notable)? You are under no obligation to answer of course, but the editing pattern is causing disruption. CNMall41 (talk) 18:26, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
CNMall41, I moved Sudhir Mehta (entrepreneur) to mainspace after fixing Gheus’s AfC decline with solid sources (e.g., Economic Times Auto) and neutral tone—AfC isn’t mandatory (WP:AfC), and I stand by its readiness, now under peer review. Like with Red Rector, my edits follow policy, not personal grudges. If you see disruption, name specifics—I’ll address them here, not at a noticeboard. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 19:35, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Sudhir Mehta (entrepreneur). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
As previously advised, your edits, such as the edit you made to Draft:Sudhir Mehta (entrepreneur), 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 were asked to cease editing until you responded 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:MH-wiki2025, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=MH-wiki2025|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:57, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
The article meets WP:GNG and WP:BIO with significant, independent coverage: *Economic Times Auto* (2025) on EKA Mobility’s EV showcase, *Fortune India* (2025) on profitability goals, and *Lokmat Times* (2024) on industry awards—plus eight other reliable sources. It’s under peer review since March 21. If notability or sourcing falls short, please specify—I propose refining it in mainspace per WP:ATD. Thanks for your oversight. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 09:00, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Sudhir Mehta (entrepreneur). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability, you may have a possible Conflict of Interest and Notability not shown. Article creator has previously agreed to submit drafts to AfC review and not move them to mainspace; clearly that is still necessary..
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
