User talk:Varunr

A tag has been placed on Right-Write Services requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mjroots (talk) 07:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Zehreela Zehreela Pyar, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. gppande «talk» 13:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Explocity, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.explocity.com/aboutus/htmlversion/who.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Explocity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Restaurant-Week-Logo.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 11:15, 29 October 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:15, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Ramjee-Chandran.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 11:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Bangalore Restaurant Week has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Concern relating to WP:Notability, Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 11:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Deletion discussion on Bangalore Restaurant Week on here. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 10:23, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest you read WP:Notability - thereafter if you still feel that the article is worth retaining you can put forward your reasoning here. With regards to the prod, its OK for you to remove it - however you must give reasoning in your edit summary. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 07:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:12, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I appreciate your help. Will do so henceforth for sure. Varunr (talk) 10:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NOTIFY: An article you started, Explocity is undergoing a deletion discussion here. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 06:17, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request to hold deletion. I have explained and responded why it must not be deleted. Varunr (talk) 07:12, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Greynium Information Technologies Pvt. Ltd. has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails WP:Notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 10:45, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Oneindia.in has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails WP:Notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 10:46, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Level10comicslogo.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)^(Talk) 11:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really knowledgeable about the subject area, so I'm not the best person to ask if it meets our general notability standards, but it looks like you've at least done your homework and gotten some reliable citations. Try putting the article out in the main space and see what people do with it. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:17, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. I will do so and await reactions. Varunr (talk) 04:03, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry for a late reply on this subject, but I concur with the above - when I first looked at the page, it definitely looked very much passable to me. The big concern these days for the articles are sources, and if there's a bunch of links to actual newspaper stories and like, then things are probably green. I unfortunately don't know what's the current consensus on corporate notability otherwise, but I can tell you that as an admin, I definitely wouldn't speedy-delete the article as barely legible unsourced spam, because the article obviously is well-constructed, articulate, reasonably sourced and sufficiently neutral in tone. Exactly the article material we are looking for. =) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 22:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. Really appreciate your comments. Thanks again! Varunr (talk) 07:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Varunr,

Well can u please tell me exactly what do u want me to check in your article as i am not very knowledgeable about this topic. Till then i would just suggest you put many creative pics make your article attractive looking so that it goes with your topic.. Besties for further editing

Anu2033 (talk) 05:54, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Anu. Will try and jazz it up. Appreciate it. Varunr (talk) 08:42, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed your request for feedback on some talk pages that I stalk. The clearest issue with the page is the number of external links. If you read the external links policy, then you should be able to cut them down to a more acceptable level. For starters, remove the social networking links e.g. Twitter & facebook. Good luck. --Mrmatiko (talk) 11:57, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Im sorry Im very busy at the moment in real life, I suggest you contact someone like User: Redtigerxyz who may be able to help you better. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 17:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Appreciate your help. Will contact User:Redtigerxyz. Varunr (talk) 04:57, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Varunr!

It was really helpful of you to you to upload File:RestaurantWeek-Logo.jpg. However, we need to properly format the image license information in order to keep and use new images.

If you can edit the description and add one of these templates, that would be great. If you're not sure how or would like some help, please ask us at the media copyright questions page and we'll be happy to assist you.

Thanks again! --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thank you so much for your input. I tried inserting {{cc-zero}} but the logo still doesn't show on the page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Varunr/Bangalore_restaurant_week). Can you help, please?

I've helped. Please go back to Media Copyright Questions to see my explanation of what happened. Nyttend (talk) 05:53, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Really appreciate your help. Thanks again.

Varunr (talk) 07:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:RestaurantWeek-Logo.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. mabdul 14:08, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I request you to change the speedy deletion request immediately. I am totally authorised to use the logo. I am the creator of the logo and have complete authority over it. Please let me know what I need to do to prevent the said deletion.

Look forward to your help. Varunr (talk) 14:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Varunr/Bangalore restaurant week has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bangalore restaurant week, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 13:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a look at the article and it feels a bit over promotional to me. If you could use the press mentions as references instead of in a separate external links section that would be a start. Also removing all but the official website external link would also be good. In terms of writing I would suggest that you expand the history section a bit more if possible. --Mrmatiko (talk) 11:32, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any better suggestions than what Mrmatiko just gave you; unfortunately, this isn't an area where I work a lot. Nyttend (talk) 12:12, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. I appreciate it. Varunr (talk) 12:24, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, not my area of interest. I would say that references 3 (facebook), 8 and 10 (youtube) are probably not useable. Did the event receive any coverage in major newspapers, such as Times of India? These are the sort of references that help to establish whether or not an article can pass WP:GNG. Mjroots (talk) 13:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. While the said references are on Facebook and Youtube, those are coverage done by actual and reputable Television News channels. Does that not count? Yes there are Newspaper mentions too, Note 5 and 6 are Newspaper clips and also, check the section titled Press mentions. Does that help?Varunr (talk) 06:26, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If these sites are hosting copyrighted material (which a video of a news item is), then they can't be used as references. See WP:YOUTUBE for the full explanation. Mjroots (talk) 06:33, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I get it. Thanks for pointing that out. I've removed the Facebook video. And will be removing the Youtube links also. Added a few more Newspaper clips as citations. Thank you so much. I really appreciate what you're doing to help. God bless!Varunr (talk) 07:02, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, here's a few pointers to begin with.

Sources

Instead of linking to the newspaper clippings from explocity, try linking to websites of the newspapers itself. That should help increase the apparent credibility of the sources. Remove the youtube link.

An easy way to decide for sources is this:

• User-generated content: Not acceptable (this includes all social networking, youtube, blogs, twitter etc.)
• Official website: Not acceptable (with exception for undisputable facts)
• Press releases: Not acceptable
• Articles in newspapers/websites/magazines/anything else with editorial control which are neither affiliated to nor owned by the event organizers: Acceptable

Useful links:

• You may want to read Wikipedia:Notability (events) which is the concerned notability guideline.
• Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources is the policy for deciding whether a reference is acceptable or not

Other stuff:

• Avoid weasel words (words that add point of view without adding information:Example: 74 of reportedly the best restaurants in Bangalore... Note that the about.com article nowhere says that the restaurants were "the best"
• Remove the press mentions section. They're the same as your references.
• You should note that it is not necessary for a reliable source to be on the internet, even though it is preferred. So you don't need to link to scanned images of newspaper coverage. As long as the newspaper article is real, you can simply cite the newspaper article with details on the newspaper name, author, date, publisher etc.
• Its probably real tough for you to add sources right now. You should try using the reftoolbar (the blue bar above the editbox when you're editing a page). Take the cursor to the end of the sentence for which you want to add a reference. Click on Cite, from the dropdown menu labeled Templates on the left in the second row, choose the type of reference you want to add (News, Web etc.); a window will pop up, add appropriate information to this window, press Insert. The citation code will automatically be added to the editbox. Then click on Save Page and you're done.

Feel free to ask at my talkpage if you need any more help.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 04:52, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! This is really helpful. I will try and incorporate these ASAP. Thanks again. I really appreciate this.Varunr (talk) 05:38, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Varunr. You have new messages at Whpq's talk page.
Message added 11:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Whpq (talk) 11:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to commend you for seeking out opinions, and seeking out sources in your quest to recreate the Bangalore Restaurant Week article. Although I believe it currently falls short for inclusion, it is absolutely the right approach to article building. I encourage you to keep this up. It's a great way to build this, or any other article on Wikipedia. If you have any questions, or need any help, please don't hesitate to post on my talk page. Cheers! Whpq (talk) 14:35, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! That's a really kind gesture. Thanks for commending the effort. I consider falafel to be a trophy for me! Thanks for your help and appreciation.Varunr (talk) 05:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bangalore restaurant week, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

• You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.
• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the Help desk or on the reviewer's talk page
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

 Chzz  ►  00:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Varunr. You have new messages at Whpq's talk page.
Message added 12:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Whpq (talk) 12:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a look at the article, an I think that you've demonstrated she is notable enough to sustain and article per WP:GNG. One minor criticism is the use of bare urls for references. See WP:CITE, The minimum information required from the {{cite web}} is {{cite web |url= |title= |publisher= |accessdate=}} - you can copy and paste this to use in properly formatting the references. Mjroots (talk) 09:18, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I've made more changes. I think I'm still lacking in the citations formatting, but I'll get there :-) Varunr (talk) 11:43, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about to leave for work, so I don't have time to check the article very carefully. Please come back and bug me if I don't give you a fuller reply later.

I do have a few concerns about the article as it presently stands:

• On a minor formatting note, citations should go after punctuation. "A is bigger than B,<ref>dictionary</ref> which is smaller than C".<ref>encyclopedia</ref>
• Putting two or more citations together (e.g. the first line) is not conducive to verification, since we're not clear what comes from what. In particular, I'm concerned about citation #2, which doesn't even mention her; why did you include it there? If you'd put each citation after the things that it was referencing, it would be clearer.
• It would help if you had citations for the "Business Development for Explocity" section.
• When you cite a Web document, you should provide a full citation: this includes the author (if given), the name of the page, the website name, the date when the document was produced (if it be unavailable, write "n.d." for "no date"), and the date when you accessed it.
• I'm also concerned about your dependence on recent newspapers. Since Wikipedia isn't the newspaper, you really need to find citations in a wider range of sources: can you provide sources on her from stable publications, such as reliable books or academic journal articles? Have you looked for non-news sources online, or for newspapers that are several years old? If only the company's website and very recent newspapers have covered her, I'd have to question whether she yet be ready for an encyclopedia article.

I'll do my best to give you a fuller response later. Nyttend (talk) 12:11, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I've made more changes. I think I'm still lacking in the citations formatting, but I'll get there :-) Varunr (talk) 11:43, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

On referencing, others have pointed out the formatting of citations. I want to discuss the references themselves.

Ref 1 appears to be a business directory listing. I don't see the need for this as it does not appear to verify anything, and it certainly does not contribute towards notability.

ref 2 suffers from the same problem as ref 1. This isn't an article about Explocity, and any non-controversial statements about the company need not have a reference given that there is an article ont eh company itself that has references.

ref 3 is again a refernce that does not mention Radha Thomas

ref 4 is problematic for two reasons. First, it does not support the assertion that Thomas has held her position since 1999. Second, the web site does not appear to be a reliable source as the information appears to be user submitted.

ref 5 is useful for notability, but you shoudl look at the wording in the article. Using the phrase "one of India's leading jazz-fusion bands" is promotional language. In fact, look at the article and remove any other instance of such language.

ref 6 is useful for verification, but as a bio from a cultural festival, it is not useful for establishing notability.

ref 7 is verifies the statement and incrementally adds to notabiltiy so this is useful.

ref 8 and ref 9 are used to verify the same statement. Ref 8 is a one line mention. I would drop that reference entirely as ref 9 is sufficient. Again on the neutral point of view, there is no support for the claim that Human Bondage was the most popular band in the 70's.

ref 10 requires a subscription that I do not have so I am unable to view it.

ref 11 fails to verify that Thomas is a featured artist. Was her maiden name "Shottom". In any case, the claim of featured artist is not borne out by the reference.

ref 12 has an error in the url but I assume that the one I have here is correct, in which case again, the reference fails to verify the information presented.

ref 13 verifies information, but as a passing mention, is not useful for notability.

ref 14 is not a reliable source as it is a Wikipedia mirror.

ref 15 is only passing mention. It verifies information but is not useful for notability.

ref 16 is an interview. there is some disagreement on interviews with respect to notability, but I would be inclined to have them contribute towards notability.

ref 17 is also an interview so same comment as ref 16.

ref 18 is a profile from her publisher and is likely self-written. Ir's only useful s a ref for non-contrversial information and not for establishing notability.

Overall, it appears that notability can be established with some key sources noted above. I agree with Nyttend that some older sources would be useful although I acknowledge they may be difficult to find online.

Given that the primary claim to notability as a musician, the lead paragraph should be written to reflect that. As it stands right now, the lead paragraph implies she is best known for being a business executive, and then, oh, by the way, she also does a bit of singing.

I hope these comments help. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 15:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whpq gave a better review than I could have given. In my quick overview of the article earlier today, I completely overlooked the fact that you were saying that her notability derives from her musical career; you definitely need to emphasise that more than her current business career. You really need to show that she's been covered in non-news sources or that she's been covered in news sources from a long period of time, because someone who just gets news coverage in a comparatively short period of time is likely to fall under WP:BLP1E. This policy page basically says that someone who gets a lot of coverage in a comparatively short period of time but little or no coverage in other times shouldn't have an article, and if someone write an article about that person, the article should generally be deleted. Nyttend (talk) 01:51, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both very much! I've made more changes. I think I'm still lacking in the citations formatting, but I'll get there :-) Varunr (talk) 11:44, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is definitely shaping up, it seems. I was going to give more helpful advice, but apparently the other commenters above have done my job this time. =) So I'll just briefly state that you may want to learn how to use the {{cite web}} template to format web citations - web citations should have at least the article name, publisher's name, when the article was published (if known) and as an overlooked but pretty important detail the access date. (From scholarly perspective it's important to just state "we can say this is what the website said at that point in time".) The "writing career" section probably could use more cites, and shouldn't be too difficult to find proper sources either.

As a special tip, I can recommend the Zotero tool, which makes saving citations off of web pages easy. Save a cite, edit the fields, repeat, and in the end you can just export all citations you choose in Wikipedia citation template format. Very handy. =) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I've made more changes. I think I'm still lacking in the citations formatting, but I'll get there :-) Varunr (talk) 11:45, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, the subject fails WP:Biography and a lot of the refs like Yellowpages are cannot be called WP:RS. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 06:24, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I've made more changes. I think I'm still lacking in the citations formatting, but I'll get there :-) Varunr (talk) 11:45, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Varunr. You have new messages at Nicke.me's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Varunr. You have new messages at Whpq's talk page.
Message added 00:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Whpq (talk) 00:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Radha Thomas, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SarahStierch (talk) 06:31, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:B.G. Mahesh.jpg, which you've attributed to http://tamil.oneindia.in/news/2013/01/11/india-oneindia-s-founder-among-top-digital-innovators-167815.html. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dianna (talk) 02:48, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa. I have forwarded a mail from the owner of the image (BG Mahesh himself) to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. I can forward the same to you too if that doesn't suffice. I had obtained permission to use the image earlier. I guess I should have forwarded it before. Just lazy! Thanks for your help in improving Wikipedia. Hope this clarifies everything. Varunr (talk) 16:54, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Ramjee Chandran, 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, product, group, service or person 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 removed 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. DGG ( talk ) 19:32, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Varunr. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Gurbani Judge page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Varunr. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:RamjeeChandran.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Oneindia 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/Oneindia 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.

DJRSD (talk) 07:25, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Oneindia 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/Oneindia (2nd nomination) 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.

casualdejekyll 22:16, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DogmaTone 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/DogmaTone 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.

Hatchens (talk) 11:42, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:DogmaTone-Records-Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:10, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]