User talk:Priya2017
Priya2017, you are invited to the Teahouse!
[edit]
|
Hi Priya2017! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 22:03, 29 May 2017 (UTC) |
May 2017
[edit]Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Sandeep Thakur has been reverted.
Your edit here to Sandeep Thakur was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/user/Sandeepthakurviolin) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 04:15, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps the message above does not make its point clearly enough. Links to YouTube are not usually acceptable, for a number of reasons. In the case of the links you added, it seems that the purpose was to attract readers to the work of the musician in question, rather than to provide information about him. Linking for the purpose of publicising works, in effect promoting them, is not permissible under Wikipedia policy. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 18:51, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation in article titles
[edit]We use descriptions in brackets after a name, as in "Sandeep Thakur (Violinist)" only to distinguish articles about different people with the same name, so for example if we had articles about three different Sandeep Thakurs we might have articles called "Sandeep Thakur (Violinist)", "Sandeep Thakur (Politician)", and "Sandeep Thakur (Poet)". If we have only one article about a person of a particular name, as is the case with Sandeep Thakur, adding a description in that way is unnecessary, and it is preferable to keep the article title simple. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 17:10, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Comments relating to your use of references
[edit]I see that you have ignored the message above about links to Youtube, which I wrote in the hope that it would help you to better understand what is acceptable in editing Wikipedia. Despite that, I have decided to spend put more more time and work into trying to help you, by explaining a number of issues relating to your editing. I hope that my comments will be helpful to you.
In addition to the fact that you have continued to post unsuitable links to YouTube, I also see that you have formatted links to YouTube as references, despite the fact that they are not references for any statements made in the article. One example is the sentence "In August 2014, he started recording and publishing violin covers of Bollywood and English pop hits on YouTube, under the name Sandeep Thakur Violinist", to which you add a "reference" to a page on YouTube, but that page does not say that he started recording and publishing violin covers of Bollywood and English pop hits on YouTube, nor does it make any mention of August 2014; it is therefore not a reference for anything in the sentence to which it is attached. Every appearance suggests that your links to YouTube are not intended to be citations for content of the article at all, but instead are there in order to attract readers to the YouTube videos, i.e. to publicise or promote them, which, as I have already explained to you, is not permissible. You should be more careful to avoid editing which appears to be promotional, as any editor who appears to be editing for the purpose of promotion may be blocked from editing by a Wikipedia administrator.
A further important point is that references mus be to reliable sources. Web sites where anyone can upload content are rarely suitable as references, so that for example references to Wikipedia are never acceptable. References to YouTube are also rarely acceptable for the same reason, though in the case of the "references" that you have made to YouTube that is if little relevance, since as I have already explained they are not references anyway, and therefore should not be there anyway, irrespective of reliability issues. I also see that you added a reference to the "Community" section of Buzzfeed. Buzzfeed does have some degree of editorial check on user uploaded content, but the degree of freedom given to users to upload content to the "Community" section makes its reliability poor. Other parts of Buzzfeed are a different matter, but the "Community" section is not a good source of references. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:02, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]
Hello, Priya2017. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Managing a conflict of interest
[edit]
Hello, Priya2017. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Sandeep Thakur, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
- avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
- propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
- disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
- avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
- do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.
In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).
Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Edwardx (talk) 01:41, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |