User talk:Liahuu

This is Liahuu'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: Arjun Sharda (March 12)

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

bonadea contributions talk 19:14, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Liahuu! 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! bonadea contributions talk 19:14, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Liahuu. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

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;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

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.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 01:13, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Of course. I do not have a conflict of interest to any particular articles that I am contributing to at the moment, but I am aware of the conflict of interest flag and will appropriately use them as needed for any future articles I write, edit, or contribute to whatsoever. Liahuu (talk) 01:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: TLEEM (April 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by WeirdNAnnoyed 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 passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Essentially all of the secondary coverage cited in this article is covering the organization's founder, not the organization itself. If some secondary coverage of TLEEM (not routine listings) can be found, then the article could stand.

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:TLEEM 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.

WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 11:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Arjun Sharda for deletion

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

MrOllie (talk) 21:56, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Star Mississippi 02:02, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Liahuu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi there. I do not intend to operate as a spambot and these were never my intentions, but looking back at my edits, I can see that it's very evident that I could be portrayed as one. If unblocked, I would love to contribute to existing articles rather than focus on new articles, until I gain a bit more experience on this encyclopedia. I don't intend to write about the former subject(s) i've wrote about or heinously move articles, and I have no intention to vandalize the Wikipedia. Would greatly appreciate an unblock - I will be far, far more careful in the near future. Liahuu (talk) 03:06, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

So far your entire editing history, both here and at Simple English Wikipedia, has to do with Arjun Sharda and TLEEM, and with remarkable enthusiasm and determination, I might add. I don't think you're being honest with us when you say you have no conflict of interest in these subjects. Your appeal makes it sound like, if you were unblocked, you would continue the same after you "gain a bit more experience on this encyclopedia"; until then, you'll just be "far, far more careful". I will not unblock you to continue this promo campaign, sorry. (You might be able to persuade another admin to unblock you if you agreed to a topic ban, although that's obviously for them to decide, not me.) DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:55, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.