User talk:Hatchens/Archive 6

4935:

now. Some of these lists have 100 people in them. Taking an average of 30 makes for 1471 x 30 (an average per list) is more than 44,000 people. Are they notable. NO. So there is a reason that Forbes x of y links, are absolutely non-RS. Yet the first reference is a Forbes x of y ref on this article, and then more, he is young bilionaire. All indicative of a paid article. For more than 10 years, anybody who spots that pattern, knows its a paid for puff piece. This is a crock, dude. Its trash. An advertisement. Doing that subverts Knowledge of Terms of Use. I can see why you have been blocked. It will be hard coming back from this.

1604:

famous personality among the epacts from Kerala in UAE, She is very active in the sector of education in Dubai and she runs a university, last year she became one among the top richest women in india, she is a notable business women and philanthropist too and the content is published with no intention to promote her, if you feel so please feel free to edit the content because i have no idea how to create an article without mentioning the core areas she covered. thanks for the understanding, requesting you to remove to deletion tag from the article.

3219:

I see the "Bitport" page too. I believe "DirectDL" and "bitport" use the exact mechanism. But, it has some references more than DirectDL, and DirectDL has local (not international) references. I try to understand everyone who reads this post; sometimes, you have to see and pass. You can't find significant international sources for a 4-month torrent cloud torrent service. But about local sources, I can give some references in turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran and... I hope the dear reviewer has noticed it.

5536:

perceptions of the subject, to be removed? Or, should the perceptions be summarised in two or three words and the essays footnoted? - Does the editor wish the details of historical discrimination in the subject institution, and statements by famous historical figures on the same, to be deleted? - Does the editor wish the details of the architectural history of the subject institution to be deleted? - Does the editor wish for any of the photos (which are stock images on Wikimedia) to be deleted?

31: 5532:- Does the editor wish each and every description of the subject institution by the press to be removed, or only some? Alternatively, should the descriptions simply be summarised in two or three words and the relevant press articles be footnoted? In other words, is the problem one of verbosity or verisimilitude? - Does the editor wish the quote by the well-known columnist and the well-known novelist, describing their respective perceptions of the subject institution, to be removed? 3557: 3449: 3053: 2925: 2795: 2667: 2425: 2197: 2069: 3349:

only questions. after that, I set some local country references but sadly, it did not accept. About the article, the function of the site is straightforward. It converts torrent (peer-to-peer) to direct link (DDL). You can get on the site and work with that. This is enormous proof that shows that the article's content is not inappropriate at all. But if the reviewer accepts, I can add new local country references (turkey- Saudi Arabia - Iran ) to the article.

3882: 4170: 1268: 432:. I thank you for considering this for taking to discussion. I reiterate again that each of the states of India have their own commission with respective offices and administration set up. However their policies are guided by Constitution of India and Right to Information Act. These commissions are of wider use for citizens for getting information and cannot be made at single place. However, I will respect the thoughts of all senior authors. 172:. I understand your concerns. However, one of the senior Knowledge authors told me if it was my creation I can do that using relevant references for each state. You can check that each state has got its own coverage in secondary sources. Kindly let me know if there is any issue, in case of copy right violation to correct it. Cant write 20 states in 20 different ways and the purpose is same. I am sorry if Iam wrong. Thanking you in advance. 1467:! That tripping happened in late October/early November 2021. Once I was guided, I rectified my approach. But in NPX Capital's case; it is a genuine mistake. I didn't check the edit history of the page, previously where it was tagged with CSD:A7. Since, it was unreviewed at that time so I took the speedy deletion route. And eventually I got blocked for taking that step. So, of course, I'm going to stay away from that AfD discussion but 5090: 288:. Request you to kindly consider my thoughts in having separate articles for each states. If they are removed we will miss greater opportunity of informing the wider audience on the presence of Information commission in each state and their location. You can observe each state has its pros and cons. There was lot of effort in creating this through research and reading various secondary sources though the content is same. 1120:, It is a genuine mistake. I didn't check the edit history of the page, previously where CSD:A7 was tagged. Since, it was unreviewed at that time so I took the speedy deletion route. But that cannot be given as an excuse because you've warned me earlier. That's why, I relinquish my rights to contest the block because you're correct. With this unfortunate incident, I promise to come out as a better editor. Thank you! - 4824:. That's not exactly sitting on the fence and it wouldn't be said at all if the evidence wasn't explicit. For the record, I have always found Hatchens to be very enthusiastic and open to learning from their misinterpretations and mistakes. I began to encounter him a lot at NCORP-related AfDs which is where I spend all my time. Not once have I suspected him of promoting any particular topic or having a hidden agenda. 5038: 4081: 4237: 3506: 3378: 2982: 2854: 2724: 2596: 2354: 2126: 1998: 4587:. :-) Once the review is completed, and if you are all satisfied with my past edits and acceptance... please let me know on this talk page, then only I will file an appeal. If not, then I apologize for letting you all down. Again, I thank each of you for trusting me and sharing the camaraderie with me. I'm very much available for a conversation or any help via email and 1229:

rejected that it mentioned nothing notable and I added the word "leading" to explain to you that this company is important and thousands of seafarers depend on its existence to get employed. It is the number 3 in the world and has no place in Knowledge in English! Just tell me what you want me to delete and I will do it! I have already deleted a whole paragraph.

5414:

qualify. I made a lot of edits and provided secondary sources that are independent of the subject in the article. It got declined few times and now I am not sure what is the reason. Are secondary sources in Bengali language are the issue or the writing style of the article? I would really appreciate any advise from you that would help. Thank you very much.--

1770:. The service is still in beta, but I've used it for some source-finding and it seems quite usable to me; I wonder whether that's just my experience. If you have a chance, the next time you'd be looking for a source on Google Scholar or JSTOR or similar, to perform the same search on IA scholar instead, I'd be curious to hear how it ends up. Thanks, 4591:(I hope that's not blocked). Meanwhile, my thirst for knowledge sharing will continue at Wikimedia Commons, where I will spend my time uploading creative commons-licensed images from Flickr - mostly American historical places. Feel free to drop a mail; it would always be a pleasure to have a good conversation over something or other. 5365:

now. Are there any more areas that to your eye clearly need improvement? I'm having some trouble continuing to find ways to neutralize/flatten the tone (this is my first Knowledge article, so please forgive my amateurism!). Thank you for your help - I'm looking forward to finishing this one up so I can start on my next one.

242:. Thanks for your reply. However for below reasons each state deserves a separate article. 1. Executive managing the organisation 2. Place of location of each organisation 3. Advantage and Limitations of each organisation 4. Website of each organisation. 5. Information availability of each organisation. 5364:

Thank you for taking a look at my Draft. I have made several changes over the last month or so in order to continue to formalize the tone and to make additional changes recommended by a previous reviewer (I have been working on this for a while now). I just made some additional changes as well just

4573:

thank you brother! If you don't mind, I might need to discuss this "appeal" thing with my peers at this talk page. During that occassion, I might need to tag you for an opinion or a comment. I thank you for the work which you're doing and despite whatever call you have taken, you have my full support

4525:

And, who said that the company has vandetta against me, it's the agency "RankHawn" which is pursuing this case against me... and, I gave you a proof of that. Now, comes the question "impressively in-depth knowledge of the Indian business world"; I reviewed companies from all geographic area. It's the

3348:

I resubmit that but try to understand you; all of the edits happen because I add new references. For example, in the last edit, I asked a question from the reviewer: can I use local references? and he said: set local references on the article, not send them to me! I never send links to him, and I ask

3218:

I created a "DirectDL" named article. But I don't know why reviewers and you do not accept that. I use this service each day and See the website domain on google. It was created four months ago. I don't believe a website with 4-month age can have a lot of good references on the international web. But

3138:

I'm not at all concerned about the editor's attitude to me. I would just like to seek to ensure that the article is of sound quality. Anything I say will be treated as sue form of attack, whether I say something positive or negative. I meant to point you at the article, not the talk page. My Freudian

1436:

I think I would have acted differently, nominating for relevant deletion processes based on the history plus the content, erring towards AfD rather than CSD, perhaps considering PROD. Tagging for notability and references is always useful since it alerts readers and other editors alike that the topic

4655:

I can say that I have seen no evidence of UPE from you, but I also do not have access to any off Wiki activity, evidence and other material. I am thus continuing to exercise my good faith and my hope that you make a successful appeal and clear your name. If you are engaged in UPE I will be more than

4348:

I already decided to block you based on the evidence I've seen and I don't find your denial plausible. But, to be clear, you don't have to convince me of anything: if I'm wrong, you can appeal this block to another CheckUser or to the Arbitration Committee by following the instructions above. You're

4312:

You tell me. I have seen evidence that you have both accepted commissioned drafts at AfC and directly contributed promotional material to them. As the above template says, you must list each article you were paid to edit (including AfC reviews) as part of the disclosure required by our Terms of Use.

2254:

First, you said that "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia". May I ask which part of the article that makes you think this is an advertisement? All the information in the article is just fact. I don't make it up and I also add links to prove it.

5176:

and used her channel in most effective ways to create awareness (about that syndrome). Unfortunately, her draft didn't meet the criteria for an AfC approval i.e., review, which I usually adhere to. So, I humbly want you (or anyone in my network) to evaluate her notability and assist in the creation

4514:

people get seasoned with time, they learn from their day to day activities. That exactly happened in my case too. If I didn't realize the impact of accepting an article which was "repeatedly recreated/removed following COI/notability concerns" that too when I was just 8-9 months of my editing, then

4333:

as per the rules, I'm bound to explain you my edits and my AfC acceptances. All, I'm asking if you could assist me with the pages and explain me the evidences. Because, I'm not paid for any edit on Knowledge, so it's too hard for me to explain you something which I have not done in the first place.

4934:

is a complete crock. The thing is total puff piece who is absolutely not-notable. It looks as though somebody has paid for it. The guy has some money and he is an investor and forbes mentioned him. None of that is a criteria for promotion. Forbes produces 1471 x of y articles in 2017. That is more

4457:

Dear Joe, please share with me all the pages where-ever you feel you have a single ounce of doubt. If I'm not able to convince you, I assure you... I'll surrender my case here itself and will not pursue my unblocking with ArbCom or anybody. I believe in your judgment and it is my duty to accept as

1603:

is not unambiguously promotional nor advertorial, i have no intention to promote Dr. Vidhya as she also pretty famous personality, and i have just mentioned about what she is doing by searching about her on internet and collected data from google affiliated news portals. Dr. Vidhya vinod is a very

5346:

Hi Hatchens! I saw your comment on my article denial, and I'm a little confused. I worked with a reviewer yesterday, and he helped me find super credible sources and said nothing about my tone. My goal here is to spread awareness about animal rights and cruelty-free beauty. I have another article

4577:

To all my dear friends on Knowledge, it has been wonderful two years of learning, editing, and ANIs. During this period, I enjoyed every bit of Knowledge as an interactive social media platform where we contribute substantially to the cause of open internet, open access, and free knowledge. As a

1228:

approved and I have no idea what it is talking about. There is not even one link pointing to the company's website, everything is justified with reliable, external sources' links, many Knowledge links were added for educational purposes and half of it is talking about a Charity foundation! It was

706: 5395:

Please let me know what needs to be changed. I have removed a lot of the language which sounded 'like an advertisement', but the submission was still rejected (for the third time). All of the statements made have citations and legitimate references. Not making any exaggerated claims or anything.

5386:

I recently uploaded an article under for the Mohammaed Bin Rashid Centre for Leadership Development and I have noticed that it has gotten rejected within less than an hour. I have reviewed the article and I see nothing but facts in it, much like any other page about a learning centre or training

4529:

Also, check my article creation history, what kind of articles I create? NRHP articles especially from NC and other states. Despite me having auto-patroller rights (had), 90% of time, I submitted my drafts via AfC route. If I'm so much into Indian companies, how come I don't create one or why my

4476:

So do I have this right? In August 2020 you heard about Nikhil Kamath in the news and decided to create Wikidata items on him and his books. Seven months later, an unrelated editor submitted a draft about him to AfC and, despite there being around 4000 drafts in the queue, you happened to see it

3101:

with an unbiased eye, and to consider what advice if any to offer to the main current editor. Advice from me to them is unwelcome since I gave them correct but unwelcome advice some time ago. I will not be interacting further with them. So please advise them directly if you believe they need it,

1513:

I'm not sure of the age boundary for putting an article back into the NPR queue. I suspect one can trip up on that, too. That is likely to be worth a discussion over there after this ANI thing has been resolved. It is a quasi-obvious answer to your thinking provided one understands the boundary,

5550:

Facilities: - Does the editor wish the mention of any facility at the subject institution to be deleted? - Does the editor wish the quotes from the press to be deleted? Or, perhaps summarised and footnoted? - Does the editor wish for any of the photos to be deleted? - Does the editor wish the

5413:

Thank you for taking time to look at my draft and leaving a comment on the page (Comment: VCs are generally considered notable. But, that doesn't mean puffery is allowed. Kindly redraft it, and submit it for a review.). According to the criteria for notable academics, I believe I article should

1219:

Hello Hatchens, I worked hard to publish this post and made dozens of revisions struggling not to sound commercial, in my opinion, as a former journalist, it is very educational and very formal. It talks about the types of vessels, about shipping companies, about international treaties, about a

3750:

thank you for reaching out. First of all, let me thank you for creating those scientific articles which are much needed for Knowledge. And, also let me thank you for adding the second sources to all those pages and removing the "one source" tag. The problem lies with the interpretation of the

5535:

History: - Does the editor wish the names and backgrounds of important historical figures who headed the subject institution to be deleted? - In the section on 21st century history, does the editor wish all references to essays by prominent scholars and writers, describing their respective

4882:(responding to ping) This is beyond my pay grade, so I don't have much to say. Hatchens has done some great work weeding out promotional articles; but I also have great respect for some folks who have raised concerns here, and know that they would not make these claims lightly. Regards, 4486:

which, as you are the first person to note based on a couple of articles in trade publications, is linked to Kamath via his company Zerodha. If nothing else you certainly have an impressively in-depth knowledge of the Indian business world – is that not difficult to keep track of from

5554:

Cuisine: - Does the editor wish the entire section to be deleted, including the portions of potential historical significance? - Does the editor wish the favourable reviews by the press/scholars/experts to be deleted? Or, alternatively, summarised in a line or two and footnoted?

2404: 468:. Thanking you for resolving this issue. It had been really hard effort to study the intricacies of each state Information commission before posting as an article. These will be useful for wider audience in coming days as Information. Hoping to work with you more in the future. 219:. I reiterate that I dont have any financial interest in the topics I have authored. I authoured it in the wider public interest and the topics which will attract attention in future. Kindly let me know if Iam wrong or missed any Knowledge guidelines. Thanking you in advance. 2774: 1402:, I apologize for keep dragging you in my Wiki adventures. I have just responded at ANI and I've tried to be my best in a genuine way. Just saw the latest discussion (which you've started!) and I'm surely going to participate in it. Thank you once again my dear friend. - 785: 4477:

within a matter of hours. You accepted it without any comments or changes so you apparently didn't notice that it had been repeatedly recreated then removed following COI/notability concerns, or the blatantly promotional tone of the article. You didn't object when

5338:, but it declined by you. This news channel in India. This is not any type of advrt. I am not understud that why this submission declined. I collect all information from Indian news channels. I am not connected to News1India. Can you help me to resolve all issus? 4515:

it make sense... that I've yet to reach the peak of my learning curve (which is a continuous process). And, I'm still not an expert in Knowledge editing/Afc acceptance/NPP acceptance. Whenever I had doubt, I always seek "Second opinion" while executing my rights.

2339: 1360:

I have the NPP right (I think) and I don't use it because I work at AFC. I am not sure of the benefit to the project of NPP in my case, and have been thinking this for some time. I am also not totally sure any more what it does, so I do not use it consciously!

2904: 2176: 1058:

for a talk page comment? Relax dude. That comment deserves to be there because an editor is being targeted for doing their job. The tweet and retweets are self-explanatory and it should be kept as a record in the talk page of the entity for future reference.

3428: 2646: 2709: 4865:, were you involved in moving articles to mainspace from Draft for personal gain? Were you involved in any Knowledge editing or other activities for personal gain? You need to come clean on this point because this has not been answered satisfactorily. 5539:

Notable visitors: - Does the editor wish the name of any historical figure who visited the subject institution to be deleted? - Does the editor wish for any of the photos of the historical figures (which are stock images on Wikimedia) to be deleted?

2048: 4044:

for a recall or for a day like this. If you have doubts, then always go for a second opinion via talk pages. And, thank you for your kind words. This is nothing more or less than a disagreement, a very part of any civilized society and at the end,

681:

Hi, can you be a bit more specific which parts exactly read like advertising so I can revise them? Also, I provided plenty of reliable and in-depth sources. Can you tell me what is wrong with the ones I posted in the comments on top specifically?

4481:

redirected it again later the same day. But a year later, you've become much better at spotting UPE, because you make a lengthy report about this company that apparently has a vendetta against you. And in another coincidence, that report includes

3696:). I noticed that you entered the One_source template there. While I understand how this is technically justified when the article is a stub with literally one footnote I was left wondering if it makes sense in such species articles. Here is why: 2111: 4533:

And, Joe.. its not at all difficult to keep track of from Seagrove, North Carolina or in fact, from any other location. If you want to discuss my personal identifiable information (incl. my current location), then we need to opt more private

2839: 806: 3363: 3032: 2581: 4107:(COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Knowledge to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is 3536: 609:, I can take it to AfD discussion only if you advise/support. In it's current stage, I'll refrain from taking any unilateral call. One thing I'm learning in Knowledge editing (in past 1 month) is avoid taking individual decisions. - 1983: 1135: 4019:

I accepted that when I was still rookie reviewer; I probably would not accept it today lol. On a serious note regarding above, I like you Hatchens and I hope that you have an opportunity to explain yourself and clear things up.

1276: 4552:

I'm not going to discuss this further. You haven't made an appeal yet; see the block template for instructions on how to. Our convention is that the blocking admin doesn't review unblock requests, in the interest of fairness.

1432:

By the way, that list of articles is one where you have, in my view, used the incorrect mechanism, but for correct, honourable reasons. It seems to me to have been a matter of timing and article history that has tripped you

4582:

in assessing my AfC acceptance and rejections as well as the NPP reviews. And do it impartially for the sake of Knowledge. I understand that an admin blocking somebody makes it a thankless job, but we have to accept this -

5561:

Literary references: - Does the editor wish for any specific mention of a writer or book to be deleted? - Does the editor wish for any of the photos to be deleted? - Does the editor wish the entire section to be deleted?

4522:, and even today, I never object them or anybody who comes with such a vast experience of Knowledge editing. I take their edits, their comments as a learning. In fact, now I seek opinions before I accept any doubtful page. 4537:

Now, as far as, the appeal is concern; I humbly request you to re-assess my edits once again. And, please share with me all the pages (the one which you have doubts); so that I can justify my acceptance and edits.

3751:

guidelines; neither you're mistaken nor I'm wrong. If you need my support to find sources for your entity pages, just ping me. I'll be more than happy to make myself available to you. Just keep up the good work! -

2967: 1243:

Different language versions fo Knowledge have subtly different rules. The English Language Knowledge has the toughest acceptance criteria of all. So an article elsewhere does not mean an automatic free pass here.

5543:

Notable speakers: - Does the editor wish the name of any important speaker to be deleted? - Does the editor wish the photos of two well-known personalities speaking at the subject institution to be deleted?

5525:

As I am new to Knowledge and the editor's comments appeared to be rather broad, I am writing to request specific guidance in what needs change in what section. I would appreciate any assistance. Thank you.

5453: 879:

Hi there, I'm not sure why my article submission was marked as having advertisement content. All the past reviewers have never flagged this. I'm not sure what could have caused this. May you please assist?

3491: 3224: 5322:

Hi, you recently tagged my article for a speedy deletion, and I have understood why. I have changed the parts where you may think is disturbing, and I was hoping if you could check it out again. Thanks.

486:. Hope you are keeping well. I observe that Tripura State Information Commission has been deleted. It would been helpful for people of Tripura. Is there any way we can retrieve it. Kindly guide. Thanks. 4392:. Now, just imagine...if I'm a paid editor; why should I wait for 6-7 months for an article to go-live? Secondly, If I'm an UPE for Nikhil Kamath, I wouldn't have participated in current ongoing AfD on 3708:

and through there to several botanical databases. If the One_source is supposed to tell the reader this information is somehow less valid because of lack of footnotes, then that just doesn't apply here.

892: 4265:

be consulted before this block can be removed. Administrators undoing checkuser blocks without permission or the prior approval from a checkuser risk having their administrator rights removed by the

3832:: It's your logic only which guided me through Knowledge from day 1. So, I trust you. Besides that, we both are here on Knowledge with a conscience - good or bad? Depends on who is asking for it! - 3124:

thank you for reaching out. Allow me to go through the edits and the discussion. I'll surely share my assessment over there. Thank you again for introducing me to such an exciting entity article. -

323: 2214: 1510:

Thats substandard article tag sounds like a discussion for the Village Pump, though I suspect the answer will be "Take it to AfD and let the community decide" which is not what you have in mind.

2258:

Second, can you elaborate why my reference links are not qualified? I believe they provide enough information about the referred matter. Can you give me some good example of acceptable source?

4677:

Thank you. I've not disappointed you in the past, and present. And, I hope not to disappoint you in the future either. All I can say, I apologize to you and others for enduring this moment. -

2942: 2442: 1792:

which I strongly recommend. Besides, JSTOR... we can also access EBSCO, BMJ, Oxford University Press, HeinOnline. etc via WP Library service. The list is humongous and constantly expanding. -

4526:

Indian/South Asian companies who's editors reacts and I respond. When you exchange comments, then with time you know their tactics and you know how to act or react. It's not just about India.

450:. Instead of speedy deletion unless the discussion is over can you remark it as Nomination for deletion like other three articles. Once deleted it will be tough to retrieve. Kindly consider. 385: 102: 2086: 1440:

Schools are a right royal PITA. They used to be given an automatic free ride if secondary or above. Now they must pass stricter criteria. They might be an area to avoid for the medium term.

1214: 126: 4270: 2814: 1255: 2684: 920:. However, the rejection of the draft is based on my personal interpretation of these Knowledge guidelines. If you would like to take a second opinion, then kindly raise your concern at 3466: 1379: 195:

by adding each state commissions' details as a bullet or just one-liner. There is no point to spaming Knowledge by copy-pasting same content and just changing the names of the states. -

3676: 3169: 2503: 4640:

Hatchens, you started here, as do we all, as an enthusiastic and 'unformed' editor. You made naïve mistakes, and we had the good fortune to meet after what I imagine was one of them.

3067: 4494:

Can you see how that story sounds a little implausible? I'm not going to go through this exercise with every article with you. It's up to you whether you want to appeal or not. –

3772: 3198:

thank you for reaching out. I'll help you in updating the draft as per the Knowledge guidelines. But, for the review and acceptance, let's wait for other reviewers to chip in. -

1175: 543: 5232:

After this new film Khadak, actor Has lead roles in two notable films and hence actor becomes notable as per WP:ACTOR. hoping you'd revisit this AfC and consider approving it.

3574: 5316: 2472:

I don't get involved in FA's articles. Sorry. On the AFC talk page, there was somebody who mentioned they would review their articles. I'll see if I can find their user name.

5547:

Notable events: - Does the editor wish the mention of any event held at the subject institution to be deleted? - Does the editor wish for any of the photos to be deleted?

5493: 3612:

editor you mentioned; you appear to have only done so for one editor. Please notify the other editors in your report. You can find notification instructions at the top of

1240:

Hatchens has other things on their mind for the next 24 hours, though they may reply to you kn that period. I am only replying to your mention of other language articles.

4145:

State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.

2376: 846: 1929:. As its autonomous and statutory organisation under Government of India, there is nothing promotional. Request you to kindly guide me to get it to main space. Thanks. 5400: 4397: 3408: 3012: 2884: 2754: 2626: 2384: 2156: 2028: 1166: 5378: 3982:

Hi Hatchens, the guy has barely worked as an actor as far as I can see, unless he is working in theatre, but the cse and before search's didn't turn up much at all.

5203: 5375:

I went ahead and made numerous, additional changes to the draft. It is substantially more factually-driven and more neutral in tone now - thank you for your help.

5142:

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at

1496:

AfC route. Can't we have something like One-click "Reassess" tag so that once we put it on a page, an admin is notified and they take a call... either AfD or CSD? -

4393: 3740: 4108: 4001:, I completely agree with you. That's why I created the page and put it for an AfC. Even I was not confident with its passing, have a look at this conversation - 148:, I'm not denying your logic. But, I'm pointing towards copypaste move from one wikipedia page to another which is not a correct practice. Please do understand. - 5484: 3220: 2248: 978: 3263:, as we are talking about a portal. Kindly update the draft and resubmit for another review based on the readings. If you need further assistance, please visit 788:

on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers,

2360: 2345: 1309:, Thank you for reaching out. I have noted your concern but you have to wait for an appropriate reply from my end at the ANI thread as I'm still blocked out. - 1094: 905: 837: 776:

when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

5251:

thank you for reaching out. Unfortunately I've been blocked and my edits and reviews are currently under investigation. I would recommend you to connect with

5009:

thank you for reaching out. Unfortunately I've been blocked and my edits and reviews are currently under investigation. I would recommend you to connect with

5347:

draft I'm working on as well for an animal charity organization, Mardi Paws. Can you help me understand how I need to change my article and get it approved?

4038:; Hey... lolz. Yeah I get it. Take my experience as a learning. My recommendation would be... whatever edits you accept or reject, just add something in the 3932: 129:. This will make the citizens of state the information of their state's office location. Request you to delete the speedy deletion tag. Thanking you again. 3721:

I haven't seen the One_source template placed on species articles created by bots. Even though some of them have been around a long time. See for example:

1600: 1589: 1546:

The article had everything bland about it, rather like eating a meal of white fish with a plain white sauce, boiled potatoes, and cauliflower, followed by

584: 1492:

The debate is; there are tons of substandard articles which are on Knowledge (since ages) and many of them published directly, and some of them published

564:, I apologize again for annoying you. I wrongly interpreted your edit summary on that page. Please do guide us (NPPs) whichever way is deemed to be fit. - 5279: 5115:, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply 5105: 5083: 5042: 5030: 4421:

You received a complain from an editor who accused me of doing doubtful/COI edits on Nikhil Kamath - , a comment added by an editor User:Nomadicghumakkad

2746: 933: 5335: 5226: 4099:. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have a financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory 3715:

template. The links provided by the Taxonbar are direct links to credible sources. The reader can verify the article information with a single click.

3350: 3314: 3300: 3282: 3252: 3237: 1859: 1844: 1587: 542:

More "guidance", and this time I'm a bit annoyed with you. Do not retag an article for speedy deletion once the tag has been declined, as you did at

1631: 1344: 163: 4910: 4888: 4648:

I have found you a collegial editor, one who clears up after their own errors, and one who is diligent. Indeed your distaste for UPE is evident at

3889: 3875: 1810:

Thank you for your suggestion! Yes, I know and I've enrolled before, but I haven't found anything over there that I didn't already have access to.

1742: 1731: 1272: 3992: 5421: 3974: 3228: 3159: 2961: 2461: 2233: 1843:

too. I am not involved in any kind of these things for which you have blamed me. Can you show me one thing that I have added with out source?

5274: 5207: 5076: 4809: 4791: 1564: 138: 4963: 4945: 4645:

You accepted guidance, though still tripped over your feet, especially in early enthusiasms for rooting out UPE. I and others guided you again.

4014: 3188: 2730: 2715: 2309: 2105: 1910: 801: 664: 650: 632: 618: 3338: 3308: 3290: 3276: 1871: 989: 5006: 4986: 1977: 1774: 1541: 1068: 1049: 1027: 420: 273: 204: 157: 4871: 4848: 4830: 4770: 4747: 4725: 4686: 4668: 4439: 4201: 3858: 3841: 3823: 3806: 3666: 3648: 3639: 3593: 3151: 3133: 3086: 2833: 2331: 1814: 1801: 1670: 1581: 1525: 1505: 1458: 1427: 1411: 1393: 4635: 4564: 4547: 4505: 4409: 4367: 4343: 4324: 4307: 4060: 4029: 3485: 2703: 2569: 2551: 2537: 2515: 92: 5022: 4196: 3760: 3255:

thank you for reaching out. I understand your dissatisfaction. But Knowledge works on the pre-defined principle of notability. Please see

5558:

Art and artefacts: - Does the editor wish for any of the photos to be deleted? - Does the editor wish the entire section to be deleted?

5028: 4785:

I second what Timtrent has just stated above. Everyone makes mistakes but Hatchens is an editor who learns and tries not to err again. ─

4483: 3870: 3207: 1444: 1318: 1129: 828: 573: 555: 537: 357: 4954:

Thank you, Scope. I appreciate your take on this! Now, after spending a year and a half at AfC, I would have also agreed on the same. -

1706:

The new version of article in question doesn't seem too bad to me, so I think I'll just keep an eye on it for the moment. All the best,

1089:. I also warned you for tagging an article when the same tag had previously been declined. You said you understood. Today, you violated 4400:(which happens to be company backed by Nikhil Kamath's firm). I hope this convinces you to look at my edits on an impartial grounds. - 1750: 5158: 3176:

tag at the end for its expansion by other users. Now that I have submitted the same for review, can you please help me in its review.

1948:; Thank you for reaching out. I beg to differ from your assessment on notability of government organizations. The current draft lacks 1357:

Please do not get blocked again. Please consider with care any response to the ANI thread. Less is often more in these circumstances.

279: 233: 4998: 2148: 341: 191:, if you "Cant write 20 states in 20 different ways and the purpose is same", then simply "don't" create it. Instead, you can expand 4334:

Help me, so that... I can give my reasons for edits and acceptances. Whatever you decide afterwards, I'll stick to your decision. -

1938: 392:

which you are trying to pass as credible pages. To know more, you can access the CopyVio reports link pasted in each and every page.

5081: 3620: 3519:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

2876: 2270: 1032:

Please move it to ANI, if you want to seek wider discussion. That comment has nothing to do with the improvement of Sampath's Bio.

333: 5111:

In accordance with our policy that Knowledge is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia

4205: 3787: 3391:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

2995:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

2867:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

2737:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

2609:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

2367:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

2139:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

2011:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

946:

Please do not post messages on article talk page that are not about improving the article. Remember there are page watchers too.

210: 181: 3114: 4384:

news and other findings. In fact, I was the one who created the wikidata of Nikhil Kamath on August 7, 2020. Here is the link -

1712: 599: 5191: 4100: 3953: 3400: 3317:

the draft is not ready for namespace. It will remain in a stage of denial till you update it as per the guidelines provided at

1339: 962:

in the edit summary. Please move your comments to a more suitable location that is NOT the Talk page of a Knowledge article. --

361: 349: 1693: 1655: 5061: 327: 313: 691: 5195: 4971: 2525: 2132: 2117: 797: 729: 495: 477: 459: 441: 345: 319: 297: 254: 5199: 4250: 3358: 3245: 1891: 4211: 4119: 3811:

Always check my logic. I am not infallible. The community has suggested and proved my logic to be incorrect before. 🇺🇦

2860: 2845: 2618: 518: 381: 377: 373: 353: 228: 5219: 5168:

thank you for reaching out. Unfortunately I've been blocked and my edits and reviews are currently under investigation.

5475: 5268: 5050: 1372: 3728:

This is not a complaint. I'm just wondering which practice makes most sense with such species articles. Any thoughts?

1220:

Charity organization with useful links for its achievements. There is an approved topic for this company in Norwegian

3384: 3369: 1299: 971: 4467: 4353: 3599: 1916: 1157: 5312:

A discussion was already started before you created the similiar article. Please tell your opinion there. Regards

4286: 4162: 5455: 5297: 4389: 4385: 3957: 3766: 3548: 3527: 3493: 3440: 3419: 3365: 3044: 3023: 2969: 2916: 2895: 2841: 2786: 2765: 2711: 2658: 2637: 2583: 2496: 2416: 2395: 2341: 2188: 2167: 2113: 2060: 2039: 1985: 1137: 888: 822: 808: 793: 369: 5241: 5045:, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months 1852: 528:, Thank you for your guidance. A7 was a mistake and I apologize for it. In future, I'll take G11 or AfD route. - 5429: 4191: 4104: 3092: 2602: 2587: 1926: 1110: 365: 192: 122: 4578:

friend (if you still count me as one), I request most of you (all of you) to extend the best possible help to

5446: 3404: 3008: 2880: 2750: 2622: 2380: 2239: 2152: 2024: 2020: 3644:

Thanks. I saw also that I moved that thread about 45 seconds before you were about to do the same thing :-)

3543:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

3435:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

3039:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

2911:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

2781:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

2653:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

2411:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

2183:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

2055:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

1010:) who has been editing a particular entity's page. So, let's hold on and seek an opinion from the masters - 5177:

of a page (via AfC route only) that will give hope to others who are suffering from this dreadful syndrome.

4994: 3544: 3523: 3436: 3415: 3040: 3019: 2912: 2891: 2782: 2761: 2654: 2633: 2412: 2391: 2184: 2163: 2056: 2035: 337: 84: 72: 67: 59: 3945: 3893: 3871: 1637: 1191: 4388:. The draft of Nikhil Kamath was accepted by me once I saw it on AfC list on February 6, 2021. Proof - 3949: 1676: 1335: 901: 884: 818: 737: 696: 583: 38: 5509: 2542:

Looking at it right now actually. Looks good. I'm just adding a couple more sources before accepting.

1758:

Hello, I see on your user page that you use JSTOR and I'd like to know more about your experience. By

623:

I forgot to check for copyvio. I've deleted it as it was virtually all copied from one older website.

4258: 4184: 1179: 862: 500: 5326: 5304: 4839:

Thank you for putting your trust on me. And, I'm sorry for putting you in this awkward situation. -

4142:

Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.

4005:. Don't worry about much, you've my full support in your assessment. And, thank you for doing it! - 4488: 4298:

could you please point me to the pages which are identified as promotion and direct advertising? -

4254: 2004: 1989: 1763: 1751: 1187: 5497: 5315: 5146:. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. 4430:

This proves who is the UPE, and how I'm getting targeted for exposing a company called RankHawn. -

4427:

Now, just visit those AfDs again and see who has voted KEEP for Zerodha; its User:Nomadicghumakkad

3657:

I reverted my additon just after checking with yours. Lol. Thanks mate! I appreciate your help. -

1171: 3403:. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they 3007:. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they 2938: 2879:. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they 2749:. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they 2621:. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they 2438: 2379:. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they 2210: 2151:. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they 2023:. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they 1759: 850: 5505: 4979:

Could you please elaborate on why my article on the Economic History of the Arts was rejected?

4226:. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public. You may instead email the 5489: 5469: 4112: 1698: 858: 676: 641:

for the help. In the future, if I can be of assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. -

842: 5293: 4390:

https://www.wikidata.org/search/?title=Q98115159&offset=&limit=500&action=history

4386:

https://www.wikidata.org/search/?title=Q98115159&offset=&limit=500&action=history

3722: 3213: 2524:, thank you, will reach them out. However, would you like to review a draft written by me? - 2266: 2082: 1887: 1325: 1261: 687: 661: 629: 596: 118: 5425: 5417: 5285: 5264: 5215: 5143: 5117: 5072: 5018: 4982: 4959: 4906: 4894: 4883: 4844: 4805: 4743: 4682: 4631: 4611: 4543: 4463: 4435: 4405: 4339: 4303: 4056: 4010: 3837: 3802: 3756: 3693: 3685: 3662: 3635: 3589: 3481: 3354: 3334: 3304: 3286: 3272: 3241: 3203: 3129: 3082: 2957: 2829: 2699: 2565: 2533: 2492: 2457: 2327: 2305: 2229: 2101: 1973: 1906: 1901:; thank you for reaching out. Will take it forward at the ANI discussion thread. Cheers! - 1877: 1867: 1848: 1797: 1737: 1727: 1719: 1707: 1666: 1627: 1501: 1407: 1352: 1314: 1210: 1151: 1125: 1064: 1023: 929: 760: 646: 614: 569: 533: 416: 269: 200: 153: 5399: 1550:

without the almonds. Each element may be well cooked, but does not make a delicious meal.

8: 5225: 5112: 4176: 3961: 3689: 3098: 2289: 1957: 1934: 1689: 1638: 1616:

I have made some edits on the article and resubmitted for the review please have a look.

1045: 1003: 985: 967: 491: 473: 455: 437: 293: 250: 224: 177: 134: 2300:

list. Just update the page accordingly, and resubmit the draft for an another review. -

1183: 5154: 4990: 4764: 4719: 4662: 4210:

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the

3852: 3817: 3781: 3570: 3326: 3264: 3145: 3108: 3004: 2949: 2934: 2810: 2449: 2434: 2221: 2206: 1650: 1621: 1609: 1576: 1559: 1520: 1453: 1422: 1388: 1367: 1250: 1033: 1006:

is unwarranted. Because those tweets are about direct targeting of a Knowledge editor (

955: 789: 781: 395:

Now, let's ping few seasoned editors/admins for a second opinion/cross verification: -

47: 17: 3608:. Please note that both ANI and COIN require you to place notices on the talk page of 5501: 5465: 5440: 5237: 4901:, I apologize for not being able to keep up with your and everyone's expectations. - 4797: 4786: 4588: 4559: 4500: 4362: 4319: 4281: 4180: 4157: 4025: 3928: 3712: 3462: 3318: 3256: 2680: 2547: 2511: 2477: 2280:, thank you for reaching out. For a company, one need to comply with following rules 1789: 1292: 1007: 999: 949: 941: 264:

by putting your responses/reasons on those individually tagged pages. All the best! -

5390: 5309: 3915: 1416:

As long as we learn from our errors we may all make mistakes, even substantial ones

854: 5351: 5252: 5101: 5054: 4951: 4938: 4623: 4349:

far more likely to get back to editing if you're honest with the community, though.

4217: 4125: 4074: 3998: 3985: 3967: 3906: 3902: 3736: 2315: 2293: 2285: 2277: 2262: 2093: 2078: 1961: 1953: 1898: 1883: 1468: 917: 913: 770: 725: 683: 656: 638: 624: 606: 591: 4424:

This allegation was made after my deletion votes on Zerodha AfD and Smallcase AfD.

2506:, reach out to any of the editors there who are experienced in dealing with them. 5068: 4691:

What I believe we need is a clear and unambiguous reply to the simple question: "

4619: 4519: 4478: 4473:

Please do not make accusations about other editors. This isn't about anyone else.

4118:

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our

3797:

I'm soon joining you there. You know very well, I never go against your logic. -

3556: 3448: 3322: 3260: 3184: 3052: 2924: 2794: 2666: 2424: 2281: 2196: 2068: 1284: 1235: 1206: 1147: 1106: 1080: 909: 551: 514: 4822:

unambiguous that Hatchens does not have the personal integrity to edit Knowledge

3914:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, pages may be

1277:

Revoking new page patroller rights from User:Hatchens due to bad draftifications

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

5289: 4694: 4649: 4135: 4092: 3613: 3605: 3173: 2467: 1949: 1945: 1930: 1685: 1041: 995: 981: 963: 746: 487: 469: 451: 433: 389: 304: 289: 246: 220: 188: 173: 145: 130: 1085:

Late last month I warned you for speedy tagging educational institutions with

5407: 5369: 5358: 5260: 5256: 5211: 5187: 5181: 5165: 5150: 5097: 5046: 5014: 5010: 4955: 4931: 4902: 4898: 4866: 4862: 4840: 4836: 4825: 4801: 4759: 4739: 4735: 4731: 4714: 4700: 4678: 4674: 4657: 4627: 4603: 4595: 4539: 4459: 4431: 4401: 4335: 4299: 4266: 4227: 4214:, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: 4096: 4052: 4006: 3847: 3833: 3829: 3812: 3798: 3794: 3776: 3752: 3658: 3654: 3645: 3631: 3627: 3617: 3585: 3581: 3566: 3477: 3330: 3296: 3268: 3199: 3165: 3140: 3125: 3121: 3103: 3097:

You often ask for my opinion on articles; it's my turn to ask you to look at

3078: 3074: 3062: 2988: 2973: 2953: 2825: 2821: 2804: 2695: 2561: 2529: 2488: 2453: 2323: 2319: 2301: 2297: 2225: 2097: 1969: 1922: 1902: 1863: 1840: 1836: 1830: 1811: 1793: 1781: 1771: 1723: 1662: 1645: 1617: 1605: 1596: 1571: 1554: 1515: 1497: 1464: 1448: 1417: 1403: 1399: 1383: 1382:. I hope I get a better understanding after folk answer it, assuming they do 1362: 1310: 1245: 1121: 1098: 1060: 1055: 1037: 1019: 1015: 959: 925: 921: 738: 642: 610: 565: 529: 483: 465: 447: 429: 412: 400: 388:. There is a 94%-96% text similarities between all these pages. It is called 285: 265: 239: 216: 196: 169: 149: 98: 3522:

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

3414:

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

3018:

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

2890:

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

2760:

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

2632:

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

2390:

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

2162:

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

2034:

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

5436: 5387:

institute. May I know why it was rejected and what I can do to improve it?

5248: 5233: 4615: 4599: 4579: 4570: 4554: 4511: 4495: 4415: 4373: 4357: 4330: 4314: 4295: 4276: 4253:

have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by

4152: 4035: 4021: 3473: 3458: 2691: 2676: 2557: 2543: 2521: 2507: 2484: 2473: 2318:, in case if you need further clarity, then I would recommend you to visit 1965: 1835:, You have nominated my 5 articles for Afd and also you have blamed me for 1086: 590:

Is back in article space and so far as I can tell has no reliable sources.

506: 404: 5350: 3938:

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing

1703:

Hello Hatchens. I agree, they are getting harder and harder to deal with.

749:; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest. 3747: 3732: 2504:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Archive 48#FA's articles

1822: 1762:, a good 70 % of the main JSTOR content is now available for everyone at 721: 408: 4752:

Thank you. It was a very important question to get a one word answer to.

4200:

reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be

3684:

Thank you for reviewing some of the plant species pages that I created (

3526:

without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to

3418:

without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to

3281:

i add new reference in article please check. many thanks for your work.

3022:

without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to

2894:

without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to

2764:

without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to

2636:

without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to

2394:

without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to

2166:

without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to

2038:

without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to

1736:

Thank you for the kind offer, I really appreciate the support. Regards,

1275:

regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is

753:

AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.

5096:

Hello, Hatchens. It has been over six months since you last edited the

5041:

Hello, Hatchens. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that

4817: 3718:

I haven't seen other reviewers place the template to new species pages.

3195: 3180: 1788:

at my local library and also, I recently got an access for the same at

1547: 1306: 1280: 1117: 1102: 561: 547: 525: 510: 403:(know for his expertise on assessing an organization's notability) and 5341: 4169: 3846:

As long as you remember that I am fallible, that works for me 😊 🇺🇦

1968:. Each of these guidelines has to be satisfied in one way or other. - 3512: 3497: 1323:

You could always send an unblock request for the project namespace –

720:

Hi Hatchens, This barnstar for your fine contributions on Knowledge.

3711:

These connections are also given directly to the reader through the

705: 5173: 4607: 3555:

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

3447:

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

3051:

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

2923:

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

2793:

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

2665:

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

2423:

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

2195:

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

2067:

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

1011: 396: 4652:, though I note the thread below the major UPE thread you started. 1882:

I reported to you, to admin and updating you as per the protocol.

4122:

to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text

3515:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. 3387:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. 2991:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. 2863:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. 2733:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. 2605:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. 2363:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. 2135:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. 2007:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. 1925:. Hope you are keeping fine. I observe that you have rejected my 998:, As per your suggestion, I copied my comment and reposted it at 110: 106: 5310:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Talk:2021_Uttarakhand_flood#Page_name

4051:

matters. Thank you once again and just keep up the good work! -

3773:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Henick (2nd nomination)

3102:

rather than offering me an opinion and suggesting I do so. 🇺🇦

2296:. For references, you need to check and tally your sources with 1644:

You are able to, you know. See my review. Thanks for the ping

5522: 4755:

Please start your appeal using the best tools at your disposal.

4352:

But as just one example, could you explain how you came across

1767: 1225: 1221: 1002:'s talk page. But, deletion/removing of my recent comment from 5379:

Mohammed bin Rashid Centre for Leadership Development (MBRCLD)

5037: 4418:

now let's find out who is the UPE on behalf of Nikhil Kamath;

954:

was right in removing your comments, but he should have noted

876: 4002: 3234: 1785: 114: 5521:

Hello, this is regarding the comments on my recent entry.

4574:

and the best wishes. Thank you once again for your service!

4376:

thank you Joe for giving me this opportunity. I have known

3505: 3377: 3325:. You have the full rights to seek other reviewers help at 2981: 2853: 2723: 2595: 2353: 2125: 1997: 4398:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Smallcase (2nd nomination)

4148:

Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future.

3677:

Entering One_source template to new plant species articles

977:

Thank you. Will you be kind enough to move or remove this

260:

The reasons for CSD tags are self-explanatory. So, kindly

245:

Kindly let me know where I went wrong. Thanks in advance.

4706:

The community will require a clear 'yes' or a clear 'no'.

4697:, have you made any edits to Knowledge for personal gain? 3533: