User talk:Rajuditchopra

Rajuditchopra, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!

The

Adventure

Hi Rajuditchopra!! You're invited: learn how to edit Wikipedia in under an hour. I hope to see you there! Ocaasi

Play The Wikipedia Adventure

This message was delivered by HostBot (talk) 17:30, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ajitabha Bose (October 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ajitabha Bose and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Rajuditchopra, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ajitabh Bose for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ajitabh Bose 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/Ajitabh Bose until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. TheLongTone (talk) 13:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. SwisterTwister talk 06:44, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ajitabha Bose (November 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

This editor got tired of being told this person wasn't notable, so they simply bypassed AfC. The article is currently at AfD (what a shock).

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ajitabha Bose and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:52, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:37, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Pocket Love Story for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Pocket Love Story 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/The Pocket Love Story until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. TheLongTone (talk) 13:50, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have evaded your block by using other accounts, the block has been extended to indefinite. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of this page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rajuditchopra, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

220 of ^Borg 09:31, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]