User talk:Brakshit23

A tag has been placed on Govind Laljibhai Dholakia, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See
  Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations
  for more information.
• It appears to be an unambiguous
  section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material 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 or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here
  .

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 deleted 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. PRAXIDICAE💕 16:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Brakshit23. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Brakshit23. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Brakshit23|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. PRAXIDICAE💕 16:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Thanks for the brief idea about this thing i was not aware about such practices. i am a law student and the subject belongs to my city and that's why i felt that i should contribute in this matter because someone has made effort to write this book. I try my best and apply much due diligence before writing anything over here. 2nd why speedy deletion i have no idea. everything is right and truthfully done. Brakshit23 (talk) 17:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Regular deletion is meant for situations where the article subject's notability is in question. In those cases, discussion is allowed (and expected) to find consensus about whether the article should be deleted or not.

On the other hand,

copyright violations

, where there is no need for discussion because the answer is obvious and unambiguous – these articles must be deleted according to Wikipedia policy, no matter how well-written they are... even if, as you say, "everything is right and truthfully done". Since the article copied text directly from a website which does not allow such copying, it was deemed a copyright violation and so deleted as quickly as possible. I hope you understand the reason for speedy deletion now.

Please do not add copyright violations again—instead of copy-pasting material, you must write in your own words when referencing a source.

Again, as Praxidicae said, please do not edit articles further until you address the

conflict of interest concerns. Kind regards, W. Tell DCCXLVI (^{talk to me!}/_c) 20:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Your account has been blocked from editing Wikipedia because your username, Brakshit23, does not meet our

paid-contribution disclosure are relevant.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our username policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you wish for your existing contributions to carry over under a new name, then you may request a change in username

by:

1. Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} below. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "Email this user" from their talk page.
2. At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a change of name request.
3. Your requested new username cannot already be in use. Therefore, please check the list here to see if a name is taken prior to requesting a change of name.

Appeals: If, after reading the guide to appealing blocks you believe you were blocked in error, then you may appeal this block by adding {{unblock|Your reason here}} below this notice.

GiantSnowman 18:30, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GiantSnowman: Unless I'm missing something, I don't see a username issue. "Rakshit" is both an Indian given name and surname. --Kinu ^t/_c 18:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DISRUPTNAME - "Usernames that are likely to offend other contributors, making harmonious editing difficult or impossible; e.g. by containing profanities" (my emphasis). GiantSnowman 18:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

That is a really myopic and Western centric view. A lot of names that are non-Westernized contain some variation of "shit" in them, we shouldn't be blocking because we see a vague curseword... PRAXIDICAE💕 18:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose I find it somewhat heavy-handed to block an editor for their username because part of what is presumably their real name coincidentally looks like profanity when transliterated into English. --Kinu ^t/_c 18:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And users on the English-language Wikipedia are supposed to work out which names are profanity and which are genuine...how exactly? GiantSnowman 18:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Common sense? A quick search of our own website? Not having such a small minded view of what a name should be? It's not like the name was fuckpoop69. PRAXIDICAE💕 18:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I actually searched 'brak shit' before I blocked - nothing came up. GiantSnowman 18:46, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because the name is Rakshit, I don't see why you're doubling down on this. It's a bad block. PRAXIDICAE💕 18:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But that is not the user name, the username is 'Brakshit23'. So, again - so is somebody meant to work out which parts of a username might or might not be a real name rather than profanity? GiantSnowman 18:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, common sense. B Rakshit. Ask the user first? Their edits were promotional but not otherwise disruptive. Is this not the standard procedure? I've seen people with more blatant username violations that are offensive and not actual names be given more leeway and at least a discussion. This just reeks of ignorance. PRAXIDICAE💕 18:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a really bad block GiantSnowman. It wasn't done in bad faith, but now that it has been explained that it's a common surname, please undo the block.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharmo_Rakshati_Rakshitah#:~:text=Dharmo%20Rakshati%20Rakshita%20(Sanskrit%3A%20%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%8B,English%20are%20righteousness%20and%20ethics.

dharma eva hato hanti dharmo rakṣati rakṣitaḥ tasmād dharmo na hantavyo mā no dharmo hato'vadhīt

— 

धर्म एव हतो हन्ति धर्मो रक्षति रक्षितः तस्माद्धर्मो न हन्तव्यो मा नो धर्मो हतोऽवधीत्

The English translation of the quote by Ganganath Jha is "Justice, blighted, blights; and justice, preserved, preserves; hence justice should not be blighted, lest blighted justice blight us."

It is the motto of Research and Analysis Wing, the Indian foreign intelligence agency and National Law School of India University.

this text is available on wikipedia only.

Just because of your wrong assumption and feeling and someone else's wrong belief of violation and infringement allegation i lost my both articles. please reactivate it. i am a small enthusiastic editor who put right information with appropriate source and valid quote of source. please reactivate page "Govind Laljibhai Dholakia" Brakshit23 (talk) 04:33, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per Special:Diff/1091188477, I have unblocked this account. Sam Walton (talk) 18:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for beating me to it. Apologies all. GiantSnowman 18:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As somebody whose family lived in Scunthorpe for more than forty years, I sympathise. - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 04:52, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

How to explain im failing at that point. if that renowned personality haven't kept any copy right conditions to Rough Polished writer than how Rough polished tabloid or journal can ask for the copy right.. 2nd its not from the given source. Looking similar is not proves that its from this link or source only.. Upto you mate.. you people act as your will say..

Good Luck Brakshit23 (talk) 03:22, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]