User talk:Rivugayen

Hello, Rivugayen, and

I noticed that one of the first articles you created or edited appears to be an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is a common mistake made by new Wikipedians—as this is an encyclopedia, we wouldn't expect to have an article about every contributor. Your user page, however, is a great place to write about yourself, making sure to stay within user page guidelines. Just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit it normally.

The page you created about yourself may well be deleted from the encyclopedia. If it is deleted and you wish to retrieve its contents, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page. If your contributions to an existing article about yourself are undone and you wish to add to it, please propose the changes on its talk page.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard
  if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

A tag has been placed on

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

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 05:42, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Saptarshi Gayen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

1. Notability (Not unusually "Remarkable" to warrant a dedicated article.

WP:BIO

2. The article seems to be self-promotional and much of its content is original research. The page creator User:Rivugayen is the person himself.

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Vulpes-bengalensis (talk) 16:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rivugayen. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Kallol Mukherjee, 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:Rivugayen. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Rivugayen|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. Star Mississippi 20:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rivugayen. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  -- RoySmith (talk) 11:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]