Hello, Goyama, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

• Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
• Check out some of these pages:
  • Contributing to Wikipedia
  • Introduction to Wikipedia
  • How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
  • The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode

• If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, , or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 05:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chamunda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ambika. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Utcursch. I noticed that you recently removed content from Prabandha-Chintamani without adequately explaining why. "Outdated material" is not a valid reason to remove reliably-sourced content. Same goes for removal of sourced content from "Criticism of Jainism" with the misleading edit summary "minor edit". In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. utcursch | talk 18:54, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please don't remove sourced content using vague edit summaries such as "outdated" and "can't rely on source" - you need to explain why. Your edits amount to POV-pushing. utcursch | talk 16:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Utcursch, this user has been involved in doing the above (as mentioned) by you in multiple pages in an unconstructive manner with a motive of de-valuing the page and credibility. I request you to urgently look into the matter.

Thanks,Livingstonshr Livingstonshr (talk) 18:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reaching out. I believe there's been a misunderstanding. My edits aim to enhance accuracy, reliability and neutrality. I'm open to discussing specific concerns. Goyama (talk) 18:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concerns and will provide detailed explanations for future edits, ensuring transparency and neutrality Goyama (talk) 18:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Goyama,

Please do not tag articles unless you know what you are doing. You tagged this article with a PROD tag but you put down another editor as the nominator, instead of yourself, and put the date as several weeks into the future. I had to untag this article.

I suggest you learn how to use Twinkle when you become more experienced which will eliminate these problems. In the mean time, work on improving your editing skills and do not tag articles or other pages for deletion.

And if you are User:ParvatPrakash, please stick with one account or you could be blocked for sockpuppetry. If you have questions about editing on Wikipedia, please bring them to the Teahouse. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:19, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, fellow editor and administrator. I just saw my name tagged here and wanted to clarify that I do not know the other editor. I think this confusion might've happened when the other editor may have copied the source from a page I had nominated for deletion earlier and pasted it here. I only have and use one account, which is the one I'm posting this reply from. Thank you. ParvatPrakash (talk) 23:34, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe 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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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:

Doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT.

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:Rajpur Deesa Panjarapole 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 or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Goyama! 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! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 08:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ibjaja055 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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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.

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:Rajpur Deesa Panjarapole 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 or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Ibjaja055 (talk) 09:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, it has been observed by me that you have been tagging multiple Jain pages for either deletion or unreliable sources at an accelerated pace. While tags do help in motivating users to add citations, your motive appears to be unconstructive and deliberate attempt to de-value the page. This isn't a constructive editing approach. You have also made multiple edits without proper explanations such as attempting to strip of Jain identity from noteworthy Jain personalities. I warn you to avoid making such disruptive edits further.

Best, Livingstonshr Livingstonshr (talk) 18:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concerns about my recent edits to Jain pages, and I appreciate your diligence in monitoring these changes. However, I must clarify that my intentions are purely constructive.

I've been carefully reading through each article, identifying areas that require improvement, specifically focusing on the credibility and reliability of sources. My goal is to enhance the overall quality and accuracy of the information presented.For instance, I've tagged articles with insufficient or unreliable citations, such as those lacking peer-reviewed sources or containing outdated information.¹ This is not meant to devalue the pages but to encourage further research and verification.Regarding edits to noteworthy Jain personalities, my aim is to ensure that their identities and contributions are accurately represented. I understand the importance of preserving cultural and religious heritage, and I'm committed to maintaining the integrity of these pages.To ensure transparency, I'd be happy to discuss specific edits and provide explanations for my changes. Please feel free to point out any concerns, and I'll address them promptly. Let's work together to improve the quality and reliability of these pages. Goyama (talk) 18:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, this explanation doesn't reflect in your actions and the recent edits. Livingstonshr (talk) 18:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To better understand my edits, I invite you to thoroughly review the entire article and its sources. The tags I added identify areas needing improvement, ensuring future edits address existing gaps and enhance overall quality.

I Goyama (talk) 18:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hemachandra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gujarati.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]