Hello, I'm Liance. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Cochin Shipyard, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ~Liance^talk 16:49, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(unblock reason)I sincerely apologize if my account "Subhashyadav120" was seen as being used for advertising or promotional purposes. It was never my intention to violate Wikipedia’s policies. If I unknowingly made any mistakes, I am truly sorry for that.

Additionally, I would like to clarify that I have no connection whatsoever with the account "Montu3242." I have only ever used this one account to contribute to Wikipedia.

I have now taken the time to understand Wikipedia’s rules and guidelines thoroughly, and I am committed to making only neutral, factual, and policy-compliant contributions in the future.

Kindly consider giving me another chance. Thank you. Subhashyadav120 (talk) 11:31, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Cochin Shipyard. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. ~Liance^talk 17:00, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liance I am a small stock market investor and if I have to invest in the stock of a company, then first of all I read the annual report of that company in detail. When I was reading the report of Cochin Shipyard, I felt somewhere that according to this report, it is necessary to have more detailed information in the Wikipedia page of this company so that all investors know well about the work of the company. I audited the page, so I gave a reference of the company's annual report 2023-24 for this. After verifying the data, I have updated the page. If you still feel that I have added any wrong information, then I can share with you the PDF of the company's annual report 2023-24. Subhashyadav120 (talk) 17:16, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

soory but not promotional content only for informational content Subhashyadav120 (talk) 17:27, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Subhashyadav120:, please do NOT highlight bold the title of the section, as you did in the article National Institute of Securities Markets. It is also not good if you mark each your edit as minor, and you should not use the summary of the edit for promotional purposes. The Seal F1 (talk) 13:20, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soory i am new and 100% Sure not nay promaton contant Subhashyadav120 (talk) 13:40, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Subhashyadav120:, Oh, then welcome! If you have any questions, you can ask them, also I highly recommend reading (at least parts of) Wikipedia:Manual of Style to make sure that you don't make any mistakes. The Seal F1 (talk) 13:47, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, I am very much interested in Indian stock market and finance but I am not getting the right mentor who can guide me in writing data related to Indian stock market and also add me to India Wikipedia events so that I can work better under their mentorship. Subhashyadav120 (talk) 14:24, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I will not add any link to Wikipedia team from now on. If I am adding any official link of any website, then all the links will seem spam or promotional to you. Yesterday I added the official link of SEBI's broad member site, you found it promotional but you did not check the data of the post properly. That post had very old data. I had collected the data by giving my 2 hours of time, still you thought that I am promoting that website. Sorry, if we do not promote small sites, then big media houses will do as they please. I have checked myself too. Many such media houses have been given links from Wikipedia which do not provide any value to the user, still their links seem correct to you. It is like Wikipedia is a person without eyes and big media houses take his stick, wherever he reaches, consider it home. Now that is home or railway track. Sorry, but this is the truth. Being a Wikipedia member, I am very sorry and sad about this. We need a lot of improvement in our way of working. I think now maybe I cannot give much time to Wikipedia, now I should give my time to Reddit and Quora, my writing work will get value from these platforms and I will be able to make a good name for myself in my field of writing,,, thanks Wikipedia family for support... Subhashyadav120 (talk) 18:04, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

S120, I haven't taken a close look at your work, but given that other editors are objecting, FWIW:

• if we do not promote small sites, then big media houses will do as they please: Wikipedia isn't here to promote small sites or to make sure big media houses don't do something wrong.
• my writing work will get value from these platforms and I will be able to make a good name for myself in my field of writing: Wikipedia is also not here to help editors make a name for themselves in their field of writing.

If what you want to write is more appropriate for Reddit and Quora, then those may be better platforms for you. Valereee (talk) 11:03, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Subhashyadav120, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
• and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! asilvering (talk) 16:24, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Groww. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources, it needs more sources to establish notability and it is promotional and reads like an advertisement. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. twisted. (user | talk | contribs) 00:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sir guide post this post i am add more refarence soures like . Govt portel and site ... thanks of valubale guidance Subhashyadav120 (talk) 01:23, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Sophisticatedevening were:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Groww 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.

Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 01:53, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Subhashyadav120! 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! Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 01:53, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did at National Institute of Securities Markets, you may be blocked from editing. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. You just added a citation to an article, but didn't provide it to cite specific information, you just slapped it on the end of the article without adding any information. This is just spam. If you believe this external link has merit, please discuss it on the article talk page and demonstrate that it is in keeping with the external link policy. 331dot (talk) 10:04, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Subject: Request for Approval to Add Reference on NISM Mutual Fund Distributor Exam Syllabus

Dear Editors,

Thank you for your message and for highlighting these important points regarding my recent edits. I sincerely appreciate the feedback and would like to clarify my intent, as well as acknowledge the concerns raised.

My Intentions:

My goal was solely to contribute additional resources that could help readers learn more about the topic.

However, I understand that simply adding an external link, especially one not directly supporting specific content in the article, can be seen as promotional and may not align with Wikipedia’s guidelines.

I recognize that my edit could be interpreted as spam, even though that was not my intention.

Understanding the Policies:

After revisiting the External Links and Verifiability policies, I now fully understand that links should be added only when they directly support specific information in the article, serve as reliable sources, or provide unique value that complements the content.

I also acknowledge that adding a link without clear justification, especially in a way that does not reference specific statements, can be disruptive.

I appreciate the reminder that Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion or advertising, and that all contributions must prioritize neutrality, reliability, and relevance.

Moving Forward:

I will be more cautious when suggesting or adding external links in the future.

I will discuss any potential link additions on the article’s Talk Page to gather community input before making edits.

My focus will remain on improving content quality and ensuring that any sources or external links I contribute are necessary, non-promotional, and aligned with Wikipedia’s guidelines.

Final Note:

Thank you again for your guidance. I am learning from this experience and will make sure to adhere more closely to Wikipedia’s standards moving forward. Please feel free to share any further suggestions, as I am committed to contributing positively to the project.

Kind regards,

Subhashyadav120 Subhashyadav120 (talk) 10:32, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My last suggestion would be, don't use an AI to write for you(93% certain according to zeroGPT). We prefer to hear from other humans directly, not an AI. An AI cannot capture the specifics of your situation no matter what you feed it, nor can it tell us what is inside your mind. Please talk to us without using an AI. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soory but my english week 106.219.86.35 (talk) 10:51, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to log in. If your English skill is such that you aren't able to communicate with us without using an AI, you may wish to contribute to the version of Wikipedia that is in your primary language. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok 106.219.86.35 (talk) 11:16, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, and thank you for contributing the page Satish Kushwaha to Wikipedia. While you have added the page to the English version of Wikipedia, the article is not in English. We invite you to translate it into English. It has been listed at Pages needing translation into English, but if it is not translated within two weeks, the article may be listed for deletion. Thank you. John B123 (talk) 20:30, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Satish Kushwaha. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it is a poor translation. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:45, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Izno (talk) 05:32, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia administrators,

I humbly request a review of the block placed on my account, Subhashyadav120.

I understand that my account was blocked due to concerns that it was used for spam or advertising-only edits. I truly apologize if any of my actions violated Wikipedia's community standards or editing guidelines. I now realize that one of my page creations might have appeared promotional, which was never my intention.

As a new contributor, I was genuinely trying to learn how to edit and contribute to Wikipedia. I made over 84 edits, mostly small and good-faith contributions, and received over 84,000 views on articles I’ve edited. I also maintained a 7-day editing streak, during which I was actively improving content and understanding Wikipedia policies.

The page I created was part of my learning process, and I now understand the importance of neutral tone, notability, proper sourcing, and disclosing conflicts of interest. I never meant to misuse Wikipedia or violate its principles.

I kindly request you to give me one more chance even if under a 6-month probation period or close monitoring — so that I can learn from my mistakes and become a better contributor. I truly value the knowledge-sharing spirit of Wikipedia and want to be part of it.

Please consider this as a sincere appeal from a student of Wikipedia.

Thank you for your time and understanding.

Respectfully,

Subhashyadav120 Subhashyadav120 (talk) 07:27, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia administrators,

I humbly request a review of the block placed on my account, Subhashyadav120.

I understand that my account was blocked due to concerns that it was used for spam or advertising-only edits. I truly apologize if any of my actions violated Wikipedia's community standards or editing guidelines. I now realize that one of my page creations might have appeared promotional, which was never my intention.

As a new contributor, I was genuinely trying to learn how to edit and contribute to Wikipedia. I made over 84 edits, mostly small and good-faith contributions, and received over 84,000 views on articles I’ve edited. I also maintained a 7-day editing streak, during which I was actively improving content and understanding Wikipedia policies.

The page I created was part of my learning process, and I now understand the importance of neutral tone, notability, proper sourcing, and disclosing conflicts of interest. I never meant to misuse Wikipedia or violate its principles.

I kindly request you to give me one more chance even if under a 6-month probation period or close monitoring — so that I can learn from my mistakes and become a better contributor. I truly value the knowledge-sharing spirit of Wikipedia and want to be part of it.

Please consider this as a sincere appeal from a student of Wikipedia.

Thank you for your time and understanding.

Respectfully,

Subhashyadav120 Subhashyadav120 Subhashyadav120 (talk) 10:46, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(unblock reason)I sincerely apologize if my account "Subhashyadav120" was seen as being used for advertising or promotional purposes. It was never my intention to violate Wikipedia’s policies. If I unknowingly made any mistakes, I am truly sorry for that.

Additionally, I would like to clarify that I have no connection whatsoever with the account "Montu3242." I have only ever used this one account to contribute to Wikipedia.

I have now taken the time to understand Wikipedia’s rules and guidelines thoroughly, and I am committed to making only neutral, factual, and policy-compliant contributions in the future.

Kindly consider giving me another chance. Thank you. Subhashyadav120 (talk) 11:29, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Subhashyadav120. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Satish Kushwaha, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:09, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Subhashyadav120. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Groww, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:06, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Subhashyadav120. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Satish Kushwaha".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one 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 , and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 16:26, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]