User talk:Iwaqarhashmi

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If I have been active and have not yet responded, please place {{Talkback|your username}} on my page as I may have missed your response.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist. If I notice that you have been active but have not responded, I may place {{Talkback|Iwaqarhashmi}} on your page in case you have missed my response.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Reminder to all Wikipedians, vandalism on this talk page will be reverted and logged immediately, and if you need general help and I cannot respond in like 10 minutes, please contact someone else or go to the Teahouse. Reminder, this page is being archived by Cluebot III; do not reply to any archived messages as they will be ignored; if you want to revive messages that are more than two days old, please create a new topic as they are archived.

Deletion of page[edit]

Hello. You recently had a page deleted for an author but there was no explanation. A request to review was sent. Everything written in the article was done as it explained in the instructions, but as soon more links were added to further verify the author the page was deleted. can you explain exactly what the issue was? Businessguys2024 (talk) 07:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue with your deleted author page was most likely that it contained promotional content. Wikipedia has strict policies against using the platform for self-promotion or promotion of others. Waqar💬 08:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. The links i provide are to make sure there is notoriety. It does get a bit confusing because we need to show the accolades and proof of published work but yet we have to make sure its not appearing to be promotional. Is there something we can pull out or fix? Businessguys2024 (talk) 08:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the process of adding changes and proper links to the page to make sure sources were correct and able to be validated. It was erased within 5 minutes after my first edit. I still was working on the page to make sure it complies. Businessguys2024 (talk) 08:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the thing: userpages on Wikipedia are not for writing articles about other people. They're meant to be a space for you to showcase your contributions to Wikipedia, such as your edit history, interests related to editing, and any awards or recognitions you've received for your contributions. However, Wikipedia pages are for factual information about notable subjects where you can create a draft article about the person. Thanks! Waqar💬 08:26, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you for your reply. Keep in mind every thing in the article was factual which was why it was made sure that every thing that was stated in the article had a link. As an Author or anyone of notoriety they have to have a story other than “they were born.. and then they became an author.” The back story to CM james was to tell how he became an author and what he did before. And other things have to be told beforehand which some of those things also need links to verify to make show its not made up. The article didn’t get flagged until we went back and made sure we had cited the city and his google business page. Again that was because i’m under the impression everything should be cited that we possibly can. Not to promote a book nor a business but to give a clear article about a person and how he transitioned into an award winning author. I’ve viewed multiple author pages for weeks to make sure we left no stone unturned. Again i appreciate your responses. Its sometimes hard to get a response from an any organization. You represent wiki well. I was just trying to fully understand how does an article suppose to tell of someone without promoting them if you all need cites and valid links, which provided to the article. Businessguys2024 (talk) 09:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raja Shafqat Khan Abbasi[edit]

Hello - can I ask why you declined this AFC? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reaching out. I couldn't find any sufficient evidence to demonstrate the politician's notability other than their position in the Provincial Assembly of Punjab. The article in Simple English Wikipedia also faced similar notability concerns regarding this politician and was deleted recently [1]. However, your efforts to expand the article are really commendable. The resulting article is much more informative and engaging. Thanks! Waqar💬 13:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look - the draft had pretty solid RS which should've been enough to show the subject met the WP:N - even if I hadn't expanded on it much And just because a similar article got deleted on another language WP doesn't automatically mean you should decline it here, too. Let's make sure you're using the reviewer tools carefully and not just turning down every draft you see. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if my decision came across as dismissive. I can assure you I don't decline drafts without careful review. I'll be even more mindful in the future. Waqar💬 14:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up:[edit]

Just checking back to see if there was an explanation how exactly the article created was “not factual” I’m not able to access it on wiki because it was deleted but fortunately I have it saved. After reviewing it one last time to see if there was any misleading information, non was found. I then checked for anything that portrayed it as being promotional; the only things that were in the article and linked were things that were only done so to verify the authors validity, not to promote a brand or business. Just to show the legitimacy showing everything stated can be verified. Businessguys2024 (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a high standard for notability. Just being an author might not be enough. You can create a draft of the article using the Wikipedia:Article_wizard. There, you can include all the information you have, with links to verifiable sources like interviews, published works, or award wins. The draft will be reviewed by experienced editors who can help ensure it meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines and factual accuracy. Thanks! Waqar💬 14:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And it seems like you're just churning out these AI-generated messages without really getting into the nitty-gritty of what Businessguys2024 (talk · contribs) was actually talking about. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFC decline[edit]

I came across Draft:Lavett Ballard earlier which was declined by you. Could you please explain why you feel the provided references are not reliable? Primefac (talk) 13:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Primefac, Seems like this dude's hitting the decline button on every other draft. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the inconvenience caused by the decline of Draft:Lavett Ballard. The references provided themselves are reliable sources, the issue I encountered was due to improper formatting of them. The red error tags make it difficult for anyone to assess their credibility. However, OIM20 has properly fixed the formatting issues in the draft. Waqar💬 14:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The red error tags make it difficult for anyone to assess their credibility. Seriously ? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:23, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse of reviewer rights?[edit]

I was checking out your reviews, and I noticed you only gave the green light to just one draft (Baddies season 5), which was seriously lacking in sources. Just wondering, what made you approve that one while rejecting the ones with better sourcing? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:37, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In approving drafts, I consider many factors, including writing style, clarity, and factual accuracy. The information was accurate and well-presented. Waqar💬 14:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your reviewing approach is very OFF. You're scaring away newbies with all those declines. Drafts are bound to be rough because they're made by beginners. And you're shooting down drafts that easily meet WP:N. You need to rethink how you're handling reviewing rights. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:03, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if I was overly critical, I promise I will be careful in the future. Waqar💬 15:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]