User talk:Duty2love

Your submission at Articles for creation: Parthasarathi Rajagopalachari (February 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was: 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Parthasarathi Rajagopalachari and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Duty2love, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Onel5969 TT me 13:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Archives

* Archive 2007
* Archive 2015

Your submission at Articles for creation: Parthasarathi Rajagopalachari has been accepted

Parthasarathi Rajagopalachari, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

LaMona (talk) 04:03, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Heartfulness Meditation (June 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by LaMona was: 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Heartfulness Meditation and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

LaMona (talk) 22:48, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Heartfulness meditation has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Heartfulness meditation. Thanks! Mduvekot (talk) 00:10, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Heartfulness meditation (September 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Heartfulness meditation and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:12, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Heartfulness meditation

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Heartfulness meditation, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DGG ( talk ) 03:30, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. Admin DGG nominated this for deletion, and I concur. I deleted your article because

• it did not provide adequate independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, press releases social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing its management. many of your references did not meet those criteria, ranging from links to your courses and interviews with your practitioners to outright spamlinks.
• As the reviewer said, this is at best a personal essay, full of opinions but light on third-party sourced verifiable facts. For example Heartfulness is about being natural. It doesn’t mean we don’t use our heads, it only means that we don’t use our heads unnecessarily and also we don’t get into our heads is somewhere between meaningless and mumbo-jumbo, having no factual content and referenced to clearly partial sources. Much of the rest is similar in content and sourcing
• There's little evidence that you meet the notability criteria, it's all philosophy, absolutely no facts such as the number of practitioners, medical reviews of outcomes, or anything else other than uncritical claims of how wonderful it is. I actually get little idea of what you actually do when you practice this Jimfbleak (talk) 08:24, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
• it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.

• there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. that's particularly the case when they are spamlinks to your organisation
• there are multiple spamlinks to your courses and download sites like itunes and Google play. In fact the "Meditation Instruction, Workshops and Retreats" contains little else. The fact that your apps and courses are free still doesn't mean you can promote them here
• "Benefits and Transformations" like the rest, absolutely uncritical, with no mention of any limitations or peer-reviewed sources for the claims. if you are claiming medical benefits, you need proper clinical peer-reviewed sources
• Hard to know where to start, but examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: profoundly change who one is and how one functions in the world by giving access to the Inner Being, the life force deep within.

• If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. In particular, if you work directly or indirectly for a company or organisation that is involved in this, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by a company or organisation, 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:Duty2love. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Duty2love|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

Jimfbleak (talk) 06:38, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

And since most those points were discussed in the deletion discussion for Heartfulness more than a year ago, it makes it even more unlikely that there could be an article about the concept at this time. --bonadea contributions talk 07:01, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

I will comment briefly. It appears that I declined the draft before it was nominated for speedy deletion. I am always willing to discuss my declines of drafts if I can see the declined draft. In this case, I can't see the declined draft because it was deleted. I don't recall everything that I decline because I review a lot of drafts and I decline most of them. (Unfortunately, most drafts are not ready for article space, and many will never be ready for article space.) I vaguely recall that it was unstructured and presented a loose case for a particular style of meditation. Approaches to meditation are only, in my opinion, notable if there has been independent coverage of the specific approach to meditation. I can't comment on the deletion except to say that I have seen User:DGG and User:Jimfbleak use sound administrative judgment.

Robert McClenon (talk) 13:19, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, and Duty2love I've temporarily restored the article history (in the same way as we do at deletion review) so you can see it. (It's in the edit history--I will remove it in a day or two) I think it's exactly what one would write on a web page advertising a talk on the method. As a suggestion, when dealing with vague concepts or those difficult to explain, the best way of handling them is often to write a bio article on the principal individual concerned, if there's good substantial third-party independent reliable sources. (An example of this, Duty2love, is your quite acceptable article on Parthasarathi Rajagopalachari) Our guidelines for bios are frequently used and relatively easy to understand. DGG ( talk ) 16:34, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

I have read the draft that I declined again. (The tape will self-destruct in about 24 hours.) I don't have anything to add to my previous comments. It reads like a personal reflection or essay on a particular approach to meditation. Unless independent (third-party) sources can be found that have discussed this particular approach to meditation in detail, I don't see any realistic likelihood of changing the tone and making it into a plausible article. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:44, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for all the valuable feedback Jimfbleak, Robert McClenon, DGG and Bonadea. I just saw all these replies in my talk page, almost 10 days later, sorry for the delay. Jimfbleak, you asked about COI, I am a practitioner of Heartfulness meditation but I am not paid by or have any relationship with any organization who wants to promote this. It is out of my personal interest I am trying to create this page on this topic. Now if you consider my situation as COI then please do let me know. What you all have listed are very valid points, and I am willing to put efforts to improve the article by correcting those shortcomings. As you can see I am not a very frequent writer on Wikipedia, hence still at novice level when it comes to creating articles those are encyclopedic in nature. Bonadea, the deletion of Heartfulness page last year was more to do with the vagueness of the topic and also with the fact that I tried to modify a very old previously existing page with same name. One of the suggestions given in that discussion was to try starting a new topic, hence I chose to start a page with more specific topic "Heartfulness Meditation". I am willing to give one more try with proper independent verifiable sources. Duty2love (talk) 10:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

You do not technically speaking fall into the groups specified by the WMF in the Terms of Use, particularly with respect to paid contributions without disclosure--they seem to have omitted dealing with the category of individual practitioners promoting their method of practice. However, you certainly do fall into what the English Wikipedia considers people with a conflict of interest, and you should at least mention it on your user page and I would suggest also on the talk page of any relevant article.

Looking at the references on the Draft, essentially none of them are usable for the purposes of showing notability. It also seems there are no independent sources that show it distinct from Mindfulness. Even if there could otherwise be an article, you would need to say something like "Practitioners of this method consider it a distinct extension of the general concept of mindfulness. "

My advice is not to attempt an article unless you have some really good references. DGG ( talk ) 16:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Heartfulness meditation

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Heartfulness meditation, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Legacypac (talk) 02:09, 4 July 2017 (UTC)