LPSingh

Your submission at Articles for creation: Women Help Women (August 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong 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:Women Help Women 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 20:00, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello! LPSingh, 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! Theroadislong (talk) 20:00, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Self-induced abortion

The article is not about doing it in a safe and pleasant manner. You removed information and citations with most of your edits. When removing such a large amount of information, you should do a wp:RfC on the talk page. See wp:BRD Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 18:43, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Self-induced abortion. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 18:45, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

--- Sorry - this was an inadvertent mistake using my back button with the wysiwyg editor -- on not enough sleep! Mea culpa! However, I did re-remove the one link that contained medically unsound, dangerous (and unsourced) information, re-added one of the few organizations that offer self-managed abortion assistance and counseling, and removed the organization that has disbanded (but their website is still up). I'm happy to discuss these and any of my updates. Thank you. /Lakshmi Singh LPSingh (talk) 19:30, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Do not use misleading edit summaries

Your wp:edit summary here states External links: updates, removed dead links, added new organisations. Both links you removed work. Your edit summary is misleading. Don't do that. Jim1138 (talk) 18:47, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

It's possible that those links only "work" from some countries. In that case, WP:External links#EL7 would apply, and they should be removed. (If it was just a case of an intermittent outage, then usually we add them back.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:26, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Notes on various edits

I'm sorry for the large number of updates, but his article is woefully and dangerously out of date. The citations and sources have, in many cases been superseded, and some of the information here is medically unsound. I am bringing this up to date using WHO documentation. In some cases, I have removed references to organizations which may still have websites, but these organizations have ceased to exist. The information that I am presenting is a. medically accurate, b. current, and c. non-political.

My apologies if any edit was overly aggressive. My intent is to make this article medically sound and avoid any hyperbole that pervades scientific discussion of this critical topic. Women's health depends on the accuracy of this information. /Lakshmi Singh LPSingh (talk) 18:57, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

If the article was titled "medically safe self-induced abortion", I would agree. The article is about Self-induced abortion which should run the full gambit from safe and effective to the horrors. While it would be best to not give bad ideas to people, it would also be a good idea to let them know what goes wrong. See Wikipedia does not WP:CENSOR. This is also balanced by wp:Medical disclaimer - i.e. Wikipedia does not give medical advice. Any medical information, which the article does not necessarily do, should wp:cite a wp:RSMED source. Please feel free to add to the article, but don't sanitize it. Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 19:04, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

If you wish to consult a medical professional on the, I would suggest leaving a note on Doc James talk page. See help:talk pages Jim1138 (talk) 19:11, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. (Note: I am a medical professional, and my specialty is abortion.) But I'm always happy to learn more! I'll follow up on your advice./Lakshmi Singh

LPSingh (talk) 19:35, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for supporting women's health! Doc James is also familiar with what can and can not be added to articles and the best way to cite them. BTW: Simply adding "[104]" to a page does not make a citation. See below. Jim1138 (talk) 22:11, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

This proves the adage that the more people that proofread a document, the greater the chance of a typo. The bracketed three-digit endnotes were in a draft. Thanks again for catching it.

LPSingh (talk) 14:15, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

You claim to be a medical student, ie. not yet a qualified doctor (do you posses even a basic MBBS degree ?) so what's the basis for your claim to be a medical professional / a specialist on abortion. MalluMalleus (talk) 16:54, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

• Note: this editor is a wp:sockpuppet and has been indefinitely wp:blocked. Quite a jerk. See "Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Singora" Delete this if you wish per wp:BLANKING Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 07:41, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm not a sockpuppet; I'm real. (I didn't know what one was until just now!) Can you direct me the page to reassess this? Happy to provide whatever data is needed! /Lakshmi Singh LPSingh (talk) 19:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

It's not you, it's MalluMalleus who is the sock. A sockpuppet or "sock" (are there sock puppets in India? :) ) is someone who has multiple accounts, pretending they are different people. In this case it was to get around a permanent block. Probably blocked for doing this sort of thing. There are obviously many who despise abortion on religious, political, or misogynistic grounds. You don't need this sort of drivel on your talk page. My advise is to blank this whole section. Jim1138 (talk) 22:07, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Jim1138. Yes, I'm just myself. I suppose there are sock puppets everywhere! :-) And sorry I've been out of touch. My short bursts of free time are amidst long periods on zero time. /LPS LPSingh (talk) 13:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

References

Adding references is how we ensure that content is valid. Without references, a reader can not easily validate information and there is no presumption of accuracy. See Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:footnotes. There is a tool that can help: See wp:RefToolbar/2.0. This is covered by the Wikipedia policy of wp:verifiability (WP:V). Please wp:cite your edits with wp:reliable sources (RS). Per WP:V unsourced content can be removed. See wp:NAMEDREF for information on how to reuse a reference (in place of the [104]) Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 22:11, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Fun again on self-induced abortion

I left it on my wp:watch list and this popped in. You might want to add the article to your watch list. In your preferences, you can enable emails to notify you of changes. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 09:04, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Be BOLD!

You should wp:be bold! Add that content. Just avoid repeating errors. See wp:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. You can always ask at the wp:Teahouse. So, try something, if someone undoes your edit, start a discussion. See wp:notifications to make sure that person knows you have started a discussion. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 00:42, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

India

I lived in India for two years as a kid. My dad worked for Bechtel building the Tarapur Atomic Power Station. I lived just west of Boisar. Visited Bombay (so named at the time) every month or two. I had a good time; especially after I got up the nerve and started playing with the Indian kids. Much nicer then the mean American kids. I lived here on the first floor of a four apartment flat. We could have gotten a single-family place, but they had a lot of leaks from the rain. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 01:17, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Mumbai is wonderful, but everyone says that it's changed a lot over the decades. So you should come back! I haven't been to Boisar (yet). Someday I'll travel more! Thanks *very much* for the pointers. I'll be getting back to work on this after Nov 1. /LPS

LPSingh (talk) 16:10, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Boisar seems to have grown significantly as well. I remember it as a sleepy, tree-lined road going in with almost all farmland. From Google maps, little open-space remains. Many, if not mostly woven palm frond shacks in the town. A fireworks vendor opened outside of the TAPS colony; mostly selling to us kids, I think. Jim1138 (talk) 18:50, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Making progress on Medical abortion and Self-induced abortion

As you've probably noticed, much of the changes you've made to Medical abortion and Self-induced abortion has been reverted. You may be asking yourself why that has happened, despite your laudable intention to update the content. Unfortunately, editing Wikipedia isn't just about writing text; it's far more about working in collaboration with others who also have in interest in the topic.

The principal problem is that you made a lot of big changes over a very short period of time. Other editors will want to review the changes you made. If you make that task too difficult, they will not spend time trying to pick out what they feel is an improvement and what is not; they will restore a version of the article that has been stable for some time, because they can be confident that the earlier version had consensus.

I'll make it clear now that my view of your changes is that you are providing too much emphasis on the safety of chemically-induced abortion and downplaying the potential for problems with self-medication. In addition, you are removing the historical perspective, which I feel is essential to full understanding of the issues.

Your path forward now is to try to build a consensus for the changes you feel are needed. To that end I suggest you focus on the sources you wish to add to the articles. On each talk page, make a post on a single issue, e.g. decrease in mortality from self-induced abortion, and give the all the sources you feel are useful. By all means indicate citations that have become out-of-date on your chosen issue, and propose consequent changes to the text on one limited area.

You'll then have discussion on the talk page and hopefully you'll convince the other interested editors that your proposals represent an improvement to the article. Other editors may not agree with your choice of sources, and you'll have to be prepared to compromise. But at the end, you'll have improved the article in one small area. However, other editors will be much happier to accept what you're doing and you'll find it much easier to tackle more of the changes you feel are needed. That's how you build your reputation as a constructive, collaborative editor, and you'll need that to be able to work on controversial topics here.

Finally, welcome once more to Wikipedia. If there are things you don't understand, please feel free to drop me a note on my talk page. Or make a post at WT:WikiProject Medicine and introduce yourself. You'll find a huge reservoir of experience and knowledge there and I hope you'll carry on contributing to our wonderful project. --RexxS (talk) 00:38, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

I endorse Rexxs's comments, especially the welcome! It's great to have you here. Rexxs is a very knowledgable, very helpful Wikipedian, as is User:WhatamIdoing, who left a comment at the Self-induced abortion talk page. Please continue editing - you're doing well for a newbie - and as Rexxs said, if you need any further help or advice, the people at WT:WikiProject Medicine are a great resource. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 08:16, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I deeply appreciate your advice! I was previously following the "be bold" advice, but I also now understand the issues concerning larger edits. My (personal) overriding problem is that, due to my schedule, I have short periods with a lot of spare time surrounded by long periods of zero spare time. I will try to continue shortly, but my time in the coming weeks will be too limited to do much. I'll get back to edits/talk/etc soon. /LPS LPSingh (talk) 13:24, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Women Help Women concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Women Help Women, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Women Help Women

Hello, LPSingh. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Women Help Women".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft 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 get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)