Jump to content

User talk:AKS.9955/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

ArbCom

As a fellow non-admin candidate, I'd like to wish you good luck in the upcoming elections samtar {t} 08:13, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

My edit to Holden Commodore (VP)

Hello, You left me a message stating that the edit I provided to the above required a source. The source is myself, I have owned one of these cars from new in 1993 and still drive it to this day. If required I may have the original sales brochure stored somewhere in the house, which I could scan and send to you. Please contact me if you require any additional information. Thank you.

(talk page stalker) Unfortunately owning the vehicle does not make you a source. You may wish to read our guides on sourcing and references. Thanks samtar {t} 14:20, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Good faith?

Good catch but this is not a good faith edit. Yours, Quis separabit? 21:16, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Ellen Gates Starr

My recent edit to Ellen Gates Starr was neither vandalism nor experimental. In fact it was a response to vandalism as it restored mention of Starr's lesbianism as supported in the accompanying source. Contaldo80 (talk) 14:11, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Hello Contaldo80, you updated, quote "and it has been speculated that Starr was a lesbian who had a particularly close relationship with Addams" Unquote. You did not provide and reference and updated a "speculation" here. I noticed that you have gone ahead and updated it again - which I am going to revert (on AGF) one last time and also post appropriate notice on your wall. I am opening a discussion on the article talkpage. Please discuss the matter on the article talkpage, build the consensus and then accordingly proceed. Whatever you do, please do not engage in WP:3RR. Thanks, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 15:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
I find your interventions on this distinctly unhelpful. If you had bothered to look at the article history page you would have seen that on 3.35 an editor with the IP 69.226.212.205 removed the words "and it has been speculated that Starr was a lesbian who had a particularly close relationship with Addams". However they left in the source which supported the claim, "The Education of Jane Addams" p361. This was why I reverted the vandalism - ie unexplained removal of sourced text. I suggest you rectify your mistake by restoring the material. If you're going to get involved with these sort of things then I suggest you do your homework first. Contaldo80 (talk) 15:14, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
"Oh dear" was in response to the fact that someone has decided to remove a sentence about lesbianism in a poorly concealed piece of homophobic vandalism. Have you actually read the source? Contaldo80 (talk) 15:26, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Contaldo80, I understand why "Oh dear" was used; especially having lived in UK myself I am well aware about the expression. What I am saying is that the edit summary was not explanatory. Moreover, the source is an offline source and cannot be verified and since the statement is mere "speculation", I am more inclined to drop it out (unless consensus builds otherwise). Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 17:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
The source is offline and cannot be verified?! So you've just you admitted that you haven't actually read the source, and yet above you state that "The source does not talk about the "speculation"." So were you lying above when you set out that initial argument? Contaldo80 (talk) 08:48, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
You have clearly stated above that "The source does not talk about the "speculation"." You did not say that you could not verify the source because it was offline. So I ask you again, how were you able to state that the source did not talk about the issue of Starr's lesbianism when you now admit that you could not access it and thus read it? Contaldo80 (talk) 09:15, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Contaldo80, Let me put it this way and for the last time. I never stated that I have read the source. What I stated was that the source does not talk about the speculation - and it is a correct statement since the source is offline and cannot be accessed. Now you are trying to push your POV without citing credible sources. I see that you have reverted the edit and hence I have no choice but to take this to the administrator's notice board since you refuse to listen. Lets discuss the matter on the noticeboard. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 09:24, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry but this is an important point. You stated quite clearly that the source (The Education of Jane Addams) did not talk about the issue of Starr's relationship with Addams (which you continue to refer to using the term "speculation"). You then admitted that you had not read the source - arguing that you could not do this because it the source is not available online. I myself HAVE read the source as I have had access to a physical copy of the book. My concern remains that you therefore deliberately misled in order to support your initial reversion. It is not a given rule that all sources cited within articles have to be available online, as I'm sure you know. That I have been able to produce other (online) sources that also talk about the relationship demonstrates that I was making a serious edit, and not pulling things out of the air. Contaldo80 (talk) 08:51, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm sure you can read what you wrote: "The source does not talk about the "speculation"." I'm sorry that you feel I'm "wasting" your time. But I don't think this is a trivial point. You have not yet been able to explain clearly why you could confidently say that the source did not talk about the relationship between Starr and Addams and yet admit that you had not read it. You did not assume good faith with my original edit. You did not credit me with actually having read the source myself. You have insisted that only online sources may be used. You did not nothing to admonish the individual that removed a piece of text supported by a source - in what was quite obviously a piece of homophobic vandalism. Contaldo80 (talk) 09:24, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Contaldo80, are you serious?? Have you not read what your edit says? It clearly has the word "speculation". What is in the source is a secondary issue. I hope you know that Wikipedia is NOT a gossip tabloid where "speculations" can be made. Yes, the source did not talk about word "speculation" because the source could not be accessed - so? Now please get off and don't waste my time further. I am done talking to you. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 09:28, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm done too. Your reversion was not made based on whether the material was speculative. Your reversion was made on the claim that you had looked at the source and decided the source did not support the point that Addams and Starr were in a relationship. I really do not hope that you are made an administrator, as I really don't think you have what it takes. And I hope others see that. Cheers. Contaldo80 (talk) 09:36, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Signpost email

Hi Arun, I've emailed you via en.wikiversity, since my daily limit here has been reached. Tony (talk) 04:52, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Arun, a reminder that copy-deadline is soon; if you're going to be included in the survey, we'll need your response within eight to 12 hours. Tony (talk) 02:59, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Arun, thanks, and noted. Tony (talk) 07:11, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Vidhan Sabha and Lok Sabha constituencies - oh crumbs

Hi AKS.9955
Oh, crumbs. Kheragarh (Assembly constituency) is a constituency of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly. It doesn't identify what "Assembly" it is part of. I think the article name needs more precision. But what to change it to?

And more "oh, crumbs": this section refers to the state MLAs as if they were members of the Lok Sabha.
Your thoughts about this? --Shirt58 (talk) 10:28, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Hello Shirt58, I hear what you say. For example, all constituencies in List of London Assembly constituencies are named the way you are suggesting. However, in case of Indian constituencies, the practice that was followed was "City name" + "(Assembly constituency)" or "(Vidhan Sabha constituency)". Check pages in this, this and this pages for example. Now that you mentioned it, I noticed that some anomalies (like this). In any-case, since most of the assembly constituencies are mentioned the way I have been naming the constituencies, I am of the opinion of following the current practice "City name" followed by "(Assembly constituency)" or "(Vidhan Sabha constituency)".
As far as this section is concerned, I don't think there is any confusion since the MLA are members of either Legislative Assembly OR Legislative Council and not Lok Sabha. Moreover, the section has proper heading with Wikilinks. Trust this explains. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 15:38, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Hi, I did that edit you undid as a joke, please do not take it as an insult Adam tA 13:23, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Hello AdamTheAwesome, it is nice to have a sense of humor but please have respect for other people's time, energy and effort. Editors like self, put in hundreds and thousands of man hours every year in content building (new articles) and keeping the existing pages clean. That one joke might be just one edit for you, but thousands of such jokes everyday increase our workload, whereby instead of creating new content, we end up spending our time in cleaning the existing articles. You are welcome to contribute on Wikipedia, but please be considerate. Thanks, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 15:42, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Bara Gumbad

Hello! Your submission of Bara Gumbad at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 00:22, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Joseph Smith 1844 Presidential Platform

I declined the speedy because it is a copy of text published in 1844 (maybe speech too?), thus not subject to copyright. I earlier prodded the article saying this doesn't belong in Wikipedia, but Wikisource. Creating editor removed the prod and said they weren't finished. It's been a week and an AfD is probably in order. Bgwhite (talk) 08:45, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello

I read your post in ArbCom. Is there any way I can get rid of Topic Ban. It's been around 2 months now. I have been topic banned for Indian religions. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 18:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Hello Capankajsmilyo, I briefly looked into your case history and must say there is nothing I can advise you apart from suggesting you to abide by what has been recommended and to place a request to the ArbCom again. Speaking out of turn, but your pattern of editing seems to be questionable; kindly consider that. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 19:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Ok Thanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 19:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

AbCom election

Hi Arun,

You seemed to have withdrawn your candidacy from the AbCom election. You're a good candidate to me but I think AbCom requires more. Let me know if you are interested in RFA, I will be glad to support you. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 06:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Hello Wikic¤l¤gy, sorry for the late revert. Thanks for offer for Admin and I was asked by one administrator few months back if I would like to run but then I declined stating that I am not ready and would need few more months. My answer is still the same. Although I would like to be an administrator, I would like tot take some more time and then run for it (when I am comfortable). Ass far as ArbCom is concerned, my view is that it is not rocket science and I have the necessary experience and judgement. However, when I looked at the final list (and as I mentioned in my withdrawal statement), I personally felt that there are some really good candidates who can do better justice to ArbCom than I can. The job needs to be done correctly - does not matter I do it or someone else does it and hence I withdrew my nomination. I am sure you will get to know when I run for Admin. Have a good day. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 10:12, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Priya Munasinghe

Since I am new to this, I hope the references and citations I have submitted are adequate. If you desire you can google the name and do a diligent search on Priya Munasinghe

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan7750 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Bara Gumbad

Hello! Your submission of Bara Gumbad at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! 4meter4 (talk) 02:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Message from User Sturtzy

Josh Gibson at one time in the 30's played against a team in burguesstown pa. A man by the name of Kel Jelovich caught a ball hit by him. Kel jelovich did a "willie mays" type of catch. And caught the ball as josh gibson was running home — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sturtzy (talk • contribs) 15:32, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Tomb of Sikandar Lodi

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Page on Miss India Australia Ananya Soni

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Credible_claim_of_significance

Unsure the request for speedy deletion as WIKI:SIGNIF applies to this page on pageant queen Ananya Soni — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaranChopra271 (talk • contribs) 08:03, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

My page is deleted

Hi, I submitted an article page for creation to review but it's deleted. Could you please help me out to identify the exact issue. I will make the changes once i come to know and will resubmit after making the changes. Ajayrwat (talk) 11:50, 4 December 2015 (UTC) Regards, Ajayrwat Ajayrwat (talk) 11:50, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Hiranandani Gardens, Mumbai/GA1

You probably forgot to warthlist the article or GAN page, and then got caught up in the ArbCom adventure. You'll need to address the issues raised during the review. If you are unable to address the issues, you'll need to let the reviewer know so he can close the review. Regards SilkTork ✔Tea time 17:11, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hiranandani Gardens, Mumbai

The article Hiranandani Gardens, Mumbai you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Hiranandani Gardens, Mumbai for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wikicology -- Wikicology (talk) 05:41, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Edit regarding Hill House School

Please could you let me know why my edit regarding Hill House School was removed? Surely an article ought to cover problems that an institution has, as well describe its successes? Teach97 (talk) 16:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Why did you do that?

Why the hell did you redirect to New Rising and Index? New Rising is a bloody companies name! The proper naming convention for new teams which don't have a brand yet are "City IPL team" or whatever. See Miami MLS team if you want an example. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 11:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

  • ArsenalFan700, Firstly the pages already existed on the subject. If the name is not proper (which even the other two names are not proper), then your should have performed a "move" function rather than creating a new page. In any case, the franchise name will be announced and then only the final name will be given to the pages. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Agreed but who created what first? I made my pages, which to be fair have more than what you had, and I added them to the Indian Premier League and 2016 Indian Premier League season page with those names. It really should be be a matter of who created what first, wikipedia is not a race to see who can create what first. The best thing would be to merge/redirect New Rising and Index with the pages I created. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 11:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Okay, but again, that does not matter. I am sorry but the name of the article should not be Pune New Balance or something like that and the information in the articles I made had more information and the IPL and 2016 IPL page both link to mine, which again, has the proper title. Doesn't matter about who came first, either we simply re-direct your articles to mine, or we do the opposite, rename yours, and just copy and paste what I had to yours but under the correct names... which would require more work but if you want the credit then fine. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 11:19, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
And now we are in limbo with the pages cause I just tried to change the name to the correct one and add more information. Was this really about getting the credit mate? --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 11:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

That was my blunder while trying to fix something that is honestly ridiculous. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 11:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, what are you doing? What is on the page is good enough for the reader to understand. Unless you are about to add a section about the whole saga from the beginning (CSK and RR being suspected, caught, suspended, then bidding put out, bidders selected etc) then there is not much else you can add. There are no players, no coaches, no real history yet. Home ground has yet to be announced, no team identity, no logo etc. Not even a website. Honestly there is no point in having that template since there is no major edit that needs to be done unless you are about to add a section about the whole controversy and even then, on those pages, you don't need to go into full detail on the whole situation. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 11:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Big Ballet

Hello, I dont understand why you and another user have chosen to use an inaccurate photo for Big Ballet. The photo is not from the show, nor does it reflect the actual ballet put on by the show's participants. The correct ballet is Swan Lake, and the show's dancers were the one's depicted in the photo. Jencardia (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Hello Jencardia, the reason I reverted your edit was although you gave your edit summary as "The picture is not from the show", you performed mass blanking, removed the entire infobox and added new content without any explanation. Please refrain from engaging into edit war with editors and if the edits are under dispute then first discuss it on article talkpage. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 16:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Correction to Big Ballet

Removing a photo that is not accurate, or does not directly relate to the article, is not disruptive. The production the Big Ballet troupe put on was Swan Lake. The ballerinas in the production were not the ones depicted in the photo. And, the ballet in the photo was done by Asaf Messerer, for the Bolshoi Ballet, not for the Big Ballet. If the issue is that a photo was removed without being replaced, I understand, but to remove a grossly inaccurate photographic representation of the article is well within the parameters of an accurate correction. The page is listed as having page issues for a writing style not akin to a wiki article, but to continue to allow the wrong picture would simply be blatant negligence. Jencardia (talk) 16:52, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arun (given name), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aruna. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Forbes list of Indian billionaires, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anil Agarwal. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:33, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

For Write an article

What is the procedure to write an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zainmobweb (talk • contribs) 08:50, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I appreciate your appreciation for the project and its contributors even if nobody else seems to. I do think it's a nice idea the foundation formally thanking a few people, but it's difficult to narrow it down to just a few editors who deserve it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:45, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the nice gesture Dr. Blofeld. I was little surprised to see the "hostility" by some editors; especially the harsh words used towards other senior editors. All I was trying to do is to have some sort of acknowledgement towards senior editors. I am not sure if you noticed, top 10 article creators have created 482,293 articles (excluding redirect) which is appx 9.6% of all articles created on Wikipedia. What I dont understand is, how can such huge contribution go unappreciated? I have written close to 500 articles and with experience I can say that it is NOT an easy task and certainly cannot be done without putting in lots of efforts. In any-case, I am glad that I enjoy your understanding on this. Thanks for your time and your effort on Wikipedia. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 18:20, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Most of them are jealous. In fairness though a lot of us who've created a huge amount of articles, a lot of them are extremely basic with little thought gone into them, simply starter stubs. If you really want to root out the fine editors just look at the people who've created the most Featured articles/good articles. I do think it would be a good thing for the foundation to stop once in a while and really thank the people who do the hard work here. But it changes little, most of us couldn't care less what the foundation thinks of us and do the work which we think helps the site. I am on very good terms with the UK wikimedia folk and I can say that they certainly do appreciate the good work that goes into wikipedia, but they might not publicly ever say anything. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:29, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Dr. Blofeld, I agree. I just gave a suggestion. I was looking forward for "willingness" to accept the suggestion; selecting a list was lesser an issue. It could have been done based on FA, GA, DYK, Edit, Article, Deletion.....etc. I never said that the top 10 list I wrote should be followed (although I think I should have explained as I would explain to a six year old). On a different note, its interesting to see your James Bond's connection ;). Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 18:37, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

BTW, when formatting access dates can you please state 16 December 2015 rather than just Dec 2015?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:35, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Arshad Ali (politician)

  • E.M.Gregory, whats wrong in what I said? Also, it is funny (and you should hear yourself speak) that my comment was about using shortcuts where I stated the prime purpose of shortcuts and you are raising objection to it by citing shortcuts (AFD & BEFORE). If you think that one should elaborate on everything then please start by elaborating on shortcuts (like AFD and BEFORE) so that I can reply properly. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:27, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
  • The problem is that you wrote: "Fails WP:NPOL , but offered no explanation of why the politician you nominated for deletion failed that policy, no evidence of having looked for sources or notability. Other editors pointed this out at the AFD. The AFD was brief, and conclusive: Keep. Because Arshad Ali has become an embarrassment and a liability to the Respect Party, your attempt to delete his page might look to some like an attempt to WP:GAME. Just a friendly warning. .E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:21, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
  • E.M.Gregory, are you serious when you accuse me of WP:GAME?? As far as other editors point out is concerned; there was only one and let me enlighten you by pointing out this and then this concerning the editor. That message was nothing but "getting back" at me; an act in which you fell. Be careful for what you stand for next time. And since you are so much in support of others not using shortcuts, stop doing it yourself and type the full message. I dont think this conversation is going anywhere and hence I will appreciate if you stop posting messages on this subject; any new topic is welcome. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 13:24, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

E.M.Gregory, what was that link (what does is tell) and what are you trying to prove? I have participated in deletion of over 700 new articles (CSD+AFD) - is that a mistake? So what it was a "new article"? Are you even aware about how AfD works? I marked the page for AfD appx 2 hours after it was created. You are barking on the wrong tree my friend and are busy splitting hair. Stop WP:HUSH with immediate effect. I am taking this message in AGF and am also warning you for not posting any further messages on my TalkPage unless you have a new topic to discuss. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 13:44, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Telegram

Hello, AKS.9955. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 13:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Sent just now -- samtar whisper 13:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AKS.9955/Archive_7&oldid=1144655583"