User talk:Arjayay/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

Mohommed Ali Shah

Shivam Roy - there is no point in pretending you "resect me" and then reinserting the same inappropriate WP:COATRACK additions - promotional speculation about someone who is not even the subject of the article. It is not for me to stop, but you. Please do before you are blocked - thank you - Arjayay (talk) 08:31, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Kovur, Nellore district

@Arjayay: Talk:Kovur, Nellore district. Can you check this?--Vin09 (talk) 16:18, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Reversions..

Hi, I have decided to revert these and two particular edits because in spite of coming from a sock puppet/troll, these improves the quality of content. I have not reverted this reversion of you'rs because the publishing house fails WP:RS.Thanks!Winged Blades ^Godric 10:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Jammu

The population of 9,53,293 is the right population for this article as against the one reverted by you.Census datas were wrongly published for Jammu city due to some political reasons...rectify it asap... Shubham22 (talk) 18:19, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Shubham22 - Interesting conspiracy theory - you would need a very reliable source to support the population you are claiming, or we stick with the national census. - Arjayay (talk) 18:25, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Usage of px in Kalimpong

Px was used in images so as to make them proportional with the infobox on top left. Without it the pictures look disproportionately small and the page structure is looking odd. However noting that px will force some users to mandatorily download in large size and should be avoided in most situation. Is there any other way to address this so that both the concerns i.e; page structure and old/slow devices/internet connections can be addressed. Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 03:09, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Kovur, Nellore district

I've expanded the page with many sections. Please watchlist it for sometime.--Vin09 (talk) 08:30, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Religions in Bihar state districts

Hi thanks for saying but what u have reverted, i used india's website of census2011.co.in Kahrori (talk) 15:24, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kahrori - the point is you have not cited your source, so, as an unsourced addition, they all need removing.
I will stop deleting them, provided you go back and add a specific reference to each and every entry, linked to the correct census2011 page - see Help:Referencing for beginners if you are unsure how to do this.
If you could remove Indic script from the lead section and infobox, when you add the references, it would also help the project. - Arjayay (talk) 15:32, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Don't create the edit warring

The names which i reverted are mentioned two times, you can see it Jagat jit singh (talk) 09:35, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

The reason behind the removal

The names which i removed in People from Punjab section have been mention two times which is creating vandalism. I just removed the names which are mentioned twice. you can see it Jagat jit singh (talk) 09:41, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jagat jit singh - that is perfectly reasonable - but as you didn't explain the reason for the removal in your edit summary, it looks just like vandalism.
Looking at your previous edits you are including the section title, but without any explanation. Please read, and follow Help:Edit summary. Thanks. - Arjayay (talk) 09:53, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

Could you explain the user clearly at User talk:Vin09?--Vin09 (talk) 10:42, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Vin09 - your explanation is very good. I only see "village" in the official websites - such as KOVUR-Village Panchayat updated in October 2016. As you have said, if it was up-graded from a village to a town, this would have been newsworthy, so the editor should easily be able to provide a link to that news, I'm watching your page, but will stay out unless the editor continues. - Arjayay (talk) 11:04, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Thankyou.--Vin09 (talk) 11:05, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Lolita vs Lolita fashion

Hi. There is constant confusion between the novel Lolita and the Lolita fashion. Updates were made to both wiki pages to help direct users to the correct article. Those in the Lolita industry often are stereotyped to be sexually promiscuous as a direct result of the novel. The updates are not "spam" or "promoting the fashion" as you stated when reversing the updates. I feel you may not be aware of this constant confusion but it has led to much harassment. The updates were, in fact, to help add additional clarity for everybody. This falls in line with Wiki's mission and is very common among more developed Wiki articles to address related topics, including ones that may seem related but are not. Please re-instate the changes. Jalauna1 (talk) 12:54, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

As an additional note, the Lolita fashion page was also updated to help clarify the confusion. If this were spam or promoting a specific agenda, this would not be necessary. Again, these updates are not spam or promoting Lolita fashion. It is to clarify the constant confusion that continues to happen. Jalauna1 (talk) 12:58, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Jalauna1 - in a word - NO
The hatnote on the current Lolita article is the correct one as it directs readers to the Lolita (disambiguation) page, which lists over 30 other uses of Lolita - one of which is Lolita fashion.
Lolita fashion does not need, or deserve, to be treated any differently to any of the other 30+ uses listed on that disambiguation page.
As for including Lolita fashion in the lead paragraph, immediately after the book title - that is just not done in any of our articles
You appear to be a Single purpose account only interested in promoting Lolita fashion, so I suspect you may have a Conflict of interest. If so, could you please read and follow our guidance at WP:COI - Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 13:09, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorry you feel that way. Have you looked into Lolita fashion? I ask because from your responses, it comes across that you may not be familiar with it or are responding based on similar stereotypes or rumors my updates are meant to help address. I'm not a single purpose account, I'm a new user. You're assumptions and treatment violate Wiki's guidelines in treatment of updates by fellow users, especially new ones, and come across as personal attacks instead of objective decisions. They also violate Wiki's language use practices. You use Google search often to justify word usage. A similar Google search for Lolita will reveal the confusion I'm trying to address. Lolita and Lolita fashion show up, with many more specific to the novel. However, neither article address the constant confusion that happens between the two topics. This shows this is lacking on both article pages. None of the other ambiguous uses you mentioned have that confusion. That alone proves why this deserves to be treated differently. I hope you'll look into this matter some more and maybe ask questions for more information before making a decision. Jalauna1 (talk) 13:30, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

The following quote was found at at Jalauna1's talk page. It is being brought here to continue and Arjayay has been asked to continue the conversation here.

" Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Lolita. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 14:01, 5 July 2017 (UTC)"

Arjayay, you may not have seen my more recent response that provides you with additional information proving my edits are not spam or vandalism. Hopefully they were not simply ignored. My edits are in-line with Wiki's guidelines. Additionally, Wiki describes vandalism as "On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge." You are clearly misusing your threat of reporting my edits as vandalism since I clearly provided reasons and proof for my edits. Your refusal to continue an objective conversation along with continued warnings and threats against myself show an nonobjective approach to this matter.

Additionally, here is Wiki's guideline for dealing with new users for you on new users. New users provide valuable input to the continuation of Wiki's mission by bringing forth new relevant content and points of view. My edits deserve the same consideration as other edits. In fact, there are very very few instances where edits should be removed.

My edits also meet Wiki's editing policies as follows: "Likewise, as long as any of the facts or ideas added to an article would belong in the "finished" article, they should be retained if they meet the three article content retention policies: Neutral point of view (which does not mean no point of view), Verifiability and No original research."

Jalauna1 (talk) 15:03, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Jalauna1 I'm not going to get drawn into this. For someone who claims to be a "new user" you have obtained a remarkable knowledge of Wikipedia's guidelines, and my past editing patterns, in three hours.
If you wish to make a complaint - please go to WP:ANI - Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 15:46, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

I've used Wiki long enough as a reference and did my homework before dong any editing. I felt I should know the guidelines before doing any edits. I'm a new user but that doesn't mean I was born yesterday or that I my knowledge or intelligence is somehow deficient compared to yours. I am capable of learning and being objective. You continue to only make personal attacks and not provide any references to Wiki rules violations. Yes, I will definitely be following up per Wiki's dispute resolution process. Jalauna1 (talk) 15:53, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Round Rock ISD

Hello, I am a representative from the school district updating our page with our recognitions and links to support content. Why is it being edited? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DFolettoRRISD (talk • contribs) 14:43, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello User:DFolettoRRISD

Firstly, Please sign all posts on talk pages with 4 tildes ( ~~~~ ) which will add your signature and a timestamp

Secondly, as I explained at User talk:168.69.254.248

"Please do NOT add External links in the bodytext of any of our articles, as you did at Round Rock Independent School District. Please read and follow Help:Referencing for beginners for how to add references - thank you"

Thirdly, as you have admitted that you have a clear conflict of interest, you should not be editing that page at all. Please read and follow our guidance here
Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 14:52, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for input. I understand the links, but the entire content was deleted too. Regardless of my affiliation, i am reporting facts that are supported and cited. DFolettoRRISD (talk) 14:56, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

User:DFolettoRRISD

You have a COI in adding anything to this page, and even if were not so, you were NOT citing them as references, just adding promotional External Links in the bodytext.
I note the page has an unfortunate history. It has been tagged for COI editing since November 2014, when an editor was blocked, for making promotional additions. Large sections of the article were removed in February this year, for copyright violations.
Please try to understand, this is NOT the school's page; it is Wikipedia's page about he school, It is not for promoting the school in any way, but to provide balanced coverage, be that good or bad, about the school, taken from reliable, independent, sources. Not what the school, its agents, parents, staff or anyone connected to the school, says about it; but what other, totally unconnected, reliable sources say about the school. - Arjayay (talk) 15:24, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the history and information. DFolettoRRISD (talk) 16:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Permanent protection for Palaruvi Express

Hi Arjayay, thanks a lot for your valuable support for protecting Palaruvi Express article.

I'd like to know whether we can go for a permanent protection of this article?? What I understood is that somebody from Punalur area is severely trying to make this article similar to the website "Indiarailinfo.com". Can we protect this article permanently? Can we ban this IP addresses permanently?

Thanks. Arunvrparavur (talk) 06:59, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Arunvrparavur
I asked for permanent semi-protection at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection at 11:42, yesterday, but that page has been experiencing problems and there is a significant back-log - it is currenly No 25 in the list. Having only had 2 x 3-day and 1 x 7 day semi-protections, it is unlikely to be permanently semi-protected, but we might get 2 weeks or a month this time and more next time.
IP addresses are almost never blocked permanently, as this affects legitimate users - we rarely know where the IP address is - a library, a university etc. so such a block could affect numerous "good" editors.

I am not sure why you think the edits are from Punalur? Looking at the IPs who added this in June - IPs 2.51.202.126 + 2.51.192.205 + 2.51.192.214 + 92.98.12.9 + 2.51.193.21 all geo-locate to Dubai city, Dubai, but 31.215.13.152 + 2.51.198.56 + 86.99.213.128 + 94.59.228.133 geo-locate to Sharjah, UAE. None geo-locate to India at all, although geolocation is not always 100% accurate.

Finally, if you think this is also a copyvio frrm "Indiarailinfo.com", could you add that to the bottom of my request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection - another editor, adding another reason for protection, can only help our case. - Arjayay (talk) 08:53, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Arjayay,
I just have a feeling that this guy is from Punalur area because somebody from that place sent me a message before. It was just after the creation of this article. Anyways, the place is not a big deal. What we want is to protect the article from persistent vandalisms. The schedule of this train is available in Indiarailinfo.com and he is copy-pasting the same thing again and again.

It's good that you have already requested for protecting the article. Let's see. Thanks a lot. Arunvrparavur (talk) 09:10, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Arunvrparavur
I predicted "we might get 2 weeks or a month this time" - we got 2 weeks - Arjayay (talk) 09:28, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

And the vandalism resumed the day the block expired - this time 92.98.80.124 from Sharjah, UAE - Arjayay (talk) 08:15, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank You

Dear Arjayay, Thank you. Jeromeenriquez (talk) 16:36, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Jeromeenriquez - I've removed several flags - could you please remove the remainder? - Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 16:37, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Dear Arjayay, i really appreciate you trying to teach me something and i am open to learning. But just wanted to know, if we do not write Indian for an Indian or Italian for an Italian in the infobox space that says Nationality, what should we write or shall we leave it blank?. If that box is useless then why is it there? and if the flags are only for sportsperson then how do we understand the country of the person from some other field. Kindly advise because I am new?Jeromeenriquez (talk) 10:51, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Jeromeenriquez - Nobody is saying you cannot use Indian, what I said was you cannot use [[Indian]], which comes out as Indian, as that is a disambiguation page - an index of other 40 pages (please click on it and see), as all your links to Indian will also need to be revisited and corrected.

Please note that as per WP:OVERLINKING we do not link the names of major:-

geographic features, locations (e.g. United States, New York City, .... London ...., France, Berlin...) - which will include India
languages, nationalities (e.g. English, British, American, French, German...) - which will include Indian
religions (e.g. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism...)

So, you should not even be trying to link to Indian - even if you were doing it correctly - so all your links to Indian need to be removed. - Arjayay (talk) 15:04, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Just want to know about the flags. I saw flags on the infoboxes of some bishops and archbishops, even some of the politicians. and even the Nationality mentioned. Shall i remove the flags and Nationality from those pages too? Please suggest. Jeromeenriquez (talk) 18:49, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Jeromeenriquez - As I have stated above, the nationality can be included, but should not be linked - the flags almost certainly should not be included - perhaps you could cite some examples of articles that you are concerned about - Arjayay (talk) 20:01, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Concerning Isaaq page

NeoSomal (talk) 00:44, 16 July 2017 (UTC) I'm curious to know why you edited out my contributions to the Isaaq article because my source was a geneticists blog debunking Isaaqs origin , while you simultaneously ignore other UNCITED claims with no references whatsoever on that very same page?. You didn't even bother to put citations needed on them but went out of your way to edit my contributions out?. Why?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NeoSomal (talk • contribs) 23:46, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

NeoSomal - My reasons for reverting your additions/alterations were summed up in my edit summary:-

Rv Non-NPOV additions "Fraudulent Lineage" based on OR "despite what I'm told about its "popularity" " blogs + other questionable sources

Your additions were not from a Neutral point of view as shown by the example I cited, included original research, which is not allowed, as per the second quote, and were based on a blog, which is not allowed as per WP:BLOGS. As for ignoring other unsourced claims, I did not read the entire article, as I was patrolling RecentChanges at the time. - Arjayay (talk) 08:52, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Ambalavasi edits

Sources will be added soon. --पुष्पकः (talk) 20:30, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Working on that. They are not original research. You may search in google books. Please don't revert --पुष्पकः (talk)

Instead of reverting, please show the area where sources are needed. --पुष्पकः (talk) 20:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi पुष्पकः Please stop making multiple small additions to this page, as it makes it impossible to reply to you.
Sources MUST be added at the same time as you make your additions - far too many editors claim they will add sources later, but fail to do so. Please ONLY re-add information with [[WP:RS|reliable sources}}, as additions without sources are considered disruptive editing - Sources are much easier to add at the time, in any case, as you should have referred to the source, to make the addition - Arjayay (talk) 20:38, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, as you can see in the previous edit by an unknown user, one of the rows in the table was blanked, without citing any relevant source. So I corrected it to the earlier version. Thank you for your comments and guidance. -पुष्पकः (talk) 04:11, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Please understand that I am not involved in edit war. You are reverting the page frequently to one that contain information not suitable to the title of the article. Anyway, now I am not reverting it back. But I have removed some irrelevant information from that page. Thank you. --पुष्पकः (talk) 15:00, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

No पुष्पकः, you are not just "involved" in an edit war, you are creating the edit war.
Ignoring myself, your edits have been reverted by three other experienced editors:- User:Sitush (189,601 edits) User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (38,971 edits) and User:Winged Blades of Godric (12,361 edits} - you have broken the 3 revert rule and keep violating Wikipedia's basic rules of verifiability based on reliable sources.
I have tried to help you in the past, but you seem intent on pushing your point of view. - Arjayay (talk) 15:42, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Halimah Yacob - IP Address 118.189.63.127 (repeated vandalism with no reliable sources)

Urgent! Please do not revert back to IP Address 118.189.63.127 edits. There's no reliable sources. That IP address has been vandalizing the articles for some times. Please warn the IP address and blocked it from editing and from further vandalism of the Halimah Yacob article. Please imposed a lock protection for the page for unregistered (IP address) editor and new user. Thank you, your help is much appreciated. Please look into the matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reid62 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Investigation for Reid62

Hi,

I have requested for a sockpuppet investigation for Reid62 here for his actions on the Halimah Yacob article. You are welcome to comment if you wish. 118.189.63.127 (talk) 00:35, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Ça plane pour moi

I come back to you after you reverted the changes I made and provided feedback on the reasons for it.

I would first like to clarify that I am a new user and, by making the changes, did not intend to breach any of Wikipedia's rules. I simply followed your advice from 17 July 2017.

Second, I would like to reply and give an explanation on each of the points you pointed out and hope that I could get some assitance from you as an experienced user:

1. The new text I suggested should have been also referenced; you could see the references in the French version of it. For some reason, they did not appear when I modified the new version. If I fix this problem so that the references for the changes appear again, would (some of) the changes be acceptable to you?

2. On the WP:SOAPBOX issue: the current page contains references to the issue as well - see for instance phrase "Despite being credited to Plastic Bertrand, the vocals were actually performed by the record's producer Lou Deprijck". This is defamatory and harmful to Mr Jouret since it is completely false, as proven by more recent and numerous references (which, unfortunately, did not appear - but as I said, this can be fixed) than the one and only reference from an unknown magasine from 2010... Actually, the content of section "Financial dispute between Lou De Prijck and the AMC record company" plainly states facts. Bearing this in mind, if the content of this section would be published with all the right references, would you still consider it as a WP:SOAPBOX ?

3. As stated above, I am aware now of the issue with the publication of the references and can fix this problem.

4. If I understand the values of Wikipedia correctly, the aim is to provide the public with the most accurate and objective information possible. If so, from the moment that an article contains inaccuracies and a suggested change to fix those can be objectivly verified on the basis of independant references which are provided, it shouldn't matter from whom the suggested changes emanate, should it?

Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.

I will be looking forward to your answers.

Lexmind (talk) 12:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Lexmind - The nature of your unsourced additions to our Ça plane pour moi article, and your repeated references to "Edit made on behalf of Mr Roger Jouret", suggest that you have an ulterior motive in trying to edit this article. Please read and understand the final warning left on your talk page by an administrator, and check the article history, which shows that your additions were considered so defamatory, as to need expunging from the page history.

I have compared the French and English versions of the page. Our existing article in English, is well written, balanced and well referenced - it has 38 references, almost all in English, many of which are used multiple times, giving 58 referenced pieces of information. Conversely, the French article has just 9 references, 3 of which are used twice, giving just 12 referenced pieces of information. Moreover, even ignoring the Controversy section, the French article includes (and your translation of it included) a long list of cover-versions, which would not be allowed in the English version as per WP:COVERSONG.

Regarding the controversy section - I can no longer read what you wrote as it has been permanently deleted, so I cannot offer any detailed comments on it, but I believed that most of the language and phraseology was unacceptable - a view which was upheld by the Administrators who removed it from the page history.
I see nothing wrong with the reference in the English version as to who sang the song - There is a similar reference, in French, in the French article "Plastic Bertrand n’a pas chanté "Ca plane pour moi"". Moreover the opening line of the French article was changed from:-

Ça plane pour moi est une chanson chantée par le chanteur belge ...

To

Ça plane pour moi est une chanson interprétée par le chanteur belge ...

If you have reliable sources stating the opposite - these could be considered, but that does NOT mean the existing references should be removed. We have controversy sections, but these need to present both sides of the case impartially, whereas from your statement "Edit made on behalf of Mr Roger Jouret" you are clearly not impartial.

Please understand that the rules in different language Wikipedias are different. I cannot see that our article would be improved by taking very much, if anything from the French article.
Finally, may I remind you that you are on a Final Warning, so need to be Very careful - Arjayay (talk) 14:23, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick reply and explanations. We will work on that basis to come up with changes which improve the accuracy of the information contained in the article, based on reliable sources in accordance with Wikipedia rules.

To make sure that we avoid any misunderstanding, would you be so kind to accept that we share any new proposals with you in order to get your opinion prior to publishing them ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexmind (talk • contribs) 15:08, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Lexmind - Who are "we" ? Wikipedia accounts cannot be shared - do I assume you are working for Roger Jouret?
I am willing to look at any proposals you may make, but I may not be around for several days, and I repeat myself "I cannot see that our article would be improved by taking very much, if anything, from the French article" - Arjayay (talk) 15:21, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Jai Ho (film)

Hello Arjayay..can you tell me the reason behind the removal of my edit in jai ho(film) page?? Shatadru srkian (talk) 17:02, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Shatadru srkian - firstly please put new posts at the bottom, not in another section, in the middle of the page, and include a title
To answer your question - in this edit you changed the gross from 1.83 Billion to 1.5 billion - but the cited source here clearly states

Q. What was the final worldwide business of Jai Ho and how is it compared to other Salman Khan films like Ek Tha Tiger and Dabangg?
Ans. Around 183 crore.

So, your changing 1.83 to 1.5 contradicted the cited source - Arjayay (talk) 19:24, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	I hope the Mahmud of Ghazni vandal will take a break soon :) Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 11:45, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Cpt.a.haddock I see you've asked for semi-protection of Mahmud of Ghazni - could you please watchlist Muhammad of Ghor‎ as well? - Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 11:51, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Done.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 11:54, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Mickey Jupp

Hello,

Here's the answer to your question "What's incorrect?" and I hope it will be easy to understand even though I'm not English.

It’s totally irrelevant. It’s a matter of opinion, not a fact.

If you look at the big sites online, like AllMusic, Billboard, Last FM, ArtistDirect etc, you will see that none of them mention anything about it, whether it’s about the album or the artist.

Mickey Jupp Wiki is available in four different languages – English, Swedish, Dutch and German – and three of them don’t mention it. Simply because, like I said earlier, it’s irrelevant. It’s not a fact, it’s a matter of opinion and Wikipedia should never be a platform for spreading one’s personal opinions.

Eitzelmeister (talk) 09:17, 22 July 2017 (UTC) Eitzelmeister

Hi Eitzelmeister - thanks for your post
This has been edit warred over for some time. As you can see here I removed a far more PoV edit earlier, which was largely reinstated by another, to the version you objected to. I wouldn't want the earlier version to be reinstated, so can I suggest a mid-way proposal? - leaving the description, but omitting the word "racist", so the reader can make their own mind up?
Because of the free-use criteria for copyright album covers, we cannot use a picture of the album cover in the article on Jupp, only in an article specifically about the album itself.
Other language versions of the article are totally irrelevant - each language has its own rules and guidelines, so cannot be used as an example for a different language - and on Wikipedia WP:Other stuff exists - Arjayay (talk) 12:05, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar for diligence

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For continuously improving, copyediting, reviewing, and working on Punjab related articles. Apuldram (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Apuldram - It's always nice to be appreciated - (in between the complaints from the PoV pushers) - Thanks again - Arjayay (talk) 17:39, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

"Panzer Ace" in popular culture.

Hi Arjayay- I am writing this on your Talk page because I want to question your reverting of my edits on the '"Panzer Ace" in popular culture" article. This article has many flaws- starting with the fact that it doesn't really deal with Panzer Aces in popular culture but rather tries to denigrate Panzer aces and question why they are popular. Basically this article is a one-sourced editorial by Steven Zaloga- a weird sort of picture book writer/defense think tanker and general US Army propagandist. The point of the article seems to be to claim that German tankers aren't deserving of their obvious popularity among tank buffs because their tanks were too good and some of their exploits may have been exaggerated! "Panzer Aces" should be about the men themselves and why they are the rock stars of tank history- kill numbers and superior equipment and training. The fact is that any unbiased tank warfare historian recognizes the inferiority of American tanks (until the Pershing) and that the meat and potatoes of tank warfare happened in the East between Germans and Russians. I will try again when I have time to correct some of the obvious editorializing in this article or else try to figure a way to make the article neutral instead of biased.Makumbe (talk) 02:56, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello Makumbe - The only edit I have ever made to "Panzer ace" in popular culture was this edit on 16 July to revert the unexplained deletions by an IP 94.125.234.4 . The IP had removed almost all the text and references, reducing the number of references from 27 to just one.
You claim that "this article is a one-sourced editorial by Steven Zaloga" however, 21 of the references that you removed were not by Zaloga, and only six were, which rather disproves your claim. I note that your later edits were removed by user:K.e.coffman a very experienced editor, and I agree with his reversion of your "editorializing". - Arjayay (talk) 08:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Arjayay-I didn't remove references on purpose- perhaps inadvertently. However I do believe if you read the article fairly you can see that the article itself is an editorial- calls people who admire the German Panzer aces "Nazi fanboys"and generally has a strong revisionist POV. I have tried again and my whole edit was again removed- I used sources at least as good as the article currently uses and in some cases far better- such as actual university historical thesis. I want to continue to work to improve the article- please check out my last revision and tell me how to make it better. The "Nazi fanboys"line should at least go. Thanks, Jeff ThurstonMakumbe (talk) 13:50, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi again Arjayay- If I am not able to edit on this article I would like your advice on how to start a new article which is simply a list of German tank "aces" and their scores. This is actually lacking in wikipedia at this point and I feel the "Panzer Ace in popular culture" article is overtly editorial and ironically doesn't even include such a list- just a few examples. Thanks for your help, Jeff TMakumbe (talk) 14:31, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Makumbe - Your last edit was reverted by an admin, User:Nick-D with the description - "editor's POV, backed by bad sources"
I would agree with that

"The perfectly realized stereotype of the German Panzer ace was Robert Shaw in the 1960's film Battle of the Bulge. Like pirates or air aces the German tank commanders cut a dashing figure in their black uniforms and their formidable tanks. Kurt Knipsel is one such ace- sporting a goatee and long hair"

is clearly a PoV - you can't hide the PoV by pasting a small fact "and also Germany's top tank ace" on at the end. Similarly, your statement

"Zaloga's point of view is a current American one- solipcistic and in denial of the facts of the time"

is also totally unsupported, as this reference which you cite, cannot be opened, so does not support your claim - hence, I suspect, Nick-D's comment about "bad sources".

As for your suggestion about "a list of German tank "aces" and their scores" - that sounds better, separating fact from fiction - but you need to read this thread at Talk:"Panzer ace" in popular culture

"There's been consensus in many previous discussions that the previous list was entirely unreliable and of little value. In addition, there's a broad agreement that as the entire concept of a "panzer ace" is disputed it should not be presented as fact."

I suggest you read the talk page archive and then re-discuss this proposal at Talk:"Panzer ace" in popular culture before wasting too much time on it. German tank commanders is not a subject I am familiar with, so please pursue your discussions at Talk:"Panzer ace" in popular culture, as it is the editors there that you need to convince - Arjayay (talk) 16:08, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Arjayay. This whole issue is completely politicized. I read the Talk page and I can see there's no hope there for a more balanced point of view. What I want to do is start a page which is as neutral as possible listing high-scoring German tank commanders- they don't even have to be called "aces". I want to just start a completely new page listing 7 to 10 names with photos. Also- if you read this article and its title "Panzer Aces in popular culture" you will find sparse reference to popular culture- rather it is a refutation of past histories which basically said the German tank force was the best in WW2 for various reasons. In my new article I want to make no reference to "Panzer ace"- I just want to list the 10 tank commanders who also happen to be the highest scoring tank commanders of WW2. If you read the article you will find a reference to another wikipedia article called "uncritical portrayal of the Waffen SS". This article is flagged for original research. I want to do the same for "Panzer Aces in Popular Culture" and flag it for POV and lack of good citations or complete lack of citations such as in the first paragraph. Any advice? Thanks for taking your time, Jeff T.Makumbe (talk) 18:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

One more thing Arjayay- the citation which you say cannot be opebned opens fine on my computer. it is a Master in History Thesis paper describing the development of the Sherman tank.Makumbe (talk) 18:10, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Makumbe - as I said before "German tank commanders is not a subject I am familiar with" so I cannot advise, other than to refer you to my quotation above:- "There's been consensus in many previous discussions that the previous list was entirely unreliable and of little value ..."
As for your citation - I've tried again and all I get is:-

Couldn’t open PDF
Something’s keeping this PDF from opening.
Go back to the last page

Guessing your location, I don't know why access in Italy would be different from that in the UK - Arjayay (talk) 18:34, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Makumbe : Assuming from your initial question that you are IP 94.125.234.4, as that was the only edit I have reverted on the page in question, please stop making edits as both an IP and a registered account, as this can be considered as sock-puppetry - Arjayay (talk) 18:45, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Arjayay- Not a sock puppet- don't even know what that means. I am in the United States, not Italy or the UK. I will get advice elsewhere as to how to proceed. Thanks again, Jeff ThurstonMakumbe (talk) 19:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

References

Somaliland

Hello Arjayay. I think you are an admin. I would like to ask for your opinion regarding the Somaliland. There is a discussion about the majority Isaak clan SNM organization and the organization pillaging and attacking the town of Borama. To keep the discussion unbiased I would like to ask for your input. Wikipedia is not a platform for Propaganda as some users are trying to turn it into one. Jamalwalal 22:39, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jamalwalal - No I am not an admin - I assume when you say "Isaak clan" you are talking about our article Isaaq ? - That article has suffered from numerous reverts and edit wars, but neither side seem able to provide reliable independent sources, just their PoV claims.
Most of my edits have been deleting blatant PoV, such as "Fraudulent Lineage", removing non-notable people and reverting totally unsourced additions. These are blatantly obvious, even to editors like me, who do not have any specialist knowledge of the situation. As for "propaganda" both sides seem to be trying to add their version, but AFAIK, the situation on the ground is not even particularly clear, and both sides are writing their version of "the truth". Sorry I cannot help you any further - Arjayay (talk) 19:00, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Arjayay. No I was actually talking about the Somaliland page, the self declared republic. Although it's alright. I'll see what I can do. ~~ Jamalwalal 23:05, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Editing the article "Narsee Monjee College of Commerce and Economics"

Hi Arjayay! I received your notification about the article "Narsee Monjee College of Commerce and Economics". Can we discuss on the article talk page on how to improve the article? Please feel free to leave a message Blackzamasu69 (talk) 05:10, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Blackzamasu69 - I've answered at Talk:Narsee Monjee College of Commerce and Economics - Arjayay (talk) 08:29, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

page on deceased kpop idols?

WOuld that be a valid page?-76.174.35.70 (talk) 02:02, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello IP from Los Angeles - I don't know why you asked me, but I see you have also asked User:TheSandDoctor and User:Snowflake91

I don't know if you are meaning an article, or a list.

Article

An article would need sourcing from reliable, Independent sources that provide an overview of the whole subject, not based on tribute pages on different k-pop bands web-sites. It would also be subject to the usual problems in this sector, of fans trying to boost their dead idol, and demean other peoples idols.
What would such an article cover? the artists are dead, and (see below) they will already have their own article, so what would the article discuss?
If there is enough independent information on how the perception/importance of certain artists changed after their death, and in the following decades, this could be an interesting page, but I suspect it is more likely to become a "shrine" or a "memorial" page edited by distressed fans, contrary to WP:NOTMEMORIAL

List

If you look at Lists of musicians you can see the existing Wikipedia lists in this general area - I can only see two similsr(ish) titles:- List of deaths in rock and roll and List of murdered hip hop musicians. I cannot see a specific reason why a list of dead Korean musicians should not be allowed, but I would have a lot of provisos/caveats:-

You need to read Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists, Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists#Adding individual items to a list which includes:-

1. All lists must have clearly defined inclusion criteria (expanded below)
2. Every entry should meet the notability criteria for its own article. Red-linked entries are only acceptable if it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future, however, if an article was not written whilst the artist was alive, it is not "reasonable" to expect an article to be written after they have died. So the list would have to be limited to artists who already have their own article (not artists whose names redirect to the article of thier former band/group). i.e. a strict policy of No article = No inclusion.
3. All items on the list must follow Wikipedia's core content policies of Verifiability, No original research, and Neutral point of view

Title

As for the title, this has several potential problems, whether it is an article, or a list:-

1. as per WP:EUPHEMISM people on Wikipedia die, not pass away, and are then dead, not deceased.
2. K-pop would need careful defining to avoid arguments over whether an artist was "K-pop" or not. As stated at our article K-pop
   - "Although it includes all genres of "popular music" within South Korea, the term is often used in a narrower sense to describe a modern form of South Korean pop music drawing on a range of Western styles and genres, such as Western pop music, rock, jazz, hip-hop, R&B, reggae, electronica, techno, nu metal, folk, country and classical on top of its traditional Korean music roots."
3. "Idols" is another value-laden phrase - which could lead to even more arguments

An article "Dead Korean popular musicians" or a "List of dead Korean popular musicians" would be a much safer title.
I am not an expert in this field so it may be worth re-asking your question at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Music genres task force - Arjayay (talk) 12:52, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Morgan House, Kalimpong

The infobox have been changed and replaced by the correct one in accordance to the article as suggested by you. Pl do check as per your convenience and let me know if any further improvement/correction needs to be done. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.100.160.57 (talk) 09:28, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Arjayay. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Vin09 (talk) 09:11, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your response to my question at Wikipedia: Teahouse. All the best, Vorbee (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Juan Mata

The version you accepted on this page had an unnecessary WP:REDLINK where the change was made. Please make sure to check the revision carefully before accepting. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 15:30, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Why Reverted on Teahouse

Hi, you just reverted my comments on Teahouse? Am wondering why? I accidentally posted an edit from my talk page...not realizing I copied and pasted my entire talk page. I resubmitted my intended edit. Can you please help me understand? Thanks. Justbean (talk) 14:18, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Justbean - Sorry, that was my mistake (not helped by Microsoft)
I had looked at your earlier edits where you added 99,471 bytes and 7 bytes - which I realized was a mistake, so I was trying to roll those back. However, in the meantime, you had reverted your large addition and added back what you really wanted to add, so, by pressing roll-back I reverted all of your edits. Normally, I might have spotted that, but Microsoft then decided to restart my machine for a new update. As you can see from my contributions - my last edit was that rollback at 14.12 and this is my next edit at 16.39

Arjayay Thanks for the clarification! You can imagine how embarrassing that was when I realized it ;) Appreciate your quick eye and help. Justbean (talk) 16:51, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Lake Braddock Secondary School#Lake Braddock Theater

The changes I've made have been entirely accurate, and I have credibly sourced the person in question. However he made changes earlier to that section in regards to his award for best supporting actor, and cites an unqualified high school theatre critic when speaking of his performance. A reference directly from Mr. Grove speaking on his wolf fighting ability has been provided, and is entirely relevant when speaking on his performance as another animal. Please consider leaving this important information where it is, and removing information only backed by amateur critics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.231.148.97 (talk) 19:35, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Do not revert !!

Hello,

I have added links from verifiable news sites and which are important as additional references for In Stereo (band) and Capital Region of Denmark. I made sure the links are related to the actual subjects and are relevant for the above mentioned topics. Do not revert !!

Please stop adding malformed lists of external links to the references sections of articles such as you did at In Stereo (band) and Capital Region of Denmark. References need to be properly formatted and added in the relevant place in the text immediately after the point that they are verifying. Please read and follow WP:Referencing for beginners - Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 14:01, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Epilones Firstly, please sign all posts on talk pages with 4 tildes ( ~~~~ ) which will add your signature and a timestamp.
Secondly, as I have already explained, your additions are NOT references. References need to be formatted, as explained in WP:Referencing for beginners and inserted at the relevant place in the text, not in a numbered list placed after the real references, as the reader cannot tell what part of the text your "reference" is supposed to be verifying and your manual numbers will be duplicated when proper references are added.
I see you have been adding these lists for some time, on several articles, which will all need cleaning up.
Several of your lists have already been reverted, such as in this edit to CoxCon, and you had a warning on your talk page. -Arjayay (talk) 14:48, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Blindly reverting is unconstructive

Hi Arjayay. It is very important to examine edits before deciding to revert to make a considered decision. Given the propriety of my edit and your reversion of it, I can only assume you did so by knee jerk reaction, without basic examination. This is especially problematic when it has the potential to chase away a new, good faith editor--who instead should be welcomed and invited to create an account. In this case I am an experienced editor, currently logged out, but if I wasn't, your edit could have had a serious and irretrievable chilling effect. Now please go actually look at the page history and revert yourself. Thanks.-24.189.83.39 (talk) 21:11, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

As "an experienced editor, currently logged out" you should be well aware of WP:Alumni and Wikipedia:College and university article advice - which establishes the inclusion of alumni lists, such as that which you are "blindly deleting" - which is unconstructive.
As for your "serious and irretrievable chilling effect", I'm just trying to remember which sockpuppet used to threaten editors with that phrase, in order to try and produce that very "serious and irretrievable chilling effect" which you are accusing me of. - Arjayay (talk) 11:44, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Helllo Arjayay. Thank you for editing my article. I will try to remember everything for next time. It feels good to know that someone has a look from time to time. The author Juliette Benzoni (1920 - 2016) deserves only the Best. Have a very nice day. Laramie1960 Laramie1960 (talk) 11:44, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Laramie1960 - thanks for your star and message
There are a lot of guidelines in the Manual of style covering the use of fonts - bold, italic etc, Date format, last names, and lots of other aspects - I doubt anyone knows them all - after nearly 10 years, I certainly don't.
Your article on Juliette Benzoni could do with some more references, but it is an impressive start - Arjayay (talk) 14:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello Arjayay, you have no idea how I would love to give as many references as possible. Everything I added there is true, I have the material which was shared with me by the deceased Juliette Benzoni. This bestselling author sold millions of books all over the world. Her bestseller Catherine is now re-issued in England. I had been afraid to link too many times to two websites which the author approved (also her daughter) Some of my links were deleted, this gave me the idea I had over-linked. Thanks for your nice words, I really give my best, English is not my native tongue, I am Swiss. Best to you, Laramie1960 Laramie1960 (talk) 15:57, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Help very much appreciated...

Good evening Arjayay, My head is spinning from adding references, correcting my "not-so-good-English". I have been to see so many pages of various authors in English and other languages. I already know that it could be better what I do. I will not give up of course. I am smiling because of the source you want for my claim that Juliette was called the “Daughter of Dumas”. It is late now, but I will bring it tomorrow. I got all the details, because the author while she still lived shared all the material she had with me. The problem is, some of the facts cannot be seen anywhere, because this author was born in 1920 and we have Wikipedia or is it Internet only since 2001. (I read that today while searching for something)In this case, I believe I will have to link to a French article about her death last year. The fifty million readers... ah thats a challenge to find again where I read that. I shall deliever it or if I cannot cite it, I will delete my claim, But I will find it. The overlinking problem, how did you mean that? I link to the same source again or on a same subject? I am eager to learn and I take all advice with pleasure. You have noticed of course that English is not my native tongue. This is not meant as an excuse, but it is a handycap as I realize now. Thanks again for going over my article. Best to you Laramie1960 (talk) 21:24, 23 August 2017 (UTC) Laramie1960 p.s of course I found everything before I went to the land of dreams yesterday. I will correct the article today.

Dhanbad

Hi you don't have corrected information and whatever I have edited in Page Dhanbad is based on information gathered local from govt. Institution Abhishek singh 10:06, 26 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhishek058 (talk • contribs)

Hi Abhishek058
Firstly, please put new posts at the bottom of the page, with a title, not in the middle of the page
Secondly, please sign all posts on talk pages with 4 tildes ( ~~~~ ) which will add your signature and a timestamp
Finally, As I stated on your talk page, you need to cite a reliable source for any changes or additions - the Jharkhand article uses the 2011 census as reported on this site which states Jamshedpur has a population of 1,339,438, Dhanbad has 1,196,214 and Ranchi 1,120,374 - Arjayay (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Bardhaman

I am convinced that you are adding Hindi language as a language in the Burdwan city article repeatedly.That's not right.The Bengali people living Bardhaman and their Mother language Bengali.As a result, Bangla and English should be in the language as the the city.I deleted Hindi language of you added several times before but you are adding Hindi again and again.That's not right.As a result, I think you will refrain from adding the Hindi language to this article.If you have something to say please contact me on my talk page.Thank you. খাঁ শুভেন্দু (talk) 15:34, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Shuvendu, thank you for your post. I see that you have, yet again, deleted Hindi from the article, without giving any sort of explanation whatsoever.
When reverting your last deletion on 12 August, I explained the reason for my revert in my edit summary "Unexplained deletion"
I also see that, only 4 days ago, you were warned about making edits without an edit summary here. Unless you explain why you are deleting something, many experienced editors will revert your deletion, as they do not know why you have made the deletion.
Please ensure you include an edit summary in ALL your future edits - thank you - Arjayay (talk) 16:02, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

List of school shootings in the United States

The edit summary for the last edit to this article by 90.255.50.126 needs to be suppressed for obvious reasons. Thanks Hmains (talk) 15:45, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Hmains - whilst I don't disagree with you, I'm not an admin - I have, however requested it be Rev-del'd by one of the admins willing to handle such requests - Arjayay (talk) 16:16, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

And it has now been done - Arjayay (talk) 16:19, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for all Hmains (talk) 16:56, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Controversy over my edit on "bisht"

Sir please read the reference before rechanging my edits i dont know on what basis you edit pages.In the reference that already exists on the page the book by ramilla bisht it states that bishts are rajputs /kshatrias that belong to india not nepal and in the second reference it states that a certain group of people in west nepal they change their surname to higher class bishts not that they are bishts please dont threaten me that i will be blocked how do i make all the people read the references please tell me i am not vandelising wikipedia Up-16 (talk) 17:50, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

@Up-16: Let's restrict this discusion to Talk:Bisht instead of scattering it over talk pages of multiple users. You can ping different users on the article's talk page using {{ping|username}}. The Ramila Bisht reference does not mention that Bishts belong only to India: feel free to make this claim with a source that actually supports it. Until then, please don't remove sourced content. utcursch | talk 20:54, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Sir i saw that you added the nepal thing again sir can i please urge you stop doing that.Sir i saw that you do not live in india or in the indian subcontinent for that matter so i know that knowing the demographics here can be hard but sir it is impossible to find rock hard evidences that bishts do not exist in nepal.The rautes have only coppied the surname and the choudhary thing sir i urge you to do a google search or visit almora sometimes i would like to take you to the district magistrates office that keeps such records but showing the records to you is impossibe.they have merely coppied the surname to boost their status that does not make them an actual bisht (as you can read in the reference provided)like if i change my surname to clinton that does not make one Up-16 (talk) 11:25, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Up-16 as stated by utcursch above, please restrict this discussion to Talk:Bisht, and please stop deleting cited information - Arjayay (talk) 11:29, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

If i restrict my discussion there sir the. How can i directly explain my thoughts to the person who has reverted my content sir it took me 3 months of explaintaion to you people so that you add the rajput thing over there and now this. Sir i shall stop if you give me the correct reference and "cited" information that states that bishts exist in nepal please sir and by bisht i mean actual ones not those phonies Up-16 (talk) 11:35, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Up-16 Please restrict this discussion to Talk:Bisht - Arjayay (talk) 11:37, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Sir i have added my points in the talk:bisht chat please take a look at them Up-16 (talk) 12:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry...

...for this edit [1]! Its been a mess dealing with a vandal who has been reverting edits using a bot and hopping IPs. The disruption is to the point where I just revert the edits w/o checking and wait for the IP to be blocked. Thanks for catching my goof! Jiten Dhandha • talk • contributions • 12:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jiten Dhandha
No worries - we all make the occasional mistake (me especially) - I knew it wasn't deliberate, hence the lack of a warning. - Arjayay (talk) 12:24, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

"Do not restore or edit the blanked content" means ... you guess!

Hi, Arjayay.

I notice that you have deleted a duplicate word in Alexander Smith (poet), from a blanked section of the text that was under copyright review and headed "Investigation of potential copyright issue ... Do not restore or edit the blanked content on this page until the issue is resolved by an administrator, copyright clerk or OTRS agent."

Your correction would have been absolutely correct under other circumstances. I share your dislike of sloppy / wrong spelling, grammar, capitalisation etc, and there are amendments that I, too, would like to make, but the text is out of bounds. Your correction was not on the visible part of the page -- it was on the part of the grass that Wikipedia had marked very clearly as "Keep Off", and that was visible only under "History". Why on Earth did you do it? Wyresider (talk) 21:10, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Wyresider
When removing such typos, I open the pages directly into edit mode, I did not, therefore, see any warning.
"Find" jumps direct to the typo, I check the context, to make sure it really is a typo, and paste the correct text.
There is little point in previewing, as the process is (almost) foolproof, and the change is often very difficult to find (there are still 54 uses of "to" on that page).
I saw the edit warning when the page saved, and considered reverting myself, but changing "to to" to "to" is so trivial, it was not worth wasting time on. - Arjayay (talk) 15:54, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi again. I didn't realise there was a route to edit that by-passed the blanking panel. And reverting would have been pretty pointless, like you say. I guess from what you say that there's a semi-automatic tool for typo-finding? Heck, there's more to learn ABOUT Wiki than there is IN Wikipedia, and I've a long, long way to go! Anyway, thanks for replying, and I apologise for bothering you.

Wyresider (talk) 21:43, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Wyresider - No worries - There may well be a semi-automatic tool, but all I am doing is going down the searches listed in Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/Repetitions. Provided you have pop-ups enabled (Preferences > Gadgets > Browsing > Navigation popups) you can then hover over the article title and get one pop-up, hover over "actions" to get a second pop-up, and then click "edit". This opens directly in the edit page. - Arjayay (talk) 08:17, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Why are you not an admin?

I'm in no position to recommend anyone to be an admin, but it strike me how an editor can be so consistent, dedicated, passionate and cool-headed for such a long time, without having the mop. Darreg (talk) 21:58, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Darreg - I have been considering it - maybe I'll try as a celebration of my 10th anniversary of being on Wikipedia.
I've already had many of the standard admin problems:- insults, complaints, false reports to AIV, ANI, SPI etc., new accounts with similar names pretending to be me, attempts to usurp my account by changing my password, etc.
What is putting me off at the moment is the week long "interview" - I need to find an entire week when I know, in advance, that I'll be available to answer questions. - Arjayay (talk) 08:37, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

I´d vote for you. You´re a sort of benevolent WP-version of Beetlejuice or Candyman. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:17, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Gråbergs Gråa Sång - though it does depend which Candyman you are referring to - this one? - Arjayay (talk) 12:36, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Arjayay

Arjayay

Arjayay

Arjayay

Arjayay

....Aaaaargh! ;) — fortunavelut luna 12:43, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Curses, my secret is out !! - Arjayay (talk) 12:46, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

That's the one, but the summoning goes

Recieve!

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:26, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Great! I'll support 100%. Can't wait to see "a request for admin is open for discussion" again. Darreg (talk) 21:34, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

ASAP Bari

Hey, you reverted my changes to the ASAP Bari article, even though what I wrote is actually right:

Following the success of ASAP Mob, Kamoni Chandler, also known as ASAP K, founded the streetwear label VLONE in 2011. After a falling out, Shelton, who had previously been the head of A$AP Rocky's merchandise during his tours[2], bullied Chandler out of the brand and took over. All connections to Chandler were concealled, and Shelton started to present himself as the founder. Shelton brought in Edison Chen of CLOT, who handles all the design work of the label.

Please put these changes back in again. The current article states facts that aren't true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:69:AF52:AE53:F47C:8193:7B72:9A11 (talk) 14:26, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Hardwell & Friends Vol. 1

An article that you have been involved in editing—Hardwell & Friends Vol. 1—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. — Zawl 10:14, 7 September 2017 (UTC)