User talk:Rayabhari/Archive 3

Coconut oil

Your addition to Coconut oil has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. [1] --Ronz (talk) 16:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

From the help desk

You may be able to help with this help desk question about Shankaranarayana. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:45, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Harappa

I've reverted you because this seems to be your own viewpoint. Please read WP:NOR and WP:VERIFY. To see what sort of sources we should use, read WP:RS. And what is Hissar.nic.in which you use for a source in Rakhigarhi? I note that article mentions some living people, that really needs sourcing also. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:29, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you need any advice or help?

Hi, Dougweller has mentioned to me that you appear to be struggling a little with our policies and guidelines. He has also said that he considers you to be acting in good faith, which is a good sign. I have been editing a lot here over the last 18 months or so and a lot of what I do is related to Indian articles, with a fair few Pakistan etc ones in the mix also. I won't claim to know every policy but I do know my way around. If you need any guidance then just leave a note here and I'll pick it up - I have added this page to my watchlist. - Sitush (talk) 16:13, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I have been developing articles on Indus Valley Civilisation sites over last one week or so.some of my edits/page creations are Rakhigarhi,Banawali,Chanhudaro,Manda, Jammu,Rangpur,Gola Dhoro etc. Am I doing in a right manner, with citations, neutral point etc. this I want to know. can you glance my contributions and give a word? thank you. Rayabhari (talk) 16:21, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I certainly can and will! Can I just point something out to you about talk page comments? What we usually do here when we reply to someone is start our reply with a colon (:), If the previous message already had one or more colons in front of it, then we start our reply with one more than that had. This causes the messages to stagger neatly down the talk page section and so makes it easier to read who said what, and when. Although you should not usually edit someone else's comment (not even for an obvious spelling mistake) I have added a colon to your reply above as a way of demonstrating this: you will see that your reply is stepped in from my original question, and that this reply of mine is stepped in from yours.

I'll try to look at some of your contributions later this evening. - Sitush (talk) 16:38, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and I moved moved your signature up a bit. Add it right after the end of your last sentence, rather than on a separate line. You'll get the hang of it. - Sitush (talk) 16:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you.Rayabhari (talk) 16:44, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

^That^ is perfect formatting of a reply, Well done. - Sitush (talk) 16:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Daimabad - edit review

You have made three edits to Daimabad.

• This one adds an infobox and is not bad at all. What you have to watch out for with infoboxes is that you do not add information to them that is unsourced in the article. If you are absolutely desperate then you could add the source inside the box, but it is not really a great idea because the box is intended as a quick summary of key points mentioned in the article. So, you might want to just check it over to ensure that all the things you added in there are sourced.

  A common mistake made with infoboxes for settlements, cities, districts etc is to include the Indian flag with {{flagicon|India}}. Alas, this is wrong, according to our WP:MOSFLAG guideline. Just name the country ... and you do not need to link the country, since our WP:OVERLINKS guideline says not to do so (most people should hopefully know that India is a country!)

• Your second edit is also fine - you are just correcting something that you did.
• The third edit is a bit more messy. I think that it is probably safe to say that the source you use is a reliable source, and I notice that the article already uses it elsewhere. However, there are various ways of creating a citation and almost always you should follow the style that already exists when you first edit an article. I know that a lot of people do not realise this and things can end up being a messy mix of different styles, but it is what you should do.

  In the case of this article, it seems that Template:Cite book is mostly being used and so that is the one that you should follow. As it happens, it is also the one that I think is easiest for newcomers to understand because it provides prompts for information and you can just fill in the blanks. In the case of the cite that you added

  • <ref>Singh,Upinder, A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century[http://books.google.co.in/books?id=H3lUIIYxWkEC&pg=PA229&lpg=PA229&dq=Daimabad&source=bl&ots=xccy3QeRgD&sig=4VrbXMwjPNBDci-067WIOhMHNyc&hl=en&ei=IFp-TJbqC4-2vQP5ib2EDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CDUQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=Daimabad&f=false]</ref> becomes
  • <ref>{{cite book |first=Singh |last=Upinder |title=A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century |year=2008 |publisher=Pearson Education |location=Delhi |url=http://books.google.co.in/books?id=H3lUIIYxWkEC&pg=PA229 |page= |isbn= |accessdate=25 June 2012}}</ref>
• You will notice that there are blanks for the page and isbn details. That is because you did not supply the page number or isbn (you really should do).

There are a couple of other issues with that last contribution but I'll let you digest all the stuff above first and perhaps amend what you did. If all your stuff is of this standard, and if you can bear in mind my points above, then you are well on the way to being a valuable contributor. - Sitush (talk) 17:34, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

All the observations and guidance are Ok for me and very clear for me, thanks for encouragement "stuff". Pl go through Gola dhoro and give some inputs/edit review. Thanks a lot.Rayabhari (talk) 17:44, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Can we just finish up on this article first? Then I'll check your amendments and you can apply your new-found knowledge in fixing any similar issues with your edits at Gola Dhoro before I look at it. I think that you will learn faster if we do it that way. - Sitush (talk) 17:48, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, That's right.Ok.thankyou.Rayabhari (talk) 18:07, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure if that has gone quite to plan, but don't panic! You did this, changing |subdivision_name = {{flag|India}} to |subdivision_name = [[flag|India]] What it should say is |subdivision_name = India

You've also somehow split a sentence with a reference (probably, you accidentally pasted something).I've fixed these for you: to make it more obvious, I reverted your edit and then put in the correct version. Do you have a way to check the isbn? I don't think that it is correct. - Sitush (talk) 18:38, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much. splitting of sentanace for reference, I think I did it intentionally and not knowingly the correct way. ISBN Number - I think the number is as printed in the book. I will try to further check it. I am so sure, your guidance will help me for future edits.thank you.Rayabhari (talk) 03:30, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem. See if you can find that isbn number ... and how about you have a go at checking your Gola Dhoro contributions, then I will review them? - Sitush (talk) 09:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I am trying to put the citations in correct way,right now, will be done shortly. thank you. When writers of a book are 4 in numbers, how to put it? Like :"Kuldeep K. Bhan, V. H. Sonawane, P. Ajithprasad & S. Pratapchandran"

The {{cite book}} template allows for more than one author. For example, {{cite book |first1=Kuldeep K. |last1=Bhan |first2=V. H. |last2=Sonawane |first3=P. |last3=Ajithprasad |first4=S. |last4=Pratapchandran ... There is a limit to how many can be shown like this but I am fairly sure that I have managed to list four in this way. Try it and let me know. - Sitush (talk) 11:40, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I am finding it little confusing to add citation the way you specified. I have done some efforts. Pl. check Gola Dhoro. Thank you.Rayabhari (talk) 16:18, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Gola Dhoro - edit review

I have looked at this series of edits. The cover what you have done on 25/26 June (so far!). You are almost spot-on, which is great news.

When you are citing more than one page (eg: you did "|page=221,401"), change it to "|pages=221, 401". That is, add an "s" to "page" and stick a space between them. You can also cite a range of pages using the same basic idea, eg: "|pages=222-223".

Where I think your confusion is appearing is actually nothing to do with the {{cite book}} bit. You have started two completely different citations with <ref name=McIntosh> The shorter <ref> would be better in this instance.

What you have done is something called named references and they can be very handy. If, for example, I wrote an article where I wanted to cite page 221 of McIntosh in 3 or 4 different places, then in the first place I would say <ref name="McIntoshp221">, then use the {{cite book}} template and end with </ref> as normal. But for all the other places where I wanted to cite p. 221 I could just type <ref name="McIntoshp221" /> and the system automatically connects everything together when the article is displayed - it can save a lot of work!

The difficulty in your case is that you have used the same ref name=McIntosh for two completely different citations (same book, but different pages). The system becomes as confused as you are!

Does this make sense? I can try a different way of explaining it. In fact, if you want we could work on an example using your sandbox, which is a great place to try things out without breaking anything that matters.

Either way, I apologise if you think that I am talking down to you/treating you as if you were a 5 year-old or whatever. I don't do a lot of this type of detailed guidance work, so I am learning also. - Sitush (talk) 18:02, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for sparing so much of your time to guide me. If the treatment is as if I am basic student, it suits me and OK as I am a starting student in technical aspects of citation, neutrality etc. I think I can use sand box, so that main article appears neat and clean. I have also done some other edits to places belonging to List of Indus Valley Civilisation sites. Apart from technical details like style of citation etc., I am a little bit concerned about neutral point of view and also usefulness of my edits.e.g.Shikarpur, Gujarat, Manda,Jammu etc. Whether such style of writing the article / edits are acceptable? Thank you.Rayabhari (talk) 03:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll take a look. First, though, could you go back to Gola Dhoro and just check what I have done with your cites - hopefully they look good now. If they do, then the other citations in the article would benefit from the same treatment because at present they are little more than barelinks. I've also got a query that you might be able to answer: the article says "(The Bagasra link shown in this article is about the Village located in Amreli, Gujarat and not the real Bagasra which is in Gulf of Kutch.)" - which Bagasra is the IVC site near, the Gulf or Amreli?

Oh, I should add that I am in the UK, so we are probably in different time zones. That is why you are going to see lags between some of your posts and my replies. - Sitush (talk) 12:08, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Regarding Bagasra, that one full sentance was in the beginning of the article, before I edited the article. Instead of deleting altogether, I kept it at the bottom, although it appears that Bagasra link and that information may not be necessary for this article and it can be altogether deleted!? The time lag applies equally for my posts also! Moreover, it is also a fact that I may not be able to attend some of your posts immediately, which I apologise, because, I may attend only after my office hours! However, your guidance is of immense help for me.

I am a little bit concerned about neutral point of view and also usefulness of my edits.e.g.Shikarpur, Gujarat, Manda,Jammu etc. can you comment on this aspect?Rayabhari (talk) 12:36, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

If it is the wrong place then the wording needs to be changed. We should remove the link and say something like "Bagasra, on the Gulf of X". What we should not do is have our own commentary in an article, and the sentence that I quoted reads like commentary to me.

I've taken a look at Shikarpur, Gujarat and see absolutely no problems regarding "usefulness" - it is clearly notable. I've done a fair amount of tidying up, which you probably should step through if you want to develop your skills, but right now I cannot really check your POV concerns. I remove the word "interesting" because that is clearly an opinion that might not be shared by other people, but as far as the rest of it goes we need page numbers for the citations - could you fix those? - Sitush (talk) 13:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I am putting the page numbers, after that tage to removed. by whom? The tidying up part - I am doing it for later edits with more care. thank you.Rayabhari (talk) 13:29, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) If you have added the page number(s) then you can delete the {{Pn}} - it is that which causes "Page needed" to appear. - Sitush (talk) 13:32, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see that the page numbers are the same for that set of citations. This means that you can use the shorthand method. Call the first citation something like <ref name="Singhp158"> and replace all the other citations of page 158 with <ref name="Singhp158" />.You will see layout of the References section becomes much neater. (I'll check the sources later today, but you can do this change as soon as you feel like it). - Sitush (talk) 13:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for suggesting shorthand method. I will use in next edits. Today I have created one page Sanauli (another IVC site) and tried to adopt your guidance as far as possible. Please have a look at it.Rayabhari (talk) 13:17, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I have received a message regarding disambiguiation, of which I am clear what to do in most of cases. But in case of Harappan, will it be OK if I replace all Harappan with Indus Valley Civilisaton?Thank you.Rayabhari (talk) 05:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

That would be one way to deal with it. Another would be to do it as I did a couple of days ago here, ie: [[Indus Valley Civilisation|Harappan]] - that causes "Harappan" to appear in the article but if someone clicks on it then they are taken to the IVC article.

I'll take a look at Sanauli now, but thereafter I'll probably not have internet access until Sunday night. - Sitush (talk) 10:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, can you add pages numbers for the Bhan, Kuldeep K.; Sonawane, V. H.; Ajithprasad, P.; Pratapchandran source in the Shikapur article, please. If there are no numbers in the PDF document, you can still work out what page it is by counting or using the "current page" info shown in your PDF reader. - Sitush (talk) 10:35, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I will add page numbers of PDF document of Shikarpur Article. I will do in the evening. Thank you. Rayabhari (talk) 10:39, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Gola Dhoro (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Harappan

Indus Valley Civilization (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Manda

Kuntasi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rangpur

Mitathal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Harappan

Pirak (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Harappan

Surkotada (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rangpur

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)