User talk:Soni/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

In response to your feedback

TheOriginalSoni, good luck, and have fun. --Harkey (talk) 21:05, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for creating an account and thank you for your feedback. Don't forget you can always get help by typing {{helpme}} on this page. Is there anything more that we can help with right now?

Harkey (talk) 21:06, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

 

Clarity vs content

I would always go for a clear concise article. If you need to cut some text that you are unsure about, you can paste it onto the talk page with an explanation of why it was cut. A rambling load of trivia is not what Wikipedia is about.--Harkey (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Is there any wikipedia guideline that states preference between these two types of articles? I would be happy to link to such articles, if I get involved in a discussion regarding why the information was deleted. Also, what is wikipedia, and what is it not about? Thanks :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Try reading Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. That should help in any debate.--Harkey (talk) 21:43, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

This might also be helpful Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia!! --Harkey (talk) 21:58, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok thanks. :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Help

Note that new sections go at the bottom; using the 'New section' tab will place them automatically. What else did you need help with? Dru of Id (talk) 21:50, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok thanks. And should tables be supplemented or replaced with timelines, wherever relevant? (Timelines are obviously a lot clearer, but then tables are also helpful. But one major problem is that tables take up too much of page space, lowering article readablity) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

That's the kind of thing that you should draft in your sandbox, then request feedback on at the article talk page. Whichever people think is the better presentation should be included, or if they feel both work. You can have multiple sandboxes, or could include several similar subjects in the same one, 'Discographies', 'Playoff brackets', whatever. Dru of Id (talk) 01:20, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Soni, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! heather walls (talk) 07:08, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Your Help Is Needed

Hey,

It seems as if no one objected to my image change proposal concerning the "Ciara" article are you still up to helping me change it? --Akiradevon1 (talk) 03:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Done :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 03:54, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. You're so nice :)--Akiradevon1 (talk) 11:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Victorian Bushrangers.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Victorian Bushrangers.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:06, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Lassi for you ! ! !

DBigXray has given you a glass of chilled Lassi with mint. Thanks for staying calm and civil! Lassi promotes WikiLove by making you cooler and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a lassi, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!

As you are not a Terrorist hope you will enjoy editing here. --DBigXray 18:54, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Spread the lovely, cool, sweet goodness of Lassi by adding {{subst:Lassi}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks. But actually I dont prefer drinking lassi. Can I have a glass of virgin cuba libre please :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Umm no, that is not good for health but Lassi is. I wont be handing you a harmful thing for obvious reasons. --DBigXray 21:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Ohk Thnx :)

Please comment on Talk:Dahn yoga

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Dahn yoga. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

I have not been "brainwashed" by dahn yoga. I've never done it, nor had I heard of it until the recent request for comment (RFC), an RFC that I see you yourself received an invitation to participate in. If you go to the article's talk page, you will see four users agreed that the article is written like an advertisement. Why on Earth you would think my changes were made to portray Dahn yoga sound better, I don't know. You should read the comments on the talk page and see that the consensus is to remove the promotional material, a difficult process that I am attempting to do step by step. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 11:56, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

In that case both of us are on the same side. I was under the impression that those edits were made by you. Someone removed the paragraphs starting "Some Dahn Yoga reports in the media describes accusations that the organization operates a manipulative "cult"..." (and other related paragraphs), and I saw it was you. So I reverted back, and put that message on your talk page.

Sorry for the inconvinience, if any :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Hm, looking at it now, I can see how you would get that impression. Like I said, it's a pretty big mess, and although I did a handful of edits the first time around, the reversion I did does look like it's putting back some questionable material while removing some legitimate information. I'm looking through the history to see how I did that. Glad we worked it out though. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 15:41, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes. :) Lets see what can be done to make that article better TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:44, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Osama Bin Laden

It's more a de facto rule. Ideally, a nominator who puts forward an article for assessment should have contributed, in some form or another. While I did state that was the principal reason for failing the article, it does not conform to the GA criteria: the lead does not summarize the article sufficiently, there are several dead links and prose is dubious in parts. If you want to take this to GAC in the future, do consult with the major contributors of the article (perhaps on its talkpage) as this is one of Wikipedia's most read articles. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 16:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Actually the reason I nominated the article was because the last Good Article nomination was failed because of some minor problems, all of which were later resolved. So I concluded from the information that the article must have been good enough, save these 2-3 mistakes.

The dead links have been removed, as far as I could have done it. For the dablinks, I could not find where they were. It will be nice of you, if you can please check both these things, and see if it has been done correctly and please correct it, if it isnt.

For the prose, i will try to see what I can do to make it better. Can you please suggest what will make the lead intro better? Because in my opinion, it looks pretty much ok, in so far as the information is concerned [The only major difference is the lack of the word terrorist, which has been omitted for obvious reasons]

Thanks,

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:22, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see. For the lead, take a look at WP:LEAD. Lead should be a summary for the entire article, giving the ordinary reader adequate information about the subject. Look at similar articles for inspiration, ones which have passed GA and FA, like Barack Obama for instance -- that is the sort of length an article on the World's Most Wanted man (at one point) needs. Perhaps place the article on WP:Peer Review to get a thorough assessment on what needs to be done. It's 75% there, some areas could be developed and a Peer Review will iron out bits you are unconcerned about. - Lemonade51 (talk) 16:39, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll do my best to better it. Meanwhile, it will be very helpful if some of the errors I am likely to miss can just be pointed out so that the article can be of the requisite standard.

Can you also please help me to resolve the NPOV issues of this article - Sino-Indian War I know it is not neutral, but I dont know exactly which portions will be best removed to give it neutrality. Thanks TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:49, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Trout!

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

For opening an RfC to propose vandalizing an article. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 10:42, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Regarding adoption

Hi TheOriginalSoni. I notice you've put a "request for adoption" template on your userpage. Given the number of users starting on the encyclopedia each day and the number who look for adoption, there can often be a backlog when just displaying the request. You are much more likely to find an adopter if you are pro-active about it, perhaps asking an editor or two from the list of adopters if they would consider adopting you? Good luck in finding someone to help out. Worm^TT(talk) 10:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. But actually I have not been able to be very active on wikipedia as of late, and so am unable to contribute full time to it. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

That's not a problem, real life should always come first. Would you like me to remove the request for the time being? You can re-add it when you have more time to contribute. Worm^TT(talk) 11:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Thanks TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello TheOriginalSoni, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

---

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

• Table of contents

• Department directory

Need help?

• Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
• Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.
• Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

• Article wizard — a Wizard to help you create articles
• The simplified ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
• Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

How you can help:

• Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.

• Community portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...

• Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.

• If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Just a question I have on wikipedia - Clarity vs content

I have often seen bad wikipedia articles that contain tons of information that is completely incomprehensible. And usually, when it is to be bettered, it involves the cropping of a lot of data involved to usefully display only a part of it in a concise and better manner.

Is wikipedia just a storehouse of information or is the main aim to be understandable? (By the latter, I DO NOT imply breaking things into layman terms, but using the correct approaches to display the given information, and removing any information that may be potentially useless from the article's readablity point of view, but still might have been considered useful were one to make an exhaustive storehouse of information) If its the latter, then shouldnt the approach of editors be being more expressive without losing the technicality?

For example, I recently edited Sweet Child o' Mine wherein I added the Legacy section, instead of the messed up Cover Versions. It necessarily involved cropping of some, if not a lot, of involved. Would this be considered a good edit?

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 09:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Kinetic Finance Limited Scam

The article Kinetic Finance Limited Scam has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nouniquenames 06:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Kinetic Finance Limited Scam for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kinetic Finance Limited Scam is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kinetic Finance Limited Scam until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Nouniquenames 15:47, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Abdul Hakeem, Pakistan

Hello, just letting you know I removed your prod on the above article as you didn't give a reason for deletion as required.

Thank you. Rotten regard Softnow 00:47, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey. Thanks for that. But I believe that while adding reasons for our actions is important, it is not a necessary condition for performing what is appropriate, and not specifying any reason as such is not reason enough to be reverted. [Do let me know if I am wrong though]. (Personally I find it cumbersome, and prefer not to give any reasons if I believe my actions are apparent/correct enough).

Regarding the deletion of content and the subsequent PROD, I did so as per WP:notablity. There was nothing in the article which spoke even distantly of any notablity, and the only way to clean the badly written article was to blank out anything not important. As it turned out, it was just the opening line that remained, leading me to add the PROD. Should you agree to my POV, please do rePROD it, or add it to AfD [or whatetevr is necessary] If not, then I myself shall start an AfD soon enough on the same lines. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:15, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

With a proposed deletion there is a definite requirement to give a reason. As to the removal of large parts of the text, well they were largely unreferenced so no telling how accurate or not they may be. As this article is claiming to be about a city, then if said location actually exists it would almost certainly be notable. So I think an afd would be best. Rotten regard Softnow 14:58, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

My bad. Did not see it. Thanks.

Because this PROD was tagged and removed because of a misunderstanding, can a PROD be tagged again? The only reason for you untagging (I suppose) was not specifying the reason for it. Does it constitute enough circumstance for the article to be not tagged PROD again? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

If you still think it should be deleted then an afd is needed. Rotten regard Softnow 19:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

thanks TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:54, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Featured article candidate

I noticed that you began the process to nominate Isaac Newton as a Featured article candidate. I appreciate that you are acting in good faith, but nominators are expected to actively respond to suggested improvements during the FAC; this is difficult, if not impossible, for nominators who have not significantly participated in the article and are not familiar with the sources.
I have withdrawn the nomination at this time. If you feel that the article meets the featured article criteria, please consult the principal contributors to the article (as required per the featured article candidate instructions) to request their participation in a future nomination. Best of luck to you. Maralia (talk) 22:55, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Umm... Sorry but is there any rule in Wikipedia that articles whose original writers have not nominated them do not have a chance to get nominated. I remember getting stuck on that once before, where it was clarified that it is not the case.

My opinion is that the article is good enough to make through the FA process (or atleast get GA status) as is.

As for contacting the original writers, almost every [major] change to the article happened more than 4 year ago, leaving not many editors with significant changes active at all.

I do believe that the article does indeed require a chance to go to FA status even if it is without any major editors at the moment. I personally shall try my best to sew the ends in whatever problems exist in the article [If I cant, I believe somebody might be willing to.]

Therefore I ask you to reinstate the withdrawn FA nomination TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:38, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

No, there is no rule that articles whose original writers have not nominated them do not have a chance to get nominated. However, there is a rule that nominators who are not significant contributors to the article must consult those who are. I touched on the reasons for this in my post above: nominators need to be intimately familiar with the article and the sources because they are responsible for addressing concerns raised by reviewers. As far as the rules go, technically you could ask the significant contributors for their input, and then nominate the article if they are not opposed—but you would be hard pressed to respond to feedback at FAC without having worked on the article.

I really don't mean to be discouraging; the article is in fairly decent shape, and it's an important topic that could be a great FA with some work. A FAC at this point would be one-sided, though, with reviewers raising concerns that could not be researched and answered within the usual timeframe of a couple of weeks. I would suggest enlisting the help of other editors, familiarizing yourself with the highest-quality sources, and starting with peer review or GAC. Maralia (talk) 07:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I shall send this article over to Peer Review at once, and see if WikiProject Science can do something to help elevate the article's standard. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 07:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Re: New editors

Re your message: I believe that my handling of the editor's edits was correct. He has for months been trying to add links to his business' website to Valley of Flowers National Park. If you review the edit history of the article, you will see that he has been using multiple IPs and accounts since my interaction with him to try to get the links added and he has been reverted several times by different editors: [1][2][3][4][5][6] and the account Trekforall (talk · contribs). -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. From the website name, and the homepage, it looked very much like a site about the place, without any affliation to any business. It was under close look only that I realised that.

And I was unaware that he was using multiple accounts and IP - I was under the sole impression that he was a good faith editor who tried to put pictures without realising why they were not suitable TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Hala, Sindh

Hello, just letting you know I removed the prod from the above article as it's about a town and therefore likely notable. Thank you. Rotten regard Softnow 22:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I am putting up the article on AfD. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

From Bekdm

Hi! I'm kinda new to wiki and have no idea how to answer to you properly, so let it be here for now :) What I meant about translating an article - it would be nice to have some wiki-tool to quickly add a translation to existing article. I thought I could find some "Add translation" button. Bekdm (talk) 13:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

The problem with that idea is that this encyclopedia is in English, and that happens to be the only language which the articles are written in. For any other language, we use THAT language only. Hope I answered your question. If its not the case, or you have any further questions, please do say. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm starting to understand, that wiki.riteme.site and ru.wikipedia.org are different sites, but despite the fact they share links on translations (some of them exist on both languages and even more), those translations are actually different articles, not one article in different languages. And that's the problem. Bekdm (talk) 14:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Exactly. But I dont think there is any problem with that. There may be many things about Putin which might be of a lot more interest to readers in Russian, but maybe not so much for Englsh readers. Here both the wikis are independant and that makes it sure that English readers do not have to go through say the list of songs he likes.. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

No offence meant

Edit summaries

Hello TheOriginalSoni,
Thanks for you efforts to improve Wikipedia. It seems however that you don't think that you need to explain your edits (your comments from previous posts), but if you are going to delete substantial sections of pages (like here at Ganish including several sources, and here, and also here) then it is a very good idea to do so. A simple RVV (revert vandalism), unsourced, or similar is all that is required. See Wikipedia:Edit summary legend for more acronyms, and also Edit summary. I hope these pages are of some help. Regards, 220 of ^Borg 20:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks TheOriginalSoni (talk) 07:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation links

Hello, TheOriginalSoni. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. However, I'm afraid your recent edits to many pages changing links to Militant to point to Militant (disambiguation) were incorrect. Articles should only rarely link to disambiguation pages, and only when the ambiguity of the term is relevant to the context in which the link appears. Just because the meaning is not particularly clear does not mean that the disambiguation page is the most appropriate target. In this particular case, there actually is a separate article, militant (word), that discusses the various uses of the word, and which may be a more appropriate target for unclear links. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 14:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I understand your concern at what I did, especially after the number of links that I converted. But as you would see, the militant(word) article was only discussing the usage of the word as it was, and not the word itself. Clearly it was not the place to be linked to. As of when my editing was done, the article actually linked to the words insurgent and terrorist, neither of which could be best describing the term, though being very good at explaining them. Therefore, the first line of the article then was much better at explaining the term than the three other pages I could have linked to. Therefore I thought it appropriate to link it to the disambiguation page itself. If you still believe my actions were incorrect, please do let me know. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:16, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, I don't agree with the removal of the links to insurgent and terrorist from the disambiguation page, but that's another matter. It seems to me that if the article that uses the word "militant" is referring to an insurgent or a terrorist, the link ought to go to insurgent or terrorist as the case may be. If we can't tell what it is referring to, it either ought to be left for someone else to disambiguate, or perhaps pointed to Wiktionary (for the dictionary definition of the word) or to militant (word) if the context suggests that the term was being used in a deliberately vague or euphemistic way. Linking it to the disambiguation page just sweeps the problem under the rug instead of fixing it. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:11, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree that my solution was not the best one that could have been. But I went with the reasoning that something is better than nothing, and did what I did. If it caused any problems, then I apologise.

That being said, linking it to terrorist or insurgent was not useful. While being very similar on many occasions, all three words have very different meaaning and usages. Linking to wither of them was NOT going to work. And as for the militart(word), the article is only useful when discussing how the word has affected English language, and its usages in the language - NOT the word itself. Therefore I went with the best I could, which was to link to the disamb page. I believe it was the best fix at the time, and you may believe otherwise.

Finally, what can be done about the article now is to first separate the disamb page from the actual page, and expand on the actual page. That my edits need to be reverted after this is done goes without saying. When done, the militant page must be describing militants in a way the terrorist and insurgent pages do, making sure to draw a line between the three. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 06:24, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Notability of places

Hello TheOrginalSoni. You asked about notability guidelines for places and geographical features. They are here: WP:NGEO. Best regards, The Interior (Talk) 10:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.

Hello. Can you please tell me what is the rule for railway stations? Are they also considered inherently considered notable. I dont see why they should be though. I am trying to get bad article Dildarnagar Railway Station deleted, but it was dePRODed for that reason. Can you tell me if the article should be deleted? I certainly think so TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:33, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:STATION before nominating. The Interior (Talk) 18:43, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Su-kam Power Systems Edit

Hi,

I wanted to understand the reason for deletion of the 'awards and recognition' category from Su-kam Power Systems wiki page.Ankursharma88 (talk) 15:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, half the things written there were in bold. Wikipedia has quite a bit of rules when it comes to writing in bold.

Secondly, what awards the company has won in some obscure award will be trivia. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of facts. The awards section was not going to be any way helpful to the article's understanding, but was giving it the look of an advertisment. The article was actually good, compared to other new articles, and its level must be mantained, not decreased. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

[If you want a more technical answer conforming to actual guidelines, I can manage that too]

If I remove the bold and also some of the awards will it be acceptable such that it doesn't look like an advertisement? Because I feel some of the recognitions are important for the quality of the article.Ankursharma88 (talk) 16:55, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Do it, and then let's see if the article looks any better. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:59, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Image Help

{{Help me}} - I want to kill myself seeing the condition of the images at Dildarnagar (Ones that have been recently removed by me. Can anyone please Speedy delete those images [The whole batch of currency images]? I am not sure how to (Twinkle isnt showing an option for CSD). Thanks TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

The images are not on en-wiki - they are on commons. On the image page, under the image you will see "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below." - click the link on "description page there" link. Either use the nominate for deletion in the toolbox in the left margin - or look at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Speedy_deletion.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:57, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

{{Help me}} - Can anyone help fix my archive and archive box so that it can be autoupdated? [The box too]. If needed be, please change the archiving format, moving the current archives to a new archive number.

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:TheOriginalSoni/Archive/2012/April http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:TheOriginalSoni/Archive/2012/June http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:TheOriginalSoni/Archive/2012/July http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:TheOriginalSoni/Archive/2012/September

I'll see what I can do.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:05, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

You now have Archive 1 - it will change to Archive 2 when it exceeds 100k. I've added the indexing bot routine and the talk header to show the index and the archives. The index page won't fill until the bot runs (sometimes) - often around 1:30am GMT  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

That list

Thanks for summarising - I knew mine wasn't great. However, your delete !vote seems to me to be somewhat buried in text. Would it not be better to finagle it so that it appears on the left-hand side as per all the other votes? I know that the closer is supposed to review the entire thing (poor soul) but it took me a while to spot it and I was looking for the thing. - Sitush (talk) 12:30, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

NP. Thats what editors are for. To help each other around. Meanwhile I am looking to gain some Wiki-experience, especially with respect to building articles and citing. Can you help and teach a few tricks here and there?

Sure. I shall do it. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Ask any questions you want to ask on my talk page, when ever you want to ask them. I don't usually bother with talkback templates but if you don't want to add my page to your watchlist then just tell me and I'll make sure to let you know whenever I respond. - Sitush (talk) 12:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Just one question for the moment - How to find, add and verify citations? I have no idea how to do that to Osama bin Laden, which I am wishing to improve to GA. Are there any gadgets/tricks etc that help in doing that? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, let's start with the $64,000 question. <g> To find, you have to read. You can get a lot by using Google Search or similar, especially if you work out how best to form the search term. Google also has "Books", "News" and "Scholar", which often turn up different results. If you are using GBooks then you should never rely on anything that is only available to you in what they call "snippet view" - you cannot see the context because you only get a small part of the page. If you feel that there is something but you do not have the full context then you can always ask around and see if anyone has a copy of the book (or you could try a local library etc). We have a great facility at WP:RX where you can ask for copies of a few pages of something and it has a very good track record.

Obviously, you do not have to use sources that are only available online. You might have a book or a decent newspaper or something that you can read while sat in a chair having a cup of tea ... if it meets our reliable sources guideline then it will be ok to cite it in an article. I much prefer to have the entire thing in front of me than to see only bits of it online but life doesn't always work out like that.

Can I make a suggestion? Rather than wander on to explain how to add and verify citations, how about we try a little exercise in finding the sources first? You mention bin Laden above - do you have any other articles/subjects that you are interested in? I'll try to set you a few queries and you can let me know what you find when you dig around for the answers. It won't be anything complicated. Oh, and by the way, I am in the UK: if you are somewhere else then it is possible that we will not see the same results if we use Google or a similar search engine, but we'll worry about that if and when it happens. - Sitush (talk) 13:13, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thats brilliant. My primary interests are in Science and India. I basically prefer editing anything related to these issues, but am perfectly fine with any other topic too. ANd as you might have guessed, I am from India.. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:30, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, I sort something out. I've been awake for nearly 48 hours, though, so it probably won't happen until late tomorrow. I'm due some serious shuteye if only I can get to sleep in the first place. - Sitush (talk) 17:21, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Can you find some reliable sources where Amitabh Bachchan comments on the death of Bal Thackeray? - Sitush (talk) 12:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

12 Those are the only two I could find. The rest looked to be all copies of the same information. Though I am not sure which of the other sources are reliable... I am pretty sure TOI and Hindu are but are the other sites with this information reliable too? ANd is there anything else I might have missed? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:18, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

This exercise was quite easy to do since its very recent and much talked-about news... A harder challenge next time shall be better :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:18, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, start with the easy stuff. You were right to opt for The Hindu, which is by far the most reliable news source in India. Second-best would be the ToI but its standards are dropping nowadays and it is becoming more and more of a gossip rag. Since The Hindu covered it, anything else is redundant - al those other websites you refer to, etc. Also note that if a story is supplied by a press agency such as PTI or IANS then you will often find it repeated across numerous newspapers, but we should still prefer to use the most reliable of those papers.

Umm.. I thought The Statesman was most reliable of all newspapers, wasn't it? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:44, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

• Louis Dumont was a sociologist who wrote a lot about Indian society. Can you find anything decent written in, say, the last 20 years that says Dumont's theories are still ok? And some that say they are not? This is quite important because he is high-profile and so it is easy to quote him but we need to ensure that we cover all points of view and not just take him at his word. Also, we prefer modern stuff to old stuff: things change all the time, - Sitush (talk) 14:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

On it TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:44, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Summary on AFD of List of Castes

While adding a summary of arguments is certainly fine in the course of a long AFD, these should be kept at the chronological point of discussion so that new editors can understand the when and why that the summary was added. Putting that summary at the top of the AFD both hurts that and appears as trying to sway the AFD in one direction or another before editors have had a chance to read the arguments leading to that point. --MASEM (t) 17:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Alright. At that time I was really irritated by comments such as DreamFocus where he persistent in pushing forward his POV despite lacking any basic understanding of how the system works. And as for swaying the reader, I believed that if someone from the Keep side could add the relevant points, the summary could just be a good way of helping new editors joining in the discussion understand what the problems are. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Sure, there's nothing wrong with a summary (Which I did simply move, not remove, from the AFD), it's just planting it out of order and at the lead is not proper. --MASEM (t) 14:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

December 2012

Hello, I'm Wikiwind. I noticed that you recently removed some content from LGBT stereotypes without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! В и к и T 17:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure how that happened. It was certainly a mistake. Sorry for the inconvenience though. Thanks and cheers,

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:36, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

No worries, we all make mistakes ;)--В и к и T 17:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:55, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Sky City

• I remember hearing about this building, the prefab one that will only take 3 months. I came up with a hook, but as far as the building itself I'm not sure if I have anything interesting to add. "... that construction of the 220-story Sky City in Changsha, China, is expected to start in January 2013 and take only three months?" --Golbez (talk) 18:11, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Its just in the article expansion where I am stuck. I can do the general editing work, but when it comes to bringing in sources and citations and references (and images) and the sort, I really get stuck. So I would really appreciate it if you can help with adding more to the article.

Thanks for the hook. I shall be sure to consider it and try to propose it as an alternate one. Further discussion may be found at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Sky city. Feel free to jump in. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the message. Willing to help. I am not experienced in writing articles and have a busy week, but I have also been interested in the Sky City recently and am willing to contribute what I can. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 18:40, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Hoping to see some contributions from you. It would be great if you could locate a few sources and add some more information. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 04:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what "DYK" means or is. If your trying to create an article on Wikipedia about it, I think that the article would be in just fine shape to be posted. It'll just need a lot more work and information, and a non-copyrighted picture. If the "DYK standards" is something that is preventing you from posting it to Wikipedia, then I'll need more information on "DYK" before helping. But thanks for the offering! ST✪12 23:49, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK is the "Did you know" section that appears on the main page. But for an article to come to DYK, it needs to expand about five-fold in the past 7 days. I am trying to meet that standards to make sure this article gets to the main page, which it(IMO) deserves to. Thats why I am trying to edit the article as much as I can here - User:TheOriginalSoni/Sky city before I post the updated version on the article, thus starting the 7 day period from then.

It would be great if you could help in working on the article and thus take it to the main page! thanks. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 04:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

• (from Astronaut's talk page) :I'm not sure what else you have added over the existing article, Sky City (Changsha), that would warrant a DYK entry; nor can I think what you might add at this stage that would meet DYK's rules. What I do see however, is some rephrasing that might have been produced by machine translation from another source (eg. "layers" in a building are more usually called "floors" or "storeys" or occasionally "levels") as well as a highly dubious claim that the project will consume 270 million tons of steel. That is a hell of a lot of steel equal to ~18% of the world's yearly steel production - similar sized buildings have a much smaller mass.

If you are planning a major expansion, do go ahead, but with a possible DYK entry as a secondary consideration and perhaps only if construction actually starts. Unfortunately, I won't be able to help you much. I have had to reduce the time I spend at Wikipedia due to a very busy real life schedule. Astronaut (talk) 17:53, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Irritating lines on top

Copied from Wikipedia:Help desk#Irritating lines on top: This was caused by a problem for about 5 minutes at 19:05, 3 December (UTC). Your browser must have cached files controlling the interface at that time. Clear your entire cache. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:39, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

And again. How can you request deletion of an "orphaned disambiguation page" on a page that is not a disambiguation page at all? Stop this. This is not consensual, so either take it to WP:RFD or give it up. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Re: Adoption

You can apply directly! --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:56, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Um, the academy said to contact one of the trainers, if i am not wrong. So I wanted to join under you. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:20, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

We can start whenever you want! --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:10, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Never a better time than now!! TheOriginalSoni 16:11, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Added your name above. Now, we need a page either under your page or my page. Which you'll prefer? --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:22, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Yours. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:55, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I have started a page here: User:Titodutta/CVU/Students/TheOriginalSoni. Please watchlist this page. --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:07, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

One new task! --Tito Dutta (talk) 21:02, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

One new task and then first test... --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

New reply! --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:16, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

+1 User:Titodutta/CVU/Students/TheOriginalSoni --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Test 01 ready User:Titodutta/CVU/Students/TheOriginalSoni#Test_01 --Tito Dutta (talk) 20:47, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Is there any word limit or something? I seriously doubt I might fall way short of it, thanks to my love for succinctness. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:57, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

There is not any word limit. Consider from this point of view, a newbie is asking you what is vandalism and you are explaining to him. Short answers will not be a problem, IMO! --Tito Dutta (talk) 21:01, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

You can continue here User_talk:Titodutta/CVU/Students/TheOriginalSoni --Tito Dutta (talk) 21:07, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Ahem, don't forget my adoption course, too. Rcsprinter (babble) No, I'm Santa Claus! @ 20:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I so totally forgot!!! Sorry!! Will be on them tomorrow itself! Just send me a message reminding me, if you can please do that! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:11, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, TheOriginalSoni, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison to other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 05:36, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

IP users

Hi. Thank you for your excellent work on anti vandalism. However, perhaps you could consider not making indiscriminate welcomes to users such as you did at User talk:82.44.166.194. If you need help any time, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Happy editing! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:06, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I am pretty sure I knew what I was doing when I put the welcome sign up there. From what I see of the IP, the user is definitely a big contributor of Indian movies and TV shows. But apparently due to a lack of communication between users like you, and him, and his tendency to make bad quality prose as well as ignorance on Wikipedia policies; it makes him appear to be a vandal, which he was not, according to my judgement (The fact that he did actually go to AfC implies he is a good faith contributor). Hence I made the welcome. (If you are absolutely sure that he is a vandal, please show edits supporting your statement) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:45, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

STiki

How do you use STiki when you are neither Rollbacker nor you have 1000 contributions (on articles) I also want to use STiki please replay me how do you do? Greatuser (talk) 12:56, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

You know that already I think. I requested for it on the STiki talk page, and am under Counter-Vandalism Unit training. Seeing that and my active intentions to fight vandals, Andrew granted it to me. I suggest you also join the CVU before asking for further permissions. That way you can have a stronger chance of getting the requisite permissions. Its always better to know things completely before asking/acting on them. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:22, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

You've got rollback now; very impressive work in the last couple of days! Yunshui 雲‍水 13:31, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a ton!!! Appreciate it!!! :D

Btw can you help me by adding the rollbacker icon to my userpage? I am not sure how to do that. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:34, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing you mean {{Rollback topicon}}, which I've added to your userpage for you. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:42, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

That was exactly what I wanted. Thanks. If I want to become a reviewer too, how do I become one? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:54, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Check that you meet the requirements at Becoming a reviewer, then apply at WP:PERM just as you did for rollback. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:55, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I probably think I do meet the requirements, and have added my request. It still might be prudent if you can just confirm if I meet the requirements or not.TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:06, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Looks alright to me, based on your contribs - I certainly can't see any glaring errors in your history that would count against you. That said, PC's not an area I've done much work in, so I tend to avoid handing out the reviewer right myself; my opinion may not count for much. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:27, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I shall wait until another admin checks on my request. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sapnon Hai Pyaar Ki Kahani

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Sapnon Hai Pyaar Ki Kahani, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Greatuser (talk) 14:46, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

ACHA

Please refer to wiki policy relating to what / who is and is not notable. If you need, you may refer this matter to a admin for clarification. Reverting the change I made will be viewed as starting an edit war and will be noted as such. Please refer to wiki policy on future matters. Best — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 22:17, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I apologise for not looking into it. I saw a large amount of info being removed and hastily concluded it was vandalism/ test. I must become more careful with which edits I revert, and which I do not. My mistake. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:08, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

It appears that you are just changing every article that you see. This is not how the tool should be used. There have been 3 edits you made in the last hour which have been changed back by other users. Please ask for help understand when / how you should use this tool. Best — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 22:23, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. I agree that I have been hyperactive and way too quick in judging on my first 2 days with STiki. Can you please also point out where exactly were those edits reverted? It will help me understand my mistakes better. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:08, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

TheOriginalSoni was correct in reverting the section blank. the annon has an inappropriate grasp of what is and isn't notable. In most cases articles are filled with content that wouldn't be notable for a stand-alone article, in fact the section he has continued to remove has links to notable subjects with stand-alone articles. His mass section blanking with no edit summary was grounds for a revert. Bhockey10 (talk) 20:40, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect, wiki policy is NOT divided into 'stand-alone' and 'not stand alone'. Bhockey10 is misinformed, or acting out or self-interest. In any case, the page is reverted to follow policy. Any further change will be noted as a edit war, as failure to follow policy. Best — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 05:05, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Before you start creating unnecessary allegations, please Assume Good faith. You are making unnecessary attacks on an editor with experience on this topic. Rather than that, why don't you simply talk about the policies concerned and see why he believes those removal were necessary.

Edit war is NOT failure to comply with policy. And you can NOT decide whether you are breaking the policy or him, by edit warring ("That" will be a conflict of interest) Please read the policies you quote carefully before threatening other users. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually I did it under the impression of vandalism; whereas the question here is more about notablity. I have no idea whether it is notable or not; so I think I shall prefer not give my own opinion on that. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

NOTE WELL bhockey10 userbox claims he played on a ACHA team. Thus under wiki policy he should not edit this page as he is in a conflict of interest. Best — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 05:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

No. Playing in ACHA does not constitute a COI. It would be one in a similar way that you will be in COI for editing your city's article or your college article. Please do not try such back hand tactics to get your way around in this argument. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Please read the whole policy concerning notable people. Furthermore, your comment on my talk page, while civil is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 17:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

I did. And you still stand incorrect. The players involved may not have been notable enough to warrant their own articles, but that does not stop Wikipedia from mentioning them. Sasha Obama does not have an article of her own. Yet we do not remove every reference of her from Wikipedia.

And my statements on your talk pages are not incorrect either TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

ps - It is a conflict when he lists himself as one of the players. Should breach policy and state his real life identity? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 17:55, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

It does not breach policy. On wikipedia pages, users can choose to be whoever they claim to be, regardless of what they might be or might have been. It does in no way breach any policy nor is he forced to reveal his identity. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Please re-read what I said. I know who this person is. He also lists himself as one of the notable players. COI? Yes clearly.

Please conduct some research and look at other pages like this have been handled. In over 99 percent, the notable people, have been removed because they do not meet wiki standard. Stop making your own policies. and you want to be an admin. Oh boy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Do you say that you "KNOW" who he is and that he is replacing his own name in? Wow. Those are pretty strong words.

Please explain where I "made up my own policy". I would be glad to know that. The last statement was unrelated to the argument, so I shall just ignore it. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

If you were to read the policy you would know the answer. Let me make this clear. Lets say I start a 5 year old boys hockey league in Austin Texas. Can I create a wiki article for that league? No, why? Because it is not worthy of being in an encyclopedia. WIkipedia creates standards and policys which are agreed by not just one person but by many, highlighting what should and should no be in an encylcopedia. This community has set a stardard for hockey which is a player has to have played 100 games at or above the echl level to be notable. ECHL is not that high a level if you are to think about it in comparison to the best hockey players in the world. This standard applies not only to stand alone pages, but to notable lists as well. Going back to my 5 year old boy league. This league does not meet the standard of wikipedia. Under this same standard the ACHA falls short. Under guidelines a strong case can be made to have this page removed. The ACHA is not a pro league and is not a top amature league. This is covered by the page which speaks to NCAA hockey. Do you see how this can now be a problem? Every hockey league in the world can create a wiki page and create a list of 'notable' people. What would happen to the creditablity of wikipedia if this were to happen? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 21:04, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

How exactly was the user in question involved in this issue? Did he start the league? Was he putting his own name there? Do you have any substantiative claims to make?

Umm. No. The guideline refers solely having an article under his name, not to be included in a list. Look carefully and you shall realise that this list actually has a well-defined explanation for notablity to be included in this list. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:11, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Are you really in university? The fate of this nation is in trouble if you are the future. Please read my argument and stop cherry picking policy. The fact is, these people do not meet the standard of 100 games in the echl. Enough said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 23:35, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Now thats a direct WP:PA. I did not cherry pick policy anywhere. If these people do not meet 100 games policy, then they ought not to have an article about themselves. The article itself has a very well defined reasoning to keep or remove names from the list, and there ought to be a reason before you decide to change it. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 09:38, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

New reply and final test

Here: User:Titodutta/CVU/Students/TheOriginalSoni --Tito Dutta (talk) 22:46, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

PERM

Hi. Just pointing out that PERM is admin territory and it's not a voting page à la RfA. Admin decisions are final unless discussed among admins. In borderline cases, users are watched carefully anyway as are all CVUA graduates during their first few weeks of use of new tools. That said, FWIW, the user had already been accorded the use of Stiki which usually requires rollaback, but the Stiki software operator already accorded the access to the programme. If you have any questions regarding this please address them at Wikipedia_talk:STiki. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:16, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I was aware of the fact that PERM was an admin process. But seeing the situation that was beginning to arise, I thought it good to notify the admin and the STiki creator who gave the user that right, with a suggestion of what can be done.

I was not aware that all users were watched by admins. Thanks for clarifying that! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

CVU Graduate Barnstar!

	CVU Graduate Barnstar!
	You are a CVU Graduate (Assessment details). -- Tito Dutta (talk) 16:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/2012 Race of Champions

Review has started --15:29, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Recognition of Citations

	Order of Myris Badge
	For recognizing the need for citations and referencing materials with a reliable source. Order of Myris (talk) 05:19, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	For your kindness and good faith to other editors on wikipedia in making it more positive. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

You exhibit a great attitude. And you went out of your way to try to get them to change the rules and honour me on the front page, not to mention having some good ideas for a new concise encyclopedia. I'd clone you if I could, positive attitude makes a big difference on wikipedia.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:56, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Those words mean a lot to me. But I dont think cloning me would be such a great idea. Many around me are already fed up with the one version they are stuck with; and there are usually more than one versions of me in their post-apocalyptic nightmares. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:59, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks ...

... for the cookie!

Rsrikanth05 has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

--Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:25, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2012 Race of Champions

Hello! Your submission of 2012 Race of Champions 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) 20:44, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Ok. I'm intersting. I will be some modifications in these days. Phósphoros (talk) 06:50, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I edited some of the prose to make it flow better. Does it qualify for DYK now or does it need more characters? I don't mind adding a synopsis for Nations Cup/Individual event if necessary. Bluevulcansix (talk) 11:20, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I saw that. I believe its just under the DYK word limit now. It would be good if we added a few more characters, just to be safe. Maybe add about the drivers and a very brief summary of the event itself, and maybe its popularity worldwide. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:22, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

New reply!

I have replied at my talk. I am not following watchlist for last one hour. If you see the article I am working and try to add 4-5 sentences in that article or expand the inforbox I hope you'll pardon the slowness of my reply. In scholar.google.com you'll get many references. If you work there, try to cite journals only (and use autofill with DOI)! --Tito Dutta (talk) 14:13, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Don't copy paste as here the numbers or symbols, it'll add some weird symbols like question marks, boxes (and even missing digits), type those characters! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:24, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I am first copy pasting, and then making the necessary edits. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:28, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

A section on "Interest"? That section needs to be deleted or merged! And seeing the writing style it seems we are writing story or poetry! Ya, "star" article is a "pain"! My next essay will be an easier one! Wanna join there too? --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:39, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry. I am not familiar with the writing style for star related articles, and so tried to explain how exactly the star is relevant.

Absolutely. Count me in. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:45, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

And citation, citation! I'll have a difficult time to understand from where you are collecting these information! Click on "Named ref" you'll see 4 journals titles there! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:41, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Which are the places the citations are needed? All are from only the 4 refs you mentioned. I shall point them out. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:43, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Ya, section on "Interest" is too much! Sounds like we are writing a movie article! You can see NML Cygni or P Cygni for reference on writing style!

To add named references follow these–

• Go to edit mode
• In the toolbar, click on "Cite".
• Click on "Named ref" (see beside "Template")
• There you'll find all the articles names. Just click on the name you want to add.
• Done! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:56, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I think I give up on editing the star article. Its way different from the usual paraphrasing and writing that I am used to doing. Sorry if I made the article worse though. If its possible, I shall come back from the Delhi article sometime later to see if I can add anything here. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:02, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Sky City

File:J220 Sky City Changsha.jpg image needs rationales for every use! --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:59, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Not good with the image stuff. Not sure what exactly to put where. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:08, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

If that is a copyrighted image, for using ine every article you have to add a separate rationale that why you think the use will be fair use. For reference see rationales in this image --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:13, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

ITN for 2012 Delhi gang rape case

--Spencer^T♦C 00:21, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Delhi rape case article

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to 2012 Delhi gang rape case does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks!
One of major edit with no reason/edit summary -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 10:49, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry its just a habit of mine not to leave edit summaries. I understand it can be problematic to the ones editing after me, but its just natural. Will try to change it though. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:01, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, yes, glad understood it well. Further, it will be great if you provide edit summaries while editing an article which is highly visible being present in the ITN section. Thanks! -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 11:21, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I realised that. Usually there arent such problems so i tend to not do it; but since this topic is super visible, and I have been making more than minor edits, I shall keep it in mind. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:24, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

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

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

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

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SarahStierch (talk) 23:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Help me

- I cant get the topicons on my userpage to be both displayed - Can someone please rectify that? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I've added the missing icon_nr parameters. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:47, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

C.I.D. Kolkata Bureau

Which article you are currently working on? I have just started article on Bengali television series C.I.D. Kolkata Bureau. There are lots of good sources too! --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:00, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I think I shall come tomorrow to see if I can add anything to the article. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:08, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

2012 gang rape

I was surprised to see that you approved this. It is full of copyright violation and close paraphrasing, it repeats some of the earlier content, it is overly-detailed and it is breathless reporting that includes peacock terms etc. Two or three paraphrased sentences would suffice, surely? I reverted for now and have to go out. Obviously, something needs to be said, so feel free to amend it. - Sitush (talk) 22:00, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Just that those 2-3 sentences seemed important enough to me to approve that edit. I figured that I Or more possible someone else could edit out and improve on the bad portions later on. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:52, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

My guestbook

Thanks for signing it! Nice to meet you too! Do you have a guestbook? AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 20:39, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

No. Not at the present moment. Maybe sometime in the future I shall change my mind and create one. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:44, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I see. That's fine. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 20:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hey, just a note about Teahouse. Multiple answers on the same question are a good thing. Having more than one viewpoint is usually helpful in ensuring that the editor understands what he is asking about. Gtwfan52 (talk) 21:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I realised that by now. Thanks.

If you are referring to my comment "all questions are answered" then I feel like not adding my answers when I see other answers because they have already described what I was about to, in better words. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

No, nothing implied. Just a general comment. Although there are a lot of hosts at Teahouse, more=better in my book, just because of what I described above. Thanks for joining us and lending a hand. Your contributions will be valuable! If you are anything like I was when I was a student, perhaps you keep rather strange hours. Questions come in to Teahouse 24/7 and coverage at all hours is needed. It all helps! And remember, just because you think another host answered a question better than you could, doesn't mean that the way you answer it won't better reach the person who asked it. You can never really know how another person's mind works. :) Gtwfan52 (talk) 21:59, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! :)

" If you are anything like I was when I was a student, perhaps you keep rather strange hours." - Wow! Its 3:30 am here, and I am just considering whether or not to sleep TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:03, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Your reverts

You get to go around reverting someone's edits and attacking them as a troll sock after and not before that has been established as a fact. Untill then, it's a personal attack you are using to justify your own improper behavior. If you have a problem with my edit at Ferret legging you can go to the talk page and say so in the discussion of that specific point. Otherwise your editing will be seen as disruptive and your editing privileges may end up being restricted accordingly. Frogportion (talk) 10:04, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

WP:DUCK. How likely, or rather unlikely is it that a new editor comes in and the first thing he does is to fuel an ongoing dispute on ferret legging, and attack one of the main editors involved? Very. Who are you and why do you seek to attack from a different account? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

You would have done better to raise those questions before rather than after leaping to conclusions of bad faith. I have never claimed to be new, but my neighbour does keep ferrets. You are doubtless aware, but choose to ignore the fact, that using one account after another, or even at the same time, is not improper. Do you have any reason to believe that I am abusing multiple accounts? Or is it that you are aware that you went too far and now seeking to justify your own improper actions by raising groundless accusations against me? Please devote your energies toi improving the encyclopedia, for example by finding sources for the material you seek to reinstate in the article in question. Frogportion (talk) 10:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Are you a new editor? No. Are you an old one? I shall leave this question to you. Are you disruptive? Certainly. Does that classify you as a sock under Wikipedia:Sock puppetry? Yes. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring

You are clearly edit warring at Ferret legging. You really need to engage in the discussion at the talk page rather than blindly reverting and adding badly sourced material. Frogportion (talk) 10:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:Admin help

Use Template:Admin help if you need help from an admin. A bunch of non-admins (including me) watch general help requests! --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually I am not sure if an admin or just an experienced user is enough to help this guy understand what he did what he did wasnt that bad (Or maybe make him promise to fight vandals in lieu of forgiveness). If I had my way, I would have preffered that the good Pope, The Almighty forgive him for his actions, so that he can sleep a little better at night. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:13, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Any non admin will step back after reading: "Can any admin/oversight please simply remove the address and email address from the user page history? " --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Oops. Forgot that one bit from there. Will change it TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:21, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

And, in future take care about this: you can not simply call someone a sockpuppet (as you have done above)! This is prohibited! If you think someone is a sock go and lodge a complaint to WP:SPI. Generally the rule is little bit stricter, after bringing an allegation that someone is a sock in next 48 hours either you have to lodge an SPI complaint or clearly withdraw your comment! Though I am not asking you to do these! } --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Ohk. Mind just reviewing my actions wrt the user in concern, and see if I was correct or not? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

It's about the allegation. Does not matter whether right or wrong. SPI allegations should be brought to SP noticeboard. Similarly legal threats. If someone gives legal threat (for any reason) his account may be blocked immediately! --Tito Dutta (talk)

Got it. But I still would like to know if there was anything else I did wrong (reversions on page, MF's talk and the SP allegation itself) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you brought an SP allegation without reporting it at WP:SPI. In case you are going to report it there in next 48 hours, then that's fine! --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:43, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I reported it. My question is more about the reverts and the comments on the talk pages. Did I, in your opinion, act in the best possible manner I should have? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that looks good! Also write edit summaries for each edit WP:FIES --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:57, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

CURTAINTOAD! ^TALK! — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hey TheOriginalSoni! Wishing you a very happy New Year :) CURTAINTOAD! ^TALK! 23:20, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Soni

~~~ — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2025. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2025 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2025 go well for you.

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year}} to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.

Posted at 20241202030823

Help request

Hi, TheOriginalSoni. I've rev/del'd the contact info per your request. In the future you may go to Wikipedia:Requests for oversight and request suppression of the edits. This is a more discrete path and lessens the chances that sensitive content is publicly visible. You may still request the deleted edit be suppressed via oversight. If you have any questions or require clarification on any point, please leave a message on my user talk. Regards Tiderolls 01:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

The request itself

- This one is way fun complicated. New Wikipedia User User:Malikussaid made one vandal edit five years ago (when he was 15 11) [corrected per user TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)] and now realises it to be a mistake. [Details of the story can be found at his user page, talk page, administrators noticeboard Later removed by me, a self started RfC on himself The page needs to be deleted btw, the talk pages of the page itself Now in archives and the talk page of AT LEAST one admin!!!!]

He is terribly new to this, and seems extremely extremely sorry for breaking WP:NPA (TOWARDS AN ARTICLE). The grave offence committed by him was to use one four letter word beginning with F and ending with k (With the letters c and u somewhere in between, in some order); and to add an "extremely islamic resource" website.

He is terribly sorry about it that he cant get over doing something wrong at Wikipedia and has posted an apology on his user page. He says - "In my personal opinion, however, I condemn, decry, and reprobate any actions against human rights, especially those instated on base of ethnic, religion, and race." He is open to any and all legal actions against him, and provided both his email address and his actual address so that any/all offended parties can contact him so that his legal counsel can reply back within 10 days.

Can any admin/oversight please simply remove the address and email address from the user page history? I'm pretty sure it must not be allowed to stay on in the encyclopedia at any time (inorder to stop him from actual harm from trolls and vandals). And please also remove the offending words and the apology from the archives of the "Guantanamo Bay". Once that is done, I prefer an admin [A normal user would not be good enough] please baptise him and rid him of all sins online [Or I fear he would either not be able to sleep at night, or would take this matter to ArbCom or the Indonesian Supreme Court asking for legal action against himself] and categorically state that what he did will not be taken against him later on.

Have a nice laugh, and please help this user; and advise him to proceed. Thanks!!! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:55, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

May I comment?

I went here to post a talkback (since TheOriginalSoni posted au revoir on my page). I see Google Translate translate Wikipedia's policy quite poorly. Few hours of good reading and opening dictionary and thesaurus turns the discussion above from as serious as hell to downright funny. I don't know, but I had a good laugh after reading thesaurus entry of "extreme" and applying it in context of my actions.

My sincere apology for all parties that involved.

----

Malikussaid (talk) 21:29, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure. You are free to comment on anything and everything! :)

I am glad now you see the funny side of it. I could not stop laughing for a long long time.

God! Please stop apologizing everywhere!!! Please! Its all right. You dont have to be this polite. [Seriously - By the kind of behavior we sometimes get here, its a natural to have a fair amount of criticism and spite against you when others speak to you.]

Do you add those ---- youself or is it a part of your signature? I find it weird actually. [You dont need to change it. Just saying it looks weird, since I havent seem them on any user's sign]

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:36, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't know, but here in Indonesia, nearly every statement uttered by polite people uses two of the following words: tolong (please), maaf (sorry), permisi (excuse me), and terima kasih (thank you). Maybe this unusual level of politeness is what makes Indonesian people world-renowned for their hospitality.

As you may have known, user may costumize their signatures on "Preferences". But I add them manually since I had not fully understood formatting. I've learned that before signing letters, please put a line for signing. Here I found ---- produces the straight line when not being indented.

----

Malikussaid (talk) 21:55, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Ohk. That explains a lot. In that case, I wont say anything. You are free to thank and apologize as many times as you wish to, but I do find it slightly weirdish for a short while.

Nobody is writing letters here. Your adding them just makes your comments longer than they should be. Usually users simply add their signature below the comment [As I did above] or beside their comment[like for this one] TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:02, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I will use this format from now on.

Malikussaid (talk) 22:23, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Association football page

Hi there, just out of interest is there any reason you deleted the picture of the goalkeeper making a save from the association football page? Cls14 (talk) 15:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Um, yes. That picture was five years old and way out of quality. We can easily find a lot better images for Goalkeepers there. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, was just being curious. Am at work and slightly bored! Cls14 (talk) 15:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Just didnt want too much fuss and attention over those chunk of poor-quality-image removals, so i didnt ask anywhere for it to be replaced. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Re:Flags for Wikicup

No, you can't use that flag; "You may choose the flag of any extant political entity (countries, counties, states, towns, principalities and so on) providing it is freely licensed." So, a country, or a town, or a state or something would be fine. Fictional flags are not OK. As for the featured pictures, merely nominating a picture does not constitute significant work; you have to have produced the picture in some way, or gone to significant effort to have it ready for Wikipedia. Merely nominating it, or even merely uploading it after you have found it elsewhere, does not count. And yes, it has to be on the English Wikipedia, not Commons. J Milburn (talk) 11:22, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiCup/2013 signups

I'm waiting on you choosing another flag to fly before I sign you up. If you are going to participate, you may want to remove the "retired" signs- they're a little misleading. J Milburn (talk) 17:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Saddening

I'm disappointed to see that you are gone, but since I'm suppose to be retired as well, I won't try to talk you out of it. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 04:38, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

TOS did say that they might be back later in the year - they've got exams coming up. - Sitush (talk) 04:45, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

They could use {{Wikibreak}} --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for HD 179821

The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Working out the details at Wikipedia:Today's article for improvement

The RFC for TAFI is nearing it's conclusion, and it's time to hammer out the details over at the project's talk page. There are several details of the project that would do well with wider input and participation, such as the article nomination and selection process, the amount and type of articles displayed, the implementation on the main page and other things. I would like to invite you to comment there if you continue to be interested in TAFI's development. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 02:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week nomination

I have copied your nomination to Wikipedia:Editor of the Week/Nominations. I encourage you to expand it further, with links to specific examples and more details on what you find to be exemplary about the editor's creations—recognition is most effective when specific actions are described, so recipients will remember receiving the recognition each time they do a similar task. Thanks for your help! isaacl (talk) 15:11, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week nomination accepted

Your nomination of Kelvinsong for Editor of the Week has been accepted! Thanks very much for your kindness in recognizing the hard work of your fellow editors. isaacl (talk) 15:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		Project Editor Retention This editor was willing to lend a helping hand!
		For your nomination of User:Kelvinsong as our first "Editor of the Week". He is an excellent example for future reference by future nominators. Well done.```Buster Seven Talk 13:53, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Archiving with ClueBot III

Just a quick note that Buster 7 set up archiving of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week using ClueBot III and you can request that the bot archive any section immediately by including {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} in that section. I've tweaked the parameters for the bot to archive a bit faster. isaacl (talk) 15:54, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks. Mind fixing the archives section also? I created a new "Archive 1" page, but it is apparently not shown in the archive infobox. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

After having looked into the innards of ClueBot III, I believe it keeps an index of the archive pages that it uses when displaying the message box, so a manually created page probably won't show up until ClueBot does an archiving run. I've restored one section and marked it for immediate archiving; let's see if that works.

Regarding a user page, generally I think the work is the thing: what I do in my contributions is what's important. I fully appreciate the value of learning more about your fellow collaborators, but at least for now, having a user page is just not my personal preference. isaacl (talk) 16:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Tea House question

In your recent reply at the Tea House I think you should also have indicated that a copy of a letter is not reliable source per WP:RS unless it has itself been published in a reliable source, in which case the source where it is published should be cited and not the letter. Also, I am not sure what the copyright status of such a letter would be. Thanks.--ukexpat (talk) 19:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, the copyright of the letter lies with the sender or the reciever(Not sure which one). But since it is sent by the head of a state (presumably the US) it could be considered reliable, in my opinion. Anyways I had forgotten about reliability concerns. Please add anything you think might be important. (I have absolutely no problem with people directly editing my answer) Thanks. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Copyright and reliability are completely independent issues. Copyright resides with the the creator unless it has been assigned elsewhere. With respect to notability we have to rely on publication in a secondary source for verification otherwise how do we know, unlikely though it is, that the PDF has not been tampered with? In any event, I will not edit or add to your response - I am not au fait with the way things are done at the Tea House, I am a Help Desk regular.--ukexpat (talk) 19:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

With respect to the teahouse , here is a brief description from my side. Hope it helps.

The teahouse is just an informal version of the help desk. People ask questions, and we answer them in a friendly way. They may return, or they may not - Thats up to them. But we make sure to have a warm and helping hand out towards them so they feel in place there.

This is why we do not edit the questions. If someone sees that their question has been tampered with, they might be intimidated.

On the other hand, we simply clarify the questions in our own replies, and add to previously said replies. There is no bar on the number of questions asked or the number of answers given (on the same question even), because we want as many hands to help as they can. Any other user may also hop into the discussion with a relevant question or answer of his own.

Sections remain as they are until archived after 4 days, which means there is no formal "closure" of the questions. As previously said, everything is designed to facilitate a healthy and friendly conversation. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

• Also note that it is usually not common practice to edit other coments, even answers. But since I did not include any links in my reply, I prefer that my answer is edited to include them, if necessary. Thats just a personal choice from my part. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

• I also believe that unless there is another secondary source, it would not be possible for the user in question to easily procure the PDF. Even if thats not the case, we need not consider ourselves with possible "tampering", IMO. I think that as long as it is free, it can be uploaded. And as long as it can be verified to be true, we may well assume it to be true. There are plenty of other images on which the same conditions apply; and yet they survive. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

The essay

...looks good! --Tito Dutta (talk) 01:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

I have removed the nomination of Sitush for Editor of the Week as malformed. If a discussion is required before nomination, it is best to have such a discussion first then make the nim. However, I also note that Sitush is not an unsung heroe. They are very well known and actively controversial making them far more known than what is within the Editor of the Week criteria. While i respect the editor and hope them a speedy recovery, I doubt they would agree that they are "unsung" in comaprison to other nominations. I cannot speak for the editor, but believe they are aware of their own notoriety.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

You're a good editor

Would love to see an increase in edit summaries. It saves us a lot of time. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:26, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry but its a really old habit of mine and I cannot seem to get it off (Others have also said the same to me, but I tend to find it way easier to just work without them)

Thanks anyways, and I hope to keep this advice in my the next time.

Cheers,

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 07:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I hope you can make the effort. If not, we have to. :) My bad habit is that I've never, ever, ever, I think, ever, ever marked an edit as minor. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Copper in heat exchangers

Dear Soni. Thank your for your quick review of the article just minutes after posting. As per your request, the references to Wikipedia user pages have been remedied. The article has been substantially reduced in size. The article was copy editied. The tags will be removed. Please let me know if you have any other concerns. Much appreciated, Enviromet (talk) 20:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Your appraisal of the »Ashita no Nadja« episode synopsis page

TheOriginalSoni:

Many salutations!!! I am pleased that you took such an interest in my latest contribution to Wikipedia; when I started work on it, I was having some RL housing troubles because of my ex-landlord back in August 2011. The fact that it has taken me until January 2013 illustrates how adversely this has affected me.

The feature presentation is your appraisal of the recently-completed »Ashita no Nadja« episode synopsis page that I do not think has been thoroughly considered. If I recall correctly, here are the flaws that have been cited:

• This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. (January 2013)
• This article may be too long to read and navigate comfortably. (January 2013)
• This article may be written from a fan's point of view, rather than a neutral point of view. (January 2013)
• This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience. (January 2013)
• This article's plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed. (January 2013)

Let us look at these one at a time. I am at a loss for why you think that there are any spelling and grammar errors when I laid down for a good night's sleep prior to moving the page out of the user space so that fatigue is not a reason for me to overlook anything.

I do have to object to your declaration of the article possibly being too long to comfortably read and navigate.  »Ashita no Nadja« has FIFTY episodes in total ... that fact alone should make it clear that this is not going to be a short article. The plot of »Ashita no Nadja« involves multiple incidences of crossing between countries; if you look at the article really carefully, I have divided the fifty episodes based on their geographical setting. I will also take this opportunity to interject that I would have had a more difficult time composing that article if I had not done that.

On a related note, I take particular umbrage at your declaration of my plot summary being too long or excessively detailed; I exerted an immense effort to restrain myself from being pedantic. I should also point out to you that there is NOTHING stopping YOU from composing an »Ashita no Nadja« episode synopsis page from scratch if my handiwork is not to your liking. I did not see anybody else taking that first step and I am quite frankly appalled at the hypocrisy of the attempt thereof on my part being so caustically criticized. If I had perfectly composed all the articles I wrote, there would not be a need for anyone else to polish and refine it ... do you not think that insults the alpha premise of Wikipedia as a COLLABORATIVE endeavor?

Dairi no Kenkyo (talk) 06:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello and Welcome to Wikipedia.

Firstly, I would like to remind you that Wikipedia is a collaborative endeavour, and that everyone working here is trying to better ALL articles here. So please Assume good faith on the part of others, and that will make it a lot easier on everyone's part to work together. Also, may I also advise you to Keep Calm when in conversation with others. That will make it a lot easier for everyone to work productively.

Now to some more specific things - Firstly, EVERY single article here has taken a lot of time from others to be improved. All good and featured articles are weeks and months of hardwork. But those articles have also taken a lot of criticism and improvement on their way up there. In the end, we as readers see not the hardwork that's put in but the quality of the work. So I advise you to take all criticism in stride, and as pointers to further improvement.

Next, I would like to reply to your last paragraph. Please note that not every person here is expected to do the same job. I have absolutely no idea who 'Ashita no Nadja' are, but I have a good deal of idea on how good an article is, and what are potential problems in it. So I believe its unjustified to call for me to try and make the page, as that wont be where I am best in. After all, we need to have the best of all talents coming together.

Also, I apologise for simply placing the tags without explaining them completely. Unfortunately, everybody has a limited time, and I was reviewing several articles. So it was not very possible for me to explain each tag everywhere. I was hoping you would understand those tags yourself.

Now to the article itself-

• The first tag is of "grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling" and not just Grammar or spelling.My main concern with the page was its tone and style. The way it is currently written, its way too much like how a fan might describe it. We need to have it more clearcut, and the way you would expect to find in an encyclopedia.
• Here I would also like to point out that an article's size must be proportional to its notablity. I do not say anything about the show's notablity, but I am pretty confident it is not as big as the Simpsons, or I would have heard of it. Yet the article size is proportionally way larger than the Simpsons. On an average, every episode's synopsis will probably need to be halved.

I think I have covered all the other points and tags above. Please look into it and see how you can improve it. Or else (Its harsh but true), somebody else is going to nominated this page for deletion. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 09:45, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Wikispace!

Click on "move"! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I know that! My questions was more on the lines of "Should I?" and "Where do I transfer that? - Should we continue with the current name or have something different?"

Yes, if you think so. Or ask in that essay's talk page.. Wikipedia:Your article title --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:15, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Or, more clearly, I think I feel the article is ready to go, that's why I gave such a short reply "Click on "move"" by that I meant, go ahead! --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:17, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Alright. Just a final question - Where should it go? And should it be aimed as a Project/ a Group or as an article? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Start as an article, then it can be moved somewhere if needed, Wikipedia:Your article title should be good! --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:27, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Last question - How to get that infobox of sorts around the first paragraph? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Which infobox? --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

The first description paragraph need to have borders around it. How do I add that box? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:32, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Try something like this, change color etc

Note This is a Group of like-minded editors. We do not represent any particular interest on the Wikipedia. Our motive is solely a better Wiki for everyone. All opinions expressed anywhere are that of individual members, and not of the Group. Anyone may join the group, but the group founders and other experienced members of the group hold the rights to remove any member who is non-productive.

--Tito Dutta (talk) 16:43, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Any way to centralise the text a bit - Start it 1-2 cm to the right and end 2 cm to the left of the respective borders? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:01, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Got it! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:20, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I have made more fmt changes there, you can customize!--Tito Dutta (talk) 03:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Like. Looks professional now. I have no idea about how it should look and stuff, and so I would rather not try my hand. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 03:44, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

TAFI tables

So, what is up with the discussion area section and the Duel Masters thing at the bottom of the "Arts" section? AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 17:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

The standard we are going forward with is to have everything as a table. Every section has its own, and new nominations can go either directly, or through the old template when a volunteer shall place them.

Since tables are not very good for discussion, any article shall stay on the table as long as there is nothing to discuss and/or there are no opposes. Should there be any opposes, one of us shall export it out of the table to the discussion area, where discussion and voting continues the normal way.

How does that sound? (Now that I think of it, it better be clarified somewhere on that page) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok, that makes sense. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 17:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Soni. You have new messages at JohnCD's talk page.
Message added 20:00, 18 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	It's very sad to see you leave Wikipedia. :( Please, come back. CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 08:55, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Remove that "Semi retired" template, you are more active than few users who claim themslves "super active" in their user page. --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:18, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Thats there to remind me that I ought to be going back anytime now. Or else my studies and preparations for IITJEE shall take a big toll. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:24, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Up and running

Yes, that looks good. The page design needs to be improved eventually! --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for inviting me to the Teahouse, just how do I get there?

I clicked on the link going to the TeaHouse and I couldn't get anywhere other than the main page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bramblenose (talk • contribs)

Teahouse Question Continued

One problem though, not all these images live on my computer! Other people have created some of them. How do I get around that because I wouldn't actually be uploading anything?Sheffno1gunner (talk) 14:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Also there's a problem with file formats, one is .svg, the others are .png, any ideas? Could you maybe take a look?Sheffno1gunner (talk) 14:58, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

To solve that, just convert the svg into png. Or better still, convert all the png to svg - Thats the better format. Or a third option would be to simply let the svg remain as a different image, and the pngs as one.

To have all the pictures on your computer, simply click on "download" on the commons page of the image. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Great, thank you very much. You've been most helpful :-)Sheffno1gunner (talk) 19:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Moving user comments

Please never move user comments on discussion pages, as you did recently at Wikipedia talk:Today's article for improvement. Once a user posts them, they should never be moved to another section. Thank you. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for clarification

I am intrigued by this edit, in which you refer to "a recent edit", but give no indication of which edit, and I wonder if you could say which edit you have in mind. You refer to "a misuse of a warning or blocking template". This IP address has never posted a blocking template, so you must be referring to a warning template. None of the four warning templates posted from this IP address looks to me as though it is obviously the one you refer to. I look forward to reading your reply, and I also suggest that, for the future, it would help if you were to always give a link to a relevant diff when you post such a message. 79.123.81.63 (talk) 12:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Its the one at User:Murklemark/sandbox. You tagged a sandbox article under G11, which is not permissible. Sandbox entries, being a work under progress, are exempt from most such deletion catgories and policies, except vandalism and hoax.

I hope you shall be more careful about your tags from now on. The user under question quite panicked seeing the tag, which ought not to have been the case.

Hope you got a satisfactory answer to your doubt.

Cheers, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

P.S. You appear to be quite adept at Wikipedia and its policies. Why do you not have an account? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

No pages, sandboxes or otherwise, are exempt from speedy deletion as promotional.

I would like to see the WP policy that says that. I am confident that the CSD G11 does not apply here.

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:33, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

No wonder I couldn't find what "a warning or blocking template" you were referring to, since it was a speedy deletion tag, not a a warning or blocking template. On the subject of "I hope you shall be more careful about your tags from now on", that could apply to you, it seems.

My apologies. I thought that was the appropriate template to be added. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I do have an account, and 99% of the time I use it. However, if I just have one or two quick edits to make I occasionally don't bother to log in. 79.123.81.63 (talk) 14:54, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2012 Race of Champions

Hello! Your submission of 2012 Race of Champions 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! Tito Dutta (talk) 06:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The TAFI Barnstar
		Thanks for your contributions to WikiProject Today's article for improvement, which have served to expand the project and increase participation and collaboration there. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for 2012 Race of Champions

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Removing !votes - don't do it

Important: Please do not ever remove people's !votes at Wikipedia:Today's article for improvement/Holding area as you did recently at (Diff page: [7]). Just leave them be, and let people contribute freely. Removing people's comments is inappropriate, and should never be done, except by admins in unique circumstances. It's unnecessary to modify the page in this manner, and this also goes against the grain of WP:NOTCENSOR. Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I believe the removal of votes was appropriate in this case as they were added "AFTER" importing to the Holding Area. We must not be having votes added after its imported, which is why I removed it, and noted the same to Amadscientist. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

No, it really isn't appropriate. Instead, consider sending the editor a message about the matter, rather than removing their additions immediately. It's unnecessary to micromanage on this level; removing people's comments leads to problems. There is significant precedent on Wikipedia that is against other editors editing the comments of others. Think about it: if I were to remove your comment, how would you feel about it? Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Have you notified User:Amadscientist about your removal of their comments there? If not, please do so right away. Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I realised I did not specifically tell him of that. Now  Done TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

• See also: WP:TPO, "Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page. Striking text constitutes a change in meaning, and should only be done by the user who wrote it or someone acting at their explicit request.

Editing—or even removing—others' comments is sometimes allowed. But you should exercise caution in doing so, and normally stop if there is any objection..." Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:20, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually I have absolutely no problems with it, which is why we are in this fix now. I do not find it very incongruent with anyone editing my comments as long as they inform me about it, and they have a valid reason. Maybe the others in Wikipedia have a problem, but I dont TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Actor

• List the notable sources
• List the award nomination he got!

That should be persuasive! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Finding sources for him is harder for me. I listed all five notable ones I could find. The rest, I still am not getting the hang of them... As for the nominations, I don't know if there are any pages online where I can find a list of nominations recieved by each actor. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

• They'll reject my post there tagging WP:Canvas if I post there. Post at WT:INB in a neutral way and ask to comment! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Btw where are you from? Kolkata? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:34, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Jadavpur --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Cool. I am from Howrah. Do you participate in the Kolkata meetups? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:41, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

• No! Howrah? I thought you are from Singapore or Vietnam! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Close enough. :P And you dont participate in the meetups? Why? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Will try someday. I am a new editor, trying to learn basic things.

• When you first posted at my talk page on CVUA, I felt you an incarnation of another user. See this one and this one was too good! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:53, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

The second one had me laughing for several minutes!!! And no. I am not that user. I am a small irresponsible boy! :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Add the AFD discussion link at WT:INB! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Btw I think you should also come to the meetups. I just got in touch with the people organising it. Looks like I might join the meetups from the next meetup onwards! :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:04, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Most probably, not very soon! --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:12, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

They say the next one will be Feb-March. But I dont think I shall come. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Congrats... Your creative suggestion made Teahouse even better!

Hi! I know that you had the best intentions about protecting new editors at the Teahouse when you suggested they should be warned before being blocked for promotional usernames. Even though that proposal is going to take some work to get accepted, I think the attitude of educating new editors before we shut them out is a really healthy approach and one that will pay dividends broadly and especially in the atmosphere of the Teahouse that people like you are trying to create. Thanks for pointing out an area where we can do better and pursuing it in the forum where it needs to be raised. It's great, keep it up!

	Easter Egg Badge
	Awarded to those who have submitted ideas to improve the Teahouse. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:00, 25 January 2013 (UTC)