User talk:Arunsingh16/Archive 1

Speedy deletion nomination of Neeraj Grover Murder Case


A tag has been placed on Neeraj Grover Murder Case requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Calabe1992 (talk) 18:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of HumanSigma


A tag has been placed on HumanSigma, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  DGG ( talk ) 06:27, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Arunsingh16/Monica Dogra
User:Arunsingh16/Monica Dogra, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Arunsingh16/Monica Dogra and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Arunsingh16/Monica Dogra during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. AKS (talk) 17:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Ramkishun
Hey Arunsingh16, I just thought I'd let you know that I saw your article Ramkishun in the New Articles list-- It would be great if you could also add references to the related article Chandauli (Lok Sabha constituency).

It's nice to see you editing!Amy Z (talk) 18:40, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Your article has been moved to AfC space
Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Arunsingh16/Abdul Rahman has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Abdul Rahman, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. Petan-Bot (talk) 06:00, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and because some issues were found, it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia&. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  18:53, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Some tips to help you out!
Hi, I thought I'd drop a few notes on your talk page with some help on writing articles :o)

First of all, it may be best for you to do a bit of reading, starting with the Wikipedia manual of style, which will give you a lot of information about how Wikipedia prefers its articles to be written. It's not as hard to follow as it might look; quite a bit of the information there probably won't be vital for you at first.

Second, I recommend you make a user sandbox - which is just an area you can use to practise in, and to make notes in, and to get things ready in. If you click this red link: user:/Sandbox, that will let you create that page (it gives you an edit window to start work in). Anything, anywhere, on the help and information pages which gives you an example, try it out in your sandbox until you're familiar with it.

For your article, the next thing you want to do is start collecting as much information as you can about it. Google searches (particularly in Books and Scholar) will be your best friend for this! Once you've found the information, the next most important thing is to start writing up each fact in your own words (very important, this), and make a note at the same time of exactly where that information came from. Build in the references as you go along; I'm going to copy in, down below this, a whole heap of help on doing references, which was produced by one of our best teachers (Chzz).

Here's another place that you'll find incredibly useful - citation templates which you can copy and paste into your sandbox, between tags; you just fill in the blanks from your sources into the template, and you'll end up with nicely formatted inline citations :o) It all helps.  Remember to add a references section to your sandbox (make a new line, and put ==References== on it, and type  on the next line, so that you can see how your citations look as you do them. Remember to save your page often! You don't want to lose your work.

Hopefully this will give you a good start and make life easier for you.

One last thing to keep as a motto: "It's better to write one good, well-referenced, nicely-presented article than it is to create fifty unreferenced one-line stubs!" Pesky ( talk  …stalk!) 13:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Something to make your life easier!
Hi there ! I've just come across one of your articles, and noticed that you might appreciate some help with references.

You might want to consider using this tool - it makes your life a whole heap easier, by filling in complete citation templates for your links. All you do is install the script on Special:MyPage/common.js, or or Special:MyPage/vector.js, then paste the bare url (without [...] brackets) between your tabs, and you'll find a clickable link called Reflinks in your toolbox section of the page (probably in the left hand column). Then click that tool. It does all the rest of the work (provided that you remember to save the page! It doesn't work for everything (particularly often not for pdf documents), but for pretty much anything ending in "htm" or "html" (and with a title) it will do really, really well. Happy editing!  Pesky  ( talk  …stalk!) 13:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

RFPP
I just wanted to let you know that I declined both of your recent requests for semi-protection at WP:RFPP, on [Vijay Mallya and Kingfisher Airlines. Neither article had a particularly high level of vandalism. In general, Wikipedia wants most articles to be open to all editors, including those who do not choose to register an account. One or two pieces of vandalism every so often do not justify semi-protection. Vijay Mallya was a somewhat close call, because it is a biography of a living person, so we need to be more vigilant in protecting it (per WP:BLP), but there was still not very much in the last few weeks. If it does get more persistent, feel free to re-raise the issue on WP:RFPP or even as me directly on my talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:13, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

List of members of the 3rd Lok Sabha of India
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of members of the 3rd Lok Sabha of India, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/more-scst-seats-in-15th-lok-sabha_100165750.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:23, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of members of the 1st Lok Sabha of India


A tag has been placed on List of members of the 1st Lok Sabha of India requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to 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 tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  07:03, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of members of the 2nd Lok Sabha of India


A tag has been placed on List of members of the 2nd Lok Sabha of India requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to 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 tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  07:04, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of members of the 3rd Lok Sabha of India


A tag has been placed on List of members of the 3rd Lok Sabha of India requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to 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 tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  07:05, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011
Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. ''You have been copying content as is (including formatting errors) from the Government of India websites and that is a copyright violation. You can use the site as a reference, but copying is not allowed. Please stop.'' &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  07:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have only taken names (of Member of Parliment) to generate list from the GOI website. I dont think any further amendement (changes) can be done on the names. Please advice as to how can one really write the names differently? AKS (talk) 07:48, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * See List of members of the 15th Lok Sabha (by state) for an example. No, you did not just copy the names, what you did was selected all the text on the source page, copied and pasted it on to Wikipedia thereby introducing formatting errors here and also carrying forward some of the errors from the source page. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  08:14, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Please see List of members of the 15th Lok Sabha of India and please tell me how was the article I wrote different from this page? Since this page has been in existance for long, I took guidance from there. If this page is acceptable then please help me understand as to why the page I created should be deleted. If there are errors then it should be tagged for clean-up and not speedy deletion without discussing. AKS (talk) 08:30, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Once again, you did not follow that model. You copied and pasted content exactly the same, including misplaced commas, state names etc. Please read WP:C to understand copyright policies. If there are any specific questions you have, I'm ready to discuss, but we both know how the copy-paste was effected, so that's not a point I'm going to discuss any further. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  08:37, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No issues, I am willing to spend time in cleaning it up. Given the volume of information, I will take time in cleaning up but since this is vital information, I suggest lets put it up on Wikipedia. I have started work from 01st Lok Sabha and trying to gather information about members and office from 1952. Your cooperation will be appreciated. AKS (talk) 08:43, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Abdul Rahman
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Abdul Rahman, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Abdul Rahman and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Abdul Rahman during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. AKS (talk) 09:42, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Sajjan Singh Verma (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to M.A. and Builder


 * Shivkumar Chanabasappa Udasi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Builder

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:40, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * K.M. Abraham (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Puthupally


 * Kazi Jalil Abbasi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Basti


 * Seth Achal Singh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to U.P.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC) *Closed

Kamen Rider Meteor
Could you not randomly add tags to this page? The subject passes the WP:GNG, and your merge suggestion is only tangentially related to the subject.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 11:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relax; I just "suggested" merger and not deletion. Dont assume that I "ramdomly" tagged a page. Cheers AKS (talk) 11:55, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Errol Wellington
Please note I have removed the A7 Speedy Deletion from this page. A7 only applies to articles where no assertion of notability is made, however this article states that the subject has represented their national team which is deemed notable per WP:NFOOTY. Please be careful when tagging articles. Camw (talk) 12:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello Errol. Copied and thanks for the action taken. I perhaps failed to establish importance; but then you know better. Will take care in future. Cheers AKS (talk) 12:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012
Hello Arunsingh16. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know however,  that tagging articles for speedy deletion moments after creation as lacking context (CSD A1), content (CSD A3) and articles created through the Article Wizard, is too fast. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), pure vandalism (G3), and copyright violations (G12) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Buddha Putra - Rahul  (Talk)  12:49, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear Rahulmothiya; thanks for educating me on the "important task". I am not sure as to what are you trying to imply by saying that I tagged an article too soon? Jeetumoni Kalita was written on 12 Nov 2011. Where is the question of tagging it too soon? If you are talking about me tagging articles other than this, then it is my suggestion that you don’t worry about it as Administrators, Reviewers and other experienced Wikipedians will be reviewing what I recommend. There is NO wait period before an article can be tagged speedy deletion. it is the responsibility of the writer to "Save Page" once when the article is complete. Cheers AKS (talk) 13:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

School deletions
Hi Arunsingh. Thank you for your concerns about  the quality  of school articles. Please consider listing schools for AfD when you are more familiar with  our policies. All high schools are generally  kept. Not being  referenced or having  a promotional  tone are not  reasons for deletion, because they can be easily  addressed. Please see WP:NPP and WP:BEFORE and WP:OUTCOMES, and if you have any  questions, do  feel  free yo  ask me on my  talk  page. Happy editing! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. Will keep that in mind for future. CheersAKS (talk) 15:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

B1 YAMUNA VIHAR
U HAVE SENT ME A MESSEGE TO DELETION OF THIS ARTICLE THIS ARTICLE IS ABOUT A SCHOOL NOT FOR A COMPONY(Rahul kaushik (talk) 16:16, 4 January 2012 (UTC))

WP:AIV
Dear Salvio; I reported WP:AIV and much thanks for your attention. I agree that I reacted to the initial comments made by user in discussion. The words used as "comments" in my edits were merely to "get back" at the other user (not an excuse and an apt thing but this is what happened). In any case, I agree that this should not have been done by me (my bad) and on the first instance when I noticed foul language, I should have reported the matter. Also, can you please help me understand if someone gets into an edit war without a valid point then what should be the right approach? Please help. Regards AKS (talk) 16:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, well, in my opinion, the best course of action is always WP:BRD: someone makes a bold edit, someone else reverts it and the two editors start discussing on the article's talk page. Ideally, the two editors should be able to achieve consensus and solve the dispute; when this does not happen, WP:DR should be followed. That page contains many useful tips as to how one can solve content disputes: you can ask for a third opinion, start a request for comments or use one of the many noticeboards, such as WP:DRN, WP:BLPN, WP:NPOVN and so on. If the other editor starts getting disruptive and edit wars, then you can ask that the article in question be protected or the editor be blocked, but this is just the extrema ratio when discussion has failed to resolve the dispute and the other editor is still edit warring; blocks should never be used as clubs to silence your opponent in a content dispute. Finally, WP:BOOMERANG too contains a very good bit of advice: when you report someone, your conduct too will be examined. Salvio  Let's talk about it! 17:11, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the information. I will review this and use when necessary. On a different note, I just happen to visit the Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback page and noticed that one user with 320 lifetime edits has been granted Rollback rights whereas my request was declined citing low experience (800+ edits). What do I need to do more to get that right? Please assist. Many thanks. AKS (talk) 17:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I haven't reviewed the contributions made by the other editor, but an edit count is a very poor indicator of experience; in particular, I declined your application because I think that you're still inexperienced when it comes to identifying and fighting vandalism. Probably, the other editor is more experienced in that particular area, despite having made fewer edits... Salvio  Let's talk about it! 17:50, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok. You guys are the best judge - not me so I guess it is fine. However I am not convinced about the “experience part” and hence a small suggestion (don’t mind) I can make is (perhaps you Admins can discuss this in your forum) that there should be some consistency in granting privileges with minimum thresholds set for each level (however crossing threshold should not guarantee rights). Just a thought.AKS (talk) 17:55, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

p.s. Check User:Jargon777

CSD status for Anywhere (band)
Hello, this is just a quick note about the CSD tagging of the new article I penned, Anywhere (band). Though the CSD was already removed by User:StephenBuxton, I just wanted to throw in my two cents about the high notability of the musicians involved in this new project. Cedric Bixler-Zavala is a multi-platinum recording artist with rock bands Mars Volta and At The Drive In, while Mike Watt is a legendary rock/punk musician whose career spans decades. The only questionable candidate for notability in the combo is, ironically, its primary songwriter Christian Eric Beaulieu, who played in a San Francisco band called Triclops!, all links to which are currently directed towards a disambiguation page while I assess the latter band's notability to see if it merits a page of its own. An initial peek seems to suggest that Triclops! was notable, with a single that was the last release on noted independent label Gold Standard Labs and two full-length albums on the long-running record label Alternative Tentacles, all of which were widely reviewed in major music media and coupled with international touring. As this is a busy week for me, however, that band's page might need to wait for a minute. Meantime, Anywhere (band) seems to meet notability requirements as the combo is about to release its second EP and seems to be building steam for a wider release. There is quite a bit more online media regarding the band's debut, but since its media outreach thus far seems to be built off a single press release most of it is formatted very similarly to the one external link I already established. Notability is also significantly burnished by substantial excitement in the progressive rock community over the existence of this band, though chatter on message boards obviously does not merit inclusion as a reference. DuendeThumb (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Deunde; thanks for the update. Reason I tagged this band was a) At the time of tagging it was on single source with not much information provided and b) I googled for the group but could not find any news on them. I think due to their name (Anywhere) my seaarch results were not good. Thanks for your understanding. Cheers AKS (talk) 04:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Grepolis
Hello

On 04/01/2012 you tagged the article "Grepolis" for speedy deletion and it was deleted almost immediately. I strongly believe that A7 is not applicable for this case, since the mentioned article is as important (or unimportant) as the Travian, Freeciv.net, Evony or any other game from the List_of_multiplayer_browser_games

Since the article is deleted already, I cannot "contest this speedy deletion". Could you please assist.

LevanJugheli (talk) 05:38, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. This is not the first time that this article was created and deleted. Apr, Aug & Nov 2010 and finally Jan 2012 this page was created and deleted by 04 different admins. I recommend you contact one of the admins who deleted this article. Thanks for your understanding. Cheers AKS (talk) 06:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * How can I see who deleted the previous versions in Apr, Aug & Nov 2010? LevanJugheli (talk) 06:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Follow the simple steps 1) Search for the article 2) Click on Article name when you are suggested "You may create abcd...." but dont create article and stop there. All details will be visible under heading "A page with this title has previously been deleted." CheersAKS (talk) 06:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The 33 Strategies of War
Welcome to Wikipedia? FYI, I have over 70K edits. Now, why do you believe that it is useful to have so much detail about a not-so-notable book? Clarityfiend (talk) 05:57, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Help me understand (for my own good), is there a guideline that tells us that details like this cannot be provided? Please help. Cheers AKS (talk) 06:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Books/Non-fiction article states "an exhaustive list of contents, without any editorial commentary or significance, should not be included". Clarityfiend (talk) 06:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * This helps a lot. Many thanks. I will revert the changes I made on the artile. Thanks once again. Cheers AKS (talk) 06:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Patrik Lindberg
So you really don't think an article with nothing but reliable sources about the subject of a person who has been nominated and won for several eSports Award categories repeatedly does not have any notion of notability? For that matter, somebody that you could Google-search his name under the categories of "Web", "Images", "Videos" and "News", for which you will immediately get features specifically about him? D arth B otto talk•cont 09:43, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * No issues Darth; just make sure all the news articles (where necessary) are referenced in the article. I am sure an administrator will review the article and all refs made on the page (not google) and if he feels, he will remove the deletion tag & leave the article intact. If the article does not qualify then it will be deleted. Nomination for deletion does not mean that the article will be deleted. Do not forget to "Contest the deletion". Cheers AKS (talk) 09:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * If there is no such issue, then why bring it up on speedy deletion? That implies that you are endorsing its deletion, not that it's an article that needs improving. I wouldn't recommend indiscriminately nominating every new article. D arth B otto talk•cont 09:22, 08 January 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Atul Kasbekar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Barbara (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

*Closed

Speedy Deletion of Polar network
Hello there,

I have recieved the message that the Polar network page is under speedy deletion. Could you lket me know what I would have to do to get this published onto Wikipedia.

Thanks for your help.

Best regards ILoveItaly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iloveitalytoo (talk • contribs) 14:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment posted on user talkpage AKS (talk) 14:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Ridiculous templating of an experienced user
Please explain in detail why you consider this edit as bad faith and vandalism on my talk page or remove your templated warning from my user page. Thank you. --MegaSloth (talk) 16:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relax MegaSloth; it was an oversight (I am a human being in case you did not notice already). Dont get upset. I know where I messed up; I noticed word "sucker" and assumed that the page was vandalized. Like rest of us, I also dont check edit count of every user before reverting changes - so dont take it personal. If it makes you feel better, please report my change as Vandalism. Cheers AKS (talk) 17:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Leica R4-R7
Hello Arunsingh16. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Leica R4-R7, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: None of this content is in the Leica article. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 18:59, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * R4, R7 etc are diff models of Leica Camera which is already included in the article Leica Camera. Please reconsider as the page Leica R4-R7 might not be required. Thanks AKS (talk) 19:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * WP:CSD only applies when an article "does not expand upon, detail or improve information" in another article. Just because the models are mentioned in the Leica article doesn't mean that they should be deleted on that criterion. Now, whether the cameras are sufficiently notable to meet WP:PRODUCT is another question, but that should be decided through PROD or AFD, not CSD. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 19:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Question (for my understanding). Should these sort of articles be merged with "parent" article? Please advice. Cheers AKS (talk) 19:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Probably not, as DGG has pointed out there probably are reviews of the cameras somewhere and the parent article should only ever aim to summarise what the individual articles say. WP:SUMMARYSTYLE may be of use. Also, I noticed that you tagged The Three Beauties as A7 and G11 - A7 has very strict rules and cannot apply to buildings. I don't really think it is spammy either. The best thing to do with it is have a quick search to make sure it isn't notable (WP:BEFORE) and then if it isn't, WP:PROD saying it doesn't meet WP:GNG. Thanks for your patrolling and vandalism fighting though! We all have to start somewhere! Let me know if you have any other questions. SmartSE (talk) 19:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Additionally, many famous camera models are individually notable. (If not, we generally merge or redirect, not delete.) If you think these not notable enough for a separate article , try AfD, but I strongly suspect they'll be found notable there on the basis of multiple substantial published 3rd party product reviews, which is the criterion.  A speedy deletion is for   obvious and incontestable deletions. There's no point arguing for a tag to be put back if removed by anyone other than the author of the article--if it has been contested in good faith, it is not incontestable. Incidentally, there is no point using prod on this one, as someone will certainly be removed which stops a prod.  DGG ( talk ) 19:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

schools
Schools are not one of the classes of things subject to deletion as A7, no indication of importance. They are specifically excluded. Our  practice is to always or almost always consider all high schools as notable, and generally but not always redirect lower schools to the locality or other suitable place. There seem to be other comments from experienced people here about you speedy tagging. Please, hold off a bit, and read WP:Deletion policy and WP:CSD before doing further deletion tagging .Even with 5 years of experience as an admin here, I find it advisable to reread these every once in a while, to make sure I'm not drifting from the standards. DGG ( talk ) 19:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey DGG, thanks for the help. Point taken and will keep in mind for future NPP. Cheers AKS (talk) 19:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion on James C. Bean
Hello, Arunsingh16, I noticed that you tagged James C. Bean for speedy deletion under criterion A7. I have contested the speedy deletion because the article contains a claim of importance or significance, that he is Provost of the University of Oregon. Thanks, Quasi  human  &#124;  Talk  19:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, as the admin who just declined your speedy-delete nomination of Hakaru Masumoto, I agree. Articles that contain any assertion of notability, even if unsourced, do not qualify under WP:CSD.


 * And to Quasihuman: the way to contest a speedy deletion is to put a hangon tag in the article. Please do not remove a speedy deletion template unless you're an admin. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your latter point, WP:CSD says: "The creator of a page may not remove a speedy deletion tag from it. Only an editor who is not the creator of a page may do so." it does not mention that only admins can contest speedy deletion nominations. Template:Db-a7, specifically asks editors to remove the tag if they are not the creator, and does not mention that one must be an admin to do so. Is this suggestion of yours based on any policy, or is it just your own opinion? Quasi  human  &#124;  Talk  23:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * My brain is foggy, it's been a rough day today. My apologies, you are quite correct. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Right, anyone but the contributor. It is of course a good idea to make very clear in the edit summary & if necessary the talk p., why you are declining the speedy. I also usually explain to the contrib. who's article was tagged that the tag was removed, and what they need do to make sure it does not get deleted by AfD. If the tagging was particularly wrong, I also explain to the tagger. All this takes time & trouble, but avoids problems later.  DGG ( talk ) 00:00, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

deleted edit
I do not understand why my edit was deleted. It provided referenced lyrics to the song title in the article. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hendersi (talk • contribs) 23:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Weeksville Dirigible Hangar
Hello Arunsingh16. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Weeksville Dirigible Hangar, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Historical buildings are not elegible for speedy deletion under speedy deletion criterion A7 Thank you. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 05:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
Hi Arunsingh16. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing!  F ASTILY  (TALK) 09:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

Dear Fastily; many thanks for the kind consideration. I am sure this tool will be helpful. Regards AKS (talk) 09:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

-- John of Reading (talk) 10:55, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Kattoor Narayana Pillai
The reason for deleting the page was omitted from the nomination. Please make sure to edit the AfD to provide your reason for seeking deletion. Thanks. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Welcoming users
I see you've been welcoming users with Twinkle, which is good, although normally we only welcome users that have made some constructive edits, per the welcoming committee. I noticed a lot of the users you've been welcoming don't have any edits (user pages created through ACIP, like A S Y V R KRISHNA's don't count) or no constructive edits (like Plownage). Twinkle is a powerful tool for making automated edits, but it still requires a human decision-making process behind it. Hope that makes sense! And thanks for the welcome message you left for me as well, although it's a couple years late! :P — Bility (talk) 09:53, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Bility; as they say - it is never too late :-P On a serious note; thanks for bringing this to my notice (I am not sure how did I end up on your Talkpage though). However, reason I left welcome message on new user page is that they get all the information needed at one place and do not end up making mistakes that in turn increases work of people like you, me and lots other. Will keep your suggestion in mind for future. Cheers AKS (talk) 10:01, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

AfDs
Hi there, you have recently nominated a number of articles for deletion, such as Etienne Mendy and Olivier Beaudry (among others), where you have not provided any good rationale. Saying "may not be notable, please check for me" is not acceptable. Both articles are notable - you need to do research before you nominate an article, per WP:BEFORE. GiantSnowman 13:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note that at least 3 of them have been speedily kept already. As GiantSnowman says, you need to both do your own research first before nominating for AfD, and also provide a deletion rationale which corresponds to some Wikipedia policy.  It is okay to nominate articles you aren't sure of--for example, I sometimes nominate things and say, "I searched for sources, and can't find any, though maybe there are some offline or buried in results that I didn't notice."  In other words, you don't have to exhaustively search every single place down through thousands of search results, but you need to make a good faith effort to look for the info first before talking and article to WP:AfD. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear GiantSnowman & Qwyrxian; thanks for your time and the feedback on this matter. I take your points and will keep them in mind for future. However, I just want to clarify my stand on this. It is not that I am just tagging articles for the heck of it - please dont get me wrong. Almost 20 odd articles that I have tagged last week have been deleted and several others not. I am also on the learning curve and hence can go wrong from time to time; but then this is continuous improvement process. Also, I fail to understand why some articles are actually created and kept on Wikipedia. For example there is an article Hitesh (proper noun). Like this, we can have millions of articles and Wikipedia will be merely reduced to “List of Baby names”. Yes, I could not ascertain the importance of the articles I tagged – but then I had opened the discussion (and not deleted the article). Your point taken that I should leave better comments for the Admin to understand. Please do guide me in the future as well. Many thanks again for your time. Cheers AKS (talk) 05:28, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello Arunsingh, your lack of knowledge on notability is not a sufficient excuse for your frivolous AfD's. On the AfD page it clearly states you should Read and understand policies and guidelines to Subject specific notability guidelines before nominating see here. So I suggest you acquaint yourself with WP:GNG, WP:NFOOTBALL & WP:FPL before nominating any more football pages. You seem like a very proactive editor, so please don't feel I'm trying to persecute you, it's just a lot of time was wasted dealing with your actions. Regards & Happy editing. &#9733;&#9734; DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 06:28, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello DUCKISJAMMMY; I am not sure what is the intent of your message when I have already stated in my message above that "Yes, I could not ascertain the importance of the articles I tagged....". I am not sure what more do you want me to say. Who gave an excuse to begin with? Please read up; I think it is only fair that I can also express my views and "why I did, what I did". In any case and as I said, Yes I will keep in mind suggestions made by all the admins on my talkpage. Cheers AKS (talk) 07:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The purpose of my message was to insure you made yourself familiar with WP:GNG, WP:NFOOTBALL & WP:FPL before nominating as you hadn't been advised of this by the others user that's all. Have a good day &#9733;&#9734; DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 07:47, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

AKS, if you have a situation in the future where you're not sure if an AfD is appropriate, feel free to ask me on my talk page first. I'm happy to help you improve. Like I said, there's nothing wrong with nominating things that get kept--it happens to me plenty of times, and that's why we have deletion discussions. The problem is nominating articles that are very definitely notable per our various rules, as that just costs editors time in responding to a frivolous AfD. So I would be very willing to help you out in learning that distinction. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd like to echo Qwyrxian's sentiments and say I'm more than happy to help if there are any AfDs that you are unsure about - all you have to do is ask! GiantSnowman 11:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Nitz 'N' Sony


A tag has been placed on Nitz 'N' Sony requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to 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 tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 14:16, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:Accusation of vandalism
Please see Talk:Charnel ground. As I stated each time I removed the section, I was moving it to the talk page, and as I stated on the talk page, this was because the section did nothing to support why it should be on the page. The section must be made actually informative, or dropped from the article.70.34.147.3 (talk) 06:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Replied on Talk:Charnel ground. AKS (talk) 16:26, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Bavaria International Aircraft Leasing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grünwald (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

what is the unconstructive thing I wrote? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.137.160 (talk) 18:32, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

At least four non-vandalism reversions today
Hello: this edit was clearly not vandalism. Neither was this, this, or this. In response to similar messages above you state that mistakes can be made, but these are all from today alone, which indicate that you may simply be acting too quickly in response to perceived vandalism. I recommend you take the time to more carefully evaluate what you are reverting. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa  (talk) 20:54, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Copied and that’s embarrassing. Will take care in the future. Thanks for pointing that out. Cheers AKS (talk) 06:26, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Castle Harlan Controversy
Hi, would you care to tell me why adding details that were in the source constitutes vandalism? It looks like you have been reverting a lot of things that weren't vandalism. If you still think that it's vandalism, please respond. Otherwise, please try to be more careful. Transcendence (talk) 21:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Agreed, it is an error on my part. Thanks for pointing that out - for sure this will help for future edits. Cheers AKS (talk) 06:47, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Constructive Dilemma
Hi Arunsingh16. You reverted my edit on Constructive Dilemma. As a matter of fact, the way it is currently set up is not logically valid. I fixed it to make it logically valid. Without my edit, the argument assumes that donating money results in the money being received. This is not always true. Please reinstate my edit. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.88.84.218 (talk) 23:24, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear 74.88.84.218; previous edit was self explnatory and the argument was valid in original text. AKS (talk) 06:47, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism
Hello, I'm a user of the Italian Wikipedia and I was reading something on en.wikipedia, unlogged, when your warning message popped out. My IP is shared to a number of people in my local area, so I guess some countryman of mine hit the "random article" button and wrote what he wrote. The edits my IP did to that page are vandalism, for exemple "la cacca siluro" means literally "the shit torpedo" so go ahead in having this IP blocked for some time if it makes some other damage. Thank you. --195.81.66.1 (talk) 11:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear 195.81.66.1; reverting changes or issuing a vandalism warning does not necessarily mean blocking the IP. It is recommended to create a user account which will relieve you from issues arising due to shared IP. Cheers AKS (talk) 11:34, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hi Arunsingh16, just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! —Tom Morris (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for answering the concerns I posted. Sorry if I was a bit hasty, I was on an unreliable 3G connection on the train home and didn't want another admin to grant autopatrolled without a check on this issue. Generally with these things, it's better if you think there's a concern to jump in and apologise later rather than sit back and potentially have another admin grant autopatrolled without necessarily seeing the issue.
 * Just one other slightly pedantic point: on new articles you create, could you be sure to tag them with the relevant WikiProject on the talk page? You just put a template for the WikiProject - this way, hopefully others who are interested will turn up. For example, on India-related topics, add WikiProject India to the talk page, on biographies add WikiProject Biography to the talk page (if they are living use ). Just to get an idea what WikiProjects there are, see WikiProject Council/Directory. WikiProjects can then be more effective in helping direct the effort of interested volunteers on that topic to improving articles.
 * Thanks for all your awesome article work, please carry on and create many more! —Tom Morris (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear Tom Morris, more than thanking you for granting the right; I must thank you for the encouragement and the kind words. I can assure you that I will keep all the suggestions in mind. After I get back from work tonight, I will start cleaning up the previous articles I have written to be in line with rest; especially before I start creating any new articles. Many thanks and all the best. Cheers AKS (talk) 09:02, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
—Tom Morris (talk) 13:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Dr. Maithili Rao contested
This is on Maithili Rao - I have been put 7 references on the notability of this doctor. She has published in many international journals in radiation oncology including NIH which is the gold standard for doctors. nor is this marketing. I am not sure if there was any attempt made to read the new references and changes made — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kballal1 (talk • contribs) 02:00, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear Kballal1, user talk page is not the place to contest any suggested deletion; it has to be done on the article / related pages. Moreover, only deletion was suggested by me and it was reviewed by others before the article was deleted by an Admin which is in line with Wikipedia guidelines. Cheers AKS (talk) 04:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Bgwhite (talk) 05:52, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Asmaan Se Ooncha (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Anwar and Abhijeet


 * Disco Shanti (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Oriya and Ghayal


 * Kishan Rungta (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Bowler and Bagar


 * R. K. Singh Patel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Banda and Balapur


 * Kingfisher Airlines (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to DGCA


 * Nishikant Dubey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bhawanipur


 * Rajaji (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Poornima


 * Springland International (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Danyang


 * Teri Payal Mere Geet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hariharan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Oil and gas companies of Russia
Category:Oil and gas companies of Russia, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Jeancey (talk) 17:31, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, my name is Dane Scarborough and I am the inventor of Uberstix. I have posted the history of Uberstix many times using the same format as the Lego page and still, all information is deleted? Please tell me why we are not welcome on Wikipedia? In past years, I have even hired people to post key history and information and it is always deleted on the premiss of advertising which I understand, so I used the Lego formate verbatim, (inserting uberstix history) and .... deleted again??? (Nadodoppler (talk) 12:13, 21 January 2012 (UTC))

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Indian music directors
Category:Indian music directors, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  05:11, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Eurasia Drilling Company Limited, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LSE (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

 * Even if you had not realized it at the time, you have recreated an article that three days prior was deleted per deletion discussion. In respecting your work, I tried to set a redirect so as to protect the article history, but as you feel that your article should remain untouched even after the deletion discussion, I have instead tagged it as a WP:CSD recreation.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:35, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * This article might NOT qualify for WP:CSD. Are we sure that the article was unimproved copy of the deleted article? AKS (talk) 21:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

(Carried from my talk page) I think the result of the deletion discussion was that, given the current situation, we don't want an article on the film until its official release. However, if circumstances have indeed changed since what was described on the discussion, feel free to take the matter to WP:DRV for a re-discussion. Deryck C. 22:00, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Yup. As a planned film lacking enough in-depth and persistant coverage to merit being an exception to WP:NFF, the original was properly deleted per established proccesses. We do not recreate 3 days later without respecting the AFD and the processes set in place. Userfication is an option.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:03, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear Deryck & Michael, I am not sure what is so different with this "upcoming movie" from the other upcoming movies? Please check page Bollywood films of 2012. I am sure you will find lots of movies that have not yet been released officially so why demand the “official release” for this movie? Kick is no different from the rest (even Hollywood movies). What I am trying to understand as to why this article has been termed bad? It does not matter what references I cite; if the article has to be deleted – it will be citing some or the other rule that can be interpreted either way (for example putting the page on CSD). To begin with, the page should not have been deleted at all (forget my write-up being deleted). Page was not based on “speculations”.


 * I don’t want to drag this forever and hence am going to rest the case; please do whatever you guys think is the best. I am not the producer of this film and hence it does not matter to me if the article stays or gets deleted. Cheers AKS (talk) 22:23, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The "difference" is in extent and persistance of coverage. Read WP:FF. Then read WP:FUTURE. Even planned films might be spoken of somewhere, if properly sourced... but for an article on a future film to merit a separate article, it needs more than we curently have. Would you like it moved to a user workspace? I'd be glad to place it where you can continue work.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:34, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello Michael, no issues and thanks for the assistance. I will try and track this movie for future. No hard feelings but it is just that I was (and am) not convinced of the AfD and later CSD. In any case, we all have to work together and hence I respect your call on this. Cheers AKS (talk) 07:38, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Martha Ballard Entry
Greetings, Just curious, I noticed that the revision of the Martha Ballard was marked as vandalism? If anything, the current version is vandalism because it reads like an uploaded middle school book report. The original entry was much more adequate and usable. The current version is virtually unusable in an educational setting. Would it be possible to return it to the original entry? Thanks. Jwoods61us (talk) 06:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear Jwoods, one of the reasons it was reverted was that significant changes were made and content removed with apt comments from user. You are free to make changes provided apt citation & ref is provided. Please do not forget to add comments. Thanks and happy editing. Cheers AKS (talk) 07:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Stop Editing Prabhas Raju Uppalapati Article
I am a relative at the same time die hard fan of Prabhas Raju Uppalapati. When you are not a telugu guy and you don't know prabhas why did you touch his article next time if you touch it i will penalise you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rebelphani (talk • contribs) 16:03, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Rebelphani, it does not matter if you are a Telgu or not or related to someone. This is Wikipedia and not Telgupedia. Next time you want to update something, follow the Wikipedia guidelines. If you need some help, get in touch with me or any other experienced user. This is NOT your personal workspace where you can do whatever you like. Please be cognizant of this fact. Any act of hostility will result in your IP being reported and might be blocked as well. Cheers AKS (talk) 16:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

2011 Beechcraft 65-80 Queen Air crash
You tagged the article proposing that it be merged into List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft. I removed the tag. A merger wouldn't work and here's why.

The list article is for accidents and incidents that have an independent article. If a incident doesn't have a independent article, it doesn't get put on the list. If you go to the article and open the edit section, you'll see the rule at the top of the page.

Another thing, Beechcraft 65-80 Queen Air, isn't generally considered a commercial aircraft but a private one instead. That's why the 2011 crash isn't on the list already.- William 18:08, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your time William. Cheers AKS (talk) 05:26, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

List of Conan episodes
Hi there! You recently reverted an edit made by 75.57.70.168 to the article List of Conan episodes, see here. You reverted it on the grounds that it was a good faith edit that was uncited, and you subsequently left a message on 75.57.70.168's user talk page. However, the edit was in fact supported by a source already contained within the article. The line of text following the line which was edited includes a named reference. To avoid any confusion on the part of 75.57.70.168, I would like to suggest that you contact that user on his or her user talk page. – Zntrip 23:02, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Lynch 7  11:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Michael Milhoan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Sneakers, Crimson Tide, Most Wanted, Multiplicity, Dirty Deeds, First Daughter, American Virgin and Anywhere But Here


 * Ashley Buccille (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Renegade and Tumbleweeds


 * Godrej Properties Limited (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hyderabad


 * Kick (1999 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Scott


 * Mishra (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Indian


 * Redington (India) Ltd (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Acer


 * Royal Orchid Hotels (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hyderabad


 * Yusaku Maezawa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Chiba

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Redington
I've done the move anyway, but some problems. As it stands, it's about what the company does, awards won and similar material which looks as if it's intended to promote the company. You have financial data, put it in the text, not just the infobox, also anything else factual and important, such as number of employees, where are its main offices (south Asia is a bit vague). If you are putting in awards, you should mention criticism. I would have prodded this for deletion, but since you have contacted me, I'll give you a bit of time to fix it  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  13:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I take your point and agree that it should be expanded more. Please allow me sometime to start the review and clean-up. Appreciate your help. Cheers  AKS   04:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * no problem, but you shouldn't leave it too long, there are other admins out there...  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Barons, Alberta
Why are you arbitrarily deleting information I am posting? I encourage you to edit new info for further accuracy/clarification but arbitrarily deleting information relevant to the Village of Barons residents I feel is vandalism. I cited the information to the Lethbridge Herald where you could easily have verified the accuracy of the content I posted. idatura@gmail.com

IDatura (talk) 19:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello IDatura, I have NO idea of what are you talking about????? I dont see your name in the page history at all. Are you using IP 199.83.154.162??? Assuming you are; here is what happened. I intended to delete text quote "Due to Village height restrictions of 15 feet Figment Cablesystems must use the existing fire tower for their equipment. This tower is roughly the same height as the trees so it is recommended that you contact Figment Cablesystems to test your site to see if internet access is available." unquoted as you had not cited any sources for the same. What I was not aware about was that you had made another update before that and the tool reverted both edits made by you (under my name). It is interesting that two back-to-back warnings by other editors have been issued to IP same id address (by other editors) on similar grounds. Please read the Wikipedia guidelines before you update / create any article. I am posting some tips on your talkpage. Cheers  AKS  19:23, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Barons, Alberta
I'm new to editing on Wiki. Please bear with me as I go through my learning curve. I've attempted to create my talk page so that we can discuss why you feel my cited post is vandalism and summarily deleted. Thank you. IDatura (talk) 19:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Appreciate your efforts. However I must caution you that any un-cited, poorly sourced, vandalism or any update that does not comply with Wikipedia guideline is most likely to be deleted without any prior warning or discussion. Hence it is advisable that the contents are properly sourced and then updated. Please refrain from "copy paste" (just in case). Let me know if I can be of any help. Cheers  AKS  19:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I've updated my talk page. I apologize if this is not the correct way to communicate with you. The major question at this point is how do I prevent relevant informaion from being deleted if no citation is available? The Village of Barons does not post its bylaws online. Thank you. IDatura (talk) 20:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi IDatura; dont worry about it. We all are here as volunteers with a motive to help each other and other readers. I recommend that you refer WP:V & WP:CITE. This will give you good idea about how to update. Please feel free to drop me a message if you think I can be of any help. I understand your frustration that it can be a pain (as a new comer) to "source" and cite everything that is updated; but then it is in the best interest; else Wikipedia articles will have no importance. Cheers AKS  20:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Ram Narayan Sharma, Dhanbad
Just FYI, I declined your speedy here as I believe a former MP is enough to avoid an A7. Will try to source but feel free to take it to AfD if you think it's not sufficient StarM 23:36, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, check that. It may be a dupe of Ram Sharma. I'm trying to determine if they're one and the same and have asked for some help from WP:India StarM 23:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

re changes to Sexaholics Anonoymous page
This was my first attempt to do any substantial Wiki editting and I made a number of mistakes along the way. I concsciously checked for mistakes and corrected them. This is why there were a total of 8 edits on one day. I believe however the end product added qualitatively to this Wiki entry.Ferneryp (talk) 00:03, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Be Careful
You have tagged this as test/vandalism. It is neither test nor vandalism. It is just addition of one extra locality in that area however trivial it may be. I just had a glancing at your contributions and found out that even this is not test/vandalism. This is a very crucial piece of information and very much a constructive edit, but you have reverted it saying that it is test/vandalism.

I am shocked to see that you have done more than 100 edits per hour using STiki. I would strongly suggest that you immediately stop using the tool and review all your previous edits. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 03:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 04:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Admin review
Hi AKS - a complaint was lodged about your conduct at the admin noticeboard. I've reviewed it and found nothing requiring admin intervention. You seem to be a fine editor and your enthusiasm is noted and appreciated.

However I do have one request - many of your edits involve the (proper) removal of dubious or unsourced information. Please don't use the "vandalism/test" tag in your edit summary in these cases. It can upset the people who added the information you added, and it suggests your reasoning is wrong (when it is actually correct). I've never used STiki but I'm sure it has an option for correctly giving your actual reason for your action.

Drop me a line if I can ever be of any assistance, regards Manning (talk) 05:08, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello Manning; many thanks for your kind consideration. As rightly pointed out by you, yes the tool by default identifies reverts as vandalism. I however make efforts to revert the edits manudally like this, this, this and lots others. At times, people just aimlessly edit articles and put unreferenced material that changes the meaning / motive of the articles. I simply revert them with the tool available with me. Unfortunately the tool identifies them as vandalism. How do I change the settings case-to-case? Yes at times, like rest of us even I go wrong and even without anyone telling me, I correct it. Please check this this. What is surprising is the talkpage of the user who reported me; check this. User had several warnings and violations himself.


 * May I request if you can advice me how to avoid using "vandalism" tag on case-to-case basis without having to exit the tool? I try and do it manually but it is very time consuming. Once again, thanks for your time and consideration. Cheers  AKS  08:29, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I use Huggle which is far more flexible in this regard. Contact the developers of STiki as far as that tool. Regards, Manning (talk) 08:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear Manning, sounds good. Let me take a break for a day before I get into the Vandal issues again. I am just surprised by the personal attack from the user; that too when he himself is 2 months old and has several reported cases against him. Once again, thanks for your support. Cheers  AKS  08:50, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Meh, it happens. (Try being here for ten years!) Stick around, do good work and you'll soon find out who the good folks are. Manning (talk) 09:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot. This (Wikipedia) is the best hobby I have ever had and I love my time here :-) . I am trying to improve and be more constructive; all thanks to help from people like you, I think I can improve further. Cheers  AKS  10:53, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
-- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 15:56, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edit
Please be careful while fighting vandalism. Your recent revert was incorrect. While I agree that it should have been reverted, the edit contained no external links and therefore uw-spam does not apply. MJ94 (talk) 21:04, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear MJ94. Reason I tagged this as spam was 1) No Ref provided. 2) Sentence makes no sense. 3) Has no relation to the subject. 4) Wrong grammar on top of everything. Please let me know why do you feel otherwise? Cheers AKS  21:11, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

uw-spam is for the addition of inappropriate links. That edit did not include inappropriate links, but it was unsourced. MJ94 (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Understood. I am new user of Huggle (yesterday was the first day). Could not find unsourced on the tool. Will look harder. Cheers AKS  03:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Can I make a suggestion here. In cases like these, instead of reverting, would putting the tag or  on the top of the article be a better option. There are many copyeditors in Wikipedia who search for the tags like these and copyedit the article. Although I am not sure if putting tag is possible through Huggle. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 11:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello MJ94 & Anbu121; thanks for the valuable feedback. I will look into it and am hopeful that it will be helpful for my future work. Cheers AKS  17:05, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Dirty Work
My addition is from the same article by Robert Christgau. Very important addition as The Rolling Stones and "cleanest sound" is NOT a good thing. It was a good thing in 1986, I think. What do you, know, sir? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.88.46.236 (talk) 13:29, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear Mr. Unknown, I don’t know anything about The Rolling Stones but that does not matter. What you should know & learn is that any updates to an article should be properly referenced and cited. Please provide valid source for the information. Incidentally, after I reverted your edit, you again put it only to be reverted by another patroller and yet another warning being issued to you. Please understand that personal opinions, understanding, knowledge etc do not matter when it comes to updating an article on Wiki. Please provide valid source for information. Feel free to let me or any other experienced user know if you need some help. Just because your edit was reverted twice, it does not mean you cannot update what you wanted to; just cite proper references. Dont forget to sign your post. Happy editing. Cheers AKS  16:55, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello again. My addition is from the same article by Robert Christgau. Read the article, before undoing the contribution, please. If you change it back to what I contributed, you will fix this. Good luck. "Winning Ugly: An Essay on Dirty Work". http://www.robertchristgau.com/xg/music/stones-86.php — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.88.46.236 (talk) 21:20, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear User, then you should update the source in the article and not leave it outside. Please review WP:V, WP:THIRDPARTY & WP:IRS if the source can be used. Cheers AKS  05:32, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Re:
 Tide  rolls  20:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Please be careful when reverting other editors
Hi there, I noticed that you just reverted 's to Edinboro University of Pennsylvania. Those edits were neither unconstructive nor an act of vandalism but they were a valid improvement of the article. E.g. some IP had previously vandalised the infobox with a nonsensical motto, which was corrected by ErichJK. I think you should apologise to ErichJK and remove your vandalism tag from his talk page. Regards, De728631 (talk) 19:25, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Reverted due to 1) No edit summary 2) No reference provided. What is the basis of the update and why should that be kept? Please advice. Cheers AKS  19:29, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * First of all, I don't use edit summaries for most of my edits, they are by no means an obligation. And not every entry needs to be sourced, only those that may be challenged. The reason for keeping ErichJK's edits is called Assume good faith, one of Wikipedia's main principles. De728631 (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I understand that edit summary is not an obligation but as a senior editor I would assume you would do it, however two things together made the edit a good case to be identified as vandalism. I am sure you are going to drop in a message to the editor as well suggesting him to follow apt methods whilst updating an article. Cheers AKS  19:40, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Changes made on the Bahadurgarh Page
Hi The changes made on the page is true to my knowlegde as i have seen it my self on this sunday in bahadurgarh. Please revert and restore the changes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.98.142.169 (talk) 06:16, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello. Thanks for your message and for your continuous work on Wikipedia. I take this opportunity to bring to you notice that any update on Wikipedia has to be properly referenced and updates cannot be done based on personal knowledge, opinion, views etc. As a matter of fact, section is mostly unreferenced and is good enough for me to delete it. In good faith, I am not reverting this section and request you to cite proper references. Feel free to ask me if you need any help. Also, please refer WP:V, WP:THIRDPARTY & WP:IRS for citing sources. Happy editing. Cheers AKS  10:13, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Test/Vandalism revert at Shawn Nelson
This was cetainly not vandalism you reverted, and clearly a good-faith edit. Indeed, given the context, it can be argued that the IP's edit was in fact correct and your revert restored incorrect information, assuming the contextual facts are correct. The M65 TOW missle was the system used on the AH-1 Cobra. The Hellfire missle is used on the AH-1 SuperCobra. The context of the IP's edit was Cobra attack helicopter, not SuperCobra.

This revert took place within a series of several reverts per minute performed by you. No way could you have possibly checked the factual accuracy of what you were doing. I recommend being more careful in the future.--Racerx11 (talk) 07:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

More falsely labeled Vandalism reverts
I couldn't help but notice that this has been an on-going problem in the past. A quick look at your latest edits reveals this - clearly not vandalism; and this  - a Google search of the key words suggests there may been some truth to this edit. Yet in both cases (and also the one detailed in the above section) they were reverted, identified as test/vandalism in the edit summary and the users issued a vandalism warning.

Judging by your comments, you appear to be knowledgeable, well-intentioned and have a willing attitude to improve. And while most of your reverts are properly reverting vandalism, a small percentage (but still too many) are frankly sloppy and irresponsible. Please keep in mind that while fighting vandalism itself is a worthwhile endeavour, accusing an editor of vandalism is a serious matter and should never be done unless one is sure about it. --Racerx11 (talk) 09:42, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Racerx11; thanks for your comments. Let me assure you that it is not my responsibility to search for updates on Google and reference them in the articles that were previously edited by other users. Any un-cited material (update) will be reverted and if need be I will tag them as vandalism. Users have to reference their updates properly & it is their responsibility. Their knowledge, know-how, perception, view point etc does not matter unless the updates are properly cited. You must also know that the tool used (STiki) identifies any revert as vandalism; it is not me shooting the messages. Thanks for your kind words, I am active in fighting vandalism and will continue to do so with zero tolerance for abuses, wrong update, un-cited material, advertisement, bias etc. Cheers AKS  10:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick reply.


 * Well, no one is responsible for sourcing everything they see or want to revert. The vast majority of information on Wikipedia is unsourced. If you want to revert every unsourced edit you see, that's fine, it should keep you busy, but don't call it vandalism if it isn't. There is a difference between unsourced editing and vandalism.


 * You are responsible for the actions of any editing tool you use. Let me repeat that: You are responsible for the actions of any editing tool you use. The STiki page states the following disclaimer at the top of the page:


 * You take full responsibility for any action you perform using STiki. You must understand Wikipedia policies and use this tool within these policies, or risk losing access to the tool or being blocked.


 * You can't blame your actions on a STiki. If the tool does not give desired results, if it violates policy, or if you are unable to use it properly then you shouldn't use it all.


 * Please don't get me wrong. Editors like you are valuable to Wikipedia. I am trying to help you understand some of what you are doing is wrong. Some of those edits have merit. Those false accusations of vandalism offend innocent editors. We can loose valuable new editors if they are driven away. Please consider this in the future. Thank you. --Racerx11 (talk) 10:51, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Arun, I suggest you start using Huggle; its much more flexible with the edit summaries.  Lynch 7  11:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * MikeLynch; Thanks once again (you are a great help always). I have already started using Huggle. STiki has caused enough heartburns to me already. Cheers AKS  13:17, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * My dear Racerx11, you really need to understand that one of the prime reasons for anyone to visit Wikipedia is that the information here is authentic AND not that new editors are not "driven away". Just because an update revert is termed “vandalism” instead of “un-referenced” it does not make the update any more legitimate and my actions any less valid. And by the way, just because lots of articles are unreferenced does not mean anyone can & should add anything. Don’t teach me that “not everything has to be referenced”. Of course I know that already. Do you know that not every referenced item can also be updated and even referenced update can be reverted? By the way, as far as STiki is concerned, that is the “fine print” like on any product and when I contacted the person who developed it – he washed his hands off by citing the same thing. I at least expected him to look at the enhancement scope and escape the discussion. As I said, I switched over to Huggle yesterday.


 * Coming back to content change - content (change) that has the potential to change the meaning, interpretation, and implication etc of an article should be referenced and I maintain it that way. Some information can obviously go unreferenced – no problem. In the three edits you tagged – here is what happened.
 * This update talked about HOW a person was killed. This changes the interpretation a lot. As a matter of fact this change was earlier also reported as vandalism by another user (I was not the first one to report this as vandalism).
 * This update talked about “breaststroke kick” not being effective in water polo. May I ask you HOW did you or the editor determine that this kick is NOT effective? This change (also) was earlier also reported as vandalism by another user (I was not the first one to report this as vandalism). Explain to me why you feel that this information should be left on the article in as is condition.
 * In this case, motto updated without reference. Please explain to me WHY you feel this should be kept without citing sources.
 * I strongly recommend that you, instead of wasting your time and my time; please spend this time in educating some newcomers about the etiquettes of working on Wikipedia. I have stayed long enough on Wikipedia to determine the priorities (Authenticity versus welcoming new users - and NO, I don’t bite them). I do take efforts in guiding the newcomers in whatever way I could but at the same time I am completely against people trying to prove others wrong just to show how smart they are. Cheers AKS  13:19, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Russell Wong
I'm afraid your bot is too sensitive. Please clarify your comment at my talk page and undo your edits to the article. Thanks. 218.250.159.25 (talk) 11:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello, I appreciate your enthusiasm about working on Wikipedia. However, I should bring to your attention that any update to an article should be properly referenced and cited. Please provide valid source for the information. Please understand that personal opinions, understanding, knowledge etc do not matter when it comes to updating an article on Wiki unless a valid source is provided. Feel free to let me or any other experienced user know if you need some help. Just because your edit was reverted several times, it does not mean you cannot update what you wanted to; just cite proper references. Do NOT attempt to update anything more without citing proper sources as I noticed on your talkpage that level 4 warning has been issued already to you and any further non-compliance might lead to your IP getting blocked from edit. Dont forget to sign your post. Happy editing.  Cheers AKS  17:02, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * There are articles on his wife and his father-in-law and I don't have anything extra to add. My edits were reverted because they were erroneously detected by the bot. I understand the relevant Wikipedia policies but still I thank you for letting me know about them again. What I am requesting is your clarification at my user talk page. 218.250.159.25 (talk) 17:17, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Could you please clarify your warning regarding Russell Wong at my user talk page? 218.250.159.25 (talk) 18:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. I noticed that you tried to change his name to a different name which is not the same as the article name. You also amended the "Ancestry". I searched and could find his real name here, here & here. Whilst you had a point, you should have provided the ref in the article. Please understand that with hundreds of thousands edits going on, page watchers dont have time to go and research on web on behalf of editors. Besides, it is the responsibility of editor to cite sources. Don't worry, there is a way out if apt references can be found on web. Refs should be credible. IMDb is not considered a credible source. Let me know following;
 * What do you want to be updated?
 * What is the source?
 * Do you think that the page name should be changed to Stephen Huỳnh?
 * What is the actor popularly known as?

There are real people like me and not bot reverting most of your edits. We use some tools to do that. Cheers AKS  18:26, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Huynh's surname is explained clearly in the text of the article, and there are already sources in the article, that I had nothing to add. I understand there are hundreds of thousands going on at any time, I'd expect admins to be courteous and refrain from accusations (e.g. saying people are disruptive) until they understand what's going on. And I'd expect other editors to discuss before they revert other people's edits and accuse people for their edits. Finally, to repeat, I'm not saying you are a bot. I was referring to the bot or the detecting scripts that you rely on. 218.250.159.25 (talk) 18:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * My friend. It is very nice that you are trying to add value to Wikipedia but follow the policies. You claim to have read & understood the policies but it appears to me all that you know is how to perform edits. Also, please do not use the word bot as there is no bot involved anywhere. What you are talking about is a template (no one ever wrote a message to you and it was a standard template). I find your tone very inapt and approach very aggressive towards senior editors (User:Tide rolls & User:Velella). I am talking about discussion here and here. Velella has more than 30,000 edits whereas Tide rolls has more than 190,000. I am sure that they both know what they are talking about. Between three of us we have more than 230,000 edits and we all are telling you the same thing again and again. You are just 260 edits old and hence please refrain from teaching them about the policies. At the same time you are demanding courtesy when you are not being courteous yourself. Once and forever, it is editor’s responsibility to do proper research and cite apt sources; nobody is going to have any discussion with you or anyone else if the guidelines are not met. Edits will be reverted and adequate warning will be issued (if it is required). Please don’t take our modesty and time for granted. Let me know please if we can be of some help. We will be happy to help. Cheers AKS  19:07, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you again for your response. It was because both of them weren't as courteous as you did. They promptly called my edits as disruptions, vandalism and unconstructive, and undid such edits unreasonably. I don't want to be aggressive at all. The reasons for my edits to Russell Wong, Stephen Huynh and Francois Huynh were apparent enough for any capable editor to understand as long as he or she is committed to Wikipedia and bothers to read the content of those articles, the diffs, and the edit summaries. It's irresponsible for any experienced editor to rely too much on the autotags and resist to read into the actual edits. It turns out that I was correct and their reverts have all been undone. I edit from an ISP with variable IP addresses and therefore I had made a lot more edits than the figure you cited. Could you please now clarify your warning at my user talk page, that those edits were mistakenly identified as disruptive? User:Night w did it and I think it's reasonable and a matter of responsibility for other admins to do the same. 218.250.159.25 (talk) 23:16, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello. In the interest to move forward and for your benefit (since 5 different and unrelated users have told you the same thing), please understand that no reverts where done unreasonably. Unless you don’t update the articles in line with Wikipedia policy, I am afraid you cannot move forward. Please do me a favour, refer to my question I asked above (about what are you attempting to do) and also review the Wikipedia policies. I am taking the liberty of posting some guidelines on your talkpage. And lastly; no I am owe any explanation to you on any revert. Before you go on and on; read what I wrote above; I never said that the update are incorrect. The only thing I said was that you did not reference it properly. As a matter of fact I spent time in researching and citing you sources. Cheers AKS  05:51, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I suppose that was because the BLP autotag was too sensitive. May I know which question are you referring to? If it's the four questions above with bullet points: Those few actors are most commonly known by their Chinese names written in Chinese characters. Sources are already available in those articles. A move request have already been submitted for Stephen Hyunh. And my edits have all been retained as far as I notice. I am not asking for explanation but clarification that my previous edits were neither disruptive nor unconstructive. Thanks again for your courtesy and your willingness to discuss, unlike some other admins who deleted my message straight away. Anyways, happy editing. 218.250.159.25 (talk) 21:20, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Little Bo Bleep (Modern Family)
As your talk page demonstrates that you know full well that you're mislabeling all sorts of edits and issuing hundreds of unsubstantiated warnings, I'll spare you the lecture and stick to the facts:

This edit was not a test or vandalism. The revert you made was against Wikipedia policy, which you may find here whenever you're done with your latest STiki bender.

— Bdb484 (talk) 05:58, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, this was a pure error on my part and agreed to what you said. Thanks for pointing this out. However don’t generalize this and make it appear that all I do is issue 'unsubstantiated' warnings and wrong reverts. Discussion above and this are totally different. Cheers AKS  06:08, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Gambian pouched rat
I was just trying to stop propaganda.I think this site should be closed down if it is going to try to convince people if wild animals should be kept as pets or not.Please,delete those lines! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.145.159.71 (talk) 18:39, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello. I checked the article and have removed the un-sourced content. Please note that any content with apt references will NOT be removed unless it is against the policies. Thanks for your feedback. Cheers AKS  18:49, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I also noticed that you made this edit which seems to be more of your personal opinion. Please add / remove any content in Wikipedia in line with the policies. If you have any difficulties, then feel free to contact me. Cheers AKS  18:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Sensor Dynamics Wiki Revision -- Totally justified
Hello fellow editor. I work in the corporate communications department for Maxim Integrated Products. Our company acquired SensorDynamics in July 2011, at which point that company ceased to exist as a legal or separate entity. I was asked to update the wiki entry and to remove all the inaccurate information, which was most of the old article. Today's edits reflect the accurate explanation of what happened to SensorDynamics, links to technology terms that are still accurate, and links to the Maxim website where an interested person can learn about the acquisition.

It is important that the edits of today (8 Feb 2012) be posted and live. Please allow the edits to appear. Marianne Hartfield, Writer and Editor, Maxim Integrated Products — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marianne Hartfield (talk • contribs) 21:02, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear Marianne; thanks for your comments. I can understand the need for amending the page SensorDynamics. However any update has to be done in line with Wikipedia guidelines. I have taken the liberty of posting some "know-how" before you make the edits. Please also note that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone and no one has to "grant" any permission as long as the updates / edits meet the guidelines. Please feel free to send me a message if you have any questions. Please dont forget to sign your post by adding four ~. Happy editing. Cheers AKS  21:08, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

SensorDynamics Edits of 8 Feb 2012
Hello again. I am new to wiki editing. How do I get my edits to show again? Please tell me what to do. Thank you, Marianne Hartfield (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Marianne Hartfield


 * Dear Marianne; please understand that you cannot remove any content without citing apt reasons & sources. To help you, I posted some guidelines on your talkpage. However you removed it even without reading. To answer your question, go to History, look for tab "Compare selected revisions". Click on this tab and you will get options. However DO NOT revert changes if you are not adding any credible sources. If not me then other editor might revert the changes and issue you another warning. Please note that after some warnings, you might be blocked from editing and hence it is important that you follow Wikipedia guidelines. Cheers AKS  21:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I also noticed that you removed warning issued to you on 8th Feb by another user. Cheers AKS  21:18, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

hi
Hi Arun

I added some good photographs about amritsat city...like airport, railway, road network tourism place etc

can you tell me which particular point of deletion of all the good work and hours spent ?

i would like if you can restore and i can take off any item you guys dont like.

thanks a lot

Ajr.raymann — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajr.raymann (talk • contribs) 08:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hell Ajr. Thanks for your message. I am not an administrator and hence will not be able to help you much on this. However, I can request you to review WP:IUP (Image use policy) & WP:UPIMAGE (upload process). These two clearly explain the process and the guidelines. Hope this will be of help to you. Cheers AKS  08:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * first i'm sorry for commenting,
 * your photo is/are indeed good, like amritsat airport outside view, but the picture of "inside view" is like rip of "from certain website/licensed photo".
 * i'm file-mover so i'm familiar with image use policy
 * insert references or source of the info (such edit) and info or sources of image
 * see WP:NPOV
 * for example one of your fault like this edit
 * i hope you didn't do this kind of thing on your next edit, thank you.Ald™ ¬_¬™


 * Hello Aldnonymous, I assume your message above is for Ajr.raymann and not undersigned. Cheers AKS  09:04, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * my message are undersigned and yes it's for Ajr.raymann... Ald™ ¬_¬™


 * Hi Aldnonymous, by undersigned I mean User:Arunsingh16 and not that you did not sign your post. Please refer this. Cheers AKS  12:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Public opinion in LGBT rights in Sweden
So, you call clippings from swedish daily newspapers unnsourced, and from official opinion polls, well then, congratulations, you seem to live in a world of your own, surely untouched by reality, and you are not even homosexual, but still think you have an opinion....As a suggestion, take the headline PUBLIC OPINION away, since you obviously don´t know anything about it; public opinion is public opinion, not what is written in lawbooks. If anyone should be banned here, I guess you know who.

Peter Brunius — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterGomer (talk • contribs) 16:20, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


 * My friend Peter; you must first learn how to update a page and also reference an article; especially once when it is on a very sensitive subject. You cannot read a newspaper and type on Wikipedia by looking at a news report - provide the references properly on the Wikipedia page. I assume you are talking about this good faith revert made by me. You should be glad that I did not identify this as vandalism. I also noticed that 5 warnings have been issued to you by different users in just 48 hours. Be careful with your edits or else you might get blocked as well. If you need help in updating a page; feel free to ask me. Cheers AKS  16:31, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh thank you soooo much for not banning me from this FREEEE encyclopedia. It seems the headline PUBLIC OPINION has no real meaning, right? Of course it is not in your interest to reveal truth about living conditions for minorities in Sweden, and certainly not since you seem to know so much about the situation yourself. So thank you again for pointing out how stupid I am who don´t even know how to show an article from Gothenburg News, and upsetting people with what I call the truth about how life is for gay people in Sweden. You know what, I feel, 70 years old and actually having lived through double your lifetime, that if you feel like banning me for good, please do so and take whatever power you think you have and stuff it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterGomer (talk • contribs) 17:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Woooaahh. Calm down big fella. Relax, the world is not coming to an end & I never used the words that I am going to ban you. Please don’t get personal. Peter, just because Wikipedia is FREEEE encyclopedia; it does not mean that unverified & FREEE information can be updated. I am a volunteer, like millions of other editors and work with an aim to ensure that information on Wikipedia is authentic. The only way we can do it is by ensuring that critical information supplied to the articles can be verified vide credible sources. Don’t take it personally; no one is doubting your knowledge. I have never been to Sweden but that does not matter as far as Wikipedia guidelines are concerned. And your point about public opinion; no public opinion cannot be updated without citing credible sources. If proper sources can be cited (that meet Wikipedia guidelines), anything can be updated. Since you mentioned about news article, why don’t you go ahead, cite the sources & update what you had to. Let me know if I can be of help. Happy editing. Cheers AKS  18:00, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
I did not vandalize the Macroscope page, buddy. Me thinks you have a lot of learning to do before you should be allowed to volunteer here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.248.139.209 (talk) 01:18, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Message
It was a minor format suggestion, which apparently you didn't like, and extirpated. Your page. No worries. That was all. Best to you keep up the good work! 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 20:06, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I could not understand the real value. However, since you tried to help - I need some help. Let me know. Cheers AKS  20:08, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Anything I can do, please feel free. The main benefit of have that template is that it lets people know exactly where they are, and convey an understanding about some of the problems that do surface around user pages. It helps prevent those. But it ain't mandatory. It is your WP:User page and basically you get to do what you want.
 * If I can be of service or assistance, feel free to drop me a line. I can be reached by e-mail. Best regards. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎</b>) 20:14, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Copied. Can you set up (or help me to set up) auto archive (30 days) for me? I have been facing issues with that. Cheers AKS  20:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not good at that. I will recruit another user who will be by anon to lend a hand. It is a wise person who knows what he knows, and knows what he doesn't. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 20:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I see that Bereanhunter has taken care of your archiving request. He is a good Wikian to know. Best regards. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 01:23, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

archiving
Hi Arunsingh16, I've set up auto archiving for you and added an archive box. A few points to consider; the bot works based on a trailing timestamp and sections that do not have that will not be archived. You can either manually archive those or go back through your history and then apply timestamps manually (If it were me, I'd archive them by hand and just make sure that future posts all have datestamps :). After the bot runs this first time, you will see which threads aren't being archived.

I moved User talk:Arunsingh16/Archive 5 to User talk:Arunsingh16/Archive 1 and removed the redirect left by the move so that the bot will consider that a clean archive page...it wouldn't write to a redirected page. I removed the collapsing from some of your threads so the bot will see them correctly and also removed where you had left a box with "closed" because of the trailing datestamp issue...it would mess up the bot.

For tweaking the archiving parameters see User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo. We should see the bot archive your page within 24 hours. Cheers, <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  21:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Great help, many thanks. Cheers AKS  05:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You're quite welcome. :) <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  13:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Archiving error
Oops. I see that there must have been an error although I haven't looked at what it is but I see you reverted the bot. You may want to revert the bot's additions to Archive 1 or it will be making duplicate copies next time it comes around. <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b> 13:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

User:Twomorerun
Hi. I wanted to point you to this page in my user space, where I'm accumulating information about this user. I still have to add diffs and clean it up, but feel feel to contribute if you're interested. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied here Cheers AKS  04:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've filed at AN/I Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:31, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Great work Beyond My Ken. Cheers AKS  04:45, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It'll be interesting to see what kind of response it gets. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, and thanks for the barnstar!! Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Anytime mate. Great job once again. Cheers AKS  04:52, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Henry Kressel edit
Hi, I'm Dr. Kressel's grandson, and therefore know relevant info for the page without having any official resources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.65.33.81 (talk) 14:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello Mr. Grandson Kressel; Thanks for your message. I am afraid to state that proper references will have to be cited for updating the DOB. Since Dr. Kressel hold 33 US patents, I am sure you will be able to find out the date of birth published somewhere or the other. Cheers AKS  14:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey who are you ?? and why the hell are you interfering if i am deleting a page ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.203.204.243 (talk) 14:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Watch your language and tone Mr. Kressel. You don’t own this Wikipedia article and hence your have no choice but to comply to the guidelines. Cheers AKS  14:58, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Going to Update the SensorDynamics Site again
Hello My. Singh. I discussed our conversations last week with the director of our corporate web activities. With his agreement, I am going to start over on the SensorDynamics wiki page. I still need to make it clear that the company exists no longer and that Maxim acquired them in July 2011. However, this time I will NOT delete all the rest of the SensorDynamics materials. Instead I will pull much of it into an extended History section. That will leave a trail for anyone who might be curious about the background of the company. I will delete the names of all the people, as they are no longer associated with the company. I will shorten the rest of the material and remove the "marketing and sales" messages that were posted originally. The amount of content that remains should not trigger any concerns about vandalism of the page. It should also not burden a reader who simply wants to know how to find the newest generation of those products. I will be doing this on Monday and trust that you will not find it objectionable. Regards, MH Marianne Hartfield (talk) 18:33, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear Marianne, I am not the page owner and hence I cannot raise any objection. To be fair to you, I think you might need some help in updating the article on Wikipedia. If not cited properly, someone else might revert your changes. I can spend sometime in assisting you. Let me know. Cheers AKS  19:33, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Started cleaning up the article, gimme sometime. Cheers AKS  19:54, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Apparently there is another company by the same name. Check this. Post acquisition, has the company merged into Maxim Integrated Products Inc? In this case, it will be best I redirect SensorDynamics to Maxim page and anyone who searches for SensorDynamics will be taken to this page. This will be done ONLY if SensorDynamics ceases to exist as a company. Let me know how to proceed. Cheers AKS  20:00, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

What a surprise-- that SensorDynamics is not part of us
Hello again, Mr. Singh. Thank you for that link. That company is not part of us, so we should not link them to us. Maxim Integrated Products designs and manufactures integrated circuits (ICs) that are sold to companies that make the electronic devices which you and I carry around all day. We do not sell direct to consumers.I think that as long as the Maxim wiki page mentions semiconductors and some product names/terms, then there should not be much confusion with this other company.

As for helping me to edit the page, I welcome that...but how can we manage it? You are in India and I am in the central part of the USA. What would you propose? Thank you and regards, MH 76.123.178.19 (talk) 16:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Palos Verdes Intermediate School
I see that you tagged this article for deletion. However the desired result is not deletion, it is redirection to Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District. I have removed the PROD tag (since we aren't asking for deletion) and instead placed a comment on the TALK page saying that the page will be redirected to Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District if no one objects in the next week or so. Either of us could go ahead and boldly do the redirect, but I understand your desire to give notice first. Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 16:06, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Updated the SensorDynamics Page Again
Hello Mr. Singh, I updated the SensorDynamics wiki page again. I show the important fact of the acquisition first. I also kept much more of the old text as history narrative and explanation of the products. I did remove all the peoples' names, as none of them are involved with Maxim now. I also deleted the long advertising copy and press references that promoted the SensorDynamics product announcements and product awards. Once that was done, the article reads more like an encyclopedia and not like a marketing brochure or annual report. With that done, finally, I removed the multiple issue banners. You now know that I am not committing vandalism on the page and I trust that you will find no reason to reject these edits. Regards, MH Marianne Hartfield (talk) 19:01, 14 February 2012 (UTC)