User talk:Drat8sub/Archive 6

TFL note
Hello again, Drat8sub. On the TFL you commented about on my talk page, I added a couple of sentences on the D'Souza hat trick, which hopefully addresses your request adequately. As for the images, it is best to stick to just one. If we have more than one, it risks throwing off the amount of space TFL takes up on the main page, or at a minimum squeezing the space in the blurb for text. Giants2008 ( Talk ) 22:23, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The blurb looks fine now. Happy with it. Thank you. Drat8sub (talk) 07:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm so sorry.
Hi, Drat8sub.

I apologize for my previous actions, attitudes and remarks.

I also swear that I will never repeat it.

If I have any questions, may I ask here?

I'm really happy to get the block released so quickly.

I seem to have edited a little too much,

I'll take a moment to read Wikipedia's conventions, or watch other editors for a while.

Thank you.

BRICK93 (talk) 23:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * You are welcomed !! Addressed at your talk page. And surely you can ask anything related to guidelines or policies or anything regarding my edits. And for any specific article better to have the discussion at article talk page. Thank you. Drat8sub (talk) 08:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

New message from ArnabSaha
 ❯❯❯  S A H A   18:16, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Go Team
regarding go team, you can find more info here add this as citation suitably. although I re-added the air India press release...  ❯❯❯  S A H A   19:19, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * addition, air india press release mentioned GO Team, so don't remove that  ❯❯❯  S A H A   20:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Arnab, if the topic is related to article its better to have the conversation at article talk page. I totally missed both of your comment here, above that, I ussually get highlighted notification, in your case I did not get any and missed along with the below added comment. User talk page is better for user's edit pattern. Anyway, whatever you've mentioned above, and the note that you have added is exactly what the article was demanding. Thanks for the note. Drat8sub (talk) 21:47, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hey thanks for the welcome! Looking forward to more interactions!

Honoredebalzac345 (talk) 21:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Welcome!! read the added linked guidelines in the welcome note, that will help you to grow here. Thank you. Drat8sub (talk) 21:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

ISL 2020-21
Please see the talk page I added in ISL 2020-21 Wikipedia. SAIKAT MARINERS DEY (talk) 15:26, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

atkmb
see my edits, it has to be same as mb subpage, ban those vandals reverting founded, jerseys (mb has 2, atkmb 1) etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.180.37 (talk) 18:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC) Also see last thing i told arnab for eb page, and why league moved from there but they listed on i league next season.... now answer in arbitrary section, everyone waits 👆 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.180.37 (talk) 18:16, 17 August 2020 (UTC) why did you move club links and reverted merge when all done ???!!!! subpage is useless then; it cant be closed but was over...btw you reverted vandalism on atkmb as "founded" needs to have proper date-age formatting! Also jerseys should have home-away title and capital letters, how most afc teams do. more, all mb multi page is useless if reverted to football again, nowhere else its like this; last but not least you unlinked field hockey which has to be clarified, mb doesnt play ice hockey for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.131.75.21 (talk) 11:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

re: After a deep slumber
Hi! Yeah, I was on and off wikipedia this month due to work and things like that. I also needed a break after the Mohun Bagan fiasco last month. I did have one issue I wanted to discuss with you. I read your intro in your userpage recently and notice you said "to my surprise there were information in minuscule on google or wikipedia" and "I am one of the main/only author of Indian football articles in wikipedia". I am not sure why, but I didn't really like those lines. I have been on wikipedia since 2010 and by 2014 had created over 350 articles pertaining to Indian football alone. When I came on, barely any non-international Indian players had a page. Me and Coderzombie worked hard and a lot was done by 2014. It was not as fulfilled as articles for the top footballing nations or the US and Australia but it was still very comprehensive but with a lot of work left to do. Basically, I disagree that there was minuscule information and would object that there was in fact, a decent amount here to get a good idea about Indian football at the time. Also, the main author thing, at the end of the day, this is wikipedia. We all take pride in articles we create and revise but we don't own the articles nor is there a main Indian football author. I probably could have been considered that from 2010 to 2018 but I didn't care. We have a lot of editors who edit and help expand the scope of Indian football on wikipedia. I just wanted to bring this up because at the end of the day, I want this to be more collaborative and not put any user on a higher pedestal than others. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 14:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC)


 * , I am sorry if indirectly I have written anything which hurts you in anyway. I never taken away your contribution from Indian football project. You and Czombie are indeed major contributors. That's why I have written "one of the". I did not say, "I'm the". And about minuscule I was talking about national teams and their statistics and records. My expertise is in statistics mainly, work with different statistical foundations. There are something that I will send you through email because I can't say it here. Anyway I will change few lines on the top to look more acceptable. And hardly anyone go through my user page. Drat8sub (talk) 15:19, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I sent you an email, you can check and hope you understand my point. Thank you. Drat8sub (talk) 17:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

mb
can you unlink atkmb title, and name under history section as its one page now; logo too, also better if add club name and ==football team== upper — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.79.28 (talk) 23:54, 1 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Ya, I know, many more things to revamp, may be few months will take to make the article a good read...and the infobox thing will take time so keep patience, an embedding solution is in progress, till then it will be kept as it is. Drat8sub (talk) 12:51, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Unlink last edit by saikat and warn him! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.69.236 (talk) 18:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * coder has to be blocked again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.1.23.130 (talk) 02:33, 6 September 2020 (UTC)


 * The Mohun Bagan page which was structured by you last was in proper shape outlining this historical date wise mentioning of the football team name. It was again vandalised with Dissolved section being added. I have removed the dissolved section and tried to update the info as you had done. But it has not come up properly. Can you kindly reedit the way you had structured. Then kindly lock it for normal edits till we reach the final structure Ztruc (talk) 05:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

List of Indian football champions
User:Hemanth Dx has vandalised List of Indian football champions SAIKAT MARINERS DEY (talk) 08:43, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

How to shape the article
, hi. I hope you will not feel bothered if we discuss the article here. I have no issue of renaming discussion there. But it's becoming chaos again like the previous discussion. And seriously canvassing is going on, the last comment by SC is one such example for sure, with whom? you'll know if you go through his talk page, they did canvassing before too during a deletion discussion. Anyway, I think we should identify some steps how to shape it, because it's becoming pointless for me to write the history at this point oR revamp the article in anyway possible. So, I want to know how you want the article to look. And if you think you want to do it, then I will be more happy because litterally I become kind of fed up with this article. Little left interest in it at this moment, may be I too need a break. Let me know. Drat8sub (talk) 08:39, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Drat, I have no problem with discussing the article here. I'm not sure about the canvasing. Could it be happening? Probably I don't want to get into that. You know my opinion by now about this page. I personally would like to see the name changed from Mohun Bagan to ATK Mohun Bagan FC. At the end of the day, the page is going to be about the football team and if that is the name of the team then that is how the wikipedia article should be too. From there, we should keep Template:Mohun Bagan A.C. sections and probably create Mohun Bagan A.C. (disambiguation) so to lead readers to the other Mohun Bagan teams if they want. After that, we should just simply clean the page. It is already all about the football page so we need to clean it and make sure it's readable. I can provide more details of how I see that but I just wanted to get this part clear first. Cheers. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 09:06, 6 September 2020 (UTC)


 * , ok, fine. Lets wait for few days, if someone else wants to participate in the discussion there in the article. Anyway, so the lead should be a very smooth read for sure but that too in such a way that if tomorrow the name is again changed, it shall not affect the lead. I think the history section have almost all the info in ample amount, just need to be organised and some other info need to be included like the trasition things...from MBAC to United MBFT Pvt.Ltd for NFL to MB India FT Pvt.Ltd to ATKMB Pvt. Ltd. for ISL. And yes a page for MBAC be created in a very summarised way and it should have section: Lead, History (including clubs inception, formation, reputation, reception or any historical events other than football or sports), Football (with Main page: ATK MB), Cricket (with Main page: Mohun Bagan A.C. (cricket)), Hockey, Athletics and so on, the "Mohun Bagan Day section" here to be shifted there, Media, Common Culture like these or may be if some other social involvement. Lets see. Drat8sub (talk) 22:56, 6 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I am working on the history section offwiki. Will take 3-4 days finish and once I finish I will let you know and show you. Thank you. Drat8sub (talk) 22:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

List of men's footballers with 50 or more international goals
Dear Drat8sub, Could you explain to me why you deleted my sortable date of the 50th goal? --Micnl (talk) 10:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)


 * , because the dates and goals are under investigation, will be updated and restored as soon as possible. Drat8sub (talk) 10:42, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

PLAYERS WITH MORE THAN 50 GOALS
You obviously make mistake. Imre Schlosser has 59 international goals (and you have the references : RSSSF and SI.)  What more should I add? But If you can find plenty of them. Just chek the RSSSF list and you will find the two mistakes : number of goals and appearances and the date of the 50 goal. In any case, it's a step forward to correct the mistake with Nielsen but it is more complicated than you think .... Γεώργιος Τερζής 2 (talk) 14:08, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

If RSSSF is not a reliable source (and you are a member) which one is? (cases Imre Schlosser, Mokhtar Dahari) Γεώργιος Τερζής 2 (talk) 20:27, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Check my answer in my talk page and I will write you more. Γεώργιος Τερζής 2 (talk) 20:53, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

UEFA. com : 8 September 2020 : Cristiano Ronaldo's 101 Portugal goals: Europe's top international scorer This is what you probably want but I' m not going to change it by my self because I'm not intreasted. Γεώργιος Τερζής 2 (talk) 21:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

RedWarn and vandalism
Hi! While may have been warranted for other reasons, the original edit was clearly not vandalism. Vandalism is the deliberate obstruction of the encyclopedia, not just poor or disruptive edits. Please be careful with RedWarn's features in the future. Thanks! — MarkH21talk 21:59, 9 September 2020 (UTC)


 * That's page lenthening and are totally in bad faith, seems vandal. And kind of plausible misinformation to the article. Drat8sub (talk) 22:40, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Lengthening the page and the material that was added are not obviously deliberate in trying to obstruct the encyclopedia. You can remove it on grounds for factual accuracy, POV, or several other reasons. But don’t label it vandalism unless it is clear that it is intentionally an attempt to obstruct the encyclopedia. This particular edit could just have easily been good-faith and misguided, rather than intentional obstruction. There’s no way to know that it had malicious intent from the edit alone.See the examples of what is not vandalism (such as "Misinformation, accidental" and "NPOV contraventions") for several editing behaviors that are unconstructive, bad faith, or disruptive but not vandalism. — MarkH21talk 23:03, 9 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I understand, but that edit is undoubtedly a deliberate one. Adding "the question of the future of Jammu and Kashmir to be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations via the UN security council resolutions" is a deliberate attempt to insert incorrect information, and secondly, why in this article?..totally unrelated to the skirmish and third, using the article as forum since the skirmish is ongoing topic, thousands visit the article everyday. And most importantly, this is not only artcile where the user added those materials, seems like sole purpose of the user is to use wikipedia as forum. Check these, 1, 2, 3, 4. Sorry to say, that's in bad faith and I don't know what else deliberate means. Drat8sub (talk) 23:25, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Continuation from last discussion about vandalism
Sorry, I didn’t get a chance to respond before you archived the last discussion. I was going to say that someone can still add that to the article and still believe that it is improving the encyclopedia. If someone with a strong POV editing according to that POV without references, they may be editing to improve the encyclopedia without actually improving the encyclopedia. I hope that distinction is clear. Again, I agree with the removal of the content added in the edit, but it was not vandalism.By the way, only wrote that many people in Kashmir while many people in Jammu and Kashmir want the conflict to be resolved by UN processes, not that the conflict was actually being resolved by UN processes. That there is some such local sentiment is certainly verifiable and reported in RSes, even if that particular edit was unreferenced and perhaps misplaced.The reason I brought this up is that we need to assume good faith. Even if you strongly disagree with the edit being constructive, just use a more specific rationale for reverting (unless it is so clear-cut that anyone, including editors with strong biases in whatever direction, would call it vandalism). If it’s even slightly possible that the edit was made in good faith, then assume good faith and call out what’s wrong with the edit itself. Lean towards giving the benefit of the doubt. — MarkH21talk 21:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC)


 * , I understand your concern when you've first addressed that to me. But, I am sorry, I cannot agree with you. My concern is very clear: before reverting I went through his edit history, where I'd found out that he did the same thing in lot of articles. Again he has been brough this thing before multiple times through edit summary and also at his talk page before he did the edit at the skirmish page. At this point it was clear, there is a POV pushing going on. Secondly, if consider other core policies, it has no verifiable source, second, the line is violating NPOV, third by saying, "decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted" is an OR as the UNSC asked for plebiscite when Pak withdraws its army first, then India will follow and the plebiscite will be allowed. Again by saying, "disputed area between India, China and Pakistan", another OR and POV, since the article is about skirmish in Ladakh, this info even if correct nothing to do with this article, Pakistan did not consider Ladakh as part of Jammu and Kashmir, since China have it, and their recent map release also says so. So, its a serious OR with POV pushing since the user is doing in multiple articles and per wikipedia it can't be assumed in gf but that's a bf when it violates all core polices of V, POV, NOR. And to my surprise, when the user's edit has been tagged as vandalism and another experienced editor brought the issues regarding the materials to their notice, the user did not stop there, rather added the same materials to 4 other articles. I dont only see the user using the articles as FORUM along with core policy violations. I could have thought of assuming it as gf once, if the user did in just one article, but sorry, it's a clear violation and deliberate one. Drat8sub (talk) 23:10, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * But that’s exactly my point: POV-pushing, OR, disruptive editing, edit-warring, and other violations of policies like V/NOR/NPOV are very problematic and should be reverted/discussed. However, they do not qualify edits as vandalism unless it’s very very clearly intended to obstruct Wikipedia (again, see WP:NOTV). Just specify the policy reason when reverting rather than just call it "vandalism" unless it’s clear to even the most biased editors. — MarkH21talk 23:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree that, not all bad faith edits are vandalism for sure. But per the guidelines bad faith edit which is a deliberate attempt to be unconstructive is indeed vandalism. And here the edits are deliberate attempts and unconstructive means the core content policy violations, V/NOR/NPOV. Once could have been understood but mutiple attempts, I don't think so, the user still don't understand what exactly they are doing, evidently from their behaviour. Drat8sub (talk) 11:34, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The issue in this particular case is that one can’t demonstrate that the edits are bad faith. These are plausible edits if sources are added, and the . They’ve been disruptive multiple times, but one can’t say that they’ve been intentionally disruptive. I honestly think it’s a combination of them being misguided and not understanding Wikipedia policies despite requests to read them.Thanks for the discussion by the way. I think you see my points and I also see how you interpret the vandalism policy. We can disagree about what crosses the line as vandalism, but we can always try to give the benefit of the doubt where we can in the future :) — MarkH21talk 13:36, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

The vandalism issue
Hi,please acknowledge that East Bengal is still not in ISL.Falcon with appendix (talk) 10:28, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I didn't say it's already in the ISL. Your edit was reverted and warned due to the fact that you removed reliable sourced content without adequate explanation. Now, since you brought this to me, let me tell you something, may be you don't have primary source for the above event but when you have almost all secondary RS saying the same you can't actually ignore these since they are all RS. Almost every news site, sports website, or portals are saying EB's inclusion in ISL. Just a matter of official procedure to complete. So, I would ask you to self revert your recent edit where you've removed the EB columns/rows from the tables, otherwise it will be considered as editwar. Thank you. Drat8sub (talk) 20:32, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

 * Thank you !! Cheers !! Drat8sub (talk) 19:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

mb history
my last edit is alternative to atkmb covering only football...?👆 ur reasonable so update if know more things!

Empty and expand sections
Hi, Drat8sub.

May I ask you a question? I'm thinking of asking a veteran person.

I am mainly editing the national team. So the question is, the women's team still needs to be revised compared to the men's national team.

Therefore, while following the manual of the national team, I am adding missing sections etc., but due to my lack of English ability and lack of knowledge about Wikipedia, I am making a minimum addition, but if the editing is rough, I have twice so far It was pointed out by other users.

I think it's reasonable. Do you think it's better not to add anything if you follow the manual completely but increase the Empty and Expand sections? I'm trying to develop the article and take it in the right direction, but as a result, the quality of the wiki may be reduced. Any advice would be appreciated. Thank you. BRICK93 (talk) 07:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Indeed the women's team article needs to be upgraded but very little info is present in sources. Don't worry, make the section or the paragraph in your sandbox and after preparing ping me. I will check and if there needs any corrections we will rectify it there and after that it can be added to the article. The sand box is for that purpose only. ok Drat8sub (talk) 11:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your quick reply and advice.

BRICK93 (talk) 21:43, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

fix
Mohun Bagan Athletic Club, commonly known as Mohun Bagan, ... add, which is missing 🙏 ....................... also, about i league: roadmap says promotion to isl from 2022. so wait for next seson, end of next season, or now as articles declared it 2nd division; as eb/mb did all + afc spot like they are promoted (even if formally looked different procedure)


 * I am staying out of the article for a while. Cannot work if everyone have their own opinion and pushing it. Needs common ground and common intentions. It has become a mess. I will surely back to the article but not for now. May be after few months. Cheers. Drat8sub (talk) 15:50, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Can you help me
Hello, Drat8sub , Actually I was trying creating an article and I accidentally  submitted for a review. So, I thought of making it as a draft so I moved it's location. Finally I messed up everything. Now I can't use my personal sandbox now .which was User:WhiteFalcon1/sandbox. Can you help me Please (WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 09:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC))


 * , request for speedy deletion of this page with criterion "Test page (G2)". And after deletion of the above page, User:WhiteFalcon1/sandbox1 here move the page to User:WhiteFalcon1/sandbox instead of sandbox1. I hope thats all you need. Drat8sub (talk) 15:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Drat8sub can you revert that redirection. I was trying delete the deleted article which I accidentally submitted.can you undo the redirection I totally messed up.Please..(WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 15:26, 20 September 2020 (UTC))

@Drat8sub so now onwards which one is my sandbox.Can you ping me the one.(WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 15:33, 20 September 2020 (UTC))
 * User:WhiteFalcon1/sandbox1 is your sandbox. But wait and watch if the redirect page gets deleted or not. Because I am not sure of the procedure. Drat8sub (talk) 15:45, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Drat8sub Thank you for sparing your valuable  time for solving my problem. Thanks once again...(WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 17:58, 20 September 2020 (UTC))


 * , add your comment after my comment here User talk:WhiteFalcon1, pointing out to the admin that you want the page get deleted.


 * And please don't add my name in my talk page. Anything you'll write on my talk, I'll get a notification of it on its own. You need to ping me when your are replying at some other talk page and don't use @, it does not ping anyone. Read the WP:TPG and Template:Reply to carefully, it will help you. And if you are satisfied with any editors or fellow users work and help, you can use WikiLove and can send cool food, drinks using any of the Wikilove templates or appreciate someone's effort by sending barnstars Thank you, cheers!! Drat8sub (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * , thanks but I am not accepting this one, just because, above I just wanted to let you know how the community appreciates and thank in a more kind way. Next time may be. By the way, simple barnstar is for editing quality or hard work. For helping you can send, "Random Act of kindness barnstar" to someone. There are many different barnstars, check the whole list, it's interesting. Drat8sub (talk) 19:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you ...(WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 19:15, 20 September 2020 (UTC))

Explanation
What is the meaning of posting that warning message on my talk page? Esat Bengal is still not in ISL. The new team will be announced at 30 october. It could be any team. So why you editors are adding it in advance? Esat Bengal is most likely to come but there can be a complete turnaround. So why you guys are adding East Bengal in advance? I want an explanation.Falcon with appendix (talk) 03:48, 24 September 2020 (UTC)


 * The warnings clearly stated what you did wrong. And before that I had also explained above, when you brought it previously, what you did wrong. I did not ask explanation now after your edit, you should have explained during edit in your edit summary describing why are you removing sourced content. Drat8sub (talk) 12:36, 24 September 2020 (UTC)


 * You have zero explanation for edits you are doing in the main space. When you joined wikipedia, you were advised to go through guidelines, did you? Simply seems no. So go through WP:PG, WP:ES, WP:V, WP:RS, WP:CS etc. It may help you. Drat8sub (talk) 12:53, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you call that RELIABLE source????????Falcon with appendix (talk) 13:12, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Mohun bagan logo 1980s.png
Thank you for uploading File:Mohun bagan logo 1980s.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. GeneralNotability (talk) 16:51, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:McDowellUnitedMohun BaganFT1998.png
Thank you for uploading File:McDowellUnitedMohun BaganFT1998.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. GeneralNotability (talk) 16:51, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:MohunBaganFootballClubPvtLtd Logo.png
Thank you for uploading File:MohunBaganFootballClubPvtLtd Logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. GeneralNotability (talk) 16:51, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Reply to your message on my talk page.
Chenco Dorji is confirmed by Sudeva, 2nd edit is I was adding bernando who was sacked and by mistake I published later I corrected it so what the problem in that. (LordJoki (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 13:26, 25 September 2020 (UTC)


 * , that is exactly the problem. Did you read my edit summary? Did you read the warning at your talk page? What are these telling you? Materials is wikipedia is only be added with a relaible source. Verifiability is one of the core content policy which you have ignored twice and asking me "what is the problem". That's exactly the problem, that you don't have the patience to read guidelines. Drat8sub (talk) 13:37, 25 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Where is your warning on my talk page I have not seen it, and where is your note I have not seen it, btw if you are taking about sources then the half the page is unsourced can you provide sources for all of then ? Please edit with source next time or I will revert it, thank you (LordJoki (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 13:46, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , Where is your warning on my talk page I have not seen it, and where is your note I have not seen it. That is your problem that you don't see things. You've opened the thread here at my talk page replying to the warning given at your talk page and you are saying "where is the warning?" Again, btw if you are taking about sources then the half the page is unsourced can you provide sources for all of then? Please edit with source next time or I will revert it, why are you telling me, am I the one who is adding unsourced contents??? Go through article talk page, I've clearly mentioned to provide citations and also added note in the section to provide citation whenever something is added. So if you can't see that is your problem. Read wikipedia guidelines, because till now you did not even learn how to interact at talk pages, everytime your comment it's unsigned, sign your comment everytime with four tildes ~ . Drat8sub (talk) 14:00, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:MohunBaganFootballClubPvtLtd Logo.png
Thank you for uploading File:MohunBaganFootballClubPvtLtd Logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:McDowellUnitedMohun BaganFT1998.png
Thank you for uploading File:McDowellUnitedMohun BaganFT1998.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:
 * File:MohunBaganFootballClubPvtLtd Logo.png

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)