User talk:Gaurav/Talk archive Sep 2006 to Apr 2010

Images on Wikipedia
Hi Gaurav

I am new WikiPedian & I am trying to Update image of Anna Hazare at Anna Hazare wikipedia article. I have uploaded it to commons by name AnnaHazare.JPG but i am unable to use it in the article i have used bellow formats

File:AnnaHazare.JPG

Also I am not sure this is the correct way to ask or not. Please guide & correct me

Thanks, Santosh —Preceding unsigned comment added by SantoshMaid (talk • contribs) 00:52, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, no, not again
Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 137.132.3.11 lifted or expired.

Request handled by:  Netsnipe  ►  11:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * }

As an aside, whatever happened to anon-only IP-blocks? We've had a general IP block on 137.132.3.* for a while now, but it works okay because the registered users can still edit. I'll try and raise our IT folks to see if they can get XPP working, though.

Anon-only IP blocks are targeted at editors who haven't logged in, while the autoblocker kicks in on a vandal's last known IP address to stop them from creating more accounts and logging out and logging back in with another account. --  Netsnipe  ►  11:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Makes sense, I guess ... grumble, grumble. Stupid vandals.
 * Thanks a million for the autoblocklift, though! Gaurav 12:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Rebooting WikiProject Fictional series
Hello...WikiProject Fictional series is in the process of getting a new start by attracting task forces. I am currently getting things set up for this and other project building areas. Please stop by and take a look. Your suggestions will be appreciated. - LA @ 01:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Afzul Khan → Afzal Khan
I have moved the article you requested to Afzal Khan (general) - this solves both the spelling issue you presented as well as the need to disambiguation from Afzal Khan (actor). JPG-GR (talk) 23:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Pune
hi gaurav, thanks for your note. the change by rockstar cannot be in good faith, all he did was delete a section as i have noted in the edit summary. changes by vaibhav are fine, as long as english is proper, and appropriate citations are given atleast for the intro paragraph. thanks --ti 16:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * i would have to disagree on rockstar's edits. deleting content without a comment, justification, discussion on the talk page; all of these more often than not indicate editors wishing to revise history, wiping out efforts of previous editors who might have moved on from the page. these changes get buried without anyone noticing, and the whole section is virtually rewritten again thanks to one delete that slipped in. (see my discussion on talk:pune regarding the transport section for an example.) ofcourse, you can take this discussion to talk:pune and see if anyone agrees.


 * again the comments by vaibhavforjoy are quite alright to be incorporated into the article. its only that t

A question
Hey Gaurav,

Needless to mention that I'm a newbie. I was really impressed by your contribution to this site.

The question isn't a productive one for either of us or shall I say it is in a way. I could write for improvement on articles on Maharashtra for no less than 16hrs/day.


 * Q: Do you get paid for this work? OR What are the benefits, monetary or otherwise, one could have by a great contribution like yours?


 * The answer can't be recognition as all this can and will be deleted or changed or updated, probably before I die. It is true that change is constant and inevitable but creation that lasts the longest is more powerful. Thinking of writing an article or contributing so much that lasts for 100 years after I die (like you did) but need more out of it for the time I live.

I could do a lot of this if I get anything out of it, I think. Rather this is what I love to do. But I also love money. I don't want to do it as a selfless service as of now. I'd better have my own blog to document my thought process that no one could edit. I know wikipedia is an encyclopedia, needs existing knowledge and isn't a book about undocumented inventions, theories or simply ideas but I'm equally good at this. I've thoroughly studied all the articles from Getting started onwards (still a lot to learn on formatting). I was learning some Wikipedia's own rule for using bold and italic. I simply loved the fundas.

IF there is no answer then I probably have this feeling of 'giving back to the society and getting contentment by the selfless work' post 65yrs of age.

You seem to be an honest and helpful person. So hopefully I'll have an honest and helpful answer.

P.S: I do not want you to take this message de-motivating in anyway. If you have a slightest of that feeling in the corner of your heart please feel free to delete it and do not care to reply. You've done an amazing job buddy and I don't want you to rethink on your credits due to this scribble of mine.

Amit Bhise (talk) 01:20, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, Amit. Sorry for not replying earlier; I come and go from Wikipedia pretty erratically! No, I don't get paid for working on Wikipedia (apart from satisfaction). I see Wikipedia as a hobby - every once in a while I feel like writing, and this is a fun place to do this. That this is incidentally helpful is merely a happy side-effect. As Wikipedia has become more strict in terms of providing well-cited content, I've moved away from writing articles - I remember back when it was just writing down everything you know about a topic! - towards editing articles. It only takes a couple of hours to take a so-so article, clean it up, polish the prose and make it really shine. I don't do that very often any more, but usually end up editing articles about every two months or so.
 * As for the "but the article is going to be updated", well, sure. That's the Wiki way. It's still very satisfying when months or even years after you wrote or edited an article, it retains the same rough form that you gave it - not only does this mean that you did a good job, but it suggests that all the intermediate contributors decided your layout was effective enough that it wasn't worth redoing. Even when an article is changed completed - I re-edited Lord Voldemort around Book 5, and, as you can imagine, it's changed a lot since then - it's still nice being part of the massive creation that is Wikipedia.
 * At the end of the day, though, it's all about how you feel about it. I'd suggest cleaning up existing articles, as that's the easiest way to make a huge contribution; see if that floats your boat and take it from there. All the best, and welcome to Wikipedia! -- Gaurav (talk) 05:09, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

A Request for Help
Hi there Gaurav:), I noticed your username on Translators Available Hindi to English. I was wondering if you could help with updating Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi on the Hindi Wikipedia? Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi on the English Wikipedia has been majorly revamped- particularly, its being treated as a Biography of Living Persons now, since no one has been able to find evidence of his death. I'm sorry to say that although I'm relatively okay in speaking Hindi, I can't read or write it, so I'd really appreciate your help in this :), although I understand if you don't have the time. Thanks in advance! Omirocksthisworld( Drop a line ) 02:13, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, Omirocksthisworld! Thanks for asking, but I'm only one better than you: I can read Hindi, and (I hope) do Hindi-to-English translations, but can't write it with *any* degree of fluency. So I wouldn't trust myself to translate English-to-Hindi without problems :). Sorry! -- Gaurav (talk) 04:47, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That's alright, thanks anyway! Omirocksthisworld( Drop a line ) 05:18, 3 April 2010 (UTC)