User talk:RegentsPark/Archive 41

A block is needed
is upto no good. Almost every single edit has been rightfully reverted. TrangaBellam (talk) 12:19, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look later today. It looks like there is some meat puppetry going on as well. RegentsPark (comment) 14:29, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * to take a look at and . RegentsPark (comment) 14:35, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * RP, sorry to be a bother but I think that we need an indef (see content as well as edit-summary). TrangaBellam (talk) 15:01, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * did someone run CU on these users? Along with the blocked User:Historical War, they all seem to have the same interests. RegentsPark (comment) 15:13, 28 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Btw, can we have Bibek Debroy protected; spamming of positive reviews, etc.TrangaBellam (talk) 09:41, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * There doesn't seem to be enough activity or blp violations to justify semi-protection. Perhaps a quick clean up?RegentsPark (comment) 13:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, sure. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:01, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

My User talk
Hi RP, it looks like the attacks on my talk page will continue for a while. Can you semi-protect it, for say a month? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:33, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅RegentsPark (comment) 14:36, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Onyeka Nwelue
P-Block the IP or issue a semi? Thanks, TrangaBellam (talk) 14:44, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Added to my watchlist (bit early for semi or partial block though this looks like a COI case). --RegentsPark (comment) 16:31, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Battle of Kartapur
The page is clearly ridden with POV issues and almost entirely soured through Max Arthur Maculiffe (a Raj era source) and primary texts written in the 18th century. Can you take a look? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 17:10, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Wiki.NYC Pavilion for Open House New York (Oct 21–22) and Wikidata Day (Oct 29)
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:55, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Why did you delete reference to 15 people killed in "Assassination of Mahatma Gandhi" page??
Hi,

Can you explain for reversal of my edits on assassination of Mahatma Gandhi page? Wasn't the event of 15 people killed in riots important enough? The fact that it was reported along with Mahatma's death in NYT should make it important enough to be there Factpineapple (talk) 05:23, 18 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @RegentsPark Factpineapple (talk) 10:36, 18 October 2023 (UTC)


 * The "fact" doesn't fit in the paragraph. "In the newly formed Dominion of India, the carnage that had been set off by the Partition of India ended with the shock of Gandhi's assassination.[111] However, at least 15 people were killed in the riots that followed the assassination.[1]The RSS, the Hindu paramilitary volunteer organisation, whose activities had been hidden from public view, and whose member Nathuram Godse had once been, was banned on 4 February 1948. " Perhaps it would if there was a section or a paragraph on the immediate aftermath but that's not there. Finally, of course, a news report from that time that says "reportedly" is not necessarily correct and I suggest you also look for a better source.RegentsPark (comment) 16:04, 18 October 2023 (UTC)


 * This is actually better discussed on the article talk page and I've copied it over there. Please continue the discussion there.RegentsPark (comment) 16:05, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Nov 15: WikiWednesday Salon + Wikimedia NYC Executive Director job
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:23, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Jarange Patil Saheb vandalism & Request to Move back couple of pages
Hi, interacting with you after a long long time. I saw your message on board talk page of Jarange Patil Saheb.

I noticed in his User page he has mentiond - Move krne m poora mja aata h this translates to it is fun to move the pages.

This indicates he is doing it for fun in total disregard to any Wiki policy at his personal whim and fancy.

Two of the pages I follow Khe moved - he moved Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya and Gurjar Kshatriya Kadia he  moved  without starting any discussion for this.

He is doing it just for fun and I suggest he should be banned/blocked

As you are Admin and have rights to move back page I request to please restore both the page Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya and Gurjar Kshatriya Kadia to old name which are proper

Thanks Jethwarp (talk) 04:26, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Looks like GirthSummit has blocked them as a sock and SpacemanSpiff has moved the pages back. Let me, or SpacemanSpiff, know if anything was missed.--RegentsPark (comment) 16:21, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Sure thanks Jethwarp (talk) 14:47, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Does IP need to be blocked?
Hi RegentsPark, IP 23.162.152.55 seems to be serving no good purpose at this time. Their only edits have been on pages that I've recently edited and they are based in the U.S. although they claim to be French. It's rather creepy especially because I already have one editor who I strongly suspect has been stalking me. Thank you for taking a look. Castncoot (talk) 17:51, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It does look kinda weird. Every page they've edited is an edit or two after your edits. I'll take a look later today (RL busy) but, yes, very suspicious. RegentsPark (comment) 18:29, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Castncoot (talk) 05:17, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Wed Dec 6: Hacking Night + job listing
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:41, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 256Drg (talk • contribs) 09:40, May 3, 2021 (UTC)

Thu Jan 4: Hacking Night + Wikipedia Day soon
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Seasonal greetings!!

 * Thanks. And a happy holiday season to you too! RegentsPark (comment) 17:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

SPA
Can you take a look at this t/p thread and perhaps, issue a page-ban under ARBIPA procedures? This account has been at it for a long while. TrangaBellam (talk) 11:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The editor has edited approximately 60 to 65% of the article, and my contribution should not exceed 7%. Currently, there are multiple issues involved in the Baidya article that can be resolved if we receive cooperation. However, it is almost impossible for me to handle this, at least for now. There are two other neutral editors involved who have been cooperative and positively engaging in development. The article has too many Shudra remarks which were first raised by LukeEmily (not by me) in their talk page. The Op added information not mentioned explicitly in any source please see here. Inspite of my query and lack of direct mention, they reinstalled it, which I have removed after a discussion with Sitush. Hey, Regents, is it possible for you or any other well-experienced editors (of your choice) to get involved in this article under WP:M? I have more information to share. I suspect there may be some additional synthesis (SYN) and original research (OR). Thanks, — Satnam2408(talk) 13:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Update: I have sought a third opinion for the ongoing disagreement. Thanks — Satnam2408(talk) 15:34, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

please add this image to Arain page.
Hi. I saw a good painting related to this page Arain, which is relevant. https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%22Arrain_Zameendars_Jalundhur%22_%E2%80%93_Painting_from_19th_century_Punjab_41.webp The page is protected, and you edited it recently. Billshine (talk) 04:19, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * could you post your request on the article talk page? In your request, include the caption you would like to see as well as where in the article the image should be inserted. Use the template Template:Edit extended-protected to make the request. RegentsPark (comment) 13:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

SP
Hi, it is regarding this new user. Looks like another account of this sockfarm. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Definite duck. Blocked. RegentsPark (comment) 13:28, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, RegentsPark! Ekdalian (talk) 07:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi.. there's a new suspect, account created right after all the socks were blocked; asking me for the link on sockpuppetry! You may please check their contributions. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 14:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Already blocked.RegentsPark (comment) 16:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Tanbur
Hi, I looked at the oud and armor page, but this page is about tanbur, using the name tanbur instead of armor seems like manipulation, because the ancient armor evolved and had different shapes, tanbur didn't exist in Sumer, definitely using the word tanbur Instead of an armored device, it causes mistakes. Parminekhosravi (talk) 21:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about this topic but the article is titled Tanbur and that's what we should use to refer to the instrument in the article. It won't make sense otherwise. If you think it should be called armor or our, then request that the article title be changed (see WP:RM). If you think it is about string instruments in general, then suggest a WP:MERGE with String instrument. But, in its present form, it will need to say Tanbur. My suggestion is that you drop a note on the talk page Talk:Tanbur detailing your concerns. Perhaps can help since they've contributed a chunk to the article. RegentsPark (comment) 21:29, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The page is about the tanbur, yes, but the first few lines are about the String instrument, and the root is far away from the tambur, not the tambur itself, so using the correct name prevents mistakes. Look at the armory instrument article. Parminekhosravi (talk) 22:03, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I think I see what you mean. I guess I misunderstood. Apologies. RegentsPark (comment) 22:09, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * thank you Parminekhosravi (talk) 22:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

HaughtonBrit
Hi. Do you remember [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/HaughtonBrit/Archive HaughtonBrit. the perennial block evader], unfortunately he's back with a number of various proxies and is continuing to evade his block logged out. See his edits on Sikh Empire, he was editing it in July 2023 with his 2601:547 IPs-. If you take a look at the most recent edits- the 108* and 50* IPs geolocate to Pennsylvania according to the WHOIS service, which means it's certainly him. Now he's edit warring and making tendentious edits with a 65* proxy-. Three users other than myself already, Maplesyrupsushi, Sutyarashi and Noorullah already agree that the Sikh Empire never encompassed any part of modern day China or Afghanistan, but he is tendentiouslly pushing it anyways. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 16:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I've semi protected Sikh Empire. Let me know if there is anything else that needs protection. RegentsPark (comment) 16:55, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot RegentsPark. I really, really appreciate it. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 17:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Problematic IP range
This IP range (27.5. ...) is disruptive. They have a habit of changing 'South Asia' to 'Indian subcontinent' and 'Indian subcontinent' to 'the subcontinent'. I've seen them in many articles. Please see. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 20:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the IP for 24 hours. I have no idea how to deal with ranges, perhaps can help you with that. RegentsPark (comment) 20:27, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, there's a lot of editing from these ranges, it's little overwhelming. Fylindfotberserk, can you give me some  similar-looking other IPs than 27.5.239.197 that have made the specific change you describe? That would make it a lot easier to look. Bishonen &#124; tålk 20:34, 21 January 2024 (UTC).
 * Hi, I've come across 27.5.167.134, 27.5.240.42, that I could remember. I believe I've seen more. Thanks . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 20:41, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that was quick! Unfortunately that range is too big to block — a /17. Indian ranges are always difficult to handle, definitely with my limited skills. Huge population, not a huge supply of IP addresses, lots of people on shared connections, heavy use of mobile. A bit of a nightmare always, sorry. Bishonen &#124; tålk 20:54, 21 January 2024 (UTC).

Need more help with my report.
What policy or guideline did you use to justify deleting my post in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents ? Cmsmith93 (talk) 18:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * See the "be brief" at the top of the ANI page. You're welcome to reinstate it if you like but it may be better if you revised it to a shorter length. As with everything on Wikipedia, the choice is yours. RegentsPark (comment) 18:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I reposted. I tried to cut it down a bit. Probably got rid of ~15%. Cmsmith93 (talk) 01:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thu Feb 8 NYC Hacking Night + Feb 21 WikiWednesday
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Unnecessary truncation of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama_Raksha_Stotra
Hello,

The page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama_Raksha_Stotra was unnecessarily truncated. It was not like a 1000 page article. I see extended block was applied till 29 Mar. While I agree with that because of "Persistent disruptive editing". Don't you think that the block should have been applied on the version before the "Persistent disruptive editing" started. Can you please restore it to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rama_Raksha_Stotra&oldid=1190266052 This version was an almost steady version till that point.

If not, atleast add the following link as a reference for those who want to see the entire hymn. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ram_Raksha_Stotra

Cheers!! ShekonTekon (talk) 20:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * . I've copied this over to the article talk page and replied there. Best. RegentsPark (comment) 20:16, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank You @RegentsPark. I would try to participate meaningfully in that forum. ShekonTekon (talk) 02:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Tawngpeng for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tawngpeng is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Need a semi
Semiprotection (indef) at Aryan Valley is warranted. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ RegentsPark (comment) 14:06, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think we will eventually need an indef but let's see. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Tue March 5: Wiki Gala NYC
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:31, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Kudmi is not a tribal community
Kudmi is not a tribal community. RITWIK MAHATA has added the name of Kudmi community to Adivasi. MT731 (talk) 13:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

WikiNYC: 3/14 Hacking Night + 3/16 Queens Name Explorer
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I
Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:


 * Proposal 2, initiated by, provides for the addition of a text box at Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
 * Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by and, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
 * Proposal 5, initiated by, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
 * Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
 * Proposal 7, initiated by, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
 * Proposal 9b, initiated by, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
 * Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by, , and , respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
 * Proposal 13, initiated by, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
 * Proposal 14, initiated by, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
 * Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by and, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
 * Proposal 16e, initiated by, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
 * Proposal 17, initiated by, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
 * Proposal 18, initiated by, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
 * Proposal 24, initiated by, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
 * Proposal 25, initiated by, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
 * Proposal 27, initiated by, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
 * Proposal 28, initiated by, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Obvious sock
Just after you blocked Joshi punekar's sock, they have come up with a new user account. Would request you to block as per WP:DUCK! Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiWednesday (April 10) and City Tech Library LGBTQIA edit-a-thon (April 11)
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Question about WP:RAJ
Someone made a claim that WP:RAJ only applies to British authors like Lepel Henry Griffin, Max Arthur Macauliffe etc. I'm pretty sure I've heard Indian authors like Jadunath Sarkar and Narendra Sinha also come under the term Raj era source- though. Does WP:RAJ apply to everything pertaining to Indian topics, if it was written before 1947? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 22:00, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * This is kind of a complicated question. WP:RAJ applies mainly to the many British administrators who wrote "histories" and "caste biographies" based on their own personal experiences rather than using standard methods of historiography. Unfortunately, many Indian writers, both Raj era as well as post-Raj ones, writing on various caste and religion topics end up using Raj era sources and base their work on those sources. In short, I would suggest discounting most Raj era texts regardless of who wrote them and be careful about using obscure or popular texts post-Raj. Sticking to modern academic writers is probably the safest. Context, to quote TB below, matters. RegentsPark (comment) 18:37, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * This comment made it a lot clearer for me, thanks Regents Park and TrangaBellam. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 23:33, 21 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Context matters. Sarkar's methods might have fallen out of favor but he was a meticulous scholar and is still relied upon by other scholars. TrangaBellam (talk) 05:40, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I see; would Autar Singh Sandhu, author of this book published in 1935- be allowed as a reliable source on Wikipedia? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 08:45, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi @RegentsParkseems like you have solved my 70% doubt but some small ambiguities are there I'll get back to you. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 18:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Please see
This user is back to edit warring immediately after the block expired block expired. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 20:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Second block. RegentsPark (comment) 21:10, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

NPOV Void
Hi @RegentsPark, If the article is clearly violating NPOV rule of wiki what can be done ? Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 21:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Best is to explain the reasons why it violates WP:NPOV on the talk page. Then you can either wait for consensus or just boldly make your changes. If you make the changes and are reverted, then try to build consensus or, if that doesn't happen, use dispute resolution. RegentsPark (comment) 21:29, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @RegentsParkGot it,so finally we have dispute resolution system.Say for example recently I was in discussion in 2 caste pages Daivadnya and gaud saraswat brahmin.Atleast in the first page I am able to add the content based on talk but second is pathetic even after having discussion for single edit I must rely on someone but they never help.Kindly try reducing the protection of this page (gaud saraswat brahmin) from extended editor to our level.If any sock or issue comes definitely we can increase the protection.Kindly look into it as I can feel some editors are not even following NPOV.Thanks Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 05:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @RegentsParkOne more thing,one editor is there(not taking his name to respect his dignity) who had maintain his POV for years I have challenged it for NPOV purpose .Now instead of replying wherever he goes calls me sock(not even suspected !).Isn't this void of wiki rule, isn't this demotivating nature/destructive nature?.Until now I had neglected him and didn't took it personally as per wiki article.Just guide me as this is one kind of mental harassment!,how to deal with this kind of people? Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 05:53, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey, please show the diffs, and don't worry; I am going to warn them! Further action may also be taken! Ekdalian (talk) 12:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @RegentsPark's page is lucky to me .I found many solutions here anyhow the wiki void behavior will be addressed if it is continued by the concerned editor. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 14:12, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Battle of Panipat.
Hi, first of all I'm new to editing Wikipedia so if that's not how wiki users contact each other than I'm sorry. I noticed that you (ReagentsPark) removed my edit from Battle of Panipat regarding advice given by Suraj Mal to Maratha. Reason mentioned for removal of edit was that source is unreliable. So if I will provide a source already used in the wiki article then will you republish the edit? Amitdabas123 (talk) 18:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi @ReagentsParks Amitdabas123 (talk) 18:38, 11 April 2024 (UTC)


 * This is perfectly appropriate and thanks for checking in with me. FYI, you don't need to ping someone when you're writing on their own talk pages because the system will automatically post a notification. The problems with the text you added are that (1) you're using a source that is not reliable. Generally, for historical events, you are better off using recent academic sources rather than older ones and, in most cases, sources pre-1947 are not considered reliable, additionally (2) the text you added was not written in an encyclopedic style. Think summary style, sticking to plain and clear sentences, as the best approach. If you have material that is not already covered in the article, you should summarize it in your own words, be direct, and cite it to recent academic sources. RegentsPark (comment) 18:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. As I said earlier can I use Kaushik Roy which has been used 5 times already as citation in the said article? You can check Suraj Mal's advice in Kaushik Roy's book which has already been used 5 times in the article. Here's the link https://books.google.co.in/books?id=jpXijlqeRpIC&lpg=PA85&pg=PA82#v=onepage&q=Suraj%20Mal%20&f=false
 * Also just now I noticed in the reference section of the article that "History of Jats" has been used as citation before I used it again and it was removed.
 * So can you please further advice me if I can use both already existing sources in the article to write the said Sub section of Suraj Mal's advice to Maratha commander-in-chief? Amitdabas123 (talk) 19:05, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Just don't use pre-1947 sources if possible - whether they are already in the article or not. And paraphrase in a summary style. And include only information that is appropriate (i.e., don't just add information because it exists). If you need specific help about what is appropriate or not, you can post a message at WP:IN. RegentsPark (comment) 20:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Thu April 25: WikiNYC Hacking Night
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

 * You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. 

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins
Hi there! Phase I of the Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
 * Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
 * Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
 * Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
 * Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
 * Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
 * Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
 * Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

May 8: WikiWednesday Salon with new Executive Director
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

User_talk:Sudsahab
Would you mind having a look? Drmies (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * . Sorry, I was off grid for a couple of weeks. I see the unblock request is still open and will take a look at it once I get my bearings! RegentsPark (comment) 13:50, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks RegentsPark! Always nice to have you on board. Drmies (talk) 13:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)