User talk:Rekonedth/Archive 1

Hi there
Hello there, just saw your post on my page. Unfortunately, I am not able to provide a case study as I am not a clinical psychologist (I have my BSc. in Psychology, with a focus on cognitive and behavioral neuroscience). You would be looking for someone with at least a Master's degree in counselling psychology or a PhD in clinical psycholoy. There may be other resources that feature case studies, such as psychiatry textbooks, which could provide some material if you have trouble finding a direct source for what you are looking for. Good luck! Di4gram (talk) 05:34, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018
Hello, I'm Sidaq pratap. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Tu Sooraj, Main Saanjh Piyaji have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. ''Please read MOS:TVPLOT and Neutral point of view. '' Sidaq pratap (talk) 16:07, 5 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Those were some accurate results from the most approved users watching the serial rated on the TRPs. Rekonedth (talk) 14:56, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Please again read the above mentioned policies of Wikipedia MOS:TVPLOT and Neutral point of view and you will understand what is wrong with this. Sidaq pratap (talk) 15:17, 13 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I know that part plus the following thing were for the users or the new viewers mutual understanding between the show and themselves. Rekonedth (talk) 18:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a TV Guide or Social media and definitely not for promotion so please avoid these kind of edits. Sidaq pratap (talk) 19:57, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not for promotion or demotion. You added some text on plot section, which is bringing the twists or turns of this series like Indian blogspot. If you are new in Wikipedia then following WP:NOT and WP:MOS. Further, If you edit like this then it will be claimed as Vandalism. Thank You, Siddiqsazzad001    (Talk)     04:33, 19 February 2018

Siddiqsazzad001   (Talk)  Hello, sidaq pratap, let me clear all you misunderstood interpretations for this serial. Starting off the scene I just discussed a character of "Aditya" with a deeper length, which in future it will provide an understanding on how the plot actually works. Such obsoleteness is not required for the cover required in a plot. You have completely confounded my friend. There is a thing for promotion and demotion; I have neither been on a promotion side nor on a demotion one, absolutely neutral if speaking about that. Now the second part about Vandalism: there are no refuted claims on the basis of evidence provided from the recently viewed edits done by me...just added two lines on the perspective of mutually benefited relationship maintained by both the viewer and the television. A simple thing to put up: if he/she chooses to go on wikipedia for a reliable source, to understand the current situation, he/she can immediately point out the behaviour and character which has been maintained by the plot. If you want to go further on talking, please go ahead as noone is going to stop you!!!. If you have misinterpreted my state of providing a fraction of statement; do object me. Waiting to hear your views...

Hello, I'm Greyjoy. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Nirav Modi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.  Grey joy talk 10:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Sir James Dyson
If you had taken the trouble to read the article, you would have seen that he was knighted (in the 2007 New Year Honours). That is why he is "Sir". --David Biddulph (talk) 09:04, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Indeed. Rekonedth (talk) 09:24, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Query
Hi sir, I have seen your message on my draft page. Sir, will it be possible to move the draft back to my sandbox page. So that i can improve it more precisely? Maverickindian (talk) 15:56, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

On Vandal at Secretary to the Government of India
Beware of Breaching WP:3RR. Back off, let the Admins deal with this. I am in no way saying what you are doing is wrong, but Policy is Policy. Geartooth Friendship is Magic! 10:33, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Already reported the guy to ANV. Geartooth  Friendship is Magic! 10:36, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

A few things
I saw you edit User talk:109.151.14.161 earlier. I wanted to point out a few things. First, editors are allowed to remove warnings from their talk page. This includes block notices. If they remove a block notice or a warning, please don't restore it. Second, you posted a warning on the talk page of an IP editor who's already blocked. This doesn't accomplish anything. Just leave blocked editors alone – don't edit war with them, don't restore blanked content on their talk page, and don't warn them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:45, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, previously an issue was raised, albeit the concern of multiple shared IPs used by certain editors; they maybe affected by it, usually scaring them to edit in good faith. Perhaps a notice of blanked warnings, like a similar case upon the revision history, can be put. Just to make editors aware, if further vandalism and/or edits contradicted, with policies and guidelines; probably be put, to check the revision history of talk page. Such as, this one raises the issue. Perhaps you're completely correct about this, let the blocked user(s), be blocked. Unless the purpose changes for the provided talk page. Rekonedth (talk) 14:59, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you
I saw that you welcomed me to Wikipedia. I hope this is the right place to put this. Thanks for making me feel welcomed. Have a happy New year. CordialGreenery (talk) 07:58, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome, keep up that good work; and keep fixing Wikipedia. Rekonedth (talk) 08:01, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

List of Muffler Men
Hello,Rekondeth; I added a new Muffler Man location to the Wikipedia List of Muffler Men article under the subheading for Massachusetts. I am a native of the area and am familiar with this roadside novelty. Additionally, it is cited on the Roadside America page https://www.roadsideamerica.com/tip/8887 Being a neophyte editor, I am not sure what else to do. I am hopeful you can assist by reviewing and restoring the edit. Thanks.BerkshireHorse (talk) 14:45, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi; thanks for the heads up. You can willingly put back the source, without being reluctant about it. I've no problems with the text being added, just needed the necessary citations to confirm afore-mentioned locations inserted into the article. Now that the source for this, to confirm it, has been provided. I'm more than happy to restore the content, and cite it with the given source. Thanks for contacting me, to provide this reliable source. Rekonedth (talk) 03:02, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Rohit Shetty
Hi, I am Ankan12201817. I edited Rohit Shetty article with proper information. Don't delete contents from it to say inappropriate excuses. This is one type of vandalism. Ankan12201817 (talk) 07:15, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. The source you provided was concerning, and it needed the following claims, to be verified. Also the reference name, I'm afraid, wasn't appropriate. Just like you sourced IMDb right here, it isn't a reliable source. They're, just like Wikipedia, generated and always supplied by users of that website, i.e., a user-generated content. Other parts included you citing starsunfolded.com, right here; again which is most likely questionable reference. If you'd like to re-insert the content upon embodying within our accepted Policies and Guidelines; feel free to do so. If not, then the content is not suitable for inclusion. Thanks. Rekonedth (talk) 07:34, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia, that was very kind of you! Happy New Year :) Lilliangish (talk) 07:20, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Have a great day ahead, and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Rekonedth (talk) 07:35, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

WP:PROD of Manifold Vector Machine
A PROD can be removed by any editor without waiting for discussion. Perhaps you were thinking of AfD? Balkywrest (talk) 12:36, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * A Edit summary (or perhaps) discussion was expected. He's blocked, anyways. Let it undergo the deletion process. Rekonedth (talk) 12:43, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:DEPROD: "If anyone, including the creator, removes a proposed deletion tag from a page, do not replace it, even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith." Your re-applications of the PROD template went against Wikipedia policy. Balkywrest (talk) 00:35, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

He was, later on, blocked by an Administrator for Disruptive editing, continued removal of maintenance templates. Well, though a formal discussion could exist, and I didn't proposed it for decision, to go through proposed deletion. It was all fine; if he removed it again, then I knew, he maybe removed it in a bad faith. If he did remove it again after my re-insertion. I wouldn't object, and would undergo the Community process, that is, Articles for deletion. Now it's clear it displays original synthesis of material and relies heavily on primary reference(s). Let it go through a formal process. Thanks and Regards, Rekonedth (talk) 04:21, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Information
So what evidence do have that they might be divorced because for my understanding how can you divorce some you never married officially.That mean you also don't have to put information which is inaccurate. Shadia mayanjja (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. Yes, that was purely a rumor spread by the public, and a clear one-off event. I reverted your edit, apparently inserting an 'underscore'; which was against the Manual of Style, for Dates (one of our Policy, and Guideline). You even messed up the Infobox template, you should only remove the rumored, and false content which is libelous. Now that you've removed that factual error, there's nothing to worry about. Regards, Rekonedth (talk) 04:44, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Whirlspeed's Clark Gable revision
Rekonedth, why did you change my correction of 1940s to 1940's in the Spencer Tracy collaboration section of the Clark Gable post? The context of the sentence indicates that the word was used in the possessive sense, hence the addition of the apostrophe to correct the grammar. 1940 was the precise year of the film's release; the sentence does not mean 1940s as the decade of the 1940s but as the year in the possessive sense. (1940's.) I'll go back and change it back then have a look and see if you don't agree with me. Thanks for your attention to this. Whirlspeed (talk) 18:37, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It indicated a possessive form, and yearly period for that, is correct. Though, I didn't referred to that. So, let's be imprecise here just to garner some information. You inserted a defamatory content which read: "He had also gained a considerable amount of weight, which he subsequently lost prior to his next picture.", which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. Unless you counter it with multiple historic references. While the other edit is seemingly fine; that edit showed many types of Vandalism, more likely, a hidden type of vandalism. So, I just reverted that. If you want to correct mistakes, please do. But, if you want to add nonsensical words, please don't. Regards, Rekonedth (talk) 05:11, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

"Vandalism" tag
Why have you tagged this edit as vandalism? It was a good faith edit. Anon. U. 14:21, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, the edits made by the user caused you to revert it one time, to the previous version. It didn't fully revert to it's original version; hence, it's regarded as Vandalism. You can opt out for a anti-vandal tool, that is, Twinkle, if you've autoconfirmed or extended-confirmed access; to revert to previously archived version in the history. Highly recommend, for Anti-vandalism reverters like you. Thanks and Regards, Rekonedth (talk) 14:26, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:STiki!
Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.
 * Thanks for that welcome; enjoying the tool already. Rekonedth (talk) 05:35, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Aydan Calafiore
Hello Rekonedth. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Aydan Calafiore, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: appearing on national television multiple times indicates signficance. Thank you. So Why  08:15, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Exactly, same concern endorsed by me. Thanks for this notification. Rekonedth (talk) 08:25, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Rights granted
Hello Rekonedth. Your account has been [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3A granted] the "rollbacker" and "pending changes reviewer" user rights. These user rights allow you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes and quickly revert the edits of other users.


 * Rollback user right
 * Please keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin).


 * Pending changes reviewer user right
 * The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection enabled is located at Special:StablePages. You may find the following pages useful to review:
 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing.
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes.
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of reviewer or rollback. If you no longer want either of these user rights, contact me and I'll remove it, alternatively you can leave a request on the administrators' noticeboard. Happy editing! Swarm {talk}  09:00, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Rekonedth (talk) 09:05, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Your revert to Mathematical constant
Hi Rekonedth, I didn't quite understand why you reverted the edit by Rijndael on Mathematical constant. Your edit comment says test/vandalism but as far as I understand this was a constructive edit. BFG (talk) 04:49, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That was a spam link(s) (popping bunch of blatantly promoting pages), to attract adverts and increase their promotion for a specified sets of products, advert-generators, etc. to solicit viewers. Which isn't allowed. Thanks. Rekonedth (talk) 08:05, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Muntinlupa - Districts and Barangays - Rollback
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muntinlupa&type=revision&diff=876934825&oldid=876934373

I removed the Etymology, and Subdivision Section because they are already in the seperate wikipedia pages of barangays
 * Alabang
 * Ayala Alabang
 * Poblacion, Muntinlupa
 * Putatan, Muntinlupa
 * Tunasan

AND

I created new pages for those that are not yet existing for the city of Muntinlupa then added their etymology in the history section and also added a subdivision section
 * Draft:Bayanan, Muntinlupa
 * Draft:Buli
 * Draft:Cupang, Muntinlupa
 * Draft:Sucat, Muntinlupa

I would appreciate if you would review these new pages so that I could link them to the existing Muntinlupa page. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.206.42.64 (talk • contribs)
 * After the following drafts are accepted and included, while it adheres to Our Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Then yes, you can add a main article link to a previous preceding article, that is, by using templates, just below subheading(s) and their given heading(s). Use and/or , to direct it to a newer article. If it's accepted; and is brought to its original article form, after the drafts are accepted, you may want to publish it and undergo a heavy review by a New page reviewer, who may or may not accept it. Thanks. Rekonedth (talk) 13:42, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * So after these pages are reviewed and accepted then I could go on an proceed to removing the Etymology, and Subdivision sub-sections in the Muntinlupa article? It seems that transferring them to other articles would declutter the Muntinlupa Article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.206.42.64 (talk • contribs)
 * Yes. Just leave a small piece of text; link to your newly revised and reviewed article, after it comes into the Article main-space. You've to use those templates and describe in your edit summary, in short "Linking to main article", remove half of the content; it does de-clutter and frees up the article. Also, review all the main guidelines before proceeding otherwise the draft maybe rejected. Make sure you're known to general basis of Notability guidelines, establish your content based on primary and secondary references, making it more inclined to the general Manual of Style. You may also want to read on how to create your first Article? usefully acquiring everything and engaging in discussions for future contributors and/or collaborators, you may meet in the future. If all sets and all is good; you'll get the following Draft(s), to the main-space. Rekonedth (talk) 14:13, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Note: Please sign all your replies on talk pages. By hitting four tildes like this:. Thanks. Rekonedth (talk) 14:19, 5 January 2019 (UTC)