User talk:Vedant/Archive 5

Dharavi Image
Hi Vedant, I have started discussion on Talk:Mumbai page to remove dharavi image, I was stunned to know that Mexico city has biggest slum in world still there is not a single word about slum on the Mexico city article, see source/list/image. I would really appreciate if you comment on Talk:Mumbai. Thanks  KuwarOnline ''' Talk 19:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Vedant, it fine if we mention it because a sizable portion, but the image just ruins the article, i dont know why all people want to show poverty to whole world....i know its fact but why give hype to it... there are many largest slum in world as i said like Mexico city, but they dont show or atleast dont advertised it..... mumbai has india's tallest towers, more than 1500 highrise building in mumbai alone see List of tallest buildings in Mumbai and List of tallest buildings in India, why we dont show this on mumbai article than showing poverty,slum etc.... hope you understand what i m trying to say. please let me know wht you think.  KuwarOnline ''' Talk 07:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reply :)  KuwarOnline ''' Talk 08:35, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   17:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

SAIC
If the debate on J-10 sourcing can be closed with no more sourcing disputes on Sinodefence, then I'll try to close the other debate at RSN. Jim101 (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Air India
Re your addition of the 2010 accident, it was not an Air India flight, but an Air India Express flight, and is covered under that article. I've replaced the entry with an edit note so that other editors don't get confused. Mjroots (talk) 17:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

BrahMos export
Good job on rewriting that section! Its much clearer now. Roger (talk) 07:23, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Mayawati
Hi Vedant. I happen to agree with your approach to the Mayawati article but if my recent experience is any guide you are going to meet some stiff resistance at the talkpage. If you are inclined to use the talkpage of Mayawati's article I may come over and add a few comments. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 18:32, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with your comments over my talk-page. You can open a discussion on talk-page of Mayawati's article and I will respond there, that will be more appropriate. As of now I think I'll prefer the article to be in previous state as per last cnsensus over talk-page of Mayawati's article. Thanks. -- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider t c s 06:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Over wealth issue I agree with Dr K because till date nothing is proven against her. -- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider t c s 09:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Mass Effect 2
Good job on the Mass Effect 2 article, lots of good and constructive edits. Keep up the good work! 70.109.163.193 (talk) 10:35, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Your request
Sure, I'll gladly take a look. If you think it's salient, you might want to put a report up on WP:SPI if your suspicions are strong enough. That provides an easy way to catalog your evidence and concerns and makes it easy for admins to look into, as well as giving a platform for the accused to defend themselves. That's not to say I won't take a look at it and keep an eye out either way, I'm just suggesting this in case you didn't know and would want to. - Vianello (Talk) 00:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Lal Chowk
Hey Vedant, wow that was a long time ago. Not sure why I removed the POV. I read through the article again and it seems alright and has sources. But I think it is important to note that there are only two sources and the sources themselves will probably need to be examined closer. -- vi5in [talk] 16:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Forbin is a destroyer
Vedant, the Forbin must belong to the Destroyer section. Just check the two images. The Forbin is a D while La Fayette class is an F. The French Navy uses the term First class Frigate for destroyers and Second class Frigate for Frigates. Check the Forbin article talk page. There was a discussion on it long back. The Forbin belong to the class of Daring class destroyers and the new Kolkata class of ships. So it's time that the French ship is given its due place that's of a Destroyer.Bcs09 (talk) 05:35, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Finally got it. The French Navy English version website calls the Forbin as a destroyer. So it's a Destroyer.Bcs09 (talk) 05:43, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

HAL TEJAS EDIT
The HAL TEJAS hindi pronunciation was deleted on 02:20, 30 June 2010 by IP address 88.106.xx.xxx. It has since been reverted however just so there is no misunderstanding the IP address does not belong to me. Thank you--Nuclearram (talk) 21:44, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no misunderstanding, please see your talk page for more information. Thanks, Vedant (talk) 17:27, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, i don't really find the pronunciation relevant as i assumed that not many people would even bother to listen to it.However it is too small a issue to engage in a edit/revert war especially if someone has a different opinion. Thanks for replying, hope i can count on your help if i need an opinion about something.--Nuclearram (talk) 20:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Royal Navy
The IP you pointed out does look to have been quite disruptive. I think it's probably best to ignore the IP and they usually makes them go away. I don't see much need for the removal of the 2 pictures from the article though. Space25689 (talk) 22:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I can see this IP has caused some disruption but it is not acceptable to revert another user's edits because of part disputes you might have had with them. I think you criticised the IP for doing that to you so I would advise against yourself doing it. Space25689 (talk) 05:03, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You know, your opinion would hold some credence if you weren't a sockpuppet of User:Yattum. Vedant (talk) 03:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Never knew such things can happen
lol, these are really funny things happening in Wikipedia. Never knew such things existed.Bcs09 (talk) 01:42, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

AIV report
Thank you for your report on User:Closeds at Administrator intervention against vandalism. I have warned the user about edit warring. You are very likely to be right that this is a sockpuppet for User:Yattum, but there is no direct evidence, and in the absence of evidence we cannot block the user on the basis of suspicion. If the editor had been warned about each unhelpful edit I would have been perfectly happy to have blocked them. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Op Blue star
Can you pls weigh in with your views whether Operation Blue Star can be categorized under "Massacres in places of worship"(discussion in here). I strongly feel calling the operation a "massacre" is not at all suitable. Thx  Arjun  codename024 11:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

HAL Tejas
Hi, by the 4 LCAs in the IAF inventory, do you mean the 4 prototypes made by HAL? If yes, I think they aren't in the IAF "inventory", but are operated by HAL to test it's various systems. I believe it will be LSP-7 and LSP-8 which will be handed over to the IAF, and that too for user-trials. HAL will only begin series production by the first quarter of 2011. --Gremaldin (talk) 04:59, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Just to make myself clear, so are the F-35 prototypes considered to be in the USAF inventory? In the same way, is the naval LCA prototype considered to be in the inventary of the indian Naval air arm? If yes, why aren't they listed in their respective articles? The way I understand it, the 4 prototypes produced by HAL are not to be included in the LCAs ordered by the IAF. --Gremaldin (talk) 15:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not about making me or anyone else happy, I just want wikipedia to provide accurate information, that's all. I only brought up this discussion as I didn't want to start an edit war. I hadn't noticed the IAF registry number before, thanks for pointing that out. --Gremaldin (talk) 15:35, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Wow, ok so maybe what you said is right after all! --Gremaldin (talk) 02:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Active aircraft of the Indian Air Force
I was reading the talk page of List of aircraft of the Indian Air Force when I noticed that you, Recon.Army (talk) and MilborneOne (talk) wanted to make a new article "Active aircraft of the Indian Air Force" and maintain "List of aircraft of the Indian Air Force" as a list of all aircraft that the IAF operates or have operated. I too am for this proposal. So shall I proceed and make the proposed article? --Gremaldin (talk) 12:36, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Doubts
I'm still new to wikipedia and I don't really fully know how things work. So please be kind enough to answer my doubts.


 * Is it against wikipedia policy to use applications like Twinkle to revert edits if we do not otherwise have permission? How can we request for permission for reverting edits?


 * How can we send an article for peer review? Does each class of article (like B, GA, A, etc.) have it's own peer review?


 * How do we nominate an article for A grade (or any other grade)?

--Gremaldin (talk) 12:43, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * How do we rename an article? --Gremaldin (talk) 14:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help. --Gremaldin (talk) 05:17, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

ANI thread
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is 99.238.167.207. Mauler90 talk 08:58, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Since legal threats are NOT allowed to be made, for legal reasons, perhaps you can use this to obtain a range block on your stalker. - BilCat (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I was pondering that as I reverted his comments. I haven't yet decided if I want to do that but I think I have enough ammunition. I'll probably silently report it though as unless the report page is auto-protected, said blocked user will be slobbering all over it. Vedant (talk) 13:07, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Re
Dosent come under the personal attack cat; But there is a problem with non native english speeking nationals who fail to understand simple English when editors of English wiki.Recon.Army (talk) 13:17, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I wonder why you would consider it a personal attack? Also when bringing up a new discussion on my talk page, please put it under a separate section. Recon.Army (talk) 13:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Apologies for that, the warning I placed was automated and it automatically decided dump it in the newly created section by 88.106 (who by the way is a sockpuppet for an indefinitely blocked user Yattum) Vedant (talk) 13:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I perceived this particular sentence as a personal attack directed against another user: This is the problem when Indian nationalists edit the English speeking wiki, most don't understand English.. In the interest of not starting a flame war or embarassing anyone, I made a mention of it on your talk page. I would urge you though in the future to be more cautious with your words. Surely you don't believe that all Indians who edit Wikipedia are nationalists who are deficient in English (Again, this is just a clarification and not an accusation)? Thanks,Vedant (talk) 13:23, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes I am aware that account is a multi. Asked him if he could provide proof of your edits, but I don't expect he can. He is one of many disruptive editors. Again it doesn’t come under the personal attack cat. Its a true statement, there is a problem with the lack of English skills of many editors who do not speak English as their native tongue. In future don’t bring up such as a personal attack but as a boarder Civility issue which just merits a friendly warning of the code of conduct and importance for co-operation. Recon.Army (talk) 13:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I trust that you will try to be more courteous when dealing with certain editors. Just as an alternative theory as to what occurred; it could just be he didn't read your paragraph fully, not that he's deficient in English. Vedant (talk) 13:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Just as an addendum, please don't be so quick to dismiss someone's ability to write English as we can all make mistakes from time-to-time. For example, speaking is spelled s-p-e-a-k-i-n-g and not with an e, and the fact that it's generally considered bad practice to start a sentence with But. Ofcourse seeing as how we lack hard facts about the number of linguistically incompetent users on en.wiki, maybe we should just return to the topic at hand. I could bring the anecdotal case up that there are plenty of people who can speak English very proficiently even though it was not their first language. Vedant (talk) 18:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey guys don't make it a big fuss its a simple matter. I said in the talk page of India Army that I misunderstood his view and apologize for that. I would make sure that this type of howler isn't committed any more. And Recon.Army hasn't launched any kind of personal attack against me. It was my fault you(Vedant) should blame me not him. Thank You -- Kkm010 &#124;  Talk with me   05:41, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not blaming anyone. I just responded against what I perceived to be a personal attack. Nothing more, nothing less. Vedant (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, the matter has been solved. If possible see the talk page of Indian Armed forces where I'm facing some dilemma about who is the Commander-in-chief in India.Thank You-- Kkm010 &#124;  Talk with me   14:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Seeking your opinion
Hello Vedant, I would like to know your opinion about changing Sino-Indian conflict from War to Limited War as war is too strong a term to describe an conflict of such small scope and limited use of hardware. This conflict is perfectly within definition of Limited War as defined by any online publication/encyclopedia/dictionary. I am trying to build consensus on Talk page of Sino-India war 1962. Thanks. Swift&amp;silent (talk) 07:17, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)