User talk:Acagastya/Archive/α

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

User:Acagastya/sandbox.v.2.0

Welcome!

Hello, AgastyaC, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Agastya chandrakant, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:05, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 18:34, Sunday, May 12, 2024 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Disambiguation link notification for February 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hong Seong-chan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gangwondo. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed it
aGastya ✉ let’s talk about it :) 11:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nicholas Taylor (tennis), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wichita. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed it
aGastya ✉ let’s talk about it :) 11:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Time userbox

Hello, Acagastya. You have new messages at LarryJeff's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Metric units do have plurals

Terms such as "joule" and "metre" do have plurals. You'll see many examples in International Bureau of Weights and Measures (2006), The International System of Units (SI) (PDF) (8th ed.), ISBN 92-822-2213-6, archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-06-04, retrieved 2021-12-16 as well as in normal usage. NebY (talk) 12:06, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, your first correction (to Maxwell) was appropriate, but the others have been reverted to their correct plural forms. Dbfirs 12:12, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This varies by language. In English, metric units form plurals like regular nouns, except for lux, hertz, and siemens. This is covered, with references, at International System of Units#Unit names.--Srleffler (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Footballers in Year articles

I notice you've edited a number of year articles such as 1980, 1981 and so forth, adding the current teams of about 30 football players born in those years. Please could you reconsider? You'll have noticed that we only identify nationalities for sports players in those articles, not teams, and I hope that on reflection you'll see that there are good reasons for this. The players' nationalities will in general remain unchanged, but football players change clubs frequently - some very often. Who is going to make sure all those changes are reflected in the year articles over the coming years? Will you? Can you even guarantee you will still be editing Wikipedia in five years time, let alone that you will be keeping track of each of those footballers and updating the year articles whenever players change clubs? We can be fairly confident that fans will update the players' own articles such as Frank Lampard or Mario Balotelli, but they won't hunt down the year articles 1978 and 1990 as well. Sadly, I have to suggest you go back and undo those edits, otherwise Wikipedia will soon have a number of errors in it. NebY (talk) 20:57, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply on my talk page.[1] I take your point that you fully intend to continue editing Wikipedia for many years to come, but do be aware that many editors find their enthusiasm for Wikipedia comes and goes, sometimes affected by problems they encounter in Wikipedia as time goes on, sometimes because their personal priorities change as life goes on. That's one of the reasons we have that convention in the year articles, that we only add historic information rather than current statuses. You can imagine what would happen if many editors now followed your example; those articles would soon be full of information that had rapidly become outdated! Instead, all those entries have their wikilinks and any reader can easily click on the link to learn all sorts of current information about the player. So yes, I do still say that those edits should be reverted; I appreciate you writing "I will surely do it!" and that will reflect well on you. NebY (talk) 15:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo! I caught just five more (in 1981, 1984, 1988 and 1990). Thanks. NebY (talk) 19:45, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

WP:SIGLINK requires that your signature includes a link to your user page and/or your user talk page. The signature which you have used recently does not meet that requirement. My guess is that you have erroneously ticked the "Treat the above as wiki markup" box at Special:Preferences; please correct it. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:59, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

Please don't change the format of the date articles as you have done here. The spacing between items is part of the template and shouldn't be changed. See WP:DAYS. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 13:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Belarusian

Please stop replacing Belarusian with Belorussian. The spelling Belarusian is correct. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 02:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Meritnation

Hi. Try reading our guidelines on notability and verifiability to understand why the page was deleted. Deb (talk) 15:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Deb i know what you mean to say. the page must be poorly framed without much references and information. But it is indeed a website which you can have a wiki of. If i could borrow some of your time, please search about it and have a look. And if you still believe that it still detains the criteria, i won't discuss it or bother you about it aGastya ✉ let’s talk about it :) 16:05, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter what I think. I am not going to rewrite the article to demonstrate its notability. If you feel it is important to have an article on this topic, you have two options:

Rewrite the article yourself, making sure it meets the inclusion criteria.
Request the article at Wikipedia:Requested articles

Deb (talk) 16:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

will rewrite it myself. thanks! aGastya ✉ let’s talk about it :) 04:37, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To add to what Deb said, I would recommend that if you want to try rewriting the article yourself you should do it through the AFC process. That way you can have your draft reviewed and it won't be deleted unless it is offensive, or a copyright violation, or unless it is left unedited for more than 6 months. If you try putting your new attempt straight in to mainspace as an article, if it doesn't meet the acceptance criteria it is likely to be deleted again. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Acagastya/Archive/α. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by LukeSurl^{t c} 16:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

help

Q. in my sandbox, there are 8 categories of my user box: can you help to arrange them in equal horisontal planes? looking at it you will understand how i want it

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

aGastya ✉ let’s talk about it :) 04:36, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Huon (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ChamithN's page

Can I just ask why you reset the archive counter at ChamithN's talk page to a lower setting? Has he asked you to do so? Now the archive may be screwed up. w.carter-Talk 16:10, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a closer look, it seems like you totally rearranged the talk page. I have no idea how to sort this out and only hope that ChamithN will know what to do to revert your edits. Please don't try to fix anything, that may only make things worse! Wait and see what User:ChamithN|ChamithN have to say. w.carter-Talk 16:18, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@W.carter: I know right!! I was confused to see that "frustrated" template back again when I visited my talk page. Maybe Acagastya wanted to know more about my signature?. I guess he wanted to reply to your humorous message about others copying my signature. It's OK Acagastya if you are comfortable with continuing discussion my on talk page please do so.--Chamith (talk) 16:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think I was able to fix my talk page. But I decided to retain that old discussion assuming it would help Acagastya.--Chamith (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@ChamithN:Sorry about the overlinking, I just had your name link in my copypaste and I was too quick in using it. Glad that the page was salvageable, I was just horrified when I saw the mess. Commiserations. w.carter-Talk 16:26, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all. In fact I'm grateful to you for starting this discussion. I don't think Acagastya meant to do any harm to my talk page. Maybe he/she wanted to restore that discussion to satisfy his/her curiosity about web colors.-Chamith (talk) 16:30, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@User:W.carter and @User:ChamithN I am sorry, i didn't know that i created so much destruction on the talk page: What actually happened: i typed my 256 and 16M doubt and saved it. but later, the change wasn't visible. I checked my contributions and it was there. So i just clicked on edit of the signature topic and wrote the same again. It wasn't my intention to disturb archives! Sorry! aGastya ✉ let’s talk about it :) 04:36, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

About pages

Ok, it's time to tell you something about pages here. There are a lot of pages on the Wikipedia that you should not edit or create talk pages for etc. I think that the mess at ChamithN's page happened when you tried to make a comment on an archived page. Don't do that. Archived pages should be left alone. Pages like the essays connected to Yunshui's page should also be left alone. You are lucky that he is a very nice and considerate admin, others may have called that vandalism. For now, just make your comments on the normal regular talk pages until you have learned more, so you do not get into more trouble. If you read something on an archived page that you whish to comment on, you should make that post on the current talk page and just refer to the archived page. Or the essay. Best, w.carter-Talk 16:38, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I only checked so that there was no more things that you had accidentally messed up, that is why I patrolled your pages. Just so you know, nobody is mad at you or anything, :) things just happened. Having a new editor on the Wikipedia is a little like having a new puppy dog at home, there will be some furniture chewed on and the carpets will be a mess, but it can all be sorted out. And the puppy dog learns. :) Best, w.carter-Talk 16:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See below - there's no rule I know of that says you can't talk about user essays on their respective talkpages. Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:58, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Yunshui for clarifying. Perhaps I should have been more specific. I was just laying down some general ground rules, since (unfortunately) far from all editors have such a positive and kind mindset as you do, and I don't want this bright new user to get into more trouble than necessary while experimenting and testing things here. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 11:11, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]