Talk:Katariya, Ambedkar Nagar district

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

India: Uttar Pradesh / Geography Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Uttar Pradesh (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian geography workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Kataria in Gazipur[edit]

In this edit, information was changed to identify this place as being in Gazipur. I'm assuming that was meant to be Gazipur District, but that is in Bangladesh and not India. If this is supposed to be an article for a town in Bangladesh, it needs to be created as anew article at something like Katariya (Gazipur). -- Whpq (talk) 18:50, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Whpq: Katariya, Ghazipur district was created on 23 July. FYI. However the removal of templates like Category:Cities and towns in Ambedkar Nagar district has continued, even after your last revert of its removal. --220 of ^Borg 11:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@220 of Borg:It appears to be worse than that. There has been uploads of copyrighted images with claims they are of Rajesultanpur. I found these images on the web and they aren't even of Rajesultnpur. One was a stock photo of Vijayawada, and the other is of Lake Michigan. Those were deleted, but the the editor seems to have tried again at Commmons. With this blatant disregard for truth, I worry about any of the edits performed by this editor that have no sourcing (which is all of them). It also appears he is editting under multiple accounts. -- Whpq (talk) 15:44, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]