User talk:Winged Blades of Godric

This user may have left Wikipedia. Winged Blades of Godric has not edited Wikipedia since July 2020. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Outhentic's page - moving from draft to article[edit]

Hello, I'd like to ask you to take a look at this page and tell me if everything's fine and it can be published on Wikipedia- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outhentic . Thank you very much! Best, Rayna --Rayna Vasileva (talk) 08:10, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moving the article 'Kumar Swami' to draft[edit]

I see that you have moved the article Kumar Swami to draft.

I am not being paid for anything on Wikipedia. My discussion with Harshil got heated because he was trying to dictate the tone of the article without discussing any details. I wrote this article passionately since it's my first article on Wikipedia. But to be clear once again, I have no association with the subject of the article. I already told in my discussion that I am ready to improve the article if someone guides me to. I will still improve the article to meet Wikipedia's standards.

Regarding the reliability of sources, why do you think that sources are not reliable ? They are from well reputed newspapers and official government websites. I would appreciate if you will guide me which references are unreliable in your view.

What else this draft needs in order to be able to be included in article space ??

I have seen many articles on Wikipedia which are much shorter than mine, have much less references and have lesser quality of references than the ones I have used.

I guess the reason that you have moved the article to draft is because of my heated discussion with Harshil, for which I have already apologized.

I find it unfair that such a well researched article which was earlier accepted has now been moved to draft.

Please reconsider your decision of reverting the article to draft. The references are indeed reliable and independent. I request you to again have a thorough look. I will keep working on improving the quality of the content but I feel it should be in the article space.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Princehr999 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Inactivity[edit]

Did you end up fixing ICPH's querry with the updated syntax? I fixed a query once before but it's not my strength and if you've already done it all the better. I would like to go through and actually do the removal of anyone who has been inactive on Wikipedia a year. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:11, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Barkeep49, In June Xaosflux removed a few, so he knows the regex to update the list Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:00, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Barkeep49: we regularly remove "special groups" that have 12 month complete inactivity, as of right now the only users that are in the "patroller" group exceeding 12 months of editing activity are secondary accounts of admins. Is that what you are looking in to? — xaosflux ^Talk 14:39, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Xaosflux, it was. Good to know that this already happens without any help from me. Thanks! Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:43, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Akiwo Arakawa (September 24)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Missvain was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Akiwo Arakawa and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Akiwo Arakawa, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Missvain (talk) 00:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Missvain:-That's a poor decline; are you aware of WP:NACADEMIC? I would have moved that to main-space myself, if I did not have a COI.

Hyperbolick, thanks for your work! ∯WBG^converse 14:34, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, nothing beats waking up and having something called "poor" you did on Wikipedia...first for everything in 14 years. And they wonder why newbies don't stick around. Missvain (talk) 15:32, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Missvain: I'm sorry, if that was the first message you saw today:-( On an aside, as someone who has been here for over 4 years with about 40,000 edits, me thinks that rejecting policy-compliant articles from newbies also affect editor-retention, negatively. ∯WBG^converse 15:59, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... I just stumbled on this thread. Highly significant in the light of current events. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:18, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Kudpung: What current events? What significance? Can't tell if you intend positively or negatively. Hyperbolick (talk) 13:52, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

section review[edit]

Hope you are doing well. Please can you review this section? It seems to have a different meaning. Previously it was [[1]]. Now it is [[2]]. It seems like the very edits based on your discussion here [[3]] are reverted. Thanks.

WP:BLP applies even to non biographies if the article talks about actions by people still living-- or allegations against them.-- Deep fried okra 13:39, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

" legal case against Wikimedia"[edit]

I don't doubt it. After my own harrowing, I'm much more sensitive to this than before. Of course, as I learned watching Law and Order, the best way to avoid an accusation of impropriety is to avoid the appearance there of. So I will almost always advocate for the removal of unsavory content when it is challenged.-- Deep fried okra 13:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy note[edit]

I have refactored my support comment that you refer to in Fram's RfA. 28bytes (talk) 00:36, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019[edit]

I'm sorry to see that you decided to edit-war on Nadja Malacrida. I believe you are mistaken in your actions and conclusions, and I am formally warning you that further edit-warring may lead to a block. I sincerely hope that it will not come to that. Removing sourced content is rarely a constructive edit, and your efforts would be better directed to proposing alternate wording on the talk page in an effort to find common ground over how best to summarise what Tinniswood wrote. --RexxS (talk) 14:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RexxS, I don't give a flying fuck about your warning and this passive-aggresive BS.

Also, the last revert was by Giano, pending which I made a thread at 3RRN and added more stuff to the t/p section, which sufficiently indicates that I am not going to edit-war. ∯WBG^converse 14:19, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Godric, if the best response to a perfectly reasonable piece of advice is "I don't give a flying fuck" then you're running the risk of getting blocked. In particular, I haven't really seen you voice any opinion on the content, but just make vague hand-waving comments about policies. For example, consider your edit here. You removed a bunch of information about Malacrida's husband as "irrelevant" (okay, but in whose opinion?) and citing WP:REFBOMB which makes no sense given the account of Piero's interior design writing is cited to a single book source. In particular, removing the source and replacing it with a {{fact}} tag should be avoided unless you can demonstrate you have checked the source and found the claims are not present, in which case it's better to tag at {{failed verification}}, and even then only if you can back up and justify your tags. It's not really surprising your edits were reverted, as they don't seem to show any empathy for the subject matter. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:19, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie333,

T/p(s) exist for a purpose and our policies explicitly ask users to not discuss stuff via edit-sums; I have indeed launched a specific section for my reverts, post the first revert by Giano. Where RexxS has responded and I will respond, soon.

I need not show any empathy for a long-deceased subject; nothing whatsoever. Also, this is a bit rich, coming after all that has happened with you. ∯WBG^converse 15:25, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User Talk Reverts[edit]

Hey there. I've noticed on a couple user talks that I watch that you'll sometimes make a comment and then decided shortly after to self-revert - in looking at your edits to user talks I see 4 such examples in the last week. Because of the nature of talk page notifications I'm guessing that in most situations that the person is still seeing your edit. So rather than walking back comments you think better of - what I am sure is your intent - it now causes all the impact of the post without allowing the person it's directed at to have a chance to respond. I'd like to suggest that you think just a tad harder before publishing comments to user talks. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:44, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

hi[edit]

Hi there. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nurul_Alam_Chowdhury&diff=918265589&oldid=918255460 Just to let you know, I didn't mean to make this revert of your addition, not sure how it happened, mis click perhaps. Regards Govindaharihari (talk) 10:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Govindaharihari:-No qualms; it happens :-) ∯WBG^converse 08:56, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and best wishes. Govindaharihari (talk) 20:00, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Rain, mostly.
Message added 09:58, 6 October 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

——SerialNumber54129 09:58, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replied. ∯WBG^converse 08:56, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Yogi's Guide to Edit Warring and Walled Gardens[edit]

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Seriously [4], [5]? I understand your concerns about self cite/walled garden issues. I also appreciate your efforts to weed them out. However, for this particular article, the deletion discussion did not come up with a consensus to remove the content. I have started a discussion at Talk:Inner Engineering: A Yogi's Guide to Joy regarding this.--DreamLinker (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IP continuing your edit war[edit]

This IP 157.43.235.10 is continuing your slow edit war. Please refrain if it is you. It is highly unlikely for a new user to dig up someone else's edit and type in those words. The IP is from where you live. --Jaydayal (talk) 10:21, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's not me and you might be surprised to know that there's a feature that allows an user to restore an earlier article version.

FWIW, I am highly curious, as to how you know where I live most of the time. And about how you managed to geo-locate the IP with such extreme precision, amidst a highly contrarian data-set spanning over the breadth of a country, at a time when I was actually at United Kingdom.

The edit-summaries were not very mature either, FWIW and WP:SPI is that-way.∯WBG^converse 13:11, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because you mention it yourself on your talk page when edit pops up. I am reverting you, please stop edit-war and respond on talk page. You have been engaging in slow edit war for ages. The IP did not 'revert' but edited! --Jaydayal (talk) 13:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

from your source[edit]

https://rasaneh.farhang.gov.ir/fa/newsagency/13355/%DA%AF%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%B4-%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%AA%DB%8C-%D9%88-%D8%AA%D8%B5%D9%88%DB%8C%D8%B1%DB%8C-%D9%86%D8%B4%D8%B3%D8%AA-%D8%AA%D8%AE%D8%B5%D8%B5%DB%8C-%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%AF-%D8%AA%DA%A9%D9%86%DB%8C%DA%A9-%D9%87%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D9%88%DB%8C%DA%A9%DB%8C-%D9%BE%D8%AF%DB%8C%D8%A7-%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%AA

WP:NPA[edit]

I will kindly ask you to WP:REFACTOR your edits about me at disgraced and [6] in light of WP:NPA and WP:CIV. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:40, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed your EEML history and still, I was subtle enough to use disgraced, which FWIW is enough factual in light of your desysop + ban, for cause. If you deem that as a NPA, AN lies thatway. ∯WBG^converse 05:41, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There was nothing subtle about that, and I agree it was a blatant personal attack. WBG, I have known you for a while as a positive editor; please take a step back and consider laying off of other editors. Drmies (talk) 14:07, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An ex-admin de-sysoped and temporally banned for running off-wiki collusion networks is textbook definition of disgraced (OED defines it as Having fallen from favour or a position of power or honour). And to me, someone (irrespective of whether he is an editor of our site or not) being intrinsically involved in trying to remove a piece critical of him, from being used a source over an article, is textbook violation of our COI policy. On some reflections, I have struck off my statement that he should have been shown the door aka banned long ago, which do remain my feelings but is fairly irrelevant. ∯WBG^converse 14:15, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is exactly the remark that bothered me. That you think someone has disgraced themselves, that's one thing, but that other remark is quite another--it doesn't only mean a lack of good faith, but also suggests that somehow the community got it wrong the whole time. That's not impossible, but it's really hurtful. I am not all that aware of the EEML debacle, but I do believe that those involved paid the price, and that includes Piotrus--who, I understand, is now being smeared off-wiki by a banned editor. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 14:19, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then we can consider it as resolved:-) I do agree that shown the door was unnecessarily harsh.

FWIW, I am a bit bothered about the reasoning :- but also suggests that somehow the community got it wrong the whole time. That's not impossible, but it's really hurtful.. The community shall not be compelled or expected to engage in some sort of group-think-like-reverence towards any event that have happened in this project; dissent (irrespective of however misplaced they might seem to individual eyes) have a place. I have definitely read you stating over somewhere (circa 2012/13; some AN/ANI thread, probably) that you did not (personally) agree with certain old blocks of Eric and thought they were poor to the extent of not mattering any, for determining a future sanction. Do you see that there is a scope of asking the same question to you, in a slightly re-framed manner? FWIW, I do not seek to comment on the merit of Eric's past blocks, in any manner. An example for the sake of it and where I agreed with your assessment. ∯WBG^converse 14:38, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's less complicated than that, I think: if their past sins were so bad, they would have been punished more in that case that was so large in scope, but that's really as much as I want to say about it. I'm not saying that the community always gets it right, but I am saying that all this was a long time ago. Drmies (talk) 16:46, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Need help in Copy edit[edit]

Can you please copy edit Cauvery calling? Previously, it was written in promotional way, I requested deletion and recreated from scratch? — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 12:46, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I (normally) don't touch anything related to this god-man with a barge-pole or so; seem to have a network of spammers to filibuster and wear down others in a bid to maintain a promotional coverage. Still, will take a shot at it, within the next few days. Regards, ∯WBG^converse 14:41, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your recent edit on Romila Thapar. The discussion related to paragraph was already going on at Talk:Romila Thapar and we were about to reach on consensus while you removed whole content. Can you please reinstate content while discussion is going on ? You’re welcome to discuss your points there. Thanks for copy edit though. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 15:16, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation[edit]

Yes, I know, we're not the best of buddies, and I don't want any words to sound patronising. But I had to share this with you. I've followed the tone of your discussions with fellow editors in the past few weeks and I've noticed that you are being very supportive, helpful and are taking criticism with all good faith. Of course, even I have bad days like you, but just thought I'll drop in and tell you what I am perceiving. Thank you. Lourdes 12:38, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

+1 ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removed pictures from D. J. Sindh Government Science College[edit]

Hi there! You removed 4 pictures from D. J. Sindh Government Science College on 12:59 pm, 25 November 2016, Friday (UTC +5). Those pictures are not watermarked and are available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0. Link to the pictures are available on the bottom my talk page along with your notice. ZaeemAkhtr (talk) 17:35, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting...[edit]

I was just sitting here (at a major equestrian event) with some extra time on my hands while waiting for the vet to finish checking my granddaughter’s horse (he came up lame) and read what you just added to your very interesting user page info. I must say, WBG, I am duly impressed - you are the first male I’ve known who has crystal balls, and I hope your account never goes rogue. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 18:13, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Only one very quick question! Unfamiliar with Indian clothing customs (bracelets)[edit]

I am unfamiliar with Indian clothing customs. In the "Social disruption" section of Bengal famine of 1943 there is a photo that Fowler&fowler (who is on wikibreak, and I do not wish to disturb him) has labeled "Destitute mother and child Bengal famine 1943". Following this description, I made the alt text: "Alt text: Old photograph of a woman squatting and tiny, emaciated toddler standing on a sidewalk. The woman is shirtless but squatting to conceal her breasts. The toddler is wearing rags." But ... you know... those arms look kinda muscular, and so does the back.. the face is a bit unclear and a bit androgynous, so might be a young man, maybe late teens (?) .. do the bracelets definitely mark the wearer as female? ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 02:55, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WBG, I am sorry for interrupting. Lingzhi2, I believe this is a married woman. According to tradition, married Bengali women (at least those who are Hindus) wear a pair of white and red bangles known as "shakha pola". Perhaps the red ones are not visible. I am not aware of Bengali men wearing bangles. There is a video clip by BBC [7] of the 1943 famine, where you can notice other women wearing similar bangles. The clip has some disturbing images though.--DreamLinker (talk) 09:35, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DreamLinker, you aren't interrupting at all. In fact, your answer is quite helpful. Thank you for taking the time to respond. Cheers! ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 10:07, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit[edit]

I have reverted your edit to Ramesh Nagaraj Rao. Please do not remove sourced content, particularly during a deletion debate. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:26, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[[WP:ROLLBACKUSE]Cease the abuse of rollback]] lest it be taken away. Please gain consensus of inclusion, over the t/p. ∯WBG^converse 12:36, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ramesh Nagaraj Rao (2nd nomination)[edit]

Hi, being the nominator of the AFD, you are WP:INVOLVED to take any administrative actions at the AFD, the same applies to user:Serial Number 54129. Also your removal of the IP vote is against policy, whether you're involved or not. There's no rule that prevents IPs from voting. Please self-revert. Thank you. SD0001 (talk) 19:36, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ramesh_Nagaraj_Rao_(2nd_nomination). SD0001 (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Stevenson article: RS?[edit]

Hi.

I noticed your recent deletion, with the note "How is this a RS?"

Well. . .

The person quoted, Jesse Bering, is an Associate Professor at a mainstream university (https://www.otago.ac.nz/science-communication/staff/bering/index.html).

Most of the deleted text consists of him quoting a respected mainstream scientist (https://news.virginia.edu/content/pioneering-professor-doris-kuhlmann-wilsdorf-dies-service-thursday).

His article appeared on the website of Scientific American -- that is, the website of an ultra-respected scientific publication. From a search of the site, it seems that Bering has been writing a regular column there since at least 2011. That is to say, he's an invited contributor.

So: How is this not an RS?

I recognize that the views expressed are controversial (one might say "flaky"). But "The content is flaky, therefore the source is unreliable" would be circular logic.

So?

Cordially,

O Govinda (talk) 06:16, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's a blog with no editorial control; a material scientist is not any expert in the relevant discipline. ∯WBG^converse 06:43, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

You are most welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:20, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gilgit Rebellion[edit]

Hi WBG, since you have the book and seem to enjoy this stuff, you might try and improve Mirza Hassan Khan and Aslam Khan (Pakistani brigadier). If you have the energy, you might even write a whole article on the 1947 Gilgit Rebellion, which is dearly in need! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:23, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

bilal 202.69.15.95 (talk) 08:53, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Specifically: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#NPA, NOTHERE, or am I being too sensitive? Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:34, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Revocation" changed to "Abrogation"?[edit]

What do you think generally? As per link should "Revocation" be changed to "Abrogation" in the page "Revocation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir"? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 10:33, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care about what a BJP mouthpiece say esp. about these subtle semantics. ∯WBG^converse 11:08, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lol ok. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 11:54, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ISRO books[edit]

Good idea. I have created a category. I am in the process of expanding each of those book articles. In fact, there are half a dozen more such books that I am going to read and create book-pages. Thanks again. Scenecontra (talk) 12:36, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request[edit]

Since you are actively editing the Wikipedia page now, I find calling Republic TV a 'mouthpiece' of the ruling government is equally wrong too. That too in the first paragraph. The exactly same issue was earlier discussed in the talk page. Many hold similar opinions on NDTV type media too.... But NDTV's page has nothing of the sort... It would be strictly wrong to refer to any news channel as a mouthpiece. Please remove that too. Content like this can find place in criticism section only. HarshithaHappyGoLucky (talk) 10:50, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@HarshithaHappyGoLucky: -- I am engaging in a total overhaul; please wait. Leads do reflect the entirety of body incl. criticism (if any) and this will be no exception, either. ∯WBG^converse 10:59, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Further edits request[edit]

Also please update the Audience share to the week 42 most recent figures.

The first line in criticism section looks more like a POV(*pushing of view). I'm sure the same information about the 'right wing bias' opinion of certain other sections of the medis could be written in an NPOV way.(*less aggressive way). This one's upto you. You may do it once you're done with the page overhaul.

Regards _/\_ :) HarshithaHappyGoLucky (talk) 11:15, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher), HarshithaHappyGoLucky, If you are going to use acronyms here, then please familiarize yourself with them (and their meaning on Wiki) before using them. POV on wiki refers to the Point of View and not "pushing of view", you should use the full version if you intend to say pushing of view.--DBig Xrayᗙ 16:08, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed[edit]

Sorry for that. :) I only meant the view was put in a rather aggressive way. Also thank you for the edits. HarshithaHappyGoLucky (talk) 16:18, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A note of caution.[edit]

I saw that you removed material from an article with an edit summary describing it as fluff solely introduced for the sake of ref-spamming. I would strongly advise that you avoid directing language of this sort towards editors generally well-respected in the community for the quality of their work. In fact, I would generally advise that where sources which you find disagreeable are introduced to an article during the course of a deletion discussion, that you address the deficiencies of those sources in the deletion discussion rather than removing them from the article while the discussion is ongoing. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:02, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Noted though I do believe that quality of edits shall be (mostly) evaluated on the basis of standalone merits. FWIW, I had already opened a t/p section with explicit analysis. ∯WBG^converse 07:59, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Even so, when you open a deletion discussion on a subject, you are asking the community to express their opinion on whether sources exist which establish the notability of the subject. It is common for editors who wish to save the article to add sources—even poor sources—which the community can then evaluate. It is incongruous to ask the community to evaluate sources while at the same time unilaterally removing sources added to an article during the discussion. You might be concerned that the community will be fooled by the addition of what you consider to be "fluff" or "ref-spamming", but these concerns can be adequately addressed in the deletion discussion without further engaging in editing of the nominated article itself. bd2412 T 16:29, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhollah Khomeini[edit]

sorry to bother you, but this material Soon after the 1979 revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini established the death penalty for homosexuality. In February and March of 1979, there were 16 executions for crimes related to sexual violations. which was inserted during this edit is copied from this source.Saff V. (talk) 07:58, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Another one, this Khomeini defined transsexuality as a disease that can be healed by means of an operation is copied from this source in this edits (1, 2).Saff V. (talk) 09:39, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And close paraphrasing at this edit from this source.Saff V. (talk) 11:21, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RfC close in progress?[edit]

Hello, WBG. At this ANRFC listing you said you were working on a close for the RfC. Is that still the case? I almost waded in to close it myself but I don't want to do so if you've been working on it. Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 05:55, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind, but I went ahead and closed the RfC. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:00, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies; I missed the notification for this thread. I had forgot the issue, in entirety and have no qualms about your's closing it :-) ∯WBG^converse 04:30, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Original Barnstar
	Woahhh Tentree 15:02, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Own note[edit]

A bowl of strawberries for you![edit]

Thank you for taking out the time to improve Republic TV. DBig Xrayᗙ 10:04, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to have access to EPW?[edit]

Hi Winged, I have been recently been given access to EPW by Wikipedia library. How to have access of it? It is being shown that new issues will be sent in a week. Will I be able to access archives then? Also, I have too many reference books and access to library offside Wiki. Can you tell how it will help here in resource exchange? -- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 13:54, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To the best of my (current) knowledge, TWL has merely sent your request to EPW, days back. They have their own internal workflow, pending the completion of which, you will be directly contacted by them and provided with login credentials. Using that, over the site, will grant you full access to their archives till-date. FWIW, any university-library having humanities courses ought be enrolled over JSTOR and IIRC, JSTOR has EPW archives until 2014.

Keep an eye out for requests over WP:RX and if a book/dissertation is available in a library, (that you can access), help out folks at your pleasure. Basically, notify them that you can help out and they will drop you a wiki-mail feature, thus disclosing their email to you ; you can then attach the scanned copies (jpeg/pdf) of resources, in reply. Best, ∯WBG^converse 14:15, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Let me create a list of books and library under my user space first. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 15:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please add Swaminarayan Sampraday and Morari Bapu to your watchlist. Several Hindutvavadis or their followers are removing sourced content from the article without proper logic. I think there’s some off-wiki connection here. I am thinking to take long break but just handle these zealots. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 07:57, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Compassionate727[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request.
Message added 18:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 18:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Need your input over at Talk:Republic TV[edit]

Sorry about our little "edit war" (if that's what is called an edit war) on the actual article. I'm a relatively inexperienced editor, just trying to do the right thing, and absolutely nothing else. Karan (Theintuitus) (talk) 14:11, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you following my edits?[edit]

Hi, I started editing after a few months. From the history on my talk pageIndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 14:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC), I can see you are the same guy who was following me the last time? Is there some personal animosity? Why are you Wikipedia:Hounding me?IndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 14:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The next block will be indef. ∯WBG^converse 14:22, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI regarding personal attacks[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Lightburst (talk) 18:09, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

N. S. Rajaram[edit]

Why did you make this change? How is labeling someone as "discredited" following [[WP::NPOV]] or encyclopedic? Rabbabodrool (talk) 00:24, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GEVAL, WP:PSCI ... ∯WBG^converse 03:47, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed it to "Pseudo-scientific", which I think is a term more in keeping with Wikipedia's voice. BD2412 T 00:58, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fairly good middle ground to take, but Rajaram is one of the extremely fringe characters of the Hindu Nationalism diaspora. Much of what he says is precise nonsense, garbed under mumbo-jumbo scholarship and critical reception is flatly negative. Will discuss at the t/p. ∯WBG^converse 03:47, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DR and don't come back to my t/p. ∯WBG^converse 14:46, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lot of POV statements above: "precise nonsense, garbed under mumbo-jumbo scholarship". This seems to be a mud-slinging exercise than a serious attempt to create an encyclopedia. Rabbabodrool (talk) 05:02, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Lunatic charlatans. Also, this is user-t/p, where NPOV ain't something to be abode by. ∯WBG^converse 05:33, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you linking me to some essay? People can point to the same essay and keep vandalising any page. But how would that help make wikipedia a good encyclopedia? Rabbabodrool (talk) 06:27, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have surely not read WP:GEVAL and WP:PSCI. ∯WBG^converse 06:34, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Again, trying to change topics. Those policies talk about not using fringe sources when dealing with more general topics. But when talking about a fringe topic itself, you are still not allowed to use abusive language about the topic. This is an encyclopedia not your WP:SOAPBOX Rabbabodrool (talk) 23:56, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eisenhower Fellowships[edit]

This is heading towards a WP:SNOW keep, so I thought you might like the opportunity to withdraw the nomination. Cheers! BD2412 T 00:59, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. You might have snow-kept, as well ') ∯WBG^converse 03:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a better way to handle it all around. Cheers! BD2412 T 03:44, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vanavasi Kalyan Ashram[edit]

If you have a moment to clean this up, I'd greatly appreciate it; I'm stretched really thin at the moment. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:18, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On tomorrow's to-do list :-) ∯WBG^converse 16:51, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

another, if you've got the time...Vanamonde (Talk) 06:24, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I know Devdutt personally; not the best person to edit that article .... ∯WBG^converse 11:57, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. Yes, good call; the issues with it are more with language than with material, but even so, best not to meddle. I'll try to find the time. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:08, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

editToken[edit]

Hello Winged Blades of Godric,

Your script User:Winged Blades of Godric/EFFPTest.js is no longer functional because it attempts to get an editToken from mw.user.tokens. The script should instead get a csrfToken. editTokens were removed from mw.user.tokens on October 3, 2019 at Phabricator during this edit as they were redundant to csrfTokens.– BrandonXLF (talk) 00:06, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you like to expand...[edit]

...then here is article MensXP.com related to one portal. I did cleanup and if you have some sources then add some content. Good Night!-- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 16:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not in my domain of interest; hardly know anything about the website .... ∯WBG^converse 11:56, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Compassionate727[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request.
Message added 20:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sections Circuit analogs and Telegraphic codes for India —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 20:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dispatched emails. ∯WBG^converse 11:55, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jai Shri Ram[edit]

I will restore the content you removed from this article, which you said you "will rewrite". Please see the article's edit history - the content has been controversial since it was added in June, but the current wording is the result of the collaboration of multiple editors. The content is well-sourced (indeed, it is the only sourced part of the article) but has been repeatedly removed by anonymous and newly registered editors as "incorrect", "unnecessary", "fake news", "wrong news to defame" etc. - to the point where the article has been protected twice to prevent that and at least one user (Ezio bhumihar) was blocked. As you can see, you are walking into a bit of a minefield! You are an experienced editor; I am not reverting your change because I oppose any change at all, but because any rewrite would clearly need discussion on the talk page first. Dorsetonian (talk) 08:31, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.

∯WBG^converse

Vedic Mathematics[edit]

Hello:

Although I do accept occasional requests to copy edit articles from editors with whom I have had extensive dealings in the past, I prefer that GA copy edit requests such as yours be listed on the Guild of Copy Editors Requests page ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Requests ). That way they are dealt with in order, in a timely manner.

That being said, I did run through the article as you requested and made what I think are appropriate changes.

The following paragraph has me completely baffled, however. This may be because of my lack of mathematical knowledge or because of the run-on sentences.

For example, multiple techniques in the book involve the use of high-precision decimal fractions. These were unknown during the Vedic times and were introduced in India only in the sixteenth century.[11] The works of numerous ancient mathematicians such as Aryabhata, Brahmagupta and Bhaskara were entirely based on fractions.[2] Some of the sutras even claimed to run parallel to the General Leibniz rule and Taylor's theorem (which, per Krishna Tirtha, were to be yet studied by the western world during the time of his writing) but did ultimately boil down to the sub-elementary performative operations of basic differentiation on polynomials notwithstanding the fact that historic India had no minimal knowledge about the conceptual notions of differentiation and integration.[2] Sutras have been further leveraged to claim that analytic geometry of conics occupied an important tier in Vedic mathematics and some others have been applied or asserted as being applicable to topics as diverse as statics and pneumatics to astronomy and financial domains.[2][11]

This sentence: "For example, multiple techniques in the book involve the use of high-precision decimal fractions. These were unknown during the Vedic times and were introduced in India only in the sixteenth century." Then there appears to be a contradiction with the sentence that follows: "The works of numerous ancient mathematicians such as Aryabhata, Brahmagupta and Bhaskara were entirely based on fractions."

I think that the rest of that paragraph needs to be rewritten in plain English so that it can be understood by the average reader.

The rest of the article is in good shape, I believe.

Best of luck with the GAN.

Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:00, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, a lot! Your point about rewriting the paragraph for average readers, is well taken. FWIW, decimal fractions refer to Decimal#Decimal_fractions but fractions refer to the typical a/b notation; need to clear that up. ∯WBG^converse 12:05, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you check and published drafts.[edit]

Hi Godric. I have made alot of drafts of actors and actresses. Can I show them to you. I am new and i am learning new stuff around. Thank you.

New message from Compassionate727[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request.
Message added 17:36, 29 November 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

This is actually very old, but I'm guessing you never got it... —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 17:36, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from shurbanm[edit]

Shurbanm (talk) 17:52, 29 November 2019 (UTC) could you please elaborate on why you reverted my additions to the Gradeshnitsa Tablets?[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 10:43, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About Thakur Anukulchandra page[edit]

Do not delete the content of Thakur Anukulchandra page without any refeence. If you have any please post on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheLoanWalker (talk • contribs) 15:12, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you have been continuously doing at Anukulchandra Chakravarty, you may be blocked from editing. Stop threatening me on my user page to hide your systematic vandalism to delete Wikipedia:Reliable_sources contents like ISBN page references and stamps issued by your Government_of_India. My friend, you speak good English. So congratulations but first deal with your third world country issues and don't show me your talent on my talk page. If you are deleting content pt appropriate comments and delete. WikiLoneCrusader (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You (and your sock) has a message at the article t\p. ∯WBG^converse 08:33, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Compassionate727[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request.
Message added 17:28, 4 December 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 17:28, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Newslaundry[edit]

Do you think there are enough sources now to create an article for Newslaundry? It was creation protected indefinitely on 13 January 2016 by an admin. It's been quite sometime since then and articles from it have also been used as sources a couple of times. DTM (talk) 14:28, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't think so. Hardly any source, that devotes significant coverage to NL. ∯WBG^converse 11:50, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm..... maybe a few months/years/decades later. I guess this one then, Sundas Malik and Anjali Chakra, seems even less likely to pass a draft review... DTM (talk) 14:30, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did not realize, that the latter was a draft of your creation. But, that's a textbook NOTNEWS failure. ∯WBG^converse 14:35, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of ThePrint[edit]

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from ThePrint, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RX[edit]

Hey! I dropped you a talkback about this a few days ago, but I'm not sure you got it. SpinningSpark received the requested article about Indian telegraphic codes, but there was some kind of error with the circuit analogs one. Could you try sending it again? Thanks, —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 18:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're up again[edit]

[8] – Levivich 04:37, 10 December 2019 (UTC)][reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Don't worry, you're not in trouble, it simply regards Kumar Swami and some longstanding issues around it. Seeing as you were previously involved, and I mentioned you in the AN, this is out of courtesy and a broad interpretation of the AN notice policy :) Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:33, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your note[edit]

As I said when I returned, I want to have a more amicable experience this round, and the way I responded to your message does not exactly confer that message properly, nor does it help me attain that goal (it was a defensive gesture because as you obviously know, we do not have the best relationship). So, even though we might disagree strongly, I will ask you directly what relists you were precisely referring to. I have looked them over myself to see if I missed something, and asked fellow admins to as well. As of yet, no one seems to think much of them other than one could have potentially faced a no consensus close (yet the relist was still was within reasonable discretion). So please, at least let me know where you stand properly, so I can take it into account for reflection if nothing else. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[I appreciate this post and will reply, in a while]. ∯WBG^converse 11:04, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fatimah[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thanks!--Saff V. (talk) 06:13, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ethos Capital[edit]

Can you clarify which sources you are flagging as unreliable? Thanks. Wwwhatsup (talk) 09:34, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the tag. Wwwhatsup (talk) 03:28, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Vastupala/GA1[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, please stop by your review here the next time you edit to indicate whether you will be returning to the review, and if so, how soon you plan on finishing it. The review will be nine months old on December 23. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:38, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On it. ∯WBG^converse 11:06, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Read[edit]

this. ∯WBG^converse 15:55, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas![edit]

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!
May 2020 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls, vandals or visits from Krampus! All the best Gavin / SchroCat (talk) 07:51, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Amit Shah[edit]

... is the face of Modi 2. Who is going to work on his page? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agree and I nominate User:Vanamonde93. (FWIW, our article on Narendra Modi has not been updated since quite a span of time and we need to do that as well ....) ∯WBG^converse 16:04, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some good news. Looks like Amit Shah has been told to lie low for a while. Jaishankar will have a lot of damage control to do in the meanwhile and we are likely to have a peaceful Christmas and New Year. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:23, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This placard appears to be a more apt slogan for this season. --DBig Xrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 17:12, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Modi's page does indeed need to be updated, and Shah's article needs to be rewritten (it seems to have gotten off my watchlist somehow; how on earth did the Sohrabuddin Sheikh case get removed from the lead? it was the primary reason for his notability until 2014...) Vanamonde (Talk) 19:12, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On noting your abusive manner[edit]

WBG: When I read your comment here, I was baffled and repelled by it's aggressive and threatening tone. That the edit in question was ill-considered I will grant. I had spent considerable time on producing a concise, focused, well-written lead for that article - only to find dumped into it a mass of ungrammatical and repetitive material that, in any case, I thought belonged elsewhere in the article. This last point was based on the misconception expressed in the comment here and acknowledged as incorrect here.

But please do not be distracted by the fact that I was mistaken in that respect. The more important fact is that my efforts were directed toward improving the writing and the structure of the article and in no way warranted your aggressive and insulting lack of good faith. Please in future do not address me (or hopefully any other editor) in such manner, do not make unfounded accusations, and do not impugn my motives in editing Wikipedia.

Thank you for your attention. Dayirmiter (talk) 13:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your motivations don't matter; the end-results do.

The extent of AGF is quite low in a domain under the AC/DS regime (as you have been since alerted to) courtesy the constant barrage of POV pushing, that we are near-incessantly used to. Controversial topics are NOT your sandbox to mess about and then, learn our rules; please choose some low-scale article where things are more peaceful.

Happy Holidays, ∯WBG^converse 16:01, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Just a friendly reminder that WP:AGF "is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia", and if anything AC-DS articles need more of AGF and not less of it. --DBig Xrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 17:14, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply and for your holiday greeting, which I heartily reciprocate. May all be well with you and yours in the coming year.

Dayirmiter (talk) 21:29, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I came to give a reminder of AGF as well, for another incident in December. Telling other editors "Are you really this stupid or are you paid" isn't the tone you ought to be taking. Bri.public (talk) 19:05, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You don't really want me measuring your AGF as to your editorial activities in the domain of suspected UPE, do you? That article (and related stuff) has been subject to continual whitewashing by sockpuppet rings and a stonewalling SPA need not be dealt with much courtesy. ∯WBG^converse 19:12, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings[edit]

		Season's Greetings
		May your Holidays and the Year that follows shine as much as this coin still does beneath the tarnish of bygone weather and long use. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!![edit]

Christmas tree worm, (Spirobranchus gigantic)CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:23, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
	Time To Spread A Little Happy Holiday Cheer!!
	I decorated a special kind of Christmas tree in the spirit of the season. What's especially nice about this digitized version: it doesn't need water won't catch fire *and batteries aren't required.
	Have a very Merry Christmas - Happy Hanukkah‼️ and a prosperous New Year!! 🍸🎁 🎉

Keep these pages in watchlist[edit]

Keep Shaj Mohan, Divya Dwivedi and their book in watchlist. Their original creators were confirmed socks, added much details about their works in multiple pages and there’s continuous disruption from france and kerala where divya and shaj belongs respectively. WP:Sockpuppet investigations/WWorringer lists all socks. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 15:57, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ∯WBG^converse 19:13, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Be well at Christmas[edit]

	Have a WikiChristmas and a PediaNewYear
	Be well. Keep well. Have a lovely Christmas. SilkTork (talk) 12:39, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What?[edit]

Exactly. Did you check the source? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:13, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will reply, morrow. ∯WBG^converse 19:13, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas[edit]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!

Hello Winged Blades of Godric, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020.
Happy editing,
And thanks for just your general contributions - I see you all over the place so couldn't point out just one! What's the Winter temperature like over in Kolkata?

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Good luck[edit]

豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s

Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラ PはWinged Blades of Godricたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！
フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラ P 04:08, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings[edit]

Hello there! Shearonink (talk) wishes you & yours the very best of the season!

Whether you celebrate Christmas, Diwali, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa,
Festivus (for the rest of us!) or even the Saturnalia,
here's to
hoping your holiday time is wonderful
and that the New Year will be an improvement upon the old.
CHEERS!

Share these holiday wishes by adding {{subst:User:Shearonink/Holiday}} ~~~~ to your friends' talk pages.

Joyous Season[edit]

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. Thank you for the Christmas cheer! I was surprised to see your username on my talk page, but I am very glad we can start a new path forward. Sorry for how things went before. You needed to give me some tough words before I left, but after a long deliberate absence I at least found how to fully see where I had been over interpreting too many things and how I overstepped in my dealings with you (if only I could walk back in time to correct my former self). At any rate, I hope we can find new beginnings and new friendship in the New Year, and I truly hope you and your family have a wondeful season and beyond! — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 21:05, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Coffee/Holidays}} to your fellow editors' talk pages.

Edit warring Savarna (gotra)[edit]

Hi. You've made repeated edits to the page Savarna (gotra) where many points were well-referenced, indulging in edit warring. Please create a talk page for the article and have a discussion regarding this. It is ideal to resolve disagreements through discussions and not edits. Thanks! TheodoreIndiana (talk) 12:39, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CAA at ANI[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

Adding this , just to let you know that I have mentioned you in my response. regards.

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:DBigXray --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBig Xrayᗙ 16:52, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is over. You missed it --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBig Xrayᗙ 23:59, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, as it may sound, someone tried to WP:NOTHERE me today.--Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBig Xrayᗙ 14:10, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have had my editorial differences with Ms. Welch but still, strange to see her mentioning of a longstanding editor as NOTHERE; weird ..... On a lighter note, see this. ∯WBG^converse 09:35, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Stribodh[edit]

On 27 December 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Stribodh, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Stribodh, first published in 1857, was one of the earliest magazines in India to be aimed at a female audience? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stribodh. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Stribodh), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

--valereee (talk) 12:01, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 28[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Asian News International, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:00, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nitasha kaul LGBT[edit]

I submitted video proofs why deleted? That section it's wrong !! Protest happened it cant be denied .We can add that Bkr3da (talk) 17:23, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well documented video & news proofs are available student protest against her !!! Why you are removing that?? Boneyjv (talk) 17:55, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the biographies of living persons policy. Wikipedia articles are not to be used as a means of shaming or attacking people, or for activism. If you can provide multiple reliable sources from major publications, it can be discussed at the article's talkpage for possible inclusion, but simply linking to Twitter or YouTube isn't sufficient. ∯WBG^converse 18:04, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Character assassination is not allowed within any pages of well-published authors and academic. You can easily discuss different point of views as long as it ties in with the overall biography. The page of Nitasha Kaul has been subject to repeat vandalism and a good decision has been taken by the Wiki team to protect the page. And we will protect it even in future. Wikipedia editors are impartial and we don't entertain unnecessary disturbances. I must add that I have already seen this user called "Boneyjv" on the Twitter profile of this author. He has been trying to purposely vandalize this author's page out of sheer malice, and to push a certain political agenda, just because she has been a fierce opponent of India's present government. It is very disturbing to have anyone push a political agenda using YouTube, Twitter, and other non-credible sources. --Tech editor007 (talk) 08:17, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How many of you are editing behind this account? ∯WBG^converse 08:47, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who this question is directed to? But my personal 10-year old account has nothing to do with users including "Boneyjv", "Bkr3da", and anyone else. I am trying to fix this article's mistake, the other unconfirmed users are here to troll mostly.--Tech editor007 (talk) 09:09, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(watching) In other news, 10-year-old account makes one edit every two weeks. Hey Ho :) ——SN 54129 10:02, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a rule that you have to edit articles daily, weekly or whatever schedule feels "adequate" to you? We're all volunteers who get to decide the amount of time we can individually allocate to Wikipedia. I may be lazy and not very frequent in my contributions though which I agree should be improved. I only wanted to highlight the frequent vandalism in one of the recent articles which I edited. Let's not change the focus. --Tech editor007 (talk) 10:17, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And we will protect it even in future. At any case, what do you intend to do with this draft? ∯WBG^converse 16:50, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- Let's discuss it in the relevant page. I had forgotten all about that one. It's a very old article for sure - 2010. But if it's in my user page, I don't care about it presently otherwise I'd have watched it surely. --Tech editor007 (talk) 21:58, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Swami Chakrapani[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Swami Chakrapani at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 19:57, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Winged, please respond. I’ve dropped stick because you handled matter. It’s upto you now. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 05:05, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looking. ∯WBG^converse 09:27, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great. BTW I still didn’t get any credentials for EPW. Don’t know what to do...— Harshil ^{want to talk?} 09:49, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can put a request for specific article(s) at WP:RX. And someone with access will aent you a copy. --Gazal world (talk) 12:13, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gazal world: I have been given access by Wikilibrary but not credentials yet.-- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 13:26, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No ideas; EPW ain't shifting to proxy, either. ∯WBG^converse 13:39, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GD Vashist[edit]

Hi, can we talk about your draftification of the article on GD Vashist to Draft:GD Vashist (2)? Your edit summary was "Fails WP:N".

Draftifying instead of nominating for deletion implies the draftifier's sense that an article doesn't qualify for inclusion now but may become qualified through improvement. However, it's established that notability is determined based on factors external to an article, and a lack of it can't be fixed through improvements to an article. So draftifying an article based on one's reckoning that the subject isn't notable is a contradiction.

In addition, if notability is a concern, there are already two valid treatments: AFD or, if one isn't sure one has a strong enough case that notability isn't met and wants to give others a chance to identify sources to support it, tagging. Draftifying, which will probably lead to G13 speedy deletion six months later, looks like an evasion of the normal protocol calling for articles to be discussed before deleting them for lack of notability.

If you feel strongly enough that GD Vashist isn't notable, why did you not simply nominate the article for deletion? Largoplazo (talk) 16:06, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have made eight edits to my t/p, to make this post and I have got 3 edit-conflicts, while saving my response. Will reply tomorrow, expecting you would have finished by then. ∯WBG^converse 17:10, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that! Largoplazo (talk) 22:40, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GD Vashsit[edit]

May I know the reason because of which you put this article to draft. IF Notability is the factor please let me know the Wikipedia's criteria for Hindu Spiritual Saints and Astrologers.--Babitahamdard (talk) 16:14, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays![edit]

Hello Winged Blades of Godric: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:31, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

FYI[edit]

A page you proposed for deletion, Muhammed Majeed, was contested via WP:REFUND by the paid editor involved in the page. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:53, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article was accepted by a sock (of a troll) who is believed to have engaged in UPE, himself. So, draftified it and the paid editor needs to get it re-accepted. ∯WBG^converse 17:23, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realize that the page didn't exist! That is more than worthy of speedy deletion, then, my mistake! Jdcomix (talk) 17:19, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It existed but I found another glaring inconsistency in the history of the article, which allowed me to draftify it. ∯WBG^converse 17:23, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Winged Blades of Godric: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:26, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

Arbitration case opened[edit]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 14, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, CodeLyoko^talk 03:30, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Winged Blades of Godric![edit]

Happy New Year!

Winged Blades of Godric,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBig Xrayᗙ 21:03, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year![edit]

Happy New Year!

MMXX Lunar Calendar

Winged Blades of Godric,
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

– 2020 is a leap year – news article.
– Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2020}} to user talk pages.

– Utopes (talk) 04:54, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

C/E notification[edit]

Hi! This is just to let you know that I have begun copyediting your article that you requested here. Thank you! Puddleglum ^2.0 18:19, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There were two words in the lede of your article, and I'm not sure what they mean. Maybe can you consider replacing those words with synonyms that will be more easily understandable? Thanks, Puddleglum ^2.0 16:23, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which words? ∯WBG^converse 16:35, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I'm going to guess it was ascetics and aegis. Ascetics is easy to link to; aegis is a bit trickier - protection might be a better choice? GirthSummit _(blether) 16:49, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit: 100% spot on! The link to ascetists is good, still need a solution for aegis. Thanks! Puddleglum ^2.0 06:17, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I found a couple more clarifications I need. (All in the lede)

What is a "lac?"

What is "Section 144?"

Do you have any pictures or perhaps an infobox that you could put in? Is kind of bare bones.

Thanks, Puddleglum ^2.0 05:01, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Internet and Google is your help. See Lakh. ∯WBG^converse 07:44, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unlawful assembly#India.

No photos, the scans from newspapers are awful. ∯WBG^converse 07:45, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's understandable about images. Puddleglum ^2.0 20:52, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to let you know that I should be done copyediting, let me know if you find any problems with it still. Thank you for helping me! Puddleglum ^2.0 19:31, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G7[edit]

I thought you'd tried to speedy delete and AfD the article at the same time so I thought the tag was an error, which was why I removed it. You should have asked for the AfD to be speedy closed as withdrawn if it was a mistake. Bookscale (talk) 23:16, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nice quote farm[edit]

Nagendranath Basu[edit]

I am curious. You wrote: "His historical methods have been challenged and his interpretations are now deemed to be quite unreliable, courtesy his religious acceptance of the-then prevalent caste hierarchy as a longstanding form of social order along with a strong antipathy towards the Muslim rule in India". I wonder what you mean.Malaiya (talk) 22:59, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nagendranath believed the Islamic rulers of Medieval India to be behind most (if not all) evils of India and oft-lamented the fall of Hindu empires, which he alleged to be the golden days of the sub-continent. Additionally, he believed the prevalent caste hierarchy to be a rigid structure, that has not only remained the same for hundreds of years but also were a form of social organisation. All have since been noted to be quite untrue and misplaced, thus affecting the merits of his overall work. ∯WBG^converse 06:14, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Winged Blades of Godric:

1. The concluding text you added looks like a personal judgement.

2. Nagendranath Basu was a distinguished editor, a scholar who brought numerous sources of information to light.

3. I personally believe that the 4-fold varna system was not applicable even in the times dharma-shastras were written and hence the varna-sankara classes were invented. It ceased to be applicable a long time ago. Other than Brahmins, it is impossible to classify communities into a varna using a scheme that cannot be challanged. However overwhelming majorty of scholars and authors today believe that the chaturvarnya still exists. Then why blame just Nagendranath Basu?

4. There have been numerous scholars of history who in addition to linking facts have expressed their own opinions. I find Basham's "The wonder that was India" obviously Eurocentric in a few places. That does not give me a right to conclude that his contributions have no value. I don't think your concluding text, which looks like a personal concluding judgement, is apropriate.

Why did you insert the template in my talk page? Please state specifically the problem you have with my editing. Malaiya (talk) 03:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah; editorial judgement is definitely required while writing an article. Can you write an article w/o one?!

True that, and covered at the article.

Your personal beliefs are largely immaterial.

Your personal impressions are largely immaterial. And, reception of his scholarship will be obviously covered.

You are alerted of the AC/DS regime and the notice begins with It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.∯WBG^converse 06:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1990 Bijnor riot[edit]

On 7 January 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1990 Bijnor riot, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1990 Bijnor riot was the most destructive event during concurrent Hindu nationalist campaigns in India, which eventually led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1990 Bijnor riot. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1990 Bijnor riot), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RX[edit]

Please see, WP:RX#Australian poem reviews. Thanks. --Gazal world (talk) 16:01, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Harshil169[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Talk:Arnab Goswami.
Message added 04:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Harshil ^{want to talk?} 04:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalising[edit]

Can't laxmi Agarwal page be locked ? https://twitter.com/OpIndia_com/status/1214890746777522176?s=20 Anshul k007 (talk) 14:04, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is; now tagged. ∯WBG^converse 14:08, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ygm[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Praxidicae (talk) 15:53, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae: - Replied back :-) ∯WBG^converse 16:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation[edit]

TBH, I was surprised that it took this long for the foundation to swing into action. --DBig Xrayᗙ 10:34, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Swami Chakrapani[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, this nomination has been waiting about a month for you to provide new hooks, the original nominator having bowed out in your favor. As you can see from my post at the nomination, there are significant issues with the hotel and its eatery—despite the initial publicity, it appears that Chakrapani wasn't at the auction where the hotel and other Dawood Ibrahim properties were sold and someone else acquired the building—so it isn't suitable for a hook and may not even belong in the article (unless perhaps as a publicity stunt). Right now, the article is without hooks, and needs to be revised.

I'm hoping you'll be able to provide what's needed in the next few days. Given the recent discoveries, and the fact that this has been the oldest DYK nomination for a while now—the article will be three months old in a week—if we don't have significant progress within seven days I think it will be time to think about closing the nomination as unsuccessful. Thanks for whatever you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:08, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anjana Om Kashyap[edit]

You left me a message on my talk page, I read it. Thank you Sir for your parenting advice & guidance. I am a new Wikipedian so i don't know everything about it. In Anjana Om Kashyap's page i done small edits about her Social knowledge. I do this because i am also from Ranchi & currently living in Ranchi. When i was a child she was young. She was a student of Missionary School. I known her & her family well. That's reason i made some edits. I request you please give me your love and parenting. Thanks. Ps.prashantsingh16 (talk) 18:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anjana om kashyap[edit]

Provide reliable sources for anjana om kashyap being pro BJP. Xhubham mishra (talk) 16:09, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Given your message at my t/p, you certainly know about viewing the multiple messages at your t/p. I roll-backed your vandalism over Jaggi Vasudev and left you a message pointing you to two relevant guidelines about why lead does not necessitate citations. Still you are at vandalizing pages. ∯WBG^converse 16:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)p/[reply]

Subramanian Swamy[edit]

Do you have the time to clean this up? It's strewn with violations of SOAPBOX. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:15, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On my to-do list:) ∯WBG^converse 18:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HeinOnline[edit]

Yo WBoG, d'you have access to this through the Wikilibrary? I'm trying to find a category of people who do, but it seems very secretive :) ——SN 54129 16:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have access through my institute. What do you need? ∯WBG^converse 13:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one. Well, this if possible. Although I don't know the name of the article in it, it's whatever the one at p.312 is. If you know wot I mean? ——SN 54129 13:36, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, that I am not ignoring the thread '( I will be picking this up from campus, 'morrow; tried a lot to make my proxy-access work but HeinOnline is behaving weirdly. ∯WBG^converse 15:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, appreciate the thought! ——SN 54129 14:19, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

:p ——SN 54129 12:13, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About my reply on talk page of 'Jaggi Vasudev'[edit]

Hey! I didn't reply to you but somehow my replies to the other discussion on the same talk page are forwarded to your discussion. So, do not be confused. I'm unable to find the reason behind the diversions of the reply, so I thought it is better to tell you this here . I hope you understand. Abhayoct13th (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is PunjabCinema07 and Gurbaksh Chahal. Lepricavark (talk) 14:31, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About edits and reverts on page 'Jaggi Vasudev'[edit]

WBG, you know the case very well. See, If you will not let people edit the article, there can be no constructive editing. It seems like few people behave, as if they are the only custodian of the article by reverting every edit that doesn't matches with their line of thought. Not everytime one would edit and revert the same actions. It appears to be absurd after a point. With a broad perspective, try to understand this. The subject has been accused of Irrationality, psuedo-scientific views, his organisation of breaking rules, all that is very true. But this also need to be mentioned he has been invited to share his views at various platforms as UN, MIT, World Economic Forum, Tedx and various summits etc. And his organisation has helped to increase the green cover of Tamil Nadu Region, health-wise benefitted people and gathered worldwide attention. His books are also well received. His controversial statements and criticisms should be mentioned along with the appraisals that he received. You also know that many of the sources mentioned in the article are clearly of a different political ideology and the subject is associated (not by him, but others) with some other ideology. It doesn't mean that they should not be mentioned but they must also not effect the writing of the article. After reading the article, one must not get the chance to say that it sounds being a little more than neutral. Every side needs to be shown and conclusions should be left to reader's conscience. The faith on Wikipedia articles and it's sanctity must remain intact. This was a humble message to you, I hope you'll assess the situation wisely. This one being last of my efforts, Thanks. Abhayoct13th (talk) 13:53, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking at TED is somewhat notable; not at TEDX. Ditto for WEF. What MITEvent it was? Provide the source. Provide sources for him enabling "increase(ing) the green cover of Tamil Nadu Region, health-wise benefit(ing) people". Truth has a left-liberal bias, and you need to live with it. Also see WP:FALSEBALANCE. ∯WBG^converse 14:37, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please live with it. Thankyou so much. Abhayoct13th (talk) 14:44, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need help[edit]

Hello my friend. Amake shahajjo korun. Ami shotti totto likhar chesta korchi, kintu Musulmanra amar shob editke noshto kore jisse. Bakhtiar he ekjon hinshro prani chilo ta shobar jante hoba. Dhonnobad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siddhartananda (talk • contribs) 14:33, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bigots don't get any help from me and are not welcome at Wikipedia, either. ∯WBG^converse 14:38, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you have information on[edit]

the real world identity of an en-Wiki editor and some sort of accusation of breaking of our rules, please contact arbcom via email. If you want to email me evidence that an editor has identified himself on en-Wiki, you may, if you wish, email that information. I don't understand the relevance of this to The Signpost, and I will remove any attempted outing from The Signpost's pages. Please be clear that:

I am not obliged to participate in your apparent attempted outing schemes
You should completely stay off my user and user talk pages, and
If you wish to take this to arbcom, I will forward your emails and any other relevant emails to them for a non-public decision. I believe that would take them about 10 minutes to decide (arbcom can be slow sometimes) and say, e.g. "what kind of rule-breaking is WBG talking about?"

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 15:20, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. ∯WBG^converse 16:33, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLPN[edit]

Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Jaggi_Vasudev--DBig Xrayᗙ 10:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Praxidicae (talk) 00:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Email[edit]

My reply to you bounced, for some reason? Gmail tells me your email "couldn't be found or is unable to receive email." In any case, short version; if content is already uncontroversially on-wiki, it is usually not suppressible when added again; I haven't the time to investigate and start a discussion; you could email the functionaries list, or email the oversight otrs, if you have concerns. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:34, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you like to improve...[edit]

... then here are two articles which need your attention-- Dhirendranath Datta and Bhupendra Kumar Datta. Both are Bengalis, from your ethnicity, and their articles are in poor conditions and not in encyclopedic language. Let me know if you can't improve them. I will request resources to improve them, I'm sure you can provide them. Quite busy but will look after week or two.-- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 04:00, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will see. ∯WBG^converse 13:58, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Harshil169: - Will improve Bhupendra Kumar Datta to ~GA; I have a host of offline sources about him. Also this brings back Chandranath Basu to the fore, an article which I intended to take to GA ..... ∯WBG^converse

Hey, help me to send this article Draft:Agnel_Roman for review[edit]

Hey buddy, Ritchie333 gave me your reference, i have one article i want to submit for review Draft:Agnel_Roman pls chack this and send this for review pls. or should i submit ?

Annki777 (talk) 23:23, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 04:11, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

chahal[edit]

This user wants me to encourage you in the work you've done. Which is easy to do as you've improved the page and fixed the related draft.-- Deep fried okra 15:58, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The sole positive output of this mess has been how freaking useless our T&S is. ∯WBG^converse 07:43, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fajr festival[edit]

I am sorry to bother you, but i though that may be you didn’t receive my ping so I leave massage here, I wonder if you take a look at the last discussion in this TP. Thanks!Saff V. (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:15:05, 6 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Annki777[edit]

Annki777 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Agnel Roman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

'

Hey, User:Winged Blades of Godric this is about my article Draft:Agnel Roman. If you don't know The Times of India is a reputed newspaper in India. AND NOT A BlOG, see WP:NEWSBLOG - so this is the verifiable source. also, the article is clearly about Agnel and is a significant coverage not a passing mentions - so pls tell me how this is not valid for notability ???.

and also there is another article in the Marathi language from Divya Bhaskar Marathi - another well-reputed newspaper of India see WP:NONENG I request you to read that first.

at last- pls do fair job buddy - Thanks

Annki777 (talk) 11:15, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Annki777: - TOI Blogs are not subject to editorial scrutiny. Also see section on User:Winged Blades of Godric/Indian Media#Times_of_India for why we don't accept any news-piece from TOI (in entertainment-genre) as contributing to passage of WP:N. If you have more vernacular sources, please add them and I will re-review. ∯WBG^converse 12:47, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric: Here is another source - an article in the Marathi language from Divya Bhaskar Marathi - another well-reputed newspaper of India see WP:NONENG I request you to read that first. ^[1]

@Winged Blades of Godric: i am waiting for reply --- Here is another source - an article in the Marathi language from Divya Bhaskar Marathi - another well-reputed newspaper of India see WP:NONENG I request you to read that first. ^[2]

Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 03:15, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

WP:WPSCH[edit]

I shepherded WP:WPSCH for nearly ten years but I've now retired from being its lead coord. Apart from the collaboration of the other coords (whom I have mostly brought into the project since Chris Cameron retired), the project is pretty much as effective as herding cats. The traditional schools and values I upheld for Wikipedia school articles have been diluted in recent years by waves of new stubs about schools of dubious notability in the Himalayas or commercial cram schools in the streets of South Asian cities. Neither of which are within my sphere of interest or expertise. With en.Wiki fast becoming the South Asian Wikipedia in English (or so it seems when one takes a glance at the New Pages Feed these days), the schools project seriously needs help from people with regional knowledge. With everything else you have on your plate, I'm not suggesting you make WP:WPSCH one of your priorities, but if you or anyone you know has the required background and would like to help out, do let the other coords know. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chahal[edit]

I have undone redirect and placed partial blocks. It looks like you are compromised by an outside influence. This needs to be taken up at ANI or ArbCom. It all needs to be sorted. Any admin may reverse me or take any other needed action. I am on a Wikibreak till at least Tuesday. -- Deep fried okra 21:10, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Am I the only one confused by this?
@Deepfriedokra: What evidence did you observe that made WBG appear compromised by an outside influence? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 21:50, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Chisme (talk) 01:27, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock[edit]

I am willing to unblock you per the statement I made at AN. Are you willing to stay away from all articles relating to Gurbaksh Chahal for the duration of the conflict? --qedk (t 桜 c) 08:22, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @QEDK: He should not. WBG is one the editors preventing the whitewashing of this article: don't let you or your tools become weaponised against that aim. ——SN 54129 12:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dloh has already unblocked absent any restrictions whatsoever. So, I guess this is moot. ∯WBG^converse 12:06, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129: Your ping did not go through, hmm. Now to clarify, my intention is never to weaponise my tools against any editor, I saw it as a relatively bad block and was willing to unblock based on the fact that it was alleged white-washing/UPE/proxying. I simply wanted WBG to stay away from the area of dispute and wanted a voluntary commitment (as I stated on ANI) to de-escalate the whole situation, that's all. --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:27, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@QEDK: My ping did not need to go through. ——SN 54129 14:29, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I did not say (or mean to imply) that you would intentionally weaponise, etc.; rather than by using them against WBG, you would be unintentionally allowing yourself, etc. Apologies for not making myself completely clear. ——SN 54129 14:30, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, also I don't watch WBG's TP, so a ping would actually have been helpful, either way, no harm, no foul.

--qedk (t 桜 c) 14:37, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Asia[edit]

Hello Winged Blades of Godric. You have been invited to join WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the Asia-related articles on Wikipedia. You received this invitation due to your interest in, or edits relating to or within the scope of the project. If you would like to join or just help out a bit, please visit the project page, and add your name to the participants.

If you know someone who might be interested, please invite them by:

{{subst:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge Invite (1)|~~~~}}

Thanks,
Chandan Guha (talk) 11:09, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Vastupala/GA1[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, your review of this nomination has now been open for over nine months, and really needs your attention. Please stop by at your next opportunity and at least indicate how soon you plan to get back to it. If you'd prefer, I can try to find a new reviewer to finish it for you. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Winged Blades of Godric, it's been another two weeks without a response. If you don't respond one way or another soon, another reviewer will need to be found; should the review hit ten months without it, action will be taken. I do hope you can take time before then, since you have been active lately, with over 150 edits since my original post here. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:47, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please find a new reviewer; my sincere apologies for the extraordinary delay and my inability to complete the review. ∯WBG^converse 04:30, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need Help[edit]

Hello sir, I had added some historical facts to Kachari Kingdom page which were ignored by some scholars. But one editor Chaipau, don't allow me to insert my point. According to him, Everything written in Ahom chronicle is perfect. He forcefully made Ahom chroncicles accepted everywhere. Scholarship in Assam is very poor, Scholars don't know difference between Heramba and Hidimba. Heramba means Ganesh and Hidimba means Rakshashi wife of Bhim. Ahom used Timisa word for Kacharis. Timisa is Ahom term. It is abusive term according to dictionary of Ahom. Similary Ahom used Tunisa for Moran , Tiura for SadiaL Kacharis and Kha-lang for Borahis. Editor Chaipau forcefully remove facts which don't fit Ahom claims. Actually, Boro history is related to Heramba kingdom . Dimasa history is related Hidimba kingdom. Boros of Heramba called themselves Ramsa. Tiprasa = Tripura , Dimasa = Hidimba , Ramsa = Heraamba. All this terms are avalable in Kachari kingdom. But Chaipau don't allow me to add Ramsa and Bodosa term. Chaipau had made Assam historical pages based on his personal goal. Sir, Actually there was two migration , One is from Guwahati to Cachar and Another is from Upper assam to Cachar. Some scholars mixed uped both tradition into one. Some scholars treated them correctly but Chaipau don't allow me to correct one. Ramsa tradition

  https://books.google.co.in/books?id=0TQzAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA829

and

  Kakoty, Suchitra (1981). "The Historical Background of the Bodo-Kacharis". A study of the educational development of the bodo tribe during the post independence period with particular reference to the northern region of Assam (PhD). Guwahati University.   

 Dimasa tradition https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.463827/page/n23/mode/2up

This one example of Chaipau's contribution which is unreliable wihtout any citation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Major_kingdoms_of_Assam.png Sir, Please help me to add my points. I have added both Ramsa , Dimasa , Bodosa terms with citation but Chaipau don't allow me to add terms related to Bodo. His edits are kind of jealousy and personal hatred towards Bodo community. There is clear evidence that All people don't call themselves Dimasa. Ahom chronicle are unrealiable because they don't have real name. Thank you sir , Please help me. DinaBasumatary (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case opened[edit]

In 2018, you offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has now accepted that request for arbitration, and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

All content, links, and diffs from the original ARC and the latest ARC are being read into the evidence for this case.

The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: arbcom-en-b@wikimedia.org

For the Arbitration Committee, CThomas³ (talk) 17:14, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Narutolovehinata5[edit]

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/1966 anti-cow slaughter agitation.
Message added 02:54, 20 March 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:54, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:OpIndia Logo.jpeg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:OpIndia Logo.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 21:57, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/1966 anti-cow slaughter agitation[edit]

Winged Blades of Godric, it is now three months since you began expanding this article and three days fewer since it was nominated; time is running out. You have been unresponsive to pings in the nomination and on your talk page while you've been actively editing elsewhere on Wikipedia. The two "clarification needed" templates have not been addressed although I first mentioned them back on January 14, and I imagine it is the lack of response since that has discouraged potential reviewers, despite the fact that I've been calling for reviewers on the WT:DYK page for many weeks now.

If you're not going to address this issue, please let me know, and I'll close the nomination. Otherwise, it needs your attention when you next return to editing. Although it is still waiting for a review, I cannot, in good faith, more actively recruit a reviewer given your lack of response over the past months. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:34, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was surprised to see that a review was finally done on March 24. I hope you give the courtesy of a reply there soon; if you haven't done so by the end of March, the nomination is likely to be marked for closure. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:50, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello WBG. As noted by BlueMoonset above, a review has already been done, and significant article issues remain. Despite this, there has been no response from you since January. Please indicate if you still wish to pursue the nomination and if you can address the concerns. As the nomination is now the oldest remaining one on WP:DYKN and there has been no significant progress since January, the nomination will likely be marked for closure within the next few days if there is still no response. Thank you and happy editing. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:07, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of OpIndia for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article OpIndia 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OpIndia 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. Brihaspati (talk) 03:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/1966 anti-cow slaughter agitation has now been marked for closure[edit]

Hello. Unfortunately, as there has been no response from you in spite of multiple pings and talk page messages, the nomination has now been marked for closure by another editor. If you still wish to continue the nomination, please leave a message stating so before the nomination is closed. Thank you and happy editing. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 07:21, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you’re well[edit]

Was just thinking of you and hoping you’re well. Hadn’t seen you around as much. Also I looked at your user page and noticed some ideas I like :) Anyway, stay safe during this mess and if there’s anything I can help with on-wiki, feel free to ping. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:51, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to add about the same thing, considering you last edited on en-wiki in July. I remembered you when noticing some of your good work at AfD, thanks for that. —Paleo Neonate – 05:37, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Unviable draft[edit]

Template:Unviable draft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Anarchyte (talk • work) 10:36, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:25, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Swaminarayan[edit]

You gave up in desperation? Talk:Criticism of Swaminarayan sect#The way. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Sources[edit]

Hello. I come in peace!

I am relatively new to wikipedia when it comes to active editing. However, i value a NPOV and came across your comments here. A question -- the first link you shared was about national herald and not the wire? the second piece you shared, seemed like good journalism. Often in a battle to be objective we forget that we don't live in an objective world? I mean, is there any thing such as pure objectivity? if not, shouldn't we all embrace our very many biases and subjectivities, and us being aware of our bias would make us somewhat objective?

A lot of right wing websites, and a few left wing websites do have a 'point of view', and i find these discussions on wikipedia really interesting because they can potentially help us out of the hate-speech and bjp versus congress that we (india) been full of since our inception. And on the other hand, i am afraid of us on wikipedia censoring website etc on the basis of which political wing they come from, instead of 'fact checking'. In the long run, as left and right twist each others arms, some more than the others, I feel that that would be fruitful. I concede that this is a mountain of a task, a slow, unending, must-always-be-at-it process.. Any thoughts? Tanyasingh (talk) 05:47, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:ZHYXCBG[edit]

Template:ZHYXCBG has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 19:35, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of OpIndia[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on OpIndia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/OpIndia.com. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ChunnuBhai (talk) 18:12, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Recreation of Nishita Goswami[edit]

Hi Winged Blades of Godric,

Greetings! Hope you are doing well!

In the past, spammy & under-sourced Nishita Goswami was redirected by you to her mother's page Moloya Goswami. Nishita Goswami is one of the leading actress from Assam. She surely meets all BLP norms. I want to recreate the page in an encyclopedic way with proper references. This is for your information.

Best regards,

Nalbarian (talk) 10:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Languages[edit]

You say on your user page that you are "bilingual fluent in Bangla, English and Assamese". Surely you are trilingual not bilingual? Sarandone2 (talk) 18:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kalaripayattu[edit]

Religious fanatics are taking ownership at Kalaripayattu and not allowing any edits deviating from their agenda. The worst part is it is pending-changes protected and they all are confirmed accounts who can make changes without scrutiny. None of them give proper explanation for reverting, and sometimes blatantly reverts multiple edits (edited with proper edit summary) without explanation. Two of them have COI as evident from their usernames (Kalari). Their main business is promoting their POV and highlighting Hinduism part, though Kalaripayattu do have rituals based on Hinduism, the art itself is not a "Hindu art", it just happened to have originated when only Hindu "religion" was prevalent in Kerala. It is a martial art practised by all religious communities, many of the masters are Muslims, the Christians even have a folk dance derived from Kalaripayattu. Some Hindu extremists are "making statements" by projecting Hinduism on an otherwise communally harmonious martial art. BTW, I am also a Hindu, but this is too much.

The first time my edit got reverted (see history here onward), I never thought it was religious agenda, but now it's becoming clearer, as User:Kalariwarrior changed "Indian mythology" to "Hindu mythology" (source says former), and User:Kalari Poothara's recent Hinduism promotion in lead, and as Outlander07 is now trying to re-insert Hinduism claims (not in the source) in lead which I had removed; he had also removed a sourced mention about a Hindu lower-caste community – Thiyya. There are multiple legends on the creator - Parashurama, Shiva, Agasthya; they want Parashurama, not only that, they don't want to attribute it as "legend" (I agree with [9]). I suspect Outlander07 and Kalariwarrior to be the same person, all three are incompetent in editing. The article requires serious cleanup for sourcing and NPOV. Should I report this activity to WP:ANI, or somewhere else, or what? Please help. 157.46.136.127 (talk) 19:59, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Belated reply (sorry!)[edit]

Hi,

I'm writing here in case you don't have my talk page on your watch list: I finally replied to your message. Have a nice day.—Gennaro Prota ^•Talk 08:44, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been pruned from a list[edit]

Hi Winged Blades of Godric! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed on the AFC's participants list, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 6 months. Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to regain access to the AFCH script, you can do so at any time by visiting WT:AFCP. Thank you for your work at AFC, and if you start editing Wikipedia again we hope you will rejoin us. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:00, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

Hope you're doing okay, miss seeing you around even if we disagree sometimes. CUPIDICAE💕 19:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I also hope you are well. I saw your name in the edit history of a page and thought, "Boy, I haven't seen him around in months." I hope you return should you get interested in contributing again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been removed from Wikipedia:Local Embassy due to inactivity[edit]

Hi Winged Blades of Godric! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:Local Embassy, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 6 months.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:Local Embassy.

Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:04, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Z184[edit]

Template:Z184 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Mathglot (talk) 01:25, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Laid to Rest: The Controversy over Subhas Chandra Bose's Death[edit]

Hi. A long time has been passed. But regarding your request at WP:RX, which was archived unfulfilled. The book is now available in my library. If you are still interested in it, feel free to put new request, and I will send you whatever you want from the book. Thanks. --Gazal world (talk) 13:29, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

account flags removed for inactivity[edit]

Hello WBG, several account flags that have 12 month activity standards have been removed, should you return to editing and wish to volunteer in these areas again pleas take time to familiarize yourself with any relevant updates to the policies and processes related to them, then you may request access at WP:PERM or other venues. Best regards, — xaosflux ^Talk 18:32, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018 RfC on Wikidata links[edit]

With regard to 24 June 2018 edits of New RFC on linking to Wikidata (WP:Manual of Style), you wrote:

As to the other proposed exception of linking to WD, by inline inter-language link, given that there is roughly a numerical tie and there's no clear-cut refutable argument(s) from either side, I am unable to see any consensus.

. But I think I am properly perplexed when this becomes:

Wikidata should not be linked to within the body of the article except in the manner of hidden comment(s) as to mentioning the Q-number.

It seems to me that you get to this depending on how the proposition is structured. For instance, if this had been interpreted as the following independent propositions:

prohibit Wikidata links in hidden comments
prohibit Wikidata links in interlanguage links
prohibit Wikidata links in ordinary text

then we'd have no consensus on the use of Wikidata links in interlanguage links, and given that the current state had been to allow them, they would continue to be allowed.

As an aside of sorts, one of the main objections to Wikidata links had been that the Wikidata "reliable source" requirement might not be up to the standards of the enwiki reliable source requirements. But insofar as QIDs are concerned, is it not the case that Wikidata is in fact authoritative? This point could have been expected to overcome most of the objections to their use in interlanguage links. Fabrickator (talk) 03:47, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No: there is consensus that Wikidata links are not allowed in text, and there is no consensus to make an exception for interlanguage links. Which means that the first rule also applies to the second case. Fram (talk) 07:56, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Over a year![edit]

...since your last edit. I hope that's a sign that you're just too busy enjoying life. You are missed! (It's not nearly as much fun arguing with other editors.) Cheers, Levivich 16:33, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

...make that two years! Hope you're alright, brother. Chisme (talk) 00:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas![edit]

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas!

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello[edit]

Hi Godric, its been a while since I saw you. Hope things are ok. scope_creep^Talk 12:24, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hemant Dhome[edit]

Hello Winged Blades of Godric

I want to create page titled 'Hemant Dhome' but I realized when this article was deleted on Wikipedia. But at present this person has acted in famous Marathi films and directed some films. I think Dhome eligible it now, let me know what you think

Thank you - User:Morekar(talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:14, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Morekar, WBoG is no longer active on Wikipedia. If you want to write a draft about Dhome, you should use the Article wizard to create a draft, which will be reviewed by experienced editors after submission. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, or Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 10:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas![edit]

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!
Have a great Christmas, and may 2023 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls, vandals or visits from Krampus! Cheers SchroCat (talk) 11:13, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Aquaporin[edit]

Aquaporin has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 14:45, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://epaperdivyamarathi.bhaskar.com/solapur/260/03022020/0/2/

[2] ttps://epaperdivyamarathi.bhaskar.com/solapur/260/03022020/0/2/

[1]

[2]