Archives

1,2

This user is busy inreal life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Please stop yourdisruptive editing. If you continue to assume bad faith when dealing with other editors, as you did atTalk:Swastika, you may beblocked from editing. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia.Doug Wellertalk13:58, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from using talk pages such asTalk:Swastika for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based onreliable sources and the projectpolicies and guidelines; they arenot for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visitingour reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Seehere for more information. Thank you.Doug Wellertalk13:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HiDoug Weller, thank you for reaching out. I only left one comment on the talk page of that article that was a part of my discussion with the commenter. The comment was not made in bad faith neither was it intended to be interpreted in the same. I assure this to you as someone who has actively been an part of this community for over seven years. I also am quite confused you took it as form ofdisruptive editing considering that that was my only comment and was a continuation of a productive discussion regarding the topic with another editor. However, I apologize, and request a removal of the edit in question if you believe it doesn't fit the guidelines. -TheodoreIndiana (talk)17:43, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

it's a standard template as not showing good faith is generally considered disruptive. It was a criticism of Wikipedia more than an attempt to improve the article and although I might be wrong I see what looks like an off wiki attempt to recruit people to change the article given all the IPs who've edited recently. That doesn't mean you're part of that, but all the attempts to make this sort of change in a short period of time are odd. The IP who made the request seems part of that. I know about the Indian use, but in most of the 20th century the most prominent use of the symbol is by Nazis and neoNazis under the name swastika.Doug Wellertalk19:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand where you're coming fromDoug Weller, I'd request you to remove that comment/edit. I once again assure you it wasn't made in bad faith - the point I was trying to get across the other editor, who seemed to be new to the platform, was that Wikipedia does not care about their personal opinion unless the edit they're making is backed by verifiable sources. But I understand how it could have been interpreted the other way. On Swastika's actual article, which seems to be a complete mess, there does seem to be some confusion around Hakenkreuz, Sauwastika and Swastika. But be rest assured, any edits I make will be backed by proper sources. Right now, I'm not taking on this topic. -TheodoreIndiana (talk)15:45, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've struck through it, the approved way to deal with text that has been replied to.Doug Wellertalk16:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The articlePrestige Public School has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:MILL institution. FailsWP:NSCHOOL.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may bedeleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion. -MPGuy2824 (talk)03:26, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @MPGuy2824, thanks for your message. It's refreshing to meet a fellowWikiProject MP member here. I believe the article still passesWP:NSCHOOL but I'll have to verify that again. It's been some time since I wrote this one, I'm aware the notability criteria for secondary schools have gotten much stricter. Will post my response on the talk page in some time. -TheodoreIndiana (talk)17:42, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleDGWHyperloop is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/DGWHyperloop 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 until the discussion has finished.

Alexandermcnabb (talk)14:38, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articlePulse (confectionery) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pulse (confectionery) 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 until the discussion has finished.

Charlie (talk)13:47, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploadingFile:Logo of Surya Roshni Limited, as of 2014.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under aclaim of non-free 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 (seeour policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in anyarticles will be deleted after seven days, as described insection F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk)17:19, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]