User talk:FacetsOfNonStickPans/Archive 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Umar Khalid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page JNU (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi DTM, any interest in developing this page? It is a current topic. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:31, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 17:55, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sports in Jammu and Kashmir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shera (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

		Please join us... We have four new topics for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October! New: Clubs Science fiction + fantasy STEM The Mediterranean Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk ) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hi DTM I saw this Not sure why you decided to do 4 UNDOs instead of 1 twinkle revert. Critics will call that efforts to increase

@

talk

) 11:43, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

true, FYI, From whatever little i know about you from our few interaction, I am sure you don't care about Editcounts, but like I said, this is something you can be accused of, so lets do it in an expected way. check out

WP:VP, regards. --DBigXrayᗙ

11:48, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I will go through this the page -

talk

) 11:53, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

cool, for now you can just check the exact section I linked above that has a screenshot as well showing the rollback links, even I have not gone through the full doc, but it would be good to check it out to know all the features it offers. Twinkle is quite user friendly and saves lot of time while maintaining articles. --DBigXrayᗙ 12:27, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I specifically read the exact section you linked for now. Understood how to use the rollback feature now and the three different rollback features mentioned. I have noticed the rollback link many times but never used it since I was unsure what exactly would happen and never understood why it was different from the revert option, after reading this it makes much more sense. Yes, Twinkle provides a lot of other features... one at a time. Thanks.

talk

) 12:34, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, good call in not testing out new things on pages other than the Sandbox. :D . the

WP:ROLLBACK's only benefit is it is faster, and you dont get to add an edit summary, if you use ROLLBACK on anything other than "obvious" vandalism, that right can be taken. It is used mostly to mass revert edits by a blocked vandal or sock account. whereas, Twinkle rollback allows us to add an edit summary to explain why we are reverting. Twinkle rollback can be safely used in many other cases (other than obvious vandalism). --DBigXrayᗙ

13:07, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Added the code. Hopefully I've done it correctly. Thanks

talk

) 18:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

I reviewed, it looks good. 30 month 90 day old threads will be archived, in archive pages named as 1, 2, 3 and so on (based on current settings. if you want to use pages that use name of the year e.g. 2018 1, 2018 2, 2019 1, 2020 1, and so on you can use format=Y %%i . anyway its your choice, both formats are correct. (I prefer the year format). you have 24 hrs time to make any changes as the bot will come after 24 hrs of setting up. regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 18:48, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Hey, the 2160 was for hours... so "sections with dates that are older than 90 days (2,160 hours) will be archived". I think you typed the months part wrong in your reply. Well, I will see how this bot works and if things get too messy then I am sure I can change it to the date format. Maybe since this is my first real year of editing on Wikipedia, the year format seems a little less appealing.... lets see :D thanks again.

talk

) 19:16, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry I stand corrected, it was a typo. sure. you can always rename later by moving the page. and there is no need to create the archive pages, the bot creates it on its own. I see you have created one , so bot has one less work to do. :D . good luck. --DBigXrayᗙ 19:29, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

		A glass of Thandai for you
		Here is a glass of Thandai for you. Thandai is a traditional Indian cold drink prepared with a mixture of almonds, fennel seeds, watermelon kernels, rose petals, pepper, vetiver seeds, cardamom, saffron, milk and sugar. Good work in learning the Text Merge procedure. Here is something to recharge you after your first merge, cheers Thank you. DBigXrayᗙ 21:18, 3 October 2018 (UTC) For more Indian dishes, visit the Kitchen of WikiProject India.

I see that you are an active indian user and so am requesting a comment on the following talk pages on the requested moves.
Talk:Modi Ministry

		Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives New: Religion Deceased politicians Asia Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): WikiProject AfroCine launches (To subscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list )

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Based on your contributions so far, Keep it up. --DBigXrayᗙ 15:32, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 19:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I invite you to join the Indian military history task force, an initiative of the Military history WikiProject. This task force is created to deal exclusively with the topics related to Indian military. If you are interested, please add you name in alphabetical order to the participants list. In addition, you can also indicate areas of special interest across your name. Please free to ping me if you have further questions. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 03:38, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

talk

) 06:55, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at

Draft:Shaurya Doval. Thanks! Legacypac (talk

) 19:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Shaurya Doval, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to

create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation

if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 11:09, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, DiplomatTesterMan. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject

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

). 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:Alok Bansal 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
  db-self
  }}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:47, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, DiplomatTesterMan! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:47, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 16:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 16:45, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan, thanks for pinging me. The reasons for blocking of this user is unrelated to your draft. So don't worry about the block. I see the reviewing user has mentioned this reason for declining as lack of notability. so lets take it from where the other reviewer left.

Can you make a comment here along with the sources (to verify) that explains why this subject deserves his own

WP:NAUTHOR If you can make a convincing argument based on these polices, some one else can approve the draft based on your argument. There is no hurry, a declined draft can still remain there at the present location for you and others to work until 6 months. If after six months the draft is still not fit for move to the main space only then it will be deleted. Hope I have clarified. please feel free to ask further question if you need more clarification. --DBigXrayᗙ

18:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

I am not sure if you intentionally submitted that draft for a review or it was just a wrong usage of the

Template:AFC submission . In my opinion, if you feel the draft is not ready for submission then you should use {{subst:AFC draft}} while submitting instead of {{subst:submit}} because the latter means that the author feels the draft is now complete and ready for mainspace. --DBigXrayᗙ

18:22, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

@

WP:NSOLDIER

 : Commanded a substantial body of troops in combat (e.g. a capital ship, a divisional formation or higher... since I don't know if it was one of the bigger warships or not.

Therefore I will just leave it in draft for now, and if no good sources arise after a period of time (which I doubt) I will delete the article myself. I had initially not realised that most of the sources I was adding were all primary sources in a way and had rushed the AFC submission, which yes, was intentional at the time. Thanks again for the reply.

talk

) 21:28, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

• DiplomatTesterMan I am glad that you took time to understand and read the links as well. I knew that you might not be aware of these policies, nobody is born with these knowledge, even I had to learn them at some point of time. Your plan for future action makes sense to me. I leave it at your good judgement (which is fast evolving as far as Wikipedia is concerned) to delete it at a later point of time. Cheers. --DBigXrayᗙ 21:34, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!

talk

) 21:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

I will refrain from engaging him as he has taken a strong dislike to me and is inclined to continue to attack me, out of, kind of, self motivation. Hope he calms down and realizes that this is a collaborative site and everyone is trying to improve articles. --Jaydayal (talk) 01:55, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 19:26, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi @

Total 7 deletions out of the 50 articles I have created in mainspace as on 23 October 2018. (Excluding redirects) That's a 14% deletion rate so far.

And if I include merges, the ratio goes up a little, (in which I mention you too for the merge part just as reminder, I hope you don't mind). So yes, I understand better now how that if I want to apply for things such as

@

WP:AFC route when you are in doubt. Or ping someone on the task-force if it is an article which comes under the task-forces' purview. Adamgerber80 (talk

) 22:26, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Just saw your new contribution, and thanks for that! I can't guarantee we will have enough hands on deck for the upcoming issue to review it properly (we are just over a day from the writing deadline now), but I will try to keep things moving forward. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

I had an independent reader (not in The Signpost's Newsroom) take a look and their feedback was that it could use an essay-style introduction. Actually the format right now is tweaked from what you submitted; I reordered a paragraph before the first bulleted list, but I think I agree that something succinct basically saying "here is what you will read about in this essay" would help. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:37, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 02:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Your piece is approved for publication and has been added to the issue 12 table of contents. Congratulations! There might be a bit more copyediting prior to publication on or about December 2. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:48, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you!

talk

) 05:31, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Dear all, I am happy to inform you that the Indian military history working group which was started in June 2016, as a part of the

@

talk

) 16:30, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@DiplomatTesterMan: Thanks for signing up. I actually sent the message to all the previous members. KCVelaga (talk) 16:32, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@KCVelaga: Ah yes. I got that from the "Dear all" :) I was just going through your profile and work on Wikipedia, awesome consistency and work! An inspiration for newbies like me.

Related to the Indian military task force: I wanted to know if it is possible to make the task force, more, how would you say, seem as if something is happening on the project page. It doesn't have to be drastic stuff of course, but even small things. Because just now even without the task force it seems that editors keep editing pages that fall under this WikiProject wonderfully in whatever capacity they can. Unless there is some sort of coordination or if the editors involved keep interacting with the Wikiproject directly, I don't really see the task force coming being as fruitful as compared to everyone just editing articles without the task force. Like I have been attempting to create and edit articles that come under this WikiProject without actually referring it. Yes, if some sort of coordination can be managed, then yes, that would be awesome.

talk

) 16:44, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@DiplomatTesterMan: Thanks for your kind words and sharing your thoughts (very much thought-provoking). I would like to answer—it will be a big reply, unfortunately I am very sleepy now. So my brain won't allow to do detailed stuff. I'll give you an elaborate reply tomorrow. Regards, KCVelaga (talk) 16:53, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 17:08, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) A good thing to do to get off the ground, would be to rate any unrated articles, and cross check some of the problematic ones. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:25, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed response. Users keep doing their regular editing irrespective whether a project or a task-force exists or not, this is an agreeable fact. But such collaborations help in coordination, mainly to discuss issues about a certain topic area. The Indian task-force, as it is relatively the youngest of all, there is a lot of work to do and there are a lot of opportunities as well. Some these include building quarterly newsletters, editing campaigns, content improvement campaigns etc. I'll be busy until the end of next month, due to my exams. So I will not be able to spare much time on this. Let us plan something significant after that. However, you're free to explore and pursue opportunities anytime. KCVelaga (talk) 04:10, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 12:18, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@DiplomatTesterMan: Hello! Thanks for the ping. Actually I've a couple of things in mind. But let us finish the first before move onto the second one, as it also requires more time investment. The first is conducting a tagging campaign for the new task force. I am not sure if all the articles from South-Asian task force have been checked and tagged for "Indian". Pinging Kges1901 and Adamgerber80 for status, if it hasn't been completely done, we can organise one tag and assess kind of campaign. KCVelaga (talk) 12:35, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@KCVelaga: So the assessment you are talking about is related to the box titled Indian military history task force assessment statistics right?

Currently -

• Total articles = 1,423
• Total lists = 39
• Other pages = 364
• ω = 7,437 Ω = 5.087

So say there is this redirect page

talk

) 13:08, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@KCVelaga: I am not sure about the tagging but I have covered some article and this an arduous task given the number of articles under this task-force. Maybe we can tap into the other members of the task-force and see if we can get this started. Thoughts? Adamgerber80 (talk) 18:38, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

If you send out messages to other TF members, a tagging drive shouldn't be hard to organize. Tagging is done by adding |Indian=y to the WikiProject Military History template on each talk page, for reference. Kges1901 (talk) 23:09, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@DiplomatTesterMan: So yes, we can organise a tagging drive. If you are interested to do this, I'll be happy to help. I would first suggest to create a section on the taskforce's talk page and a start discussion with the members about the duration, dates and objectives. Pinging AshLin who previously organised a Tag & Assess drive for WP:IN. Best, KCVelaga (talk) 04:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Jammu and Kashmir football team are you willing to work on this ? take a few days and then let me know. the article is completely unsourced and content is clearly hoax. a candidate for deletion in my opinion. Good catch though. if you arent willing to work on this, please nominate for deletion. --DBigXrayᗙ 20:01, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 12:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 12:51, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

While I still believe this is a non (or barely) notable team but at least this is factual article. Good work in finding the sources. Yes let it be.--DBigXrayᗙ 22:36, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

		The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone. New: Photography Laureates Countries beginning with 'I' Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): BBC 100 Women 2018 (To subscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk ) 13:55, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

	The Original Barnstar
	For your excellent work writing Lavanya Rajamani signed, Rosguill talk 23:34, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 15:14, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions, this is obviously a good work, but I've a few suggestions at this point. Here they follow:

• Using autofill for references can be easy, but I don't suggest completely relying on it. For example, the website for a reference was mentioned as "www.cprindia.org", but it should be the website's name, but not the website itself. So it is better to keep it as "Centre for Policy Research". Same is the case with.
• For ref 6, none of the template parameters were filled expect for the URL. Please do mention the website, and since it is a PDF, |format=PDF should be added.
• Infobox; it is good enough to mention the degrees with the field of study if required, but not with the universities or college. They can be listed for the "alma matter" field. "Occupation" field, denotes the occupation but not a position in an organisation. Something like "Policy analyst" "Policy researcher" can be good.
• Lead doesn't generally require citations unless a new fact is presented. See
  WP:LEADCITE
  .

I've corrected a few, please make other corrections based on this. Also consider nominating for

WP:DYK when you create a new article or expanded 5x. Best, KCVelaga (talk

) 04:57, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 15:07, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

@DiplomatTesterMan: Pleasure! KCVelaga (talk) 16:09, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

I have had so many similar experiences in editing, your article really pulled things together for me. I may have a lot of edits, but I am still a newbie in the sense of all the policies and etiquette that exists here. Please, please continue to write for the signpost. I have been hoping for a long time that we will get a contributor from India. We have so much content regarding India and Indian culture. No long term commitment is required to be an editor/contributor for the Signpost. You can even have a go at creating/collaborating on a Humour article. I am glad to know you and thank you for your work. The Very Best of Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 14:27, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 15:05, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

• DTM, I was pleasantly surprised to see my name featuring in the Signpost, Thanks a lot for the kind honours. The Article was indeed very well written and I guess every editor can relate to it in someway, because we all start somewhere and learn along the way. Hope to see more of DTM in the future signposts --DBigXrayᗙ 16:16, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 15:06, 2 December 2018 (UTC

• Nice article, DTM! I can see you have writing in your 'bones'. Well done! May you have a bright career at Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 21:40, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Initially I was thinking whether I should inform the Wikipedia users I am mentioning in the article before the final date just to confirm if they have any issues with there name there, including yours, but then I just left the informing part... glad no one has any problem. (Positive mentions not associated with anything controversial... and article turned out decent too, so a happy ending).

talk

) 22:02, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Oh,don't worry. You enjoy the

freedom of the Press when you write for the Signpost. Besides, you were only saying nice things about us. Helping us new editors find the ropes is something I wish I could do more of, if only I had the time and patience... -- Kautilya3 (talk

) 22:37, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Signpost Barnstar
		I thoroughly enjoyed reading your signpost article (and felt the need to award you this Barnstar). Happy editing! Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:38, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

@

talk

) 21:52, 2 December 2018 (UTC)