Hello. Help copy edit. Thanks you. Charless21 (talk) 07:54, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Akshaypatill (talk) 07:59, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know the original work of "R. V L. Bhave", that was referenced in the footnote? TrangaBellam (talk) 15:40, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm - if only they had provided a source. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:45, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:TrangaBellam We have Wiki page of the auther in marathi. Here - [1]. The page has listed his books. Likely - This is the book - [2] Akshaypatill (talk) 16:33, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:TrangaBellam I skimmed through first few pages, but couldn't find anything about the letter or Rajput. May be this isn't what you are looking for. I will try to find his other books. Akshaypatill (talk) 17:31, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I already came across the mr.wiki entry and the particular book but failed to spot anything. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:54, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:TrangaBellam According to this article [3], there are three books (Rumals). The one which I had linked above is the first book. The second book is about Senapati Bapu Gokhale and the third deals with letters from Shivaji's times (शिवकालीन’ व ‘अलिबहादराची पत्रे). I could get hold on the first two books but failed to get third one. This could be the book, but it isn't available anywhere. Akshaypatill (talk) 05:17, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nice find. I will try to have the book scanned if it is held in any Dutch library. TrangaBellam (talk) 12:27, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:TrangaBellam Best luck. I can try to find a copy of it from local libraries if you really want to read it. Akshaypatill (talk) 13:27, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:TrangaBellam Got the source for Hmm. This is it - [4] Akshaypatill (talk) 02:29, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh - wow, thanks! Wonder how I missed this nugget. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:25, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings @ User:Akshaypatill,

I came with this request following you from Noticeboard for India-related topics. Actually, while searching google for Bengali and Hindi sources I ended up on some Marathi language source and if those sources are relevant you can help us out in translation. The main translation request is mentioned in last 2 paragraphs.

• Context

I do work on some women's issues related articles lately Taharrush, a kind of mass sexual abuse at public place for example Draft:2021 Minar-e-Pakistan mass sexual assault the second one which I am working on is almost 50 years old case for expansion of which I request your help.

One of the nights in first half of the 1969 Rabindra Sarobar Stadium, Calcutta went too awry due to technical faults in audio equipment.

Not only famous actor Ashok Kumar could not perform but upset mob indulged in en masse public molestation and alleged sexual violence against women present at the stadium.

The incidence was embarrassing moment in Calcutta's history having political fall out and has been covered in official biography of Jyoti Basu then West Bangal's home minister to some extent. But some more encyclopedically important details are needed like closeness of Jyoti Basu with Ram Chatterjee and other state government politicians were accused as a reason of suppression of inquiry (this accusation appears even in a Phd thesis based on a Bengali language source). Many English Bengali and Hindi sources are still to become available, I am requesting and expecting those one by one.

• Translation and expansion /update request from Marathi language sources.:

• • One of the name one comes across is Ram Chatterjee, that seem to appear in a Marathi language magazine of 17th May, 1969 माणस Page 14 second para seems to mention Acharya, Chatterjee, Banerjee and Basu. Please see if that paragraph is helpful in improving Draft:1969 Rabindra Sarobar Stadium en masse sexual violence controversy in any way.

• • Then माणस magazine from 21 June 1969 seem to have a series 'Kolkata Dinank'. I could get these 2 links माणस 28th June, 1969 Page 16 and माणस 5th July 1969 page 13 seem to have some details under articles titled 'Kolkata Dinank' which I do not fully understand.

Please do see if you can help us in understanding if above source is relevant enough to Draft:1969 Rabindra Sarobar Stadium en masse sexual violence controversy and help expand and update the same if found relevant enough.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 10:20, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bookku Here are few points from the first link that may help -

• 1) Indira Gandhi commented that the things that happened at Rabindra Sarobar Stadium are being exaggerated. The author says Gandhi has disappointed the people who expected her to visit and hear to the victims.
• 2) The author says a session of robbing, firing, rapes, murders etc completed with the farmer riots in 1967. The offenders were arrested. Fortunate for them, Jyoti Basi became Chief Minister and Home Minister in 1969 and released all these men. These men were the organizers of the 6th April event. S. K. Acharya was the main organizer. Left-wing leader Vijakumar Banergy was the inaugurator of the event. Ram Chatergy, a left communist, was the host of the event.
• 3)The author calls the ruling party a party of murder-rape apologists. Efficient police officers were helpless and scared of Home Minister. Akshaypatill (talk) 11:35, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, the author is implying that the ruling party in Bengal and Jyoti Basu are backing the offenders. Akshaypatill (talk) 11:46, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bookku This one has very detailed account of the event [5]. The author claims that he has discussed the event with hundreds of people and eye-witnesses. I will try to summarise it, but it will take some time as the article is quite large. Akshaypatill (talk) 12:03, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ Akshaypatill, A report based on eye-witnesses sounds interesting. I shall cross the fingers. You can take time as required no issues. Thanks so much, you have accepted my request and helping me out.

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 12:46, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bookku Here is the story. It didn't take that much time as I thought. The article didn't go as I was expecting, I sense a little POV here.

The event was scheduled on 15-16 March ( 2 days event). Underworld don Tulu Mukherjee (referred to as Tulubabu hereafter) was the organizer of the event. Everything was set.

However, in the first week of March, two groups of goons clashed. Sensing that the clashing can affect the event, Tulubabu arranged an emergency meeting in his garage to reconcile. Three goon leaders were present at the meeting - Nandan, Dasu and Pratim. The meeting failed and the goon leaders had a fight that caused Nandan to lose two fingers. Angri Nandan challenged Tulbabu and told him to cancel the event otherwise, he would wreck the event.

The news of the incident went viral and reached Ashok Kumar. Kumar informed the newspaper Anand Bazar Patrika that he isn't performing in the event. Anxious Tulababu postponed the event to 6 April.

On 6 April, People started gathering at the stadium right from the early afternoon. Most of the men and women present at the event were aware that something bad could happen and fierce Nandan is set to cause turmoil in the event. There were 40,000 people inside the stadium and 15,000 outside. Loudspeakers were provided for the people standing outside. But, the overall arrangement was a mess, with a lot of problems like dysfunctional speakers, mics etc. The function was set to start at 6 PM but was dragged for hours. The local artist kept performing and bored the people.

The people standing outside, waiting for Ashok Kumar, got annoyed and started throwing stones. The people inside the stadium began throwing things at the stage. 300 men of Nandan were sitting at some distance from the stage. Some police joined them. The lights went off (though roof searchlights were on for the whole incident), and the drama started. Some threw chairs at each other. Some started running at doors to escape. 90% of people were trying to escape, while 10% were busy chasing and fueling the already volatile situation. Some robbed jewellery and abused the girls and women around by groping and inappropriately touching them. Some grabbed and tore the clothes of women. Police requested the people to maintain peace so everyone can leave safely. But the crowd kept making chaos. They were unable to see anything due to the tear gas fired by the police.

Now the author put his conclusions based on the interviews of eye-witnesses (at least 10) and others - There were no incidences of rapes on the site. The narratives of 5-6 goons raping a woman, women committing suicides in the lake after the rape and abuse , Sardars giving their phetas to the naked women are all fake.

The photos published in newspapers after the incident, all of them show the firing of cars and other things. A woman, who was a teacher in the school in the stadium, went to the site the next day and found torn clothes of women. There were bras but no panties. The author inquired if anyone heard cries, screams of women at the site but no one responded positively. There was sexual abuse, kind of grosser than the common one, but there were no rapes. The author iterates that if someone is trying to bring down the ruling party elected by the people, by capitalising on such incidents, they aren't going to succeed. Akshaypatill (talk) 09:27, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ Akshaypatill It is very nice of you for providing up to the mark summary and all the support.

Since I am trying to include multiple sources hopefully POVs of any side will get diluted over a period of time. Only sources of pre internet era becoming available is time consuming. I got Marathi translation from you even before getting Bangla one. But that depends how much particular source is easily available on internet.

As that journalist suggest in a crowd of 20 plus thousand people 'rape' would have been a difficult thing. After Egypt and Germany incidences of such phenomena of mob harassment and molestation in large gathering are being known as Taharrush. What mobs do is encircle individual women pretending they are trying to save her but actually they themselves molest women. So proving crime legally remains a huge challenge even in modern times of CC TV cameras those times of 70s must have been much more difficult to prove. A minor aspect in that journalist report is, we can't be sure how far use of 'panties' would have been common beyond Western Europe un til late twentieth century, but that is a matter for cultural historians of clothings to decide

• Some other Possible media and political context

The local Kolkatta news papers certainly did not give molestation related news un til first couple of days but news started reaching Delhi since even Jyoti Basu was in Delhi. Loksabha was in session but on an average Parliamentarians are not directly allowed to discuss state law and order since according to Indian Constitution that is state subject matter then parliamentarians need to find via media to take up discussion. What happened in Delhi some 200 parliamentarians singed a letter to Indira Gandhi, in turn Indira Gandhi said things are being exaggerated. Parliamentarians are allowed to discuss Prime Ministers statement. So what happened to women was certainly an issue Non communists tried use opportunity politically that is their political job. Jyoti Basu was worried that will give excuse to central Government so they seem to have suppressed entire inquiry. And Naxlaism was at it's peak so no one would have dared to speak against what happened at local level.

Many thanks again for your kind support in providing the summary of the article.

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 11:45, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bookku I am not suggesting anything. The last two paragraphs of the article made me think that the author is trying to back the ruling party of Bengal. That is why I said I sense some form of POV. Nothing else. If you found something worth the article, go ahead and add it or you can leave it. No issues. The goons related backstory is pretty interesting though. Akshaypatill (talk) 12:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will see if I could find more sources in Marathi and Hindi. Akshaypatill (talk) 12:11, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact thanks you informed me including about POV part too. Since twentieth century media had been a lot polarized with either left side or right side POV and soft cornering and backing accordingly. Specially in India those sixties and seventies were same times when intelligentsia & politics was tilting to left side further. Still this Marathi magazine seems to be covering both sides. In first part we saw they included criticism of West Bengal Govt. and second part they have given space to left POV journalist too and that way the platform seems to be neutral enough. The goons related backstory with specific names is quite interesting revelation unknown so far, and it is quite possible Calcuttans preferred to give away goon's names than left politicians remain under accusations. But whatever level of crime happened in this case and over the years has largely gone unpunished that is not possible without politicians behind the scenes.

Any ways as encyclopedist our job is to cover it in best possible manner. Please help update whenever you come across any other Marathi language sources. About Hindi I was looking for one Delhi based magazine archive called Dinaman which has covered this case in particular.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 13:50, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Might try having a word or two with Sreenivasan KG1 and see if they are willing to understand our policies - ought be easier for you than me. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:21, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why there is blue link in sub-section heading ? I suggest you to change it and add Maratha kingdom in Further information or see also templet.Holland Tok (talk) 12:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Holland Tok, done. Maratha Empire already has a wikilink in the lead. Thanks for pointing out. Akshaypatill (talk) 13:00, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing lot on Chatrapati's article, so want suggest you, if you have good books about Shivaji Maharaj and our Maharata history, you have to read and add it with book citations in the article. Holland Tok (talk) 13:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Holland Tok It is work in progress. No worries, I have read a lot of reference books about him. However, It has to adhere with NPOV. Akshaypatill (talk) 13:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have to make a WP: WikiProject about Maratha Empire or Maratha kingdom, so the the interested history editors can join the project and edit. Holland Tok (talk) 14:22, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot have a NEUTRAL POV (WP:NPOV) because you are a marathi, and i've seen yor edits. You cant seem to bear thing negative about that shivaji. Too much attached to it..not the wiki way dear !115.98.24.175 (talk) 09:01, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher)Please comment on edits rather than on editors and their familial/ethnic/religious affiliations. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:26, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know why did you delete that edit on shivaji ? Potatochips90 (talk) 09:48, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jhy.rjwk (talk) 04:18, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jhy.rjwk Happy New Year!!! Thank you. Akshaypatill (talk) 05:35, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	Thanks for your help once again Aleena98 (talk) 19:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please note the warning I have left you on Talk:Exodus of Kashmiri Hindus. Please take it seriously. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:51, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not post messages on article talk page that are not about improving the article. Remember there are page watchers too. WP:NOTFORUM Venkat TL (talk) 12:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About this edit, reusing refs, but with different quotes, is something I find tricky. Now that the at param is removed by your edit, the tooltip shows the other quote (A film that is based on the tragedy ...) and not the quote on casualty numbers. I think the popular way of handling ref reuse with different quotes is to use {{sfn}} but I sorta prefer {{rp}} with page or at parameters. Do you wish to convert it to an {{sfn}} quote so that the correct quote gets displayed? Hemantha (talk) 15:39, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, this is a very minor point since the quote repeats what Kautilya3's ref said - though with some number discrepancies(?) - and the whole thing perhaps needs a bit of restructuring. I just thought to mention the fact that a slightly-not-so-relevant quote gets displayed now. Hemantha (talk) 15:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Hemantha. This is the easiest way to do it - Open Source Editing. Now click on Cite. Then go to Templates. Now click on cite news. Now add the url in the URl field and click on the search button, it will fetch all the details. Now click on Show/hide extra fields button given below. Now look for the Quote field. Add your quote in the Quote field. Click Insert. Done. Akshaypatill (talk) 18:33, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks. Not asking for advice, actually. Please read what I wrote. Your 'ce' edit has broken the quote display and an incorrect quote is being shown for the sentence. For now, I'll revert you. Hemantha (talk) 18:37, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hemantha, your edit messes with the format. It shows the para number in the article, which should not be shown. That's why I had edited it. You are doing it the wrong way. Akshaypatill (talk) 18:40, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, why should para not be shown? Are you able to grasp the issue here? Without a valid at parameter, the quote from the first ref definition will be shown - which isn't relevant in that specific usage. Hemantha (talk) 18:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hemantha, If you really want add the quote, follow the steps above. It isn't that hard. Akshaypatill (talk) 18:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hemantha, Don't bother. I have did it for you. Akshaypatill (talk) 18:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your condescension combined with the lack of knowledge is astonishing. What you have done is unnecessarily repeat an existing citation. The template {{rp}} is there to help in such situations. Please see Pinyin#cite_ref-w3c-clreq_36-0, Scotland#cite_ref-Barrell_2000_47-0. There is nothing wrong in that format as all these usages attest. (Do please click on blue links and read them to understand what & how of template use). Hemantha (talk) 18:57, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hemantha Does any of these pages show "Para # in the body/article in middle of a sentence? Akshaypatill (talk) 19:01, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you perchance on mobile? I don't think so, but still check Fiduciary, especially the lead and the last ref in the lead. I'm done here. Hemantha (talk) 19:12, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hemantha, I wasn't aware of that. But still this is silly workaround to add a quote. It hampers the readability. Should the readers be counting the paragraphs as you did? Akshaypatill (talk) 19:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What? I added the ref and the quote because you removed the sentence as SYNTH. Why should readers count? What's the silly workaround when a template with 40k+ uses exists for this specific use case? Please be coherent. Hemantha (talk) 19:54, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a little bit of time and state what your objection exactly is. Otherwise this appears to be another instance of the behavior you've been warned for previously. Hemantha (talk) 19:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AkshayPatill, please could you consider the consensus in the section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Kashmir_Files#Drama_Film_to_Historical_Drama and provide your feedback in the section? Webberbrad007 (talk) 10:07, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi you have removed my edits inspite of giving clear edit summaries. Isn't it too hagiographic and overly detailed? Also, too much mention of political parties.(not required) Nenetarun (talk) 04:30, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Akshaypatill, this was unnecessarily confrontational. The other editor was not being very civil, but your response there focused only on them and not at all on the article, and could be seen as a personal attack. --bonadea contributions talk 11:56, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Bonadea I realised it later. I usaually maintain my cool but I was a little furstrated then. He was questioning over trivials. Akshaypatill (talk) 13:38, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You removed a tag pasted by my to clarify, You gave reason in summary that the article already is to long. You said the More (clan) have further info, but that article don't have info about Chandrarao More, or why CSM killed him, the background. I know it is a controversial as it written in the Shivaji I article, but only 3 to 4 lines can clarify the incident but you removed tag. But readers deserves to know what was the circumstances behind killing of Chandrarao. I kno, he told our beloved Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj in a letter, I don't consider you a king but readers also have rights to know.Success think (talk)

You had made a clear point over here on 19th April that the actions of hindus + hindu right wing students in rutgers was not targeting. Moreover I had also raised this point in 2 separate sections on the same talk page. But when I had moved to edit the page in that way, those edits were reverted by Trangabellam saying that I don't have consensus.
Since your statement on 19th April, that is around 6 days from now, I dont exactly understand what should I do because he is neither bringing any objections to our statements nor stating that we agree on this, even after my reminder ping.
Your suggestion? >>> Extorc.talk 20:20, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Extorc, sometimes she takes a while to reply. Kautilya3, from his replies, don't seem to have problem moving it from the section. As I see, you already have reminded her of the issue. Let's wait couple of days for a her reply. Akshaypatill (talk) 04:16, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Extorc, you are misrepresenting yourself as well as others because your arguments were markedly different from Akshaypatill's. K3 has conceded to my reasoning about why your choice of section-title (social media) did not make sense and Akshaypatill has conceded about the Hindu Right aspect.

So, we are effectively left with Akshaypatill's singular concern of "targeting" - Wikipedia has no deadline and the two of you can propose specific amendments in this regard. Thanks, TrangaBellam (talk) 05:15, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I dont see how what I raised here and what AkshayPatill stated here are "markedly different".
"your choice of section-title (social media) did not make sense". I would like to see where this was reached.
I continue to hold that even if some of the petitioners were members of the Hindu Right Wing, that doesn't make any of this targeting untill sources explicitly state that. >>> Extorc.talk 06:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

K3: Ok, I agree that the petition was criticising both her social media activity and academic teaching. Then we need to address the other [Deeming the students' petition as part of RW efforts] issue.

TrangaBellam (talk) 07:03, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, your refined stance—singularly focusing on the usage of "targeting"—is in agreement with Akshaypatill. Propose a way out at the t/p. TrangaBellam (talk) 07:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting that I have since convinced myself that "Hindu on Campus" is a Hindu Right grouping. It seems to have been created just for the sake of this petition and, after that, they have been acting as a mouthpiece of the Hindu Students Council and the Hindu American Foundation. The usual wing right-wing tactic of spawning organisations to hoodwink the public about the real identities. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:25, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! TrangaBellam (talk) 10:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Extorc, I believe in User:Kautilya3's expertise in the subject. If "Hindu on Campus" is in any way related to the Hindu Students Council and Hindu American Foundation, it definitely can be categorized as targeting. Akshaypatill (talk) 10:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I am fine with this. >>> Extorc.talk 16:03, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know freedom of speech is important to you. But calling me "insignificant" and then making yourself feel too "significant" by deleting my section--> you have. been warned 2A01:E0A:911:1070:9DDA:4E3:EFE0:B93F (talk) 00:26, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to discuss it, create an account and discuss. This is not Twitter, Facebook or Instagram for posting whatever you want. If you are not sticking to the subject and posting things that don't help improve the article, then they will be removed. Wikipedia isn't a forum. See WP:NOTAFORUM. Akshaypatill (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I advise you to take your own advise and discuss on the "talk" page rather than deleting entire sections despite repeated warnings by several wiki users. Creating a ticket for your account review 2A01:E0A:911:1070:18C9:4CA2:565:E1F4 (talk) 12:07, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Best of luck. Akshaypatill (talk) 04:23, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. 2A01:E0A:911:1070:18C9:4CA2:565:E1F4 (talk) 12:19, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cringe pop 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/Cringe pop 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.

Python Drink (talk) 23:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	(diff) ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 18:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 impose site bans, 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{subst:alert/first|ipa}} Doug Weller talk 13:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller What is this? Akshaypatill (talk) 13:58, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, used the source editor. I'll do that again. So far as I can see, you've never had an alert - the template at the top of your page doesn't mention any. Doug Weller talk 14:19, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller I have had the alert a few times and that's why I had put the tamplate at the top. It has changed somehow. I will correct it. Would you mind if I remove this from the talk page? Akshaypatill (talk) 14:25, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, just make sure you fix the template. Doug Weller talk 14:37, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller I already have..:) Akshaypatill (talk) 14:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Already has had an alert:[6]. Doug Weller talk 12:36, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was using the script. It said failed, but I see, it has posted it anyway. Akshaypatill (talk) 13:27, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed it. Akshaypatill (talk) 13:30, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 impose site bans, 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:48, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]