Actually I created both the page name Maithili New Year (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maithili_New_Year) and Maithili calender(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maithili_calendar) at almost same time... I myself was surprised to discover that, I copied the content of Maithili New Year to Maithili calendar. Honestly, My intention was not so. Thank you.. for pointing the mistake.

.

Actually the content in Maithili candler is originally of Maithili New year. Within few hours, I will re-write the Maithili calender (entirely different from Maithili New year). So, please suggest me the next, to be done.Vikas11004315 (talk) 09:09, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to have (How I Met Your Mother) after a title if the titel used cannot be confused with anything else. Rabbit or Duck did not need the (parentheses), and on the episodes list all you needed to do was click the redlink for Rabbit or Duck, rather than edit the episode list to include the incorrect title. Darrenhusted (talk) 15:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Shashwat986, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! JohnCD (talk) 10:59, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for tagging Bessi Jóhannsson just now, but after you tag a page for speedy deletion you should copy to the author's talk page the warning which is generated for you on the speedy template, towards the bottom. Otherwise the newbie author doesn't know what's happened, thinks he pressed the wrong button, and often just puts the article in again. Also, if it's a new contributor who has never had a Welcome template, it's useful to give one before the speedy warning - it makes it less BITEy, and gives useful links that may help him do better next time. {{subst:firstarticle|<article name>}} is a good one. Keep up the good work - New Page Patrol needs all the eyes it can get! Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:59, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I've just started Patrolling, and comments like these really help me improve. Thanks again, Shashwat986 (talk) 13:43, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shashwat,

you proposed a speedy deletion of this article as attack page. Do you think this page is dangerous towards the Christians in Delhi? I thought it might be helpful for their safety to write on this subject. Do you see other problems with this article? Kind regards, Sarcelles (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have declined the speedy deletion tag you placed on this article; I just wanted you to know that I completely understand why you placed it there. The article you saw did not seem to contain any clue that the individual in question met the requirements of WP:POLITICIAN and it was only later that that became clear, due to additions to the article by its creator. If you feel the individual doesn't meet WP:POLITICIAN, I'd now suggest taking the article to Articles for deletion. If you have any questions or problems, I'm at your service. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Bans on school uniforms. I do not think that Bans on school uniforms fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because the page is not evidently a test page. However, the proposed deletion is reasonable and the article will likely be deleted soon. I request that you consider not re-tagging Bans on school uniforms for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. You are, of course, free to tag the article with {{prod}} or nominate it at WP:AFD. Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 22:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Shirik. I thought it wouldn't fit in the test page category, but I didn't know which category to place it in. I saw the prod template later, after I had added the speedy deletion template. I think I should go through WP:WWIN again. Thanks again. Shashwat986 (talk) 23:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a brazilian version of this category and I thought that I could create one like that in the american wikipedia. I want you to understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuckyourpanic (talk • contribs) 23:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it would make more sense for you to upload the article once you have added some points to it. As of now, according to me, it satisfies the criteria for speedy deletion.
Also, if you have any other issues with the article's speedy deletion nomination, I think it would make more sense for you to add a {{hangon}} template to the article instead of deleting the CSD template.
You can also try making the article as a subpage of your userpage, and later uploading it as a whole instead of it being a set of links. Cheers, Shashwat986 (talk) 00:03, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for it. My english is not too good, I'm brazilian. I'm going to do it now, bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuckyourpanic (talk • contribs) 00:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, now at AfD.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 02:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Shashwat986 (talk) 02:14, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've declined the speedy deletion tag you placed on this, but I hasten to add that the information that caused me to decline it was added after you tagged it. You had no way of knowing from what you saw that the individual had received an Order of Australia. Thanks for your work in assessing new articles. If you have any questions or problems about this particular article, I'm at your service. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Shashwat986 (talk) 06:14, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to discuss it with you, experts in removal, but User:Tagishsimon ignores the User talk page. I would not like to wage war of undos. Give we will discuss this question.--Andrey! 15:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am quite open to a discussion, and although I disagree with what Taghshsimon wrote, he is right about the article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so, the material you put as articles should be helpful to the readers. The note page is obviously not going to help many users. I suggest you make a blog, or a website for your notes, but Wikipedia is not the place for them.
Also, I would like you to continue making edits if you deem them to be useful for Wikipedia. Please think about the other readers before making such edits in the future. A few links that may help you are: What Wikipedia is not and Your first article. The russian articles are: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/ВП:ЧНЯВ and http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/ВП:СТАРТ. Feel free to contact me with any queries. I shall answer them the best I can. Shashwat986 (talk) 16:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer. If you look my contribution will recommend "Your one hundred first article". But we will talk about other: I have an opinion on tour in general as object. As you think where I could discuss it, but Portal Venue it is not visited by Users now. Will I be helped by Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment?--Andrey! 16:18, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, unfortunately, there is a No Original Research requirement for a Wikipedia article. So, you cannot post your views on the tour. If your view is also supported by a reliable external source, then you can mention it along with a reference to the source. You cannot put your views alone on the tour. Also, I didn't understand the second part of your question.
you can obviously ask at the Reference desk, but they won't mention anything different from the No Original Research point. Hope I helped! Shashwat986 (talk) 17:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will tell directly: I consider pertinent to give a general characteristic of music venues for article about any musical tour. It is a question at a size of notes.--Andrey! 17:28, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about the contents of the article should be on the article's talkpage ... "opinions" of any editor can never be included. That's what personal blogs are for. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:21, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have opinion that the music venue changes a concert tour essence, but thus concert tour does not change a music venue. At what here a blog?--Andrey! 17:28, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See, Since this is your opinion, it can not be put on Wikipedia. If you do want to tell the world about your opinion, you should start a website or a blog (for example http://www.blogger.com) and write it there.Shashwat986 (talk) 17:33, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I will return all notes about venues in Dire Straits tour article. After all except my opinion there are no others. The blog is not necessary to me.--Andrey! 17:44, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! :-)
Also, please make sure you give proper references for the notes you put. Shashwat986 (talk) 17:49, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And you saw what you marked to delete? There references more than text. Thanks.--Andrey! 17:57, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Notes" pages are contrary to good practice. Like I already said, discussions about what to include in an article belong on that article's talkpage, and nowhere else. As such, the notes page had to go (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

about that article's talkpage: Your opinion does not suitable - at music groups more tours and it is necessary to solve equally for all.--Andrey! 07:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have passed this question.--Andrey! 09:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

about "Notes" pages are contrary to good practice: In my opinion, this information is necessary to article. If you know other way I am ready to make so.--Andrey! 07:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See, it's very simple. You Cannot place uncited and unreferenced material on Wikipedia. If you add any material in a wikipedia article, it should also have the references from where you have taken it. If no references exist, you cannot put it in the article. That's it. Shashwat986 (talk) 09:18, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And you saw what you marked to delete? There references more than text. Thanks.--Andrey! 17:57, 5 March 2010 (UTC)--Andrey! 09:42, 6 March 2010 (UTC) Where you saw a material uncited and unreferenced material on Wikipedia placed by me? Why you write same the second time?--Andrey! 09:47, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I marked the 'Notes' page for speedy deletion under criteria G2 (test page), although it would have made more sense under criteria A3. This criteria is applicable when the page created has no content or only external links. At the time, your page had just a few headings and external links. The unreferenced material point was because of the note by Tagishsimon on your talk page and because of the doubt you asked me at the start of this discussion. Shashwat986 (talk) 21:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think Chippewa needs a way for the information to be shown, which hasn't been done on Wikipedia. Go to Talk:Chippewa Middle School, Shoreview, MN for more info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ratburntro44 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for keeping Wikipedia clean! I've done a little work on Rojas-Suarez' page and wanted to see if you would be willing to remove the clean-up tags. Most significantly, I've added citations for biographical details (and will try to go back and add a 'research' section that describes her most prominent work. I believe she satisfies notability under WP:ACADEMIC, and is certainly at par with other economists included in Wikipedia. Wrenelhai (talk) 17:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the relevant tags, but I believe you should provide more third-party references. Please look at WP:IRS for more details. Shashwat986 (talk) 18:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! When I have a little more time, I'll try to add that 'research' section, which should be better sourced. Wrenelhai (talk) 19:05, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No Worries. This is an experiment for a Digital Marketing class. As quickly as the page was created, the community is deleting it.

Crowdsourcing is an interesting phenomenon!

Cheers, Todd

I do not understand why you are doing it? As I have already discussed it on my talk page, I am making a detailed list of power stations in Iran, which does not exist on wikipedia (English). Please have patience till the process is complete and the data added gradually. I have added List of power stations in Iran, which did not exist on Wikipedia and all these pages, I am creating is related to that. Please do not waste my time by putting tags and messages which do not contribute towards betterment of the project. If you want to help, I suggest to help me add more data to articles by translation from Persian sources. Also please before issuing warnings go over my talk page, to what is going on here. I you have issue with the article, you can do two things, either improve them by helping me or discuss it on the talk page. Wikipedia was not built in one day.--Irooniqermez (talk) 19:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Firstly, I understand what you are doing, and that is why i have put a PROD tag. Anyone can remove a PROD tag from the page, even you. The PROD tag gives you seven days to add details to make the page compatible with Wikipedia standards. Secondly, as I mentioned in my tag, you are writing about proposed dams to be built in Iran. The fact that the proposed building of a dam is being studied, does not guarantee its being built. When you address these issues, or provide more details or secondary sources, anyone looking at the page will agree to the PROD Tag's removal, and you may remove it yourself. As of now, I believe I have tagged the page correctly. For more information, please check out the page: What Wikipedia is not. Thanks. Shashwat986 (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I also fully understand your point of view. Your are right about they may not be built, but dams are abit different, I believe. You can check Wikipedia and you will find thousands of examples of dams under study which have their own pages. The reason for that is: Dams are not like a house which if never built is considered not existent. The mere feasibility study of dam raises issues, ecological, social etc. That is why even dams which were once proposed and then cancelled, have their pages on wikipedia. The pages are going to be expanded in time. Right now the mere translation of the names of the dams is taking a while. I think it is not really practical to expect me to come up with 50K size pages for the dams off the bat, so to qualify for addition. 99% of all pages on wikipedia have very modest start, you can see it on their history. It is a community project, where every one contributes. Thank You.--Irooniqermez (talk) 20:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Beyond_a_Reasonable_Doubt_(Remake) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trumpetrep (talk • contribs) 18:46, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would respectfully request that you DO NOT start deleting and merging articles about which you are unfamiliar. Giant cell carcinoma is NOT considered a variant of large cell carcinoma any more. Neither is it related to, or a variant of, bronchioloalveolar carcinoma. I have plagiarized NOTHING. Your bot and your conclusions are in error. Please remove your deletion tags and ask an editor who knows something about the subject to look my stuff over and let he/she handle it. PLEASE.

Thank you.

Regards: Cliff L. Knickerbocker, MS (talk) 17:52, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Corporal R.V. Burgin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

BLP with only one external link.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 06:57, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This man is one vote away from being the next prime minister of the world`s 2nd largest economy. Kindly do not delete.andycjp (talk) 10:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, you have not given any references to support your claim, nor are any references mentioned in the article. Under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

Secondly, I don't think you can be sure he will be the next prime minister, and if you are, then either (a) he will have sufficient third-party citations, or (b) you can remake the article after he becomes prime minister. Thanks. Shashwat986 (talk) 10:35, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sourced. please read page.andycjp (talk) 10:38, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the reference clear. Please add as many details as possible, and soon, a senior editor or administrator shall decline the speedy deletion. Shashwat986 (talk) 10:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shashwat986, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Legislative Assembly of Assam, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: -db: A10 does not apply as it is a fair attempt to write a separate article on a subtopic. In genreal we certainly have articles on state legisalative bodies. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Tikiwont (talk) 08:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shashwat986, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Izuru Makihara, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The author has asserted importance, which is enough to pass A7. Let's see whether he can demonstrate it - if not, PROD or AfD. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 12:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All he has done, according to the references is give a quote to New York Times. Shashwat986 (talk) 15:39, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I don't think he's going to make it. I'm not criticising your A7 tag, but with the "hangon" the author said he was "a very important figure in Japanese politics", and to pass A7 only requires a credible assertion of importance. In fact it looks as if he's in the news because he commented on the political situation and several papers picked that up. I'll give it a day and then PROD if nothing more appears. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 21:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Shashwat986 (talk) 18:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about that? Pretend that you were taking a constructive approach instead: What changes would you suggest? Would a redirect work as an alternative? Do you understand and forsee all of the other possible usages and contexts for the term besides the ones I can list off the top of my head? -Stevertigo (w | t | e) 06:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, all the entries you have listed exist in the State disamb page. Also, if a user is searching for the entries, they are much more likely to type state than State information. Also, State information would more likely refer to information held by the State, where State refers to a governing authority, Sovereign or Federate. This definition would not actually require a Wikipedia article because it's a very specific term. For that matter, so is the definition you have stated. Thus, I think state information per se does not need a separate article, since State does suffice. Shashwat986 (talk) 09:29, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it your view that any redundancy is unacceptable? Aren't there cases where a concept or term might be a subordinate disambiguation of another ambiguous concept? Have you ever seen cases where other people add topics and information to disambiguations that you yourself have not considered in forethought? -Stevertigo (w | t | e) 09:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to How I Met Your Mother (season 6) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Logical Fuzz (talk) 16:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the text and put it in my own words. If you can, please check if it's appropriate now. Shashwat986 (talk) 17:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I did a little more rewording and changed the sentence structure a bit to separate it further from the source. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 18:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I edited Christian persecution and you marked it as vandalism and reverted it. I don't feel it was vandalism. Jews were singled out of the population. If a single religion is singled out, then it must have been another religion. Christianity was at the root of Nazism. It was a proper edit. I was going to go back and add in references. Maybe I should have done that first. Hitler said he was a Christian and wanted to make Germany a Christian nation. He was loved by his country people, not hated. Please see:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm http://atheism.about.com/od/adolfhitlernazigermany/p/NaziChristian.htm http://www.theturning.org/folder/nazis.html http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/Catholic/NaziCrosses.html http://atheism.about.com/od/adolfhitlernazigermany/Adolf_Hitler_Nazi_Germany_Christian_Nationalism_AntiSemitism.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_religious_beliefs

Hitler was a Christian but that is not the point because he is only 1 man, so there is no reason to debate it. It took the entire nation to support him to bring to power and allow him to kill millions of Jews. Hitler did not kill those Jews; citizens of Germany and other European nations did, even if they were ordered to. Most believed in Hitler. These are predominantly Christian countries. These were Christians persecuting Jews based on Religion. They did not argue with the orders because of pre-existing anti-semitism.

Safeerladha (talk) 04:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC) Safeer[reply]

Hitler called himself an Aryan. Also, the article deals with persecution of the Christians, and not the Christians persecuting the Jews. So, your paragraph would be more accurate in the Persecution of Jews article. Also, the Nazis are already mentioned in that article. Shashwat986 (talk) 02:41, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reading this article Hotel Gate One Bratislava. The property is noteworthy because of the architectural price nomination. I tried to avoid all superlatives, that could not proved by citations and I was corrected after submiting the text by another editor, so it looks even better now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riso (talk • contribs) 10:04, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Shashwat986. Edited a bit at Steffen Larsen. Please don't for one second think I'm treading on your toes - just clarifying - still fully support the #A7. --Shirt58 (talk) 14:05, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the speedy on this (I'm not an admin, but anyone can remove speedy tags) because the article does make some claim to notability. Feel free to take it to AfD, though; I'm not sure whether or not it meets WP:GNG. It does make enough of a claim to get it past A7, but don't worry; I saw the state of the article when you tagged it, and it was definitely a borderline A7 then. Ater you tagged it, someone added a reference and a little more information, so it now passes A7. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Shashwat986 (talk) 07:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Shashwat986! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:14, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyeswikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:39, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys!

Thanks to all of you who have commented on the New Page Triage talkpage. If you haven't had a chance yet, check it out; we're discussing some pretty interesting ideas, both from the Foundation and the community, and moving towards implementing quite a few of them :).

In addition, on Tuesday 13th March, we're holding an office hours session in #wikimedia-office on IRC at 19:00 UTC (11am Pacific time). If you can make it, please do; we'll have a lot of stuff to show you and talk about, including (hopefully) a timetable of when we're planning to do what. If you can't come, for whatever reason, let me know on my talkpage and I'm happy to send you the logs so you can get an idea of what happened :). Regards, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all!

Thanks to everyone who attended our first office hours session; the logs can be found here, if you missed it, and we should be holding a second one on Thursday, 22 March 2012 at 18:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. I hope to see you all there :).

In the meantime, I have greatly expanded the details available at Wikipedia:New Page Triage: there's a lot more info about precisely what we're planning. If you have ideas, and they aren't listed there, bring them up and I'll pass them on to the developers for consideration in the second sprint. And if you know anyone who might be interested in contributing, send them there too!

Regards, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 00:22, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys.

I appreciate this isn't quite what you signed up for, but I figured as people who are already pretty good at evaluating whether material is useful or not useful through Special:NewPages, you might be interested :). Over the last few months we've been developing the new Article Feedback Tool, which features a free text box. it is imperative that we work out in advance what proportion of feedback is useful or not so we can adjust the design accordingly and not overwhelm you with nonsense.

This is being done through the Feedback Evaluation System (FES), a tool that lets editors run through a stream of comments, selecting their value and viability, so we know what type of design should be promoted or avoided. We're about to start a new round of evaluations, beginning with an office hours session tomorrow at 18:00 UTC. If you'd like to help preemptively kill poor feedback, come along to #wikimedia-office and we'll show you how to use the tool. If you can't make it, send me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org or drop a note on my talkpage, and I'm happy to give you a quick walkthrough in a one-on-one session :).

All the best, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Big update on what the developers have been working on, and what is coming up:

coding

• Fixes for the "moved pages do not show up in Special:NewPages" and "pages created from redirects do not show up in Special:NewPages" bugs have been completed and signed off on. Unfortunately we won't be able to integrate them into the existing version, but they will be worked into the Page Triage interface.
• Coding has been completed on three elements; the API for displaying metadata about the article in the "list view", the ability to keep the "patrol" button visible if you edit an article before patrolling it, and the automatic removal of deleted pages from the queue. All three are awaiting testing but otherwise complete.

All other elements are either undergoing research, or about to have development started. I appreciate this sounds like we've not got through much work, and truthfully we're a bit disappointed with it as well; we thought we'd be going at a faster pace :(. Unfortunately there seems to be some 24-72 hour bug sweeping the San Francisco office at the moment, and at one time or another we've had several devs out of it. It's kind of messed with workflow.

Stuff to look at

We've got a pair of new mockups to comment on that deal with the filtering mechanism; this is a slightly updated mockup of the list view, and this is what the filtering tab is going to look like. All thoughts, comments and suggestions welcome on the NPT talkpage :). I'd also like to thank the people who came to our last two office hours sessions; the logs will be shortly available here.

I've also just heard that the first functional prototype for enwiki will be deployed mid-April! Really, really stoked to see this happening :). We're finding out if we can stick something up a bit sooner on prototype.wiki or something.

I appreciate there may be questions or suggestions where I've said "I'll find out and get back to you" and then, uh. not ;p. I sincerely apologise for that: things have been a bit hectic at this end over the last few weeks. But if you've got anything I've missed, drop me a line and I'll deal with it! Further questions or issues to the usual address. Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 17:08, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Shashwat986 :). A quick update on how things are going with the New Page Triage/New Pages Feed project. As the enwiki page notes, the project is divided into two chunks: the "list view" (essentially an updated version of Special:NewPages) and the "article view", a view you'll be presented with when you open up individual articles that contains a toolbar with lots of options to interact with the page - patrolling it, adding maintenance tags, nominating it for deletion, so on.

On the list view front, we're pretty much done! We tried deploying it to enwiki, in line with our Engagement Strategy on Wednesday, but ran into bugs and had to reschedule - the same happened on Thursday :(. We've queued a new deployment for Monday PST, and hopefully that one will go better. If it does, the software will be ready to play around with and test by the following week! :).

On the article view front, the developers are doing some fantastic work designing the toolbar, which we're calling the "curation bar"; you can see a mockup here. A stripped-down version of this should be ready to deploy fairly soon after the list view is; I'm afraid I don't have precise dates yet. When I have more info, or can unleash everyone to test the list view, I'll let you know :). As always, any questions to the talkpage for the project or mine. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:27, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Shashwat986! We've finally finished the NPT prototype and deployed it on enwiki. We'll be holding an office hours session on the 16th at 21:00 in #wikimedia-office to show it off, get feedback and plot future developments - hope to see you there! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 03:34, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.

The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:19, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all. Some quick but important updates on what we've been up to and what's coming up next :).

The curation toolbar, our Wikimedia-supported twinkle replacement. We're going to be deploying it, along with a pile of bugfixes, to wikipedia on 9 August. After a few days to check it doesn't make anything explode or die, we'll be sticking up a big notice and sending out an additional newsletter inviting people to test it out and give us feedback :). This will be followed by two office hours sessions - one on Tuesday the 14th of August at 19:00 UTC for all us Europeans, and one on Wednesday the 15th at 23:00 UTC for the East Coasters out there :). As always, these will be held in #wikimedia-office; drop me a note if you want to know how to easily get on IRC, or if you aren't able to attend but would like the logs.

I hope to see a lot of you there; it's going to be a big day for everyone involved, I think :). I'll have more notes after the deployment! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:59, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all :)

A couple of new things.

First, you'll note that all the project titles have now changed to the Page Curation prefix, rather than having the New Pages Feed prefix. This is because the overarching project name has changed to Page Curation; the feed is still known as New Pages Feed, and the Curation Toolbar is still the Curation Toolbar. Hopefully this will be the last namechange ;p.

On the subject of the Curation Toolbar (nice segue, Oliver!) - it's now deployed on Wikipedia. Just open up any article in the New Pages Feed and it should appear on the right. It's still a beta version - bugs are expected - and we've got a lot more work to do. But if you see something going wrong, or a feature missing, drop me a note or post on the project talkpage and I'll be happy to help :). We'll be holding two office hours sessions to discuss the tool and improvements to it; the first is at 19:00 UTC on 14 August, and the second at 23:00 on the 15th. Both will be in #wikimedia-office as always. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 15:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all :). We've just deployed another set of features for Page Curation. They include flyouts from the icons in Special:NewPagesFeed, showing who reviewed an article and when, a listing of this in the "info" flyout, and a general re-jigging of the info flyout - we've also fixed the weird bug with page_titles_having_underscores_instead_of_spaces in messages sent to talkpages, and introduced CSD logging! As always, these features will need some work - but any feedback would be most welcome.

If you look at the original version of Amidoxime that I created, you'll notice that it's just a redirect to a subsection of another article.

Someone else (an anonymous editor) came along later and converted it to a "real" article.... but because I'm the supposed "creator" I can't revert to the original version as I'm not allowed to remove the speedy(!) tag.

Please restore this article to the original redirect, cheers. Ubcule (talk) 20:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems to be solved now. :-)

Hey Shashwat986. This will be, if not our final newsletter, one of the final ones :). After months of churning away at this project, our final version (apart from a few tweaks and bugfixes) is now live. Changes between this and the last release include deletion tag logging, a centralised log, and fixes to things like edit summaries.

Hopefully you like what we've done with the place; suggestions for future work on it, complaints and bugs to the usual address :). We'll be holding a couple of office hours sessions, which I hope you'll all attend. Many thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all :).

We're (very shortly) closing down this development cycle for Page Curation. It's genuinely been a pleasure to talk with you all and build software that is so close to my own heart, and also so effective. The current backlog is 9 days, and I've never seen it that low before.

However! Closing up shop does not mean not making any improvements. First-off, this is your last chance to give us a poke about unresolved bugs or report new ones on the talkpage. If something's going wrong, we want to know about it :). Second, we'll hopefully be taking another pass over the software next year. If you've got ideas for features Page Curation doesn't currently have, stick them here.

Again, it's been an honour. Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:06, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a tribute.

Anyway. You're getting this note because you've participated in discussion and/or asked for updates to either the Article Feedback Tool or Page Curation. This isn't about either of those things, I'm afraid ;p. We've recently started working on yet another project: Echo, a notifications system to augment the watchlist. There's not much information at the moment, because we're still working out the scope and the concepts, but if you're interested in further updates you can sign up here.

In addition, we'll be holding an office hours session at 21:00 UTC on Wednesday, 14 November in #wikimedia-office - hope to see you all there :). I appreciate it's an annoying time for non-Europeans: if you're interested in chatting about the project but can't make it, give me a shout and I can set up another session if there's enough interest in one particular timezone or a skype call if there isn't. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:20, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

It seems that this article has already been deleted. Quick work!

Ritchie is an author who wrote many (maybe more than 50) books. I came across him when I noticed that he co-authored a book with Earl Derr Biggers, another writer. I could not find much information about him on the net other than his birth and death dates. In the past I have started these stubs and watched them advance with the work of others who know something of the subject. See, for example, Alice Askew. At least I provided a reference for the work which I did on him. He can be deleted as far as I am concerned, but you seem to have been very quick on the trigger. Collywolly.

Hey Collywolly. I did not mean to remove an article that was noteworthy. It's just that when I saw the article, I felt that it wasn't notable enough. Note, I'm not an administrator, and I don't have the power to delete the article. All I did was give my opinion that this article doesn't satisfy the notability criteria. An administrator agreed and deleted the article. I feel the best way to make sure an article not entirely researched stays is by using either the 'Contest speedy deletion' button after a speedy deletion, start the article as a subpage in your user page, or use one of the {{newpage}}, {{In use}} or {{Under Construction}} templates. Shashwat986 → talk 15:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

This page was created by me. However, my friend who is a relative of the Person and knows closely is currently editing the page and collecting all the relevant details. Meanwhile, let us know how to validate something that doesn't exist on internet and is being created by us from start.

Thanks!

Hi Sarku, I do know what you mean. However, and probably unfortunately, wikipedia is not the path you want to take for this article. Wikipedia is very strict about third-party references. The correct way to get an article on Mr. Natarajan into wikipedia is to get details about him in proper citations, for example news articles, or award pages. The PROD tag on the page gives you roughly 10 days to find relevant third-party sources. If you feel there aren't any as of now, I'd recommend you delete the article or move it to your userspace for the time being, and re-create it on the main wikispace when there are reliable sources. Feel free to contact me if you have any other queries. Shashwat986 → talk 15:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hi, we have a reference for mr. sankaran natarajan. Please refer the offical link, http://www.sify.com/movies/kj-yesudas-achieves-a-rare-feat-imagegallery-kollywood-mkepSwabgdc.html http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-10-04/news-interviews/34239905_1_film-industry-k-j-yesudas-rare-feat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganthimathinatha (talk • contribs) 09:38, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please go through the Wikipedia General Notability Guidelines. Mr. Natarajan's name is just mentioned in the articles. They don't talk about him, and in fact mention that he's a debutante, which means he definitely isn't notable enough as yet. There is no more information about Mr. Natarajan. The sources you have provided will not work for this article. However, the simplest thing to do now is to state your case on the AfD page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natarajan Sankaran. I'm not in charge of deleting a page. It needs to get votes by other editors to keep or delete, and then per the deletion discussion, an administrator will make the decision. Shashwat986 → talk 10:43, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shash - noticed you've speedied the above, which the author is contesting, whilst admitting its about himself! Anyway, just a heads up - he's also now submitted another similarly iffy article: Danielle's subway. All the best, Plutonium27 (talk) 18:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC) - Quick work! Nice one. Ta, Plutonium27 (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You know, if you believe there's an article that can be speedied, you can do it yourself. Shashwat986 → talk 04:45, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just realised that, having read through the procedure. Thanks. Plutonium27 (talk) 18:57, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Shashwat986

Waleed dilawar is one of the youngest one's in pakistan to get cpanel and whm LINUX certification and has been on media too. so why removing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aneelperv (talk • contribs) 14:20, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't removed it. I'm nominating it for deletion, because it is my opinion that he isn't notable enough to have a wikipedia page. A discussion on whether this should be deleted or not is ongoing at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Waleed_Dilawar_Chughtai and you are invited to join in. Any decision taken will be taken by the admins after discussion with the community. Please STOP removing the template. That is blatantly ignoring the rules of Wikipedia, and won't stop your article from being discussed for deletion. Shashwat986 → talk 15:31, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are prop with regards. True day. --Suksessingerplaatz (talk) 19:48, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 19:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shashwat986,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Plantdrew (talk) 04:27, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to KreditBee. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to LendingKart. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:57, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]