On Talk:Sino-Indian War, an IP user (check the history) has been going on about India's Rape of Goa and keeps posting links to Goan seperatist websites. He also goes on about Indian bullying of Sikkim and Bhutan and his words, despite being irrelevant, remain on the talk page, sending viewers of the talk page to Free Goa websites. How does one deal with this? Traing 02:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- It is the free encyclopedia and some people think that they are free to post any materials they want to post. Perhaps they fail to understand the encyclopedic nature of this Wikipedia. Over a period of time, such editors understand the futility of their useless contributions, and go of their own or are driven out. As such, please don't worry much - the time will take care of such editors, if your assessment is about that IP user is correct. I don't find any need to become unduly wary of such edits. Please continue to add value to the project. Thanks. -- Bhadani ( talk) 02:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- Copy of my reply to an e-mail
Hi ...,
I thank you for your suggestions.
I was not aware that the turnout is so poor and I am unable to understand the reason for the same. It means that the largest and most active wikipedia, English Wikipedia's influence on the Board id decreasing! This is not a good sign perhaps though I am not sure.
I have not exercised my vote as I am remaining mostly inactive for last several months and I find that a lot of time is wasted on English Wikipedia to discuss useless issues.
I have migrated to Wikias where I am doing regular edits for last several months.
In case, I feel like voting I may vote.
I once again thank you for reminding.
With warm regards.
Bhadani
Hi Bhadani, it appears that you have not yet voted in the current Wikimedia board election, although you appear to be eligible to vote.
There are many reasons why it is very important that YOU vote in this election. The board is responsible for oversight and direction of the Wikimedia projects, including fundraising, defining the mission, and determining foundation-wide policies, so though it does not have direct input into English Wikipedia day-to-day policy, you still are affected by what they choose to do.
The election process is simple, and because it uses approval voting, you don't have to figure out who is best; you simply need to select all candidates who are acceptable.
You can find out more about the election at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/en
The election closes at 23:59 on Saturday, July 7, 2007 (UTC, don't let the timezone catch you off guard!). That means you still have time to participate, although with thousands of words written in question and answer pages it will probably take you a little time to build a fair assessment of the candidates, so you should start looking now.
You can read the candidate statements at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Candidates/en and each candidate has as Question/Answer page linked from their statements.
Bhadani, it is critically important that you participate in this process.
As it stands right now substantially less than 16% of all eligible and recently active voters on English Wikipedia have participated in the election process. This is a lower turnout than previous years although enwiki has always had poor voter turnout.
Low turnout makes the election process dramatically more vulnerable to several types of bias; for example, people with strong emotions and potentially unreasonable feelings about the candidates are more likely to participate without encouragement. The impact of sockpuppets, small-POV groups, and parties with any personal or financial interests in the outcome is greater when turnout is low, because these parties will tend to cast a fixed number of votes.
Regardless of the election outcome, low turnout from English Wikipedia also sends the wrong message to the board. English Wikipedia is by far the largest Wikimedia community, and English Wikipedia has, by far, the largest readership. While it is very important that other Wikimedia projects be well supported and understood by the board, the importance of English Wikipedia should not be understated.
There are organized campaigns to increase turnout from some of the other projects, and the result appears that English Wikipedia's influence and interest in Wikimedia is far less than it actually is.
Even if you do not have an opinion on the outcome of the election, even if you think that all candidates are acceptable or that all are unacceptable, you can and should still vote. We use approval voting, and you can cast a vote approving everyone or even a vote approving no one. Neither of these two options will influence the direct outcome of the election, but both will still add to the total count of English Wikipedia voters and both will send the message that our project is important and involved.
OK. Thanks for your suggestions. I decided to vote and it may look a bit bizarre and childish to declare that : I voted for: Mindspillage (Kathleen Walsh) -- Bhadani ( talk) 16:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Childish and bizarre as no one generally talks about secret voting. I may add that I also respect all other candidates and wish them the best in the election. -- Bhadani ( talk) 16:46, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Could you please contribute to the discussion at [1], to resolve the ongoing dispute regarding Aryan migration theory/OIT related issues. Sbhushan 17:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sbhushan. Thank you for your kind message. I feel that my comments shall serve no useful purpose as I have discounted an editor from my mind completely with whom you are having discussion. I regret. Thanks and regards. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I am not able to relate to your second note. Can you point me to a specific thing that I did. Sbhushan 17:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Oh. Perhaps there was a communication gap - it was a general comment and I have never seen you doing anything improper. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Cheers! -- Bhadani ( talk) 18:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Take a shit break Bhadani. You badly need it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.111.87.20 ( talk • contribs) of 06.07.07
- Thank you for your suggestion - I am already on a long wiki-break [2] for last one year. Regards. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that there was no article about the book Attack of the Smart Pies so I was just about to create one when I noticed that a page with that name had recently been deleted. So I came over here to ask you why you deleted that page. Is it because Wikipedia should not have an article about it, or because the article was poorly written? - E2MB the museblogger 22:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Did I delete the page? - Bhadan's logs. I request you to please give me the particular link indicating the particular deletion you are talking about to enable me to reply to your query. I do believe that the page you are talking about should normally be a part of wikipedia - poor articles unless they tantamounts to nonsense is no cause for deletion, I believe. Cheers! -- Bhadani ( talk) 10:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Gizza Discuss © 02:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- "Black is believed to be a color of silence and concealing. Yet, the color sometimes "talks" even more eloquently than any other tone. We obtain black color when we mix various colors. Similarly, when our mind has various, complex feelings, perhaps our mind becomes like a melting pot, mixing diverse items, and then our feelings become darker and darker until they all become pure black color." [3]
Could you check Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology and the talk page and the history page and tell should campus recruitment be entered or not?. I have deleted campus recruitment many times and this person Tusk4all and 1 ip edit keep reverting it. The reason why i delete was it is a usual college marketing and wikipedia is not the place for marketing. Has wikipedia is a encyclopedia. I will be waiting for your response in NSIT talk page and settle down this fights whether to keep the campus recruitment or not in the article. -- SkyWalker 08:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps there is nothing about campus recruitment in one of the featured articles relating to the leading engineering institutions of India - Indian Institutes of Technology. Any one having even a little idea about the IITs must be aware of their brand values and the companies they draw for campus recruitment. Drawing a lesson from this featured article, I think that pages relating to colleges should not normally have any detailed information about campus recruitment. Our users may go to the website of particular college to learn more about the campus recruitment. -- Bhadani ( talk) 15:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
This category is again nominated for discussion at user categories for discussion. Since you contributed to the last discussion, you may wish to say something in the current one, which was started on 8 July 2007. This is a courtesy notice I'll be leaving for everyone who contributed in the last UCFD nomination and not in the current one. BigNate37 (T) 13:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi Bhadani! I had a quick question about the comments you left on the talk page of Krekka jack. I was on there to leave the user a standard template warning about vandalism, and I noticed you had deviated from the template to say 'Please do not do idiotic edits as you did at Eugene La being deleted by me right now' and 'And, don't try to take shelter of being a new editor - you are really foolish as you don't understand why you have been given the privilege to edit.' I was wondering if this harsher language might violate WP:AGF and WP:Don't bite the newbies, and why you chose to give this instead of a standard vandalism warning? Thanks! Eliz81 15:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed harsher language as suggested by you. However, in my opinion, WP:AGF and WP:Don't bite the newbies preclude certain elements who come to wikipedia for fun and to do vandalism - if you are able to see the deleted page than you will understand the reason for the harsher language. Sometime, one has to ignore rules to protect the integrity of wikipedia. I am aware that a number of our policies are favourable towards vandals and so called new editors - to the extent that several real editors have left wikipedia due to these policies. Assume Good faith presumes edits done to value add wikipedia and not to make fun of the editing privileges and to vandalize wikipedia. I think that I have made my stand clear. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Now, I understand more clearly the reasons of editors saying final good bye to wikipedia: rules are to protect the integrity of wikipedia and not to defend the vandals and freaks. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Bhadani, thanks for your comments, and thank you for changing the comments on the user's talk page. I understand completely how frustrating it is to deal with mindless vandalism, time and time again. The frequency and persistence of some vandals can be quite daunting, and some vandalizing edits are truly vitriolic and horrifying to read. I certainly don't advocate defending 'vandals and freaks', but I personally prefer to stick to template warnings, since it standardizes the process. I'm afraid that personal note chastising sometimes only eggs these people on more, who are looking for attention and confirmation that they have caused a level of irritation and/or destruction. And I *absolutely* assumed good faith, which is why I asked you about your choice of words. It doesn't take much poking around to see that you've been a longstanding valuable editor and administrator here. Without your efforts, Wikipedia wouldn't be as valuable a resource as it is. Don't let the vandals get you down!
Eliz81 18:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
-
Friends :) --
Bhadani (
talk) 18:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- I'll bring the cake if you bring the ice cream!! :) Eliz81 18:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
-
Friends :) --
Bhadani (
talk) 18:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
wikipedia networking -- Bhadani ( talk) 18:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
This user created a (while admittedly amusing) page that chronicles the life of a fictitious whore named Christina Moon. Beside the point though. I've nominated this page for speedy deletion, along with two other users (counting you), though the page's creator repeated removed these, replacing them with "Good Article" tags. I have reported him to WP:AIAV, though without response. I would ask that you would take some step here, such as blocking the user, or protecting the page until the appropriate deletion takes place. Thank you, †Ðanieltiger45† Talk to meas 14:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps the user may be new and not fully aware of the type of contents to be put here. I think we should watch more edits from that user before deciding anything serious. Thanks. -- Bhadani ( talk) 14:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Bhandani, I updated the potential Wikindia logo per your suggestions. Check out your User talk over at Wikindia for more details. If there's any changes or additions (i.e. text, picture, etc.), please let me know. Thanks, — Curran ( talk | contibs | random) 16:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- Just replied on your WI talk page. —
Curran (
talk |
contibs |
random) 18:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- More thanks. -- Bhadani ( talk) 22:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
How about adding orange and white or black and white :D -- SkyWalker 17:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
- I will try. Thank you. --
Bhadani (
talk) 17:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
- Look bright and sharp. :) -- SkyWalker 17:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I started the Anthroponymy WikiProject. It's a long word but it basically means the study of human names. Since you have showed some interest in name articles, I thought you might be interested in this. Remember 20:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Khushab and Khushab District merge
It seems that Khushab should perhaps be merged into Khushab District. I've tagged both accordingly, but since I've never proposed a merge before and know nothing about the subject matter of these articles, I thought I'd drop a note here, since you've edited at least one of them. - Special-T 21:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your message. I didn't lof for few days and so saw the message moments before. In case, both pages relate to the district named Khushab District and the former (Khushab) is not a town or the district headquarters, you may merge the pages, the easiest way shall be to transfer the contents of Khushab page to the Khushab District page, and making a re-direction link from Khushab page to the Khushab District page. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi there man. Hope you're in good cheer and good Wikipedia mood. :) I see that you've been editing in a variety of topics since I last checked you. Keep up the work. Myself, I've been restricted to a few spheres (mainly military history and political) in Wikipedia because of several reasons. The thing is, an article Atlantique Incident has been nominated for FA status by a Pakistani Wikipedian, and nobody seems to have given any further suggestions/comments/vote save myself. So I'd be glad if you can chip in with the process if it's not too much to bother you. Thanks. -- Idleguy 03:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your message. I find the article good and full of potentials to become FA. However, subject is rather difficult and requires more development perhaps. I have toned down my commitments to wikipedia for the time being though I am confident to step up my activities shortly. Regards. -- Bhadani ( talk) 16:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
This is a request from a common user. The entry Frontline (Magazine) is being repeatedly vandalized by this user: 59.145.142.36 (IP). The user doesn't deign it fit to thrash out the issue in the discussion pages. I request you to either block further editing of the page or block the user, whatever is deemed fit according to the rules of Wikipedia. Thanks (Vrsrini)
On Talk:Sino-Indian War, an IP user (check the history) has been going on about India's Rape of Goa and keeps posting links to Goan seperatist websites. He also goes on about Indian bullying of Sikkim and Bhutan and his words, despite being irrelevant, remain on the talk page, sending viewers of the talk page to Free Goa websites. How does one deal with this? Traing 02:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- It is the free encyclopedia and some people think that they are free to post any materials they want to post. Perhaps they fail to understand the encyclopedic nature of this Wikipedia. Over a period of time, such editors understand the futility of their useless contributions, and go of their own or are driven out. As such, please don't worry much - the time will take care of such editors, if your assessment is about that IP user is correct. I don't find any need to become unduly wary of such edits. Please continue to add value to the project. Thanks. -- Bhadani ( talk) 02:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- Copy of my reply to an e-mail
Hi ...,
I thank you for your suggestions.
I was not aware that the turnout is so poor and I am unable to understand the reason for the same. It means that the largest and most active wikipedia, English Wikipedia's influence on the Board id decreasing! This is not a good sign perhaps though I am not sure.
I have not exercised my vote as I am remaining mostly inactive for last several months and I find that a lot of time is wasted on English Wikipedia to discuss useless issues.
I have migrated to Wikias where I am doing regular edits for last several months.
In case, I feel like voting I may vote.
I once again thank you for reminding.
With warm regards.
Bhadani
Hi Bhadani, it appears that you have not yet voted in the current Wikimedia board election, although you appear to be eligible to vote.
There are many reasons why it is very important that YOU vote in this election. The board is responsible for oversight and direction of the Wikimedia projects, including fundraising, defining the mission, and determining foundation-wide policies, so though it does not have direct input into English Wikipedia day-to-day policy, you still are affected by what they choose to do.
The election process is simple, and because it uses approval voting, you don't have to figure out who is best; you simply need to select all candidates who are acceptable.
You can find out more about the election at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/en
The election closes at 23:59 on Saturday, July 7, 2007 (UTC, don't let the timezone catch you off guard!). That means you still have time to participate, although with thousands of words written in question and answer pages it will probably take you a little time to build a fair assessment of the candidates, so you should start looking now.
You can read the candidate statements at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Candidates/en and each candidate has as Question/Answer page linked from their statements.
Bhadani, it is critically important that you participate in this process.
As it stands right now substantially less than 16% of all eligible and recently active voters on English Wikipedia have participated in the election process. This is a lower turnout than previous years although enwiki has always had poor voter turnout.
Low turnout makes the election process dramatically more vulnerable to several types of bias; for example, people with strong emotions and potentially unreasonable feelings about the candidates are more likely to participate without encouragement. The impact of sockpuppets, small-POV groups, and parties with any personal or financial interests in the outcome is greater when turnout is low, because these parties will tend to cast a fixed number of votes.
Regardless of the election outcome, low turnout from English Wikipedia also sends the wrong message to the board. English Wikipedia is by far the largest Wikimedia community, and English Wikipedia has, by far, the largest readership. While it is very important that other Wikimedia projects be well supported and understood by the board, the importance of English Wikipedia should not be understated.
There are organized campaigns to increase turnout from some of the other projects, and the result appears that English Wikipedia's influence and interest in Wikimedia is far less than it actually is.
Even if you do not have an opinion on the outcome of the election, even if you think that all candidates are acceptable or that all are unacceptable, you can and should still vote. We use approval voting, and you can cast a vote approving everyone or even a vote approving no one. Neither of these two options will influence the direct outcome of the election, but both will still add to the total count of English Wikipedia voters and both will send the message that our project is important and involved.
OK. Thanks for your suggestions. I decided to vote and it may look a bit bizarre and childish to declare that : I voted for: Mindspillage (Kathleen Walsh) -- Bhadani ( talk) 16:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Childish and bizarre as no one generally talks about secret voting. I may add that I also respect all other candidates and wish them the best in the election. -- Bhadani ( talk) 16:46, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Could you please contribute to the discussion at [1], to resolve the ongoing dispute regarding Aryan migration theory/OIT related issues. Sbhushan 17:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sbhushan. Thank you for your kind message. I feel that my comments shall serve no useful purpose as I have discounted an editor from my mind completely with whom you are having discussion. I regret. Thanks and regards. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I am not able to relate to your second note. Can you point me to a specific thing that I did. Sbhushan 17:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Oh. Perhaps there was a communication gap - it was a general comment and I have never seen you doing anything improper. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Cheers! -- Bhadani ( talk) 18:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Take a shit break Bhadani. You badly need it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.111.87.20 ( talk • contribs) of 06.07.07
- Thank you for your suggestion - I am already on a long wiki-break [2] for last one year. Regards. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that there was no article about the book Attack of the Smart Pies so I was just about to create one when I noticed that a page with that name had recently been deleted. So I came over here to ask you why you deleted that page. Is it because Wikipedia should not have an article about it, or because the article was poorly written? - E2MB the museblogger 22:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Did I delete the page? - Bhadan's logs. I request you to please give me the particular link indicating the particular deletion you are talking about to enable me to reply to your query. I do believe that the page you are talking about should normally be a part of wikipedia - poor articles unless they tantamounts to nonsense is no cause for deletion, I believe. Cheers! -- Bhadani ( talk) 10:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Gizza Discuss © 02:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- "Black is believed to be a color of silence and concealing. Yet, the color sometimes "talks" even more eloquently than any other tone. We obtain black color when we mix various colors. Similarly, when our mind has various, complex feelings, perhaps our mind becomes like a melting pot, mixing diverse items, and then our feelings become darker and darker until they all become pure black color." [3]
Could you check Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology and the talk page and the history page and tell should campus recruitment be entered or not?. I have deleted campus recruitment many times and this person Tusk4all and 1 ip edit keep reverting it. The reason why i delete was it is a usual college marketing and wikipedia is not the place for marketing. Has wikipedia is a encyclopedia. I will be waiting for your response in NSIT talk page and settle down this fights whether to keep the campus recruitment or not in the article. -- SkyWalker 08:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps there is nothing about campus recruitment in one of the featured articles relating to the leading engineering institutions of India - Indian Institutes of Technology. Any one having even a little idea about the IITs must be aware of their brand values and the companies they draw for campus recruitment. Drawing a lesson from this featured article, I think that pages relating to colleges should not normally have any detailed information about campus recruitment. Our users may go to the website of particular college to learn more about the campus recruitment. -- Bhadani ( talk) 15:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
This category is again nominated for discussion at user categories for discussion. Since you contributed to the last discussion, you may wish to say something in the current one, which was started on 8 July 2007. This is a courtesy notice I'll be leaving for everyone who contributed in the last UCFD nomination and not in the current one. BigNate37 (T) 13:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi Bhadani! I had a quick question about the comments you left on the talk page of Krekka jack. I was on there to leave the user a standard template warning about vandalism, and I noticed you had deviated from the template to say 'Please do not do idiotic edits as you did at Eugene La being deleted by me right now' and 'And, don't try to take shelter of being a new editor - you are really foolish as you don't understand why you have been given the privilege to edit.' I was wondering if this harsher language might violate WP:AGF and WP:Don't bite the newbies, and why you chose to give this instead of a standard vandalism warning? Thanks! Eliz81 15:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed harsher language as suggested by you. However, in my opinion, WP:AGF and WP:Don't bite the newbies preclude certain elements who come to wikipedia for fun and to do vandalism - if you are able to see the deleted page than you will understand the reason for the harsher language. Sometime, one has to ignore rules to protect the integrity of wikipedia. I am aware that a number of our policies are favourable towards vandals and so called new editors - to the extent that several real editors have left wikipedia due to these policies. Assume Good faith presumes edits done to value add wikipedia and not to make fun of the editing privileges and to vandalize wikipedia. I think that I have made my stand clear. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Now, I understand more clearly the reasons of editors saying final good bye to wikipedia: rules are to protect the integrity of wikipedia and not to defend the vandals and freaks. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Bhadani, thanks for your comments, and thank you for changing the comments on the user's talk page. I understand completely how frustrating it is to deal with mindless vandalism, time and time again. The frequency and persistence of some vandals can be quite daunting, and some vandalizing edits are truly vitriolic and horrifying to read. I certainly don't advocate defending 'vandals and freaks', but I personally prefer to stick to template warnings, since it standardizes the process. I'm afraid that personal note chastising sometimes only eggs these people on more, who are looking for attention and confirmation that they have caused a level of irritation and/or destruction. And I *absolutely* assumed good faith, which is why I asked you about your choice of words. It doesn't take much poking around to see that you've been a longstanding valuable editor and administrator here. Without your efforts, Wikipedia wouldn't be as valuable a resource as it is. Don't let the vandals get you down!
Eliz81 18:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
-
Friends :) --
Bhadani (
talk) 18:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- I'll bring the cake if you bring the ice cream!! :) Eliz81 18:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
-
Friends :) --
Bhadani (
talk) 18:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
wikipedia networking -- Bhadani ( talk) 18:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
This user created a (while admittedly amusing) page that chronicles the life of a fictitious whore named Christina Moon. Beside the point though. I've nominated this page for speedy deletion, along with two other users (counting you), though the page's creator repeated removed these, replacing them with "Good Article" tags. I have reported him to WP:AIAV, though without response. I would ask that you would take some step here, such as blocking the user, or protecting the page until the appropriate deletion takes place. Thank you, †Ðanieltiger45† Talk to meas 14:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps the user may be new and not fully aware of the type of contents to be put here. I think we should watch more edits from that user before deciding anything serious. Thanks. -- Bhadani ( talk) 14:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Bhandani, I updated the potential Wikindia logo per your suggestions. Check out your User talk over at Wikindia for more details. If there's any changes or additions (i.e. text, picture, etc.), please let me know. Thanks, — Curran ( talk | contibs | random) 16:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- Just replied on your WI talk page. —
Curran (
talk |
contibs |
random) 18:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- More thanks. -- Bhadani ( talk) 22:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
How about adding orange and white or black and white :D -- SkyWalker 17:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
- I will try. Thank you. --
Bhadani (
talk) 17:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
- Look bright and sharp. :) -- SkyWalker 17:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I started the Anthroponymy WikiProject. It's a long word but it basically means the study of human names. Since you have showed some interest in name articles, I thought you might be interested in this. Remember 20:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Khushab and Khushab District merge
It seems that Khushab should perhaps be merged into Khushab District. I've tagged both accordingly, but since I've never proposed a merge before and know nothing about the subject matter of these articles, I thought I'd drop a note here, since you've edited at least one of them. - Special-T 21:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your message. I didn't lof for few days and so saw the message moments before. In case, both pages relate to the district named Khushab District and the former (Khushab) is not a town or the district headquarters, you may merge the pages, the easiest way shall be to transfer the contents of Khushab page to the Khushab District page, and making a re-direction link from Khushab page to the Khushab District page. -- Bhadani ( talk) 17:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi there man. Hope you're in good cheer and good Wikipedia mood. :) I see that you've been editing in a variety of topics since I last checked you. Keep up the work. Myself, I've been restricted to a few spheres (mainly military history and political) in Wikipedia because of several reasons. The thing is, an article Atlantique Incident has been nominated for FA status by a Pakistani Wikipedian, and nobody seems to have given any further suggestions/comments/vote save myself. So I'd be glad if you can chip in with the process if it's not too much to bother you. Thanks. -- Idleguy 03:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your message. I find the article good and full of potentials to become FA. However, subject is rather difficult and requires more development perhaps. I have toned down my commitments to wikipedia for the time being though I am confident to step up my activities shortly. Regards. -- Bhadani ( talk) 16:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
This is a request from a common user. The entry Frontline (Magazine) is being repeatedly vandalized by this user: 59.145.142.36 (IP). The user doesn't deign it fit to thrash out the issue in the discussion pages. I request you to either block further editing of the page or block the user, whatever is deemed fit according to the rules of Wikipedia. Thanks (Vrsrini)