Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
You can use "Email this user", but I will probably reply on your talk page, or the article talk page, as discussions should be open and on the record.
I have experienced problems with e-mails not being delivered, so please leave me a message on this page if I have not replied within 48 hours.
The Wiktionary definition of Broadcasted states the use is sometimes proscribed, so it should not be used. The word also appears on Wikipedia:Lists_of_common_misspellings/B
Broadcasted appears in some dictionaries, but others, e.g.
Chambers state "Sorry, no entries for Broadcasted were found".
Broadcast appears in all dictionaries, and should be used as
COMMONALITY - "Wikipedia tries to find words that are common to all varieties of English".
A May 2023 search for
Broadcast gave over 234,000 uses, compared with a search for
Broadcasted which gave just 99.
Of these, 16 are redirects to "Broadcast" articles, 14 refer to a 2015 Canadian TV award and 5 relate to a 1924 cartoon. The rest are in quotations.
Hello, I am glad you noticed this. Something odd has been happening for the past several days, which is the insertion of that book into dozens of Project Medicine articles. It is always accompanied by poorly written English, brand-new accounts with only edits to a particular article or two, and an insistence of putting-back reverted content; there has been copy-pasting straight from that book that I've had to learn how to do a copyvio-revdel for. I have been posting to talk pages with warnings, reverting changes that need it, and copyediting what seems ok to leave in. I have not gone so far as to remove instances of citing this book because I didn't want to judge for myself its merits. I have a copy of the book and it doesn't seem outright fictitious but past that I'm not a med student and can't say how high the quality is.
Can anything be done about this? Do you deem that source poor enough quality that I should go back and remove it where it was added in the past few days? Kimen8 ( talk) 12:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Indraprakash Building
(has been included in some of their refs) and insource:"|last=Khurana |first=Indu"
should bring up some results, but it doesn't seem to. I know that this book was referenced a good bit in the past few days, because I obtained a copy for my library a few days ago and have been cross-referencing when I find it used so as to confirm no copy-pasting.insource:"jaypee brothers"
turns up 343 results, obviously some of which will be false positive, but it gives a suggestion as to how much this publisher's undergraduate textbooks are in use).Hi @ Arjayay , I need to ask something according to the WP:RAJ , sources of Raj Era , Archaeological Survey of India and books printed by local publications are not reliable as these books follow the same main sources i.e. Raj Era , so I removed the citations and the stuff which includes these sources but edits are reverted by other user and I also found some articles which are using these sources which are locked. Below are the pages which are using Raj Era sources and the current version is live :
Hi Arjayay I restored your old revision 1219272919 in Bongaigaon page, if you have any problems of the older revision please edit it. Thank you Worldinearth ( talk) 03:59, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi Arjayay, I have noticed a mistake in Bongaigaon page. The mistake is in the article Demography section. The Bongaigaon (2011) census population is 67,322 according to info-box, but the Demography section's population is 139,650 it is wrong population please remove this population from Demography section of Bongaigaon and add 67,322 according to info-box. Please match it to info-box population, if you have not match the population from info-box the many problems have on Bongaigaon. Surfunchy ( talk) 16:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I need your help regarding an issue. There is a user who is vandalizing the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor, Trans–Karakoram Tract and Maratha Empire articles. I and a few other editors reverted these edits but the user changed their IP. I reverted them again and now this guy comes to my talk page and swears at me in a hindi abbreviation "tmkc". Can you please do something to block this user or at least protect the articles. Your help would be appreciated. An Asphalt ( talk) 08:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
why are you providing false information about dhadhor clan of ahirs.if you don't know about us than mind your own business. 103.99.198.162 ( talk) 16:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
its the current scenario! Its not even a current scenario, it's always been there and controversial, so Why shouldn't I add it? I'm a tribal myself, so I know. Tribes like BODO,KARBI,MISING etc don't consider your pov Warriormann ( talk) 11:06, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
User:DishonoredRighteous pretty much looks like a sock of User:Kichappan with common interests and editing style. 2409:4073:219F:ED5:140F:D300:2351:B52 ( talk) 11:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
You can use "Email this user", but I will probably reply on your talk page, or the article talk page, as discussions should be open and on the record.
I have experienced problems with e-mails not being delivered, so please leave me a message on this page if I have not replied within 48 hours.
The Wiktionary definition of Broadcasted states the use is sometimes proscribed, so it should not be used. The word also appears on Wikipedia:Lists_of_common_misspellings/B
Broadcasted appears in some dictionaries, but others, e.g.
Chambers state "Sorry, no entries for Broadcasted were found".
Broadcast appears in all dictionaries, and should be used as
COMMONALITY - "Wikipedia tries to find words that are common to all varieties of English".
A May 2023 search for
Broadcast gave over 234,000 uses, compared with a search for
Broadcasted which gave just 99.
Of these, 16 are redirects to "Broadcast" articles, 14 refer to a 2015 Canadian TV award and 5 relate to a 1924 cartoon. The rest are in quotations.
Hello, I am glad you noticed this. Something odd has been happening for the past several days, which is the insertion of that book into dozens of Project Medicine articles. It is always accompanied by poorly written English, brand-new accounts with only edits to a particular article or two, and an insistence of putting-back reverted content; there has been copy-pasting straight from that book that I've had to learn how to do a copyvio-revdel for. I have been posting to talk pages with warnings, reverting changes that need it, and copyediting what seems ok to leave in. I have not gone so far as to remove instances of citing this book because I didn't want to judge for myself its merits. I have a copy of the book and it doesn't seem outright fictitious but past that I'm not a med student and can't say how high the quality is.
Can anything be done about this? Do you deem that source poor enough quality that I should go back and remove it where it was added in the past few days? Kimen8 ( talk) 12:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Indraprakash Building
(has been included in some of their refs) and insource:"|last=Khurana |first=Indu"
should bring up some results, but it doesn't seem to. I know that this book was referenced a good bit in the past few days, because I obtained a copy for my library a few days ago and have been cross-referencing when I find it used so as to confirm no copy-pasting.insource:"jaypee brothers"
turns up 343 results, obviously some of which will be false positive, but it gives a suggestion as to how much this publisher's undergraduate textbooks are in use).Hi @ Arjayay , I need to ask something according to the WP:RAJ , sources of Raj Era , Archaeological Survey of India and books printed by local publications are not reliable as these books follow the same main sources i.e. Raj Era , so I removed the citations and the stuff which includes these sources but edits are reverted by other user and I also found some articles which are using these sources which are locked. Below are the pages which are using Raj Era sources and the current version is live :
Hi Arjayay I restored your old revision 1219272919 in Bongaigaon page, if you have any problems of the older revision please edit it. Thank you Worldinearth ( talk) 03:59, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi Arjayay, I have noticed a mistake in Bongaigaon page. The mistake is in the article Demography section. The Bongaigaon (2011) census population is 67,322 according to info-box, but the Demography section's population is 139,650 it is wrong population please remove this population from Demography section of Bongaigaon and add 67,322 according to info-box. Please match it to info-box population, if you have not match the population from info-box the many problems have on Bongaigaon. Surfunchy ( talk) 16:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I need your help regarding an issue. There is a user who is vandalizing the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor, Trans–Karakoram Tract and Maratha Empire articles. I and a few other editors reverted these edits but the user changed their IP. I reverted them again and now this guy comes to my talk page and swears at me in a hindi abbreviation "tmkc". Can you please do something to block this user or at least protect the articles. Your help would be appreciated. An Asphalt ( talk) 08:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
why are you providing false information about dhadhor clan of ahirs.if you don't know about us than mind your own business. 103.99.198.162 ( talk) 16:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
its the current scenario! Its not even a current scenario, it's always been there and controversial, so Why shouldn't I add it? I'm a tribal myself, so I know. Tribes like BODO,KARBI,MISING etc don't consider your pov Warriormann ( talk) 11:06, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
User:DishonoredRighteous pretty much looks like a sock of User:Kichappan with common interests and editing style. 2409:4073:219F:ED5:140F:D300:2351:B52 ( talk) 11:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)