LeoFrank

Leave me a message

AI and AIX fleet page

Hi. It's a good thing you've removed 737max orders from Air India fleet page. It's abundantly clear that they'll all go for AIX, yet some people are changing it again and again. May I also request you to update the same on the AIX Wikipedia page as well? P.s. I tried to change it some time back, but like I said, someone keeps changing it again and again 59.88.131.183 (talk) 03:36, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Copy paste of content

Hello LeoFrank, I need your help in reviewing the recent additions by PotatoCyborg in Christ University, which seems unnecessary as the person has basically copy pasted the entire articles, rather than summarising in few lines. Tobinkoshy (talk) 16:10, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey Tobinkoshy. If you have actually read the wiki contents and the citations it would be obvious that its summarized. It just looks huge because the University has lots of controversies. Please show me at-least one instance of direct copy paste evidence.

And hello LeoFrank. You can't just edit out all the controversies by doing a huge (−12,456) revert back to a version over a month old. If you have any issues with formatting or citations let me know. PotatoCyborg (talk) 15:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

PotatoCyborg Oh really? Ever heard of WP:BRD? And do you WP:OWN the page that I have to consult you to remove problematic content? — LeoFrank  ^Talk 15:55, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

LeoFrank, I urge you to consider the principles of Wikipedia's WP:NPOV policy. The extensive reverts seem to diminish the comprehensive nature of the article, potentially skewing the portrayal of Christ University. While I acknowledge the importance of brevity, the deletion of well-sourced and significant information appears as an attempt to obscure the full spectrum of the university's history, including its controversies. We should aim for a balanced representation, allowing readers to access a complete historical record. Rather than large-scale deletions, we should work collaboratively to refine and improve the content, ensuring it meets Wikipedia's standards for accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability. Let's focus on editing and refining the content rather than erasing substantial parts of it, which might inadvertently lead to an information bias. PotatoCyborg (talk) 14:45, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Please publish all what you are putting up in your news article if you are a journalist. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a collection of news and responses from accused! I suggest you to read WP:NOT which you seem totally unaware of before you just blindly revert to justify your point-of-view — LeoFrank  ^Talk 14:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

LeoFrank, my intention is not to transform Wikipedia into a news outlet but to ensure that the encyclopedic content reflects a comprehensive and balanced view of Christ University's history, including its controversies, as per Wikipedia's guidelines. The WP:NOT policy you referenced indeed stipulates that Wikipedia is not a newspaper, but it also emphasizes the importance of including significant information relevant to the subject's notability, which these controversies undeniably are. My edits are driven by the desire to maintain a neutral point of view and to document significant events in the university's history, backed by reliable sources. I advocate for a discussion on the content's relevance and representation, not its complete omission, to preserve the integrity and neutrality of the article. Let's collaborate to ensure the content is concise, factual, and adheres to Wikipedia's standards, rather than dismissing substantial, verified information. PotatoCyborg (talk) 15:01, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

The content you added has nothing to do with WP:NOV. Each and every controversy is also not necessary and notable either. Also, who writes reactions of students, accused in an encyclopedia? This is purely blog-like/news-like material. You are clearly here for a single purpose— LeoFrank  ^Talk 15:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

LeoFrank, acknowledging that not every controversy warrants inclusion in Wikipedia, the instances cited—student suicide linked to sexual harassment allegations, faculty misconduct, and significant student protests—are undeniably notable. These events received extensive coverage from reputable sources, reflecting their impact on the university's community and public perception.

To dismiss these controversies is to overlook the essence of what makes them significant: they are pivotal moments in the university’s history that have led to public discourse, institutional scrutiny, and policy changes. The inclusion of such events in the article is not about sensationalism; it's about documenting the university's history comprehensively and accurately.

We should not shy away from presenting these events in the article, given their documented significance and the substantial attention they've garnered. To do so would be an injustice to the principle of historical completeness and would dilute the article's integrity. As Wikipedia contributors, our role is to ensure that the encyclopedia reflects a full and unbiased record of notable events, supported by credible sources. Let's uphold this responsibility by including these notable controversies in the article, with a balanced and well-sourced narrative. PotatoCyborg (talk) 15:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Common name

Have a look at this change to WP:COMMONNAME. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:43, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

I restored the WP:COMMONNAME, but didn't remove the other name, which seem to show up in RS. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:47, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I somehow feel IATA's code search should be used for naming convention. — LeoFrank  ^Talk 16:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Please stop trying to cover up Controversies of Christ University

Please stop trying to cover up controversies of Christ University. The entire "Controversies" section has been removed with the reasoning of WP:NOTNEWS, which is not applicable in this context. This action appears as an attempt to obscure the historical and ongoing issues within the institution. It is crucial for the sake of transparency and accountability that all significant events, especially those that have impacted the university's reputation and stakeholder trust, are documented comprehensively and impartially. Therefore, I urge reconsideration of the removal and advocate for a balanced and well-cited section that accurately reflects the university's history, including its controversies. PotatoCyborg (talk) 14:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Since you are so interested in including reactions of students, accused and write news-like content, please do so in your own news agency since you don't seem to understand how to write encyclopedic content. — LeoFrank  ^Talk 15:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

LeoFrank, let's clarify a crucial point: my interest is not in chronicling mere reactions but in reflecting significant developments that have been extensively covered by major news publications. These are not fleeting opinions but substantiated events that have shaped the narrative around Christ University. Every piece of information I've added aligns with Wikipedia's guidelines, emphasizing notability, verifiability, and neutrality.

Assuming that my contributions are akin to news-like content overlooks the fact that these are well-documented incidents with lasting implications for the university's history and reputation. Wikipedia thrives on presenting a comprehensive view, which includes detailing notable controversies when they are substantiated by reliable sources. My edits are not an exercise in sensationalism but a commitment to the encyclopedic documentation of the university's significant historical moments.

Therefore, I reiterate the necessity of including these well-covered and impactful controversies in the article, not as a news report, but as an encyclopedic record in line with Wikipedia’s standards. Dismissing these events underestimates their encyclopedic value and detracts from a complete and balanced portrayal of the institution. PotatoCyborg (talk) 15:36, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

March 2024

Your recent editing history at Christ University shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)