Arjayay

E-mails

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.

Broadcasted

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.

---

---

Precious anniversary

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:09, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda Arendt - 8 years? doesn't time fly when you are enjoying yourself ! - Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 09:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Complaint

Hello, I would like to complain against User talk:Ravensfire regarding his edits on MTV Splitsvilla (season 15). He removed an important element from the page "Ideal Match" section calling it unsourced fan trivia, which is false. I have reverted his edit but now he just want to keep it as he wants which is not right. I have been active on the MTV Splitsvilla (season 15) page and I know what should he there. I even added references. Please tell him to do some research and not indulge in edit wars without any knowledge regarding the article. Help Me. Dr. Trafalgar D Water Law (talk) 04:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

@Dr. Trafalgar D Water Law as I've pointed out, it's WP:FANCRUFT in an article already full of excessive details. I've invited them to discuss on the article talk page and work through WP:DR. Ravensfire (talk) 04:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

There is no WP:DR because there is no dispute honestly. All i want to request is do some research regarding the article. Dr. Trafalgar D Water Law (talk) 04:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello Dr. Trafalgar D Water Law, I do not know why you have posted here, I am not an Administrator and, other than correcting "recieve" to "receive", I have never edited that page, and have no interest in the subject whatsoever. Ravensfire is correct in saying you should discuss it on the article talk page. You need to cite WP:reliable sources, published by a body with a reputation for fact checking, not a fansite, blog or opinion piece. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 09:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm new to the community, I do not know where to find justice. I have added WP:reliable sources from a reputed body. I know him well, he just like to take control and don't listen to others' opinion. No body have an issue it has been part for over previous five seasons. Who I am supposed to talk on talk page? It's only him with a problem. Dr. Trafalgar D Water Law (talk) 09:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Dr. Trafalgar D Water Law you won't "find justice" until you follow procedure, which starts with discussing it on the talk page.
This has been suggested to you several times, but you still have not edited the talk page. On the talk page, other interested editors can join-in inone, centralised discussion; please do not discuss it here, or anywhere else. Set out your points, citing your reliable sources, show that they are reliable and ask why the other editor finds them unacceptable.
Please do not start attacking, or disparaging, other editors, just concentrate on the facts. - Arjayay (talk) 10:03, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Sure, I will start a discussion on talk page. I am not attacking, or disparaging, the user did that before as well on other articles. If you do not believe me kindly check his talk page. The user is self centered. Dr. Trafalgar D Water Law (talk) 10:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Removal of Name in Regional Language from Vizhinjam International Port Trivandrum

Hello , I noticed that you removed the name written in Malayalam from the Vizhinjam International Seaport Trivandrum article. I would appreciate it if we could discuss this further and come to a consensus. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. Best regards, Hobbywriterae (talk) 16:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Hobbywriterae, as explained in my edit summary "Rm Indic script as WP:NOINDICSCRIPT". As you can see if you read all the threads listed under that link, that is the consensus, which evolved from 2012 to 2017 and cannot be overturned by any "localised" discussion between you and me, on a talk page. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 16:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

A semi-protected edit request on 20 May 2024

If you can do this edit, it will be great of you. Thanks. [1] 2409:4085:2D9D:1D42:0:0:C74A:9C09 (talk) 10:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Barnstarrd

Black_Barn,_Ramsbury_-_geograph.org.uk_-_2256194

Here is a barn's tarrd as an acknowlegement of your relentless typo fixing. Thank you for making wikipedia that much more coherent. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:08, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks D'n'B - It is always nice to be appreciated, although I am wondering if your misspelling of "acknowlegement" above, was a test, a joke (or a typo)? - Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 11:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Haha, that was genuine. (or was it? it was). -- D'n'B-t -- 18:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Request for Approval of Draft:Aamir_Naik

122.161.243.179 (talk) 10:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, editor from J+K, I am not a new page reviewer. Please don't go around pestering editors, please wait your turn in the queue. Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 11:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Dear

I hope this message finds you well. Iam writing kindly your assistance in reviewing and potentially approving my draft Wikipedia article for publication.

I have carefully followed Wikipedia's content guidelines amd ensured that the article is well - referenced with reliable sources. Additionally i have made necessary improvements based on feedback received from other editors.

I believe it contributes valuable information with the standards notability and verifiability.

Best Regards 122.161.243.179 (talk) 11:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Try reading my post of 11.00, above your latest post - Arjayay (talk) 11:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Sockpuppet or abuse investigation

Username Sutyarashi is abusing multiple pages. Please investigate. Thanks Unleashed something (talk) 09:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thank you for your ongoing assistance with handling 64.124.92.43's edits and for the report at AIV. Have a good one! GSK (talk • edits) 21:17, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks GSK - I'll have a quick one before bed - 21:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Regarding Recent edit

Hi @Arjayay, I noticed your recent edit in saraswat Brahmins page.Detail goes as follows, page:59 Footnote:28. 28. Burton mentions that many of these saraswat brahmins were considered low caste and were also called "Sindhur," from the vermillion tika (Hin. mark on the forehead),

The fact is not represented properly even though I didn’t edited others work.The whole paragraph is explaining how the local ritual expert Brahmins helped in raising status of Khatri and lohanas.Now it’s your turn to revert your edit. Have a nice day. RobertJudeson (talk) 21:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

RobertJudeson - as I clearly stated in my edit summary "No reference to anyone called Burton on this page" - coming here and telling me about what is on page 59, in some book, with an unknown title, by an unknown author, issued by an unknown publisher, is of no help to anyone.
Moreover, if the book is by R. G. Burton, (the only writer on Indian subjects I know called Burton) that would not be seen as a reliable source, as per WP:RAJ. - Arjayay (talk) 21:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Arjayay,

I agree with you as the whole paragraph is based out of RAJ,the selected statements are extracted from footnote so it’s not the opinion of modern author.

Statement with cite ,

-Burton mentions that many of these saraswat brahmins were considered low caste and were also called "Sindhur," from the vermillion tika (Hin. mark on the forehead),

.Here Burton is R G Burton while writing military history of Punjab.You are senior editor,you know the rules better than me.I leave this to you. RobertJudeson (talk) 05:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Arjayay,

Richard Francis Burton,a British officer during Raj wrote a book on Sindh(1851).The footnote of above book contains this book extract which has been used as it is.

https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Sindh_and_the_Races_that_Inhabit_the_Val.html?id=IOrGrQEACAAJ&redir_esc=y

You were right this is Raj era.Rules bounded Shall we delete this sentence? RobertJudeson (talk) 13:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes RobertJudeson, I can't see much of the Google book - they show different pages to different viewers - but anything based on the Raj sources, which this is, is probably not reliable. - Arjayay (talk) 15:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

References

Qaddiryya

I am trying to add the references but for me to do so I need to undo your edit. Otherwise I have to write the entire chain out again which takes eternity. Stop making this into an unnecessary edit war and have some patience while I add the references. 86.5.202.27 (talk) 15:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

You can easily add the references in the same edit as the reversion - they are not an add-on extra for some time in the future. - Arjayay (talk) 15:25, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I am new to Wikipedia. Hence I do not know how to do that. The easiest way for me was to undo and then simply add the references. Now I had to write the entire chain out again otherwise it will like an edit war. Thanks for that friend. I have added it properly now. 86.5.202.27 (talk) 15:36, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

If you undo the edit, you can then simply add the reference(s) before saving it - incidentally, we do not put references in section titles. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 15:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)