User talk:SBC-YPR/Archive 5

Archive 5 : February 2010 - June 2010

Talkback

Hello, SBC-YPR. You have new messages at Talk:Darjeeling.
Message added 06:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Abecedare (talk) 06:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Railways in India

Can we have a discussion on WP:INRI to improve the articles and organization of the articles ? --naveenpf (talk) 02:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Bengaluru/Bangalore

Did not see any discussion on the talk page. There is one solitary post at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bangalore#Bengaluru that posts a question, which is not answered.

Also, not clear why you flagged my edit as vandalism. I'm not sure if you understand what vandalism is.

Anyway, have a nice day.

-Splitpeasoup (talk) 18:21, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Chittaurgarh Fort

I am looking forward to your review observations on my GAN of the above article to reply and effect the needed changes.--Nvvchar (talk) 01:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

• I have noted your review comments. It would be possible for making changes as suggested. Hence, I would request that the article be kept on hold for two weeks.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:06, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Chittorgarh Fort/GA1

Hopefully you'll get to reviewing that soon; the tag isn't meant to be an indefinite placeholder for a review. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive

WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of April. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 200. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. Hope we can see you in April.

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 18:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

GA Review Tablighi Jamaat

How does it work? You'll review it i and others will work on those suggestions? If so, then when are you going to post your review? —  Hamza  ^{[ talk ]} 18:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Taare Zameen Par/GA1

Hi - so are you going to post the review then? Or had you forgotten? –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

And Talk:Tablighi Jamaat/GA1 has been waiting a week as well. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

NOt to mention Talk:Anti-Hindi agitations of Tamil Nadu/GA1. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:30, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

More on TZP

Hi there - thanks for offering to review TZP for GA - I am wondering if you have an idea as to when you will be posting your review. I am not checking in as frequently and thus want to make sure to know when to look at your feedback. Thanks, -Classicfilms (talk) 17:12, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look. -Classicfilms (talk) 17:16, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Edits to TZP

Hi SBC-YPR - Thanks for your helpful responses. I essentially deleted material or tweaked according to what you said. I hope that I interpreted your comments properly. I wonder if you could take a look and see if my tweaks were in accordance with what you asked for. Regards, -Classicfilms (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks and I appreciate the further copyedits. I read through the instructions for the conversion app but I am not sure I understand exactly how to use it. Could I ask for your help with this? Also I'm not sure what the "third external link" is - could you just delete it if it is not necessary? Let me know if there are other fixes I can do before the final pass to GA. Thanks for your help, -Classicfilms (talk) 16:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much!! -Classicfilms (talk) 13:30, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

GAN backlog elimination drive - 1 week to go

First off, on behalf of myself and my co-coordinator Wizardman, I would like to thank you for the efforts that you have made so far in this GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a success, and that is thanks to you. See this Signpost article about what this drive has achieved so far. We're currently heading into the final week of the drive. At this time, if you have any GANs on review or on hold, you should be finishing off those reviews. Right now, we have more GANs on review or on hold than we do unreviewed. If you're going to start a GA review, please do so now so you can complete it by the end of the month and so that the nominator has a full 7-day window to address any concerns. See you at the finish!

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 16:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:PINQ

Hey. As the person to answer the Q25 of WP:PINQ Round 35, you now have the baton to ask the Q1 of Round 36. Waiting for you! Harsh Mujhse baat kijiye(Talk) 11:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Anti-Hindi Agitations GAR

I have finished implementing the GAR comments. Please take a look.--Sodabottle (talk) 06:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive

GAN backlog elimination drives chart up to 1 May On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, I'd like to especially thank you for your efforts over this past month's GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a complete success, which hopefully results in more expedient good article reviews, increasing users' confidence in the good article nomination processes. Even if you made just a small contribution, it still helped contribute to the success of this drive. Here is what we have accomplished this last month in this drive. 661 total nominations were reviewed. 541 of them passed (~81.8%), 97 (~14.7%) failed, and 23 (~3.5%) ended on hold. The WP:GAN page started at 110,126 bytes length on 1 April and ended at 43,387 bytes length at the end of 30 April (a 66,739 byte reduction in the page, about 60.6% less). Excluding extremes, the longest wait for someone's GAN to be review was about 11.5 weeks at the beginning. (I mistook the figure when I reported to the Signpost that it was 13.) At the end, with the exception of one that was relisted, the longest wait is now at 10 days. 63 different users participated, each having completed at least one GAN, with others also having helped out behind-the-scenes in making the drive a success. The drive started with 463 GA nominations remaining and 388 unreviewed. At the end of the month, we ended with 89 remaining (374 or about 80.8% less) and 47 unreviewed (341 or about 87.9% less). For those who have accomplished certain objectives in the drive, awards will be coming shortly. Again, thank you for your help in the drive, and I hope you continue to help review GA nominations and overall improve the quality of articles here on Wikipedia.

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

mughal map

sir 
 I humbly ask for your position on the following issue in the history of india page: 

The map of Mughal Empire[by Joppen]is grossly inflated.The empire was actually based in the Ganga-Jamuna basin in Northern India.It never effectively controlled areas south of the Vindhyas.It was successfully resisted by the deccan sultanates,the central Indian Rajput states and most importantly the Marathas.True that the forces of the empire had reached a long way into the Indian peninsula but they had to retreat.Such temporary advancement can never be the ground for including any area within the domain of any political entity.They did not have effective rule over the following parts-1.Large parts of Madhya Pradesh 2.Chattisgarh 3.Large parts of Orissa. 4.Jharkhand 5.Large parts of Maharashtra.6.Karnataka 7.Large parts of Andhra Pradesh[except of course the Telengana region] 8.Tamil Nadu 9.Kerala.10.Parts of Gujarat. The support for the above contentions is available in the works of noted historians like J.N. Sirkar,R.C. Majumdar etc.This inflated map has been a recurrent theme in the politically motivated histriography of certain colonial historians and later on certain Marxism oriented historians.It is unfortunate to see the same tradition being followed in a dynamic medium like the Wikipedia.I appeal to fellow wikipedians to try to rectify this malady of looking at our history throgh the eyes of westerners who ,in many cases like Joppen,were not even trained to be historians.History,being a dynamic subject,is constantly revised and updated in the light of new findings.Often these have important implications in present day.As such I expect that the wikipedia page that serves almost as a portal to Indian history should have a more balanced pov with respect to the above issue.At least we can have an alternative viewpoint presented side by side along with the given map.Unfortunately the editor spiff seems very recalcitrant to any suggestions.Being an ordinary wikipedian I can only appeal to fellow wikipedians to plead this case. 05:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)skylark p.s. you doing fine work in here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skylark2008 (talk • contribs) 05:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

New heading 'Historical reference' added to Belgaum Border Dispute.

Plz check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgaum_border_dispute#Historical_Reference . I have added new info which should change the way this dispute has been seen till now and tilt the balance in Karnataka's favour. It is obvious that it might face war-editing from certain sections. I request you all to follow the page and ensure the truth prevails.

Tej smiles (talk) 13:01, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Delhi Metro Stations

[1] Need help in expanding previously created articles and in creating new articles. Also, upgrading the the templates of the respective lines and if possible images of as many Metro stations as possible. Thank you and Regards. --Johnxxx9 (talk) 08:25, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

Your undo of my edit was pure vandalism as I gave links to explain why the incident, 'Over time, however, the Sufiana governance gave way to outright Muslim monarchs' happened.--Surajcap (talk) 05:53, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Re: Vandalism

'Over time, however, the Sufiana governance gave way to outright Muslim monarchs' appears in the article which is true but no explanation for it is given which I provided. The reason is Islamic requirement to turn the world into Darul Islam as per Koran and hence link of the 'Holy' Quran with the appropriate verses was quoted as reference (just click the verses in link to see them in Koranic perspective). Another was a site on the History of Jihad in India with special reference to Kashmir which by any standards are most reliable sources and none can ignore Quranic instructions as non-reliable sources while discussing on Islam & its nature, in this case Islamic Government. Likewise without history of jihad the article is incomplete not only in elucidating the quoted line at the top but also in writing about overall Muslim rule in Kashmir!--Surajcap (talk) 12:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you so much for participating at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Indian Passport.jpg and saving the image and even more important, File:Emblem_of_India.svg! --JovianEye (talk) 13:53, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

FAR

Hello. I am here to let you know that I made a comment about Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties of India here and am hoping you can address it soon. GamerPro64 (talk) 13:40, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For your extraordinary efforts saving Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties of India from de-listing as a featured article. Mkativerata (talk) 19:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6