User talk:Smtchahal/Archives/2013/April
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
List of educational institutions in Gurgaon
Those links are pure, undeniable WP:REFSPAM. They don't verify anything at all, other than that the school's exist, which we don't actually need verification of. Having them there is nothing other than a way to drive traffic to the school's websites. I consider re-adding them blatant spam that must be absolutely prevented. Here's another way of putting it: a reference must be used to verify something in the article. Here, there's nothing in the list-article other than the school's name. But we don't need to verify that. Since the "references" aren't verifying anything, they're acting as external links wrapped in a reference tag. Once that is the case, then they fall under the provisions of WP:EL. And there is never any circumstance in which we would provide an external link for an individual line on a list article. If those schools had their own Wikipedia article, then they could include the official link there; but for a list, the only possible legitimate EL would be one which is a link to some sort of "official" list of schools (maybe a government sponsored one, or possible one run by a reputable accrediting agency). Qwyrxian (talk) 03:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- I'm getting you now, but you should've been careful not to remove the categories. smtchahal 03:59, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- I have a question here: why is it that the verification of a school's existence is not needed? Won't that promote hoaxes? Some people can add schools or institutions to the list that don't even exist. smtchahal 04:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- First, my apologies about removing the categories--that was a pure mistake on my part. As for verifying the school's existence, the problem comes then with how we deal with the unverified schools. Especially in a non-Western country, we can't assume that all schools have an online or other readily cite-able source, which means we'd have some items sourced, and some not. Arguably, at that point, we should then remove all of the unsourced ones. But are those really likely to be wrong? Yes, there could be hoaxes, but it seems somewhat unlikely, and also there isn't too much harm done in that case. For BLP-related issues, of course, we require a source to be on a list of this type (like in a "Notable people" section for a city/area). But for educational venues, we generally just trust editors. I mean, if someone added "Paris Hilton Secondary School", I'd probably remove it, but beyond obvious cases, the lists tend to just grow. The problem for me is that adding the school's website really does feel like spam; it's even worse for things like lists of hospitals, where it's clearly just an attempt to drive customer business. I suppose I could be wrong on this matter; we could ask at WP:RSN for other input if you like. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- I have a question here: why is it that the verification of a school's existence is not needed? Won't that promote hoaxes? Some people can add schools or institutions to the list that don't even exist. smtchahal 04:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Speedy deleted animal?
Hi. No idea how I managed to add the SD tag for pets on that Cuttie Williams article. Slip of the mouse, I guess. Yintan² 16:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- I did figure it was a mistake; it's not likely that a rollbacker with over 10,000 edits would do this on purpose. I'm sorry if I sounded rather rude in the edit summary, because I didn't mean to... smtchahal(talk) 17:20, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- I never considered your summary rude. No sweat. Yintan² 18:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Former Lai Chi Kok Hospital
I removed the speedy tag on Former Lai Chi Kok Hospital. I think the references and the building's status as a listed building establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- Fair enough. The article didn't have those references when I marked it for deletion. smtchahal(talk) 17:20, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Ive added a reference to the above mentioned page and since am still editing it,I would like you to go through it and determine if you still think it should be deleted,thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.160.73.244 (talk) 17:07, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- I still don't think the article should stay. It's more than clearly a notability issue. A person who is merely a lawyer, lecturer and accountant doesn't make him/her notable enough. Please see WP:NOTABILITY for further information. smtchahal(talk) 17:20, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Mblumber (talk) 14:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC)I have reworked the article Brad Zellar. Please have a look over and re-assess the article at the AFD. You may still feel that it does not meet the guidelines, but I have done some work that I think addresses many of your concerns and made some important discoveries about this author. Mkdwtalk 08:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jim Kates, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page White Plains (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Fixed (to those who think I'm an idiot, I did this as a reminder to myself and not to inform anyone; not to inform a bot) smtchahal(talk) 12:10, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Danny Whitehead
Hi Smtchahal,
I noticed that you tagged Danny Whitehead for deletion based on the fact that it had no references. The creator of the article put up a source I consider unreliable and then removed the tag for deletion. I was going to nominate it for speedy deletion because it still does not indicate the subject's significance and because it had been deleted and recreated maybe two times already (see User talk:Chip505). However, you were the last person to nominate it for deletion so I wanted to ask what you thought before I did anything. Feel free to act.
Sosthenes12 (talk) 19:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)Sosthenes12
- I only just realised that the article has once been deleted as a result of a discussion and hence marked it for speedy deletion via the G4 as well as A7 criteria (because of the insignificance of the topic). I think that the article can still be nominated for deletion (via AfD) but as it has already been deleted as a result of a discussion, I'm trying speedy deletion first. smtchahal(talk) 05:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- As reviewing administrator, I deleted it for G4, unimproved recreation of a previously afd'd article. There is no point placing both the G7 a tag on such an article as well. In fact, A7 wouldn't have applied, because saying that someone is a member of a team that has an article about the league on wp is something which is an indication of possible importance; it was correctly decided at the AfD that membership on this particular team is not notable, but the bar for notability is much higher than for A7. Anything which an editor might reasonably think important an article passes A7. The article has been recreated several times, and there seems to be a problem with others on that team also. I will deal with those problems. DGG ( talk ) 20:54, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
AFT5 re-enabled
Hey Smtchahal :). Just a note that the Article Feedback Tool, Version 5 has now been re-enabled. Let us know on the talkpage if you spot any bugs. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 01:03, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- I can't see the tool on any of the Wikipedia main-space articles yet... is it just me? smtchahal(talk) 09:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
- It's on a very small subset of articles, in line with the community RfC. If you've got an article you'd like it on, and you're willing to moderate the feedback that comes in, just add Category:Article Feedback 5 to the page :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:25, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, thanks! But is it true that only registered users can see the tool? Because I went through a few articles belonging to the category and couldn't spot it on any of them; not until I logged in. smtchahal(talk) 15:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
- Huh; weird :/. That shouldn't be happening. If you see it again, could you grab a screenshot? Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I still see the problem. Here's the screenshot.
- Huh; weird :/. That shouldn't be happening. If you see it again, could you grab a screenshot? Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, thanks! But is it true that only registered users can see the tool? Because I went through a few articles belonging to the category and couldn't spot it on any of them; not until I logged in. smtchahal(talk) 15:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
- It's on a very small subset of articles, in line with the community RfC. If you've got an article you'd like it on, and you're willing to moderate the feedback that comes in, just add Category:Article Feedback 5 to the page :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:25, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
smtchahal(talk) 09:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Strange! I can see it on that article, logged in and logged out. Tried clearing your cache? Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:36, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Speedy deletion contested: Yingo (website)
Hello Smtchahal. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Yingo (website), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. hmssolent\You rang? ship's log 05:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- I've moved this to AFD however - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yingo (website). hmssolent\You rang? ship's log 05:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia Rollback
As you may already know, I have posted a request for the rollback feature on Wikipedia, and you posted a reply saying: "At the time this comment was added, the user only had 111 edits in article-space". What do you mean by that? Is it for the admin to see that I am insufficient for rollback? Don't worry I'm not mad, just curious, please reply on MY talk page (UPDATE: Your talk page is fine too, I prefer it to be on my page). Thanks PBASH607 (talk) 18:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
FÍS NUA
Hi there,
The federated party does not consider itself as "left-wing". In fact, FÍS NUA calls itself an ecological party. Key aspects are sustainability and support for a steady state economy. => http://fisnua.com/ => http://fisnua.com/?page_id=58 => http://fisnua.com/?page_id=10 => http://fisnua.com/?page_id=524 This is far away from left-wing ideologies. The hyperlink [1] Wikipedia is citing does also not support the claim.
Furthermore I like to point out that the party logo has changed => http://fisnua.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/FIS-NUA-logo-4-2013.jpg
It would be nice if you could correct these issues. Thank you.
Regards,
Charlie Williams FÍS NUA Federated Party Co-ordinator — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.78.87.244 (talk) 14:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Problem solved by Ktr101. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.78.91.250 (talk) 01:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Didn't appear constructive
You undid one of my recent contributions to Feni Girls Cadet College because of nonconstructive, Let me know what issue relate to this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GbySmn (talk • contribs) 17:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GbySmn (talk • contribs) 18:14, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Greater Essex County District School Board
Why don't you take some time to actually research who the chairperson and the director are of the Greater Essex County District School Board. Undoing my revision with no grounds is against the Wikipedia guidelines. I m a high valued contributor to other wiki sites.
I hope this clears up the matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kagazuda (talk • contribs) 20:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- The edit I reverted was made by an IP user. Unless you were the IP user, I never reverted your edit.
- Yeah I agree I made a mistake. I just assumed an IP address is not likely to make constructive edits. I'll make sure I'm more careful next time. smtchahal(talk) 01:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Welcome, and congratulations, from STiki!
|
Hello, Smtchahal, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Here are some pages which are a little more fun:
We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 05:13, 28 April 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar
|
|
|
Congratulations, Smtchahal! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (talk) 05:13, 28 April 2013 (UTC) |
- Thank you very much! I'll try my best to use the tool effectively (i.e., with the ability distinguish vandalism edits from good faith edits). smtchahal(talk) 07:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
A Barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| For your efforts in the anti-vandalism area.....Keep it up! TheStrikeΣagle 07:26, 28 April 2013 (UTC) |
BTW I'm just 3 months older than you! 
Cheers, TheStrikeΣagle 07:26, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
edit count on ToolServer.org
Hi! How can I add edit count on ToolServer.org in my page tab? --GbySmn (talk) 16:42, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- You will need to add the following code to your user page (or your talk page; whichever you choose):
<div style="display:none; right:{{#expr: 0*(2+15)+10+{{{offset|0}}} }}px" class="metadata topicon nopopups">[[File:Wikimedia Community Logo-Toolserver.svg|15px|link=http://toolserver.org/~tparis/count/index.php?name=GbySmn&lang=en&wiki=wikipedia|This user's edit count on ToolServer.org]]</div>
- Replace "
{{{offset|0}}}" with the number of pixels you want the button to stay away from the rightmost side of the page. Doing this makes sure the other top-icons don't clash with this one. The greater is the number, the more the button will stay towards the left. It is towards the extreme right by default. smtchahal(talk) 16:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Re: RfA
Many many thanks for the nomination . This is such an unexpected thing and it flatters me a lot. I need just a little bit of time to decide whether to accept the nomination. Once again, thank you so very much! Do you prefer alcoholic or non-alcoholic drinks? –pjoef (talk • contribs) 19:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- You're most welcome. I'm sorry I didn't make a very good description of your contributions to Wikipedia on the RfA page; this was my first RfA nomination. But I'm sure you're not a bad nominee for administratorship. I've seen admins with fewer edits than you (though by no means am I saying that edit counts are the only basis of judgement for administratorship).
- I'm not old enough to consume alcoholic drinks yet, nor do I prefer them (
). But what has it got to do with anything? smtchahal(talk) 09:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- The reason of the alcoholic/non-alcoholic quesation is shown below :)
–pjoef (talk • contribs) has given you a cup of tea. Tea promotes WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day ever so slightly better. 
Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tea, especially if it is someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!
Spread the lovely, warm, refreshing goodness of tea by adding {{subst:wikitea}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Just want to let you know that I have accepted the nomination. Thanks! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 14:15, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- The biscuits will be helpful: your nominator threw you to the wolves wholly unprepared for the ordeal-by-fire that is RFA ... maybe the biscuits will distract them long enough :-) (✉→BWilkins←✎) 21:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Don't you know it is grossly rude Bwilkins? TheStrikeΣagle 01:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- I would say it is rude and surely not something I would have been expecting from a sysop. Saying that the nomination was premature, or even stupid, might be acceptable but this is just ridiculous. smtchahal(talk) 01:28, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- I would have expected the both of you to be able to read English. My message clearly says something other than what you believe it does (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:52, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- Pardon me for my lack of intelligence, but I could really appreciate an explanation. smtchahal(talk) 14:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- As I can see that you have read and obviously completely understood my friendly message to pjoef at his talkpage, I will freely assume (without making asses of anyone) that I don't need to make further comment. I appreciate the statements that you made over there - I think we're very fortunate that pjoef is taking the comments being made at RFA as a positive as opposed to the negatives that we often see from candidates. I do ask that you take great care in the future as to nominations - throwing someone to the wolves at RFA who are unprepared for the ordeal is often how we lose good editors. I think we're lucky this time. Cheers (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:32, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
- Apologies BWilkins for misunderstanding your comment...I understood it's true meaning just some hours later.. :) TheStrikeΣagle 14:48, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying. No, I never considered your message on Pjoef's talk page unfriendly; it was the one you posted here that bothered me... I'm sorry for misunderstanding it, though. Of course I didn't mean to!
smtchahal(talk) 15:00, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
- As I can see that you have read and obviously completely understood my friendly message to pjoef at his talkpage, I will freely assume (without making asses of anyone) that I don't need to make further comment. I appreciate the statements that you made over there - I think we're very fortunate that pjoef is taking the comments being made at RFA as a positive as opposed to the negatives that we often see from candidates. I do ask that you take great care in the future as to nominations - throwing someone to the wolves at RFA who are unprepared for the ordeal is often how we lose good editors. I think we're lucky this time. Cheers (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:32, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
- Pardon me for my lack of intelligence, but I could really appreciate an explanation. smtchahal(talk) 14:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- I would have expected the both of you to be able to read English. My message clearly says something other than what you believe it does (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:52, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- I would say it is rude and surely not something I would have been expecting from a sysop. Saying that the nomination was premature, or even stupid, might be acceptable but this is just ridiculous. smtchahal(talk) 01:28, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- Don't you know it is grossly rude Bwilkins? TheStrikeΣagle 01:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Smtchahal, at the moment I do not think I am going to withdraw my nomination, if there will be a change and things go fifty-fifty or so, then I might consider the possibility of "retiring form the competition" lol. I feel happy (some editors at RfA call this an "enthusiastic approach") and this is true. My "happiness" derives from your support and esteem and this meens a lot to me, making me feel, probably enthusiastic, but surely very-very happy (^___^). The nomination does not matter, means nothing. If anything, I'm sorry to have fully disappointed your expectations (^___^). We are running for the worst record in the entire history of Wikipedia's RfA (^___^). It will be remembered as "the record of the records", the greatest possible numbers of NO in RfA's history (^____^). I'm just starting a campaign to say NO to my RfA nomination ... peoples signing to Wikipedia just to say NO to my nom. (^___^) Seriously, I'm so proud of your support and esteem. I have (voluntarily) offered my services to the community, if there is no need for those services, then I save time (and health). Cheers! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 15:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Your request for rollback
Hi Smtchahal. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
- Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
- Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Rollback should never be used to edit war.
- If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
- Use common sense.
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 22:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC) Beeblebrox (talk) 22:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC)