User talk:Ratnahastin
Emergency user slap button
Editors: Use this button if the user is malfunctioning. (direct link)
Editors can a malfunctioning user to Wikipedia talk:Village stocks.
Siachen Base Camp (Pakistan) Declined Reason[edit]
Greetings,
With reference to the page Siachen Base Camp (Pakistan) which I wrote, I recieved a notification of it being declined by you.
Can you kindly tell me what particular part was problematic? I wish to rectify that so that I may publish this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markhor777 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Hey!
Just wanted to drop a quick message in regards to the above - I've moved your acceptance to National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test Controversy per WP:NPOVTITLE - just a curtesy note and awareness of the above if you come across similar before. I couldn't really find any sourcing using the previous title and references to "scam" seemed to not be universal in the sources the article cited. The accepted page also had some copyvio issues and close paraphrasing which were missed on your review. It also needed substantial copyediting to get into the right state for mainspace, but I'm less worried about this as this isn't a criteria for review. Thanks for reviewing it, however just wanted to flag up the copyvio check in particular being missed as there were several warning flags as to there being copy-paste issues - happy to discuss this offline if you wish? I messed up as well by removing them and failing to tag them for revdel, so I'm hardly perfect in this case either! Mdann52 (talk) 14:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- I think 2024 NEET controversy would be the better title. Ratnahastin (talk) 14:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm open to discussing it - especially if NEET is the common name (whether we need the year, though, is another question, see WP:DAB. Feel free to start a move discussion, however having "scam" in the title is (usually) a red flag for me. Mdann52 (talk) 14:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I'm not a regular at AfD - does a close of "No Consensus" mean you can "blank the page, delete its history, and redirect"? Especially when you yourself were the nom? Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk to me!/my edits) 03:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- "No consensus" means there is no agreement over any outcome. Since enough editors supported drafting and title change I went along with that. Also see this discussion. Ratnahastin (talk) 03:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- But you have not just draftified the article. You've redirected the draft to another article which carries over no material that discusses the specific dynamic between Rajputs and Mughals. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk to me!/my edits) 04:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Reading it more closely, it appears the new article indeed includes it, but under Political marriages in India#Kachwahas, which seems pretty random to me. Why aren't the Mughals under their own section? Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk to me!/my edits) 04:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- You are free to create a section of Mughals for the instances that involved political marriages. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Will do! I will be busy until August though.
- Could you also explain why you went through a roundabout process of draftifying the page (in the process getting the original title deleted), changing the draft title, and then mainspacing the new title with "newly" created redirects from the old title? Now when you click on Rajput Mughal marriage alliances (and go to the page itself, not the Political marriages page) and check its history, it appears as though "Rajput Mughal marriage alliances" never existed and was only created by you as a redirect. I don't have much experience with forking and merging articles (the only one I've ever done is New Parliament House, New Delhi which was a fairly straightforward affair) so I want to know if this is a normal thing to do.
- Lastly, I don't know why you called this section SYNTH. All of it is cited to recent books and follows a logical order (although poor in prose). WP:SYNTH refers specifically to original research that combines facts from multiple sources to make a claim that no single source did - aka doing the work of a secondary source. I do not see how that could possibly apply to the lead section that you removed. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk to me!/my edits) 05:18, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- You are free to create a section of Mughals for the instances that involved political marriages. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Reading it more closely, it appears the new article indeed includes it, but under Political marriages in India#Kachwahas, which seems pretty random to me. Why aren't the Mughals under their own section? Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk to me!/my edits) 04:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- But you have not just draftified the article. You've redirected the draft to another article which carries over no material that discusses the specific dynamic between Rajputs and Mughals. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk to me!/my edits) 04:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)