User talk:Ravensfire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I will generally respond on this page inside the section which has been added unless you request otherwise. Please watch this page if you leave me a message, and remember to sign your post with ~~~~. Thanks!


Saath Nibhana Saathiya[edit]

Hi! If you think the page is too bloated, kindly tell me and I will revise it. I love editing and especially love this show and will certainly trim it down - but please don't cut everything I have written. (Kamleshbhabhi (talk) 04:53, 22 January 2015 (UTC))

@Kamleshbhabhi: See your article talk page. You HAVE been told it is too long. Trim it down, a LOT, before trying to put it back it. And honestly, discuss your changes in the article talk page before making them. You have been warned about breaching 3RR which you are past and pointed to the MOS section for film plots. Ravensfire (talk) 04:59, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Conspiracy theory[edit]

I notice you have reverted the definition sentence. Now I applaud your action -- the change was an apparent vandalism. But the definition sentence you restored does not agree with the article. A definition that agrees with the body of the article might read as follows: "A conspiracy theory is a pathological delusion consisting of a large and often complex explanation for events that does not agree with the facts." Quite honestly, I prefer the definition you restored, but whole article should not be maintained with the definition sentence in disagreement with the body. I have attempted to bring this conflict to the attention of the ad hoc community that maintains the page, and you can find my arguments in TALK. Perhaps you would care to venture your opinion in that forum. Slade Farney (talk) 05:49, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Danish Oil[edit]

Dear Ravensfire,

On the 1st of Feb I added the little known history of Danish Oil, which is verifiable, yet you removed it. May I ask why?


Gavin Mason — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) February 12, 2015

Gavin, I removed it for a couple of reasons. First, it was completely unsourced. Generally, information in articles needs to be sourced to reliable sources (that page has info on what is a RS). Second, it seemed overly promotional in nature. In fact, I really thought it was from an external website that sold the product but didn't find a match. Finally, it was shoved at the beginning of the article when, if properly sourced and edited to be non-promotional in nature, it should be integrated into the existing article. A section on the history would be helpful, but again, we need sources for that. Hope that helps some. Ravensfire (talk) 16:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Brennan edit[edit]

Thanks for your note. How does one determine what is considered by Wikipedia to be a legitimate "source?" As I dug deeper on TPNN I can see how their reporting may be closer to rumor than proven facts. Although questionable, my personal experiences in the Middle East for many years was aligned with observations within an article I attributed as my source.

Over the years most of my problems with Wikipedia had been from others who doubt my original copyrighted images, submitted to contribute to Wikipedia content. I'm still learned about Wikipedia copyrights.

Thanks again. Initially, thought your editing carried another agenda. (Abuse). But your note helped clarify things.

Dan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edgy01 (talk (talkcontribs) February 14, 2015

@Edgy01: Dan, glad the note helped some. The best place to start is the reliable sources page. There's a lot of information there and I'll freely admit it's tough to determine what is and is not a reliable sources. For a lot of news-ish websites, it can often come down to a reputation for accuracy. That's very different from bias, as a site can be biased but still have a reputation for accuracy. If you aren't sure about a particular source, a great source is the Reliable Source Noticeboard. You can add a section there with the source you want to use, the article(s) you where you want to use the source and the information you want to add/change in the article and you'll get some feedback from various editors.
Something to note, however. The specific edit you made has some other issues around it that would have caused problems. Religion is a very touchy subject that has been used in the past to tar people unfairly. A general rule that has emerged in various discussions is that religion is what the person self-identifies as their religion. For example, someone is both in faith A but now practices faith B. What's their religion? Or someone practices faith A but periodically goes to faith B religious ceremonies. What's their religion? For that second example, I'll use myself as an example. My wife and I have different faiths but alternate which church we attend. Neither of us could be said to be of the other's faith, but someone else watching us might try to say I was of faith X, not Y. Tricky subject, isn't it? Ravensfire (talk) 17:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Deletion notice of Pahawe manahce[edit]


Thanks for being Blunt and leaving message. It is website "" is not owned by me, but I am a regular reader of the same. This is a new website and very new experiment in a regional language in India. Let me know exactly which part of the page you want information/approval from owner of the website and I will try to contact him.

I am just trying to give information about this new website that gives movie reviews of World Cinema in Marathi. This is not a very common in my language(Marathi)

(You can see I have already contributed very much in Marathi Wikipedia about various topics including websites, history, art and culture. This is first time I am contributing on English pages so that those who don't visit Wikipedia in Marathi would also get this information.)

You have won[edit]

I'd like to edit other articles as well. Please stop to follow all my contributions. I'm asking generously. Thanks! AHLM13 talk 18:24, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Sure! As soon as I can be sure you understand editing in a collaborative manner and how to follow Wikipedia policies. Could be problematic based on our past edits and what you've said on your talk page though. You need to learn from the advice you've been given. Since you were given the same advice some months ago and showed a failure to learn, you've shown no willingness to change. Ravensfire (talk) 04:27, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Sargun Mehta[edit]

Hi Ravensfire, i need your suggestion. I am currently working on this article, and recently i see that she has added her hubby's (Ravi Dubey) surname and writes her name as Sargun Mehta Dubey on April 2014, but newspapers are still writes her name as Sargun Mehta, see recently published articles, [1], [2], [3], [4], I've added a comment on article talkpage, So please suggest me that this article should be move on a new name?, And please also suggest me that the article content is enough/better for GA nomination. Hetika (talk) 15:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Hetika:, I left a comment on the article talk page in the name issue. On the GA - I did a quick glance at the article. The sourcing looks good which is always nice to see - well done! The lead seems a bit long given the length of the article and could use some tightening up. There are lots of shows mentioned in the lead and that's probably something that can be reduced. Shows that represent significant and/or current events belong there, but the rest probably don't. There are also some layout issues in the lead - the italics are messed up someplace. I also noticed there are a lot of categories. I think there is some over-categorization there where you've got a child category and the parent category. For example, Category:Indian soap opera actresses is a sub-category of Category:Indian television actresses. Same with Bigg Boss category, you also have the parent listed. Generally, we only use the lowest category in an article. Ravensfire (talk) 17:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
@Ravensfire: Thanks for help, And i've read this policies and will fix it, but i'm still confused in Layout issues, i don't understand about this policy; so can you fix any one of Layout issue for an example??? Hetika (talk) 15:04, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I've fixed some problems, and added more blp info with RS, The lead is now rewrite and removed unsignificant shows from the lede, and also removed head categories. So i request you to please check it again and notify me if any problems. Hetika (talk) 15:16, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
@Hetika:, I've been following your changes and they look nice. I'll try to review and comment sometime later today. Ravensfire (talk) 15:41, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

The DAB pages about UIBE[edit]

Thank you for your remind of WIKI rules. The important issue is that is there any confusion about the similar names or entity using the same names. We don't think the case are here. The UIBE and SUIBE both affilicated with Education Ministry of China. The "Shanghai" is quite important for people to understand who it is. If people search for SUIBE they will add the "shanghai" anyway. But most of the searches with the exact "UIBE" or "University of International Business and Economics" will go to us like the google showing in

The situation is we are later for the RM is the original page and the users wrongly accepted the RM request. We are hoping to fix this and please talk to us and Ahecht and other users in talk page of

We are new here and thank you for you help for how could we get enough support or opposition to complete a new RM? Hope you could help Amuwazi and us to solve this and we would like to hear from SUIBE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{2}}}|{{{2}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{2}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{2}}}|contribs]]) 09:42, March 5, 2015‎ Hades1011

Merely having a copyright on something doesn't really matter on Wikipedia. You're totally ignoring that other entities can use the same abbreviation (UIBE) in other places or can be commonly referenced by similar (or the same) name. Wikipedia practice in those scenarios is to use a disambiguation page (or DAB) to direct editors to the correct page. The actions you and other editors have taken in this matter completely ignore Wikipedia's procedures and demanded, under threat of legal action, that we take your preferred approach. That's a rather poor way to address things and won't win you much help. From a dispassionate view, I think this is handled correctly though. The entities do have similar names, so a DAB is generally how we progress. In time, if it's determined that one page gets dramatically more views than another, a different approach may be taken, but that's something to consider sometime next year probably. Ravensfire (talk) 15:37, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

a hand[edit]

Hi, I hope you're fine.

On 17 February I edited S. Abdul Qayum's article, which were reverted from you. How did you notice that? Via watchlist? If so, how to utilise this tool properly? In my watchlist there are are various article. Also, whenever I edit any page, that article appears automatically on my watchlist? Is there any method to stop this? I actually want only my favourite articles to be included there. Can you help me with this? Thanks. -- AHLM13 talk 14:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Probably watchlist. Any article you create is, by default, automatically added to your watchlist. Any article you use Twinkle on is also automatically added to your watchlist. I don't think a general edit is added by default, you should need to check the "Add to watchlist" box. Once an article has been added, you can remove it pretty easily. I think there's a menu option if you're on the article and you can also edit your watchlist through View and Edit Watchlist option on your watchlist page. If you've got the Popup script enabled (Prefences -> Gadgets -> Navigation Popups), you can also add/remove by right-clicking on the article name. Depending on how many other scripts you use, there may be other ways articles are added to your watchlist. Ravensfire (talk) 04:45, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


I thanks. I'm only trying to be constructive. But this needs reworking. If you read it you can see how so much is either - irrelevant, POV or in the wrong spot. I am really trying to faithfully improve the article. But everything has been undone. LOTS_Scholar (talk) 16:29, 1 April 2015 (UTC)


Have you ever read the WP:BLPABUSE? Please change your offensive username. Follow these steps here. [5] -- AHLM13 talk 14:20, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

You have the funniest ideas on how Wikipedia works, you know that? I do see abuse of BLP articles and strident POV pushing, AHLM13, but it from you. Ravensfire (talk) 14:24, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Why? I am the only who discovered your username which is offensive. Please change it. -- AHLM13 talk 17:14, 5 April 2015
Thanks for the good laugh! Well, small sad chuckle really. Ravensfire (talk) 17:24, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Are you joking with me? I am serious. Where are you originally from? Indian? Isnt'it?-- AHLM13 talk 10:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
You, of all people, are certainly not entitled to ask for such information, nor would I even consider reveaing it to anyone. That you're asking for it is just sad. The origin of the name is Indian (of sorts) - you might consider googling the words and enlighten yourself. Ravensfire (talk) 12:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ravensfire, i think your name is cool, i don't know what your name is based on, i like it from my readings of Norse and American Indian mythologyFace-smile.svg Coolabahapple (talk) 00:11, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
@Coolabahapple: Thanks! My username is inspired by American Indian mythology. While sometimes considered a trickster, Raven is also often shown as the provider of light and/or fire, often using cunning to bring light/fire back to humans. He perseverance through difficulty is shown by his black feathers which started as white but turned black while carrying fire back from the smoke. It's interesting that most of the tales of Raven come from tribes in the Pacific Northwest, so they aren't universal. Powerful stories. Ravensfire (talk) 18:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Birmingham Central Mosque[edit]

Dear Ravensfire, I hope you are well. Can you please look at the recent edit history of Birmingham Central Mosque. It's not nice to be called a religious hypocrite by User:AHLM13 -- again -- merely because I asked for evidence for his addition. Thanks a lot, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 05:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

@GorgeCustersSabre:, both Mbcap and I left warnings on AHLM13's talk page about the edit summary comment. Yeah, that was wrong for him to do. At this point, a warning is really all that can be done. Mbcap also pointed out WP:BURDEN, a policy which says that the person adding or restoring information is responsible for finding a reliable source that directly supports the claim. Not someone else, that person. I did note that AHLM13 left you a message on your talk page that is less than helpful. There is a phrase at the end that I could not find a translation for - if that's also a person attack, let me know and we'll take this to WP:ANI. Ravensfire (talk) 14:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

A word[edit]

Hi, Ravensfire. I wanted to stop by and thank you for your efforts addressing edit warring/overly exuberant editing at Muhammad Iqbal. I noticed your posts only after I had made similar posts. I wanted to explain that my messages were not meant to show any disrespect for your efforts. Also, I regret the appearance of "piling on". I was editing from work and failed to notice that you had already made the situation clear to the involved parties. Again,'s good knowing that I have help out there. Regards Tiderolls 02:18, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, appreciate the comment. I think AHLM13's heart is in the right place, but there is definite room for improvement. I'm worried a bit that they just ignore anything I say, but hopefully the same concerns being raised by others will help them realize something needs to change. The tendency to edit-war with minimal discussion and the exaggeration of what sources say to puff up certain subjects are two big concerns of mine. Hopefully they'll improve before things go to various drama boards. Ravensfire (talk) 03:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

lakshmi mittal[edit]

You changed from "most richest" to "wealthiest". In this case wealthy means someone who possess a good patrimony, such Mukesh Ambani, who built the second most expensive house in the world. But Mittal doesn't posses all of these stuff like Ambani. -- AHLM13 talk 15:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Grammatically, "most richest" is terrible. "Wealthiest" means the same thing in common English and is much easier to read. Ravensfire (talk) 15:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Why can't I have access to you userpage? -- AHLM13 talk 15:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Huh? Why the heck would you need to touch my userpage? I don't have one - it's a redirect to my talk page. Ravensfire (talk) 15:33, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Calm down!!! I just wanted to see it, and not touch it, as everyone is free to see someone's userpage. You can see my one. You are always observing my contributions, but I never acted like you. Read WP:HARASS.-- AHLM13 talk 15:40, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Indeed, if you had acted like me you'd have edited based only on what the sources say, not what you want them to say. Ravensfire (talk) 16:14, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
You're changing the argument. I don't understand why you suddenly got angry. -- AHLM13 talk 10:43, 16 April 2015 (UTC)


I have seen your comment, so I am thanking you. I need to move this article [6], but I can't do it. Why? I need to move to "BRITISH PAKISTANI", without S, as for British Indian and British Bangladeshi. -- AHLM13 talk 16:00, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. On the page move, British Pakistani currently exists, but as a redirect to the plural title. That is what's preventing you from moving the page, so an admin will need to get involved. I looked in the talk page and archives and there was a previous request several years ago for the same move that didn't happen - see Talk:British_Pakistanis/Archive 1#Requested move 3. Please read through that discussion as it was closed as no consensus so you'll need to take in account the points raised there. It mentions some discussions at a WikiProject so you may also want to read those discussions. The right approach may be to make all of the articles plural.
Given that, you'll need to propose the move on the article talk page as this is a potentially controversial move. The full instructions are at WP:RM#CM.
Short version is create a new talk page section and put in this template: {{subst:Requested move|newName|reason=your reason}}
  • Replace newName with your proposed name and add your reasons. Ravensfire (talk) 16:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC)


You've given a brilliant overview. I appreciate it. AHLM13 doesn't appear as a naughty guy, but he has the necessity to understand Wiki policies. I've noticed that you tried a lot to favour him almost in every situation. --115ash→(☏) 08:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. nafSadh did say 18:32, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

@Nafsadh:, Thank you for starting that, hopefully someone can calm down both parties and offer some advice that will be heeded. I think they are both passionate editors which is good, but can cause issues. Ravensfire (talk) 18:34, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


Musical note nicu bucule 01.svg

Please mention references[edit]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kashyap G Rao (talkcontribs) 12:18, May 1, 2015‎

@Kashyap G Rao:, Relying on memory alone is an easy way to add incorrect information. Information on Wikipedia generally must be verifiable, so a reference is often added. In this case, right at the end of the quote from the review is the reference itself. It's that little [43] you see - click on that and you go to that reference in the ref section with a link you can click on. Of course, when you edited that section, the reference would have been there, including the URL so you could have used that. Finally, you could have simply done a web search and verified the information before changing. All of these are simple and would have taken you 15 seconds. In the future, please verify the information you add before making the edit. Ravensfire (talk) 17:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)