User talk:Ganesha811

Archives (Index)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

GAN Backlog Drive - July 2021

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Question re GAN for Biden subarticle

Hi. I'm intending to put Early life and career of Joe Biden up for GAN. Would you be interested in being a co-nominator? Also, is there anything more you are currently intending to add to the article? I think I have added/clarified the items that I had in mind. Fwiw I am the editor who originally brought the Joe Biden main article to GA status in 2008. Subsequently I retired from working on active contentious political articles, so I did not attempt to save the main article's GA status last year when it was removed. But I would like to at least see this subarticle get back part of that GA. Let me know. Thanks ... Wasted Time R (talk) 22:12, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Wasted Time R, sure, I’d be happy to. I may be fairly busy, but I’ll help out with improvements and fixes where I can. There are no major expansions I have planned. I think we should be able to get this one to GA, but I agree that the main Joe Biden article is probably impossible to pass - it would never reach the stability required, regardless of quality. Thanks for your work on the article! Ganesha811 (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. The article is now nominated, with you listed as co-nominator. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:12, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi again. I have no problem with the additions you have been making to the article, however I note that on this addition, you include later discussion/speculation/commentary about a past event. Yet earlier you took out this material that I had added that included a similar kind of perspective on a past event, with your reasoning being that speculation/hypotheticals should not be given undue weight. But there has been more WP:RS commentary on Biden's history with the draft and in the context of that era than there has been on Biden and Corn Pop. So maybe you will reconsider the draft material, or suggest an alternate wording of it? Thanks ... Wasted Time R (talk) 13:06, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Wasted Time R, that's a fair point. I think the key is to share just the connections the sources make, and no more, to avoid WP:SYNTHESIS. In the Corn Pop case, the sources were explicitly talking about that story. I've re-added the first sentence I removed, about some observers finding Biden's asthma odd, since that's also the case there. But I think the general sentence that "some young men sought to avoid the draft" should be kept out unless there are sources specifically talking about that general phenomenon in connection with Biden in particular. Ganesha811 (talk) 13:14, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay. I've reworked and added that part of the material back in, this time using sources that explicitly include Biden in the discussion of that general phenomenon. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:13, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Wasted Time R, sounds good, thanks for your work on it. Ganesha811 (talk) 03:25, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

July 2021

Hello, I'm Fowler&fowler. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Great Famine of 1876–1878 have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Per WP:BRD, you need to establish consensus for your edits. Edit warring by peremptorily posting an intention of your edit, is not consensusTemplate:Z186 Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:59, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Important information

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:19, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Some Lahpet for you!

	Thank you so much!
	Thanks a bunch. Hope we can work together more in the future. Zin Win Hlaing (talk) 14:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

• No, thank you for writing a very interesting article on a country that deserves more coverage on English Wikipedia. Ping me if you ever nominate any more for GA and I'll see if I have time to review them. Ganesha811 (talk) 14:21, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Can you tell me how to nominate for the second time? Thank you!

Hi Ganesha811, Is it the second nomination at the bottom of the template page of the last failed DYK nomination for Ink wash painting? I tried several times and failed. Can you tell me how to nominate for the second time? Thank you! --Jujiang (talk) 00:46, 29 July 2021 (UTC)