User talk:Arjayay

A Gnome Explains

It is a silly WikiGnome story:-
I found I had misspelt retrieved, as retreived (ei), three times in one article (one mistake, copied & pasted).
I set myself a "penance" (nothing like a little masochism) of correcting the "ei" versions in Wikipedia articles.
I only intended to do the 100 or so misspellings there were at the time, but I then adopted "retrieved" (retreived, retrived, retreved)
I then added "rhythm” (rhythem, rhythim, rhythym, rhytm, rythem, rythim, rythm & rythym)

I then got carried away, and adopted the Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/R - all of it.
Don’t do it, it's bad for your health

Broadcasted

I have been asked about my changing "broadcasted" to "broadcast"

The Wiktionary definition of Broadcasted states that the use is proscribed, so it should not be used.
The word also appears on Wikipedia:Lists_of_common_misspellings/B

Broadcasted is accepted in some US dictionaries, but not at all in some UK ones, e.g.Chambers which states "Sorry, no entries for Broadcasted were found"
The very first section of WP:ENGVAR is WP:COMMONALITY "Wikipedia tries to find words that are common to all varieties of English."
If "broadcasted" was the only acceptable word in US English, then under ENGVAR, that should be used in articles on US subjects.
However, as there is a word "common to all varieties of English" then COMMONALITY requires that it is used throughout, even if other spellings exist.

An April 2014 article space search for Broadcast gave over 139,500 uses, compared with a search for broadcasted which gave just 39.
Moreover, of the uses of Broadcasted 15 are redirects to Broadcast articles, and five relate to one Turkish TV station

---

---

Please comment here

External Links

Thanks for the advice. I was adding links to sites witch information i found as being relevant, did not think there were by a problem...

kind regards,

AlexFrieza (talk) 12:30, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for pointing out the mistake I have been making. It was due to a typing mistake in an AWB regular expression parse and replace string. I have now fixed it. I will now go back over my last 250 edits or so and fix any mistakes I have created, by this edit. -- PBS (talk) 10:52, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

I think I've done a lot of them - although currently the search index has only caught up to early on 5 January, so it is probably worth working backwards. - Arjayay (talk) 10:56, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

I introduced the error into the script in the last couple of days, but to make sure I got them all I went back to the start of this AWB run which was on January 2 (about 1000 edits to my surprise). The pass picked up about a score of errors which have been fixed. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- PBS (talk) 11:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Addition of Turkey Broadcast of "Mi ex me tiene ganas"

Hello Arjayay. I thank you for your contribution to the Mi ex me tiene ganas page. You edited the broadcast section by indicating that it will soon air on FOX Turkey under the translated title "Benim eski beni istiyor". Could you please post a link to show when it will air on the channel or if it has already started airing. I will appreciate it, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarVit3 (talk • contribs) 13:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I have only made one edit to that page, this one which was simply to correct a spelling mistake (see top of this page for a detailed explanation). I have not indicated "that it will soon air on FOX Turkey under the translated title "Benim eski beni istiyor" " and know nothing about that at all. Arjayay (talk) 13:38, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Please do not ask a question and then remove my reply, which I have now re-instated.
Having checked this using "Wikiblame" the information was added in this edit on 18 August by an IP user User:217.164.75.14 (talk)
You could try contacting them, but as this IP was only used for 5 edits, all on the same day, you are very unlikely to get a reply. - Arjayay (talk) 13:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Robert Burns

Hi, Arjayay, I just noticed you made an edit on Robert Burns at the request of an IP. I'm just double checking - the link used as the ref goes to the Jean Redpath site where they are selling the CDs. I'm wondering if this is just promotional, especially as Burns night is in a couple of weeks? Sorry if you've already considered this but I thought I'd flag it to you anyway. SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:12, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your message User:Sagaciousphil.

I'm quite happy if you want to remove the link to the sales site, as long as that doesn't give rise to an "unreferenced" problem. Sales sites are always problematic, but this does include some "editorial" information, albeit it is a "primary" source. Redpath has her own article, and there two other internal links, in those two lines, which you may consider adequate? AFAIK Redpath's covering of Burns' songs is the most extensive currently available, so deserves a mention, even if she "only" managed 7 of the 22 volumes with Hovey, plus 3 for the Scots Musical Museum. Arjayay (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for such a fast response. I'll just leave the ref (for now anyway) - as you say, it's always so difficult with sales sites, I think that's why my re-action wasn't "I'll just remove it". Let's just keep on eye on it for now? Thanks again for your response! SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:40, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Search index not updating

Yes, scary. CirrusSearch development/implementation does not appear to be moving along very fast. I dropped a note on AKlapper's talk page. Tim Starling no longer appears to be active. Let's keep our fingers crossed. Chris the speller ^yack 19:12, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thank you very much for your careful reading of the page I created. Allow me to insist however to keep the full name if only at the beginning of each new section. I find it reads a lot better. That is the practice in written texts after all -- books or newspaper articles. Many thanks, AlexandraSl AlexandraSl (talk) 10:23, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

A fierce kitten searching for misspelled words. Please go through my edit history and correct spelling. Thanks.

Geraldshields11 (talk) 20:11, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Plesae can you check the references fro 1) Martineau family 2)James Martineau 3) Philip Meadows Martineau thanks so much - I am not sure if I have referenced correctly cheers Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.160.17.244 (talk) 22:47, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

A discussion you may be interested in

Hello Arjayay, as you may recall you had some suggestions yesterday regarding the Egyptian constitution article here [1]. Someone has suggested here [2] that the article be moved. You may want to provide your input, if you want. Thanks,David O. Johnson (talk) 06:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks David - I've answered there.

Seeking your arbitration Comment

I noticed that you have had previous input on the article Mohammed Burhanuddin. Well, there is an ongoing dispute between myself and another editor regarding the inclusion/exclusion of a stampede at this mans funeral. Could you please leave your thoughts on the talk page discussion. Thanks.Fotoriety (talk) 23:32, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

User:HZ100 and the WICL page

Please do not make any changes for User:HZ100 on the WICL page. HZ100 is a sockpuppet of indef-blocked User:Zimmerman1997 and has been a long-time vandal of the WICL page. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:14, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - as you can see I didn't make any changes, because something about the attitude was wrong, especially linking to a blog, which repeated the same dispute, as some sort of "proof". Arjayay (talk) 18:36, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I know you didn't, I was just giving you a heads up before you did. This user has an ongoing dispute about what the format of WICL is. They haven't provided any sources except for personal recollection or original research and have edit-warred constantly. There has also been problems with incorrectly formatted images being added. The user doesn't seem to want to listen to anyone's posts telling them how to correctly edit, mine or any admins.

But, I just wanted to give you a heads up on what was going on with this user. Not an accusation or anything like that. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Notable people from Harit Pradesh

Dear, I think we can use "notable people from proposed harit pradesh" or "notable people born in proposed harit pradesh". You said " nobody can come from somewhere that does not exist".If we go by your logic then we just cant tell anything about Harit Pradesh except that it is a proposed state and that people are in favor or against it. The point is that there is difference in creating something new (say inhabiting on a new island after discovering it) and carving out a part of land from a bigger one on which everything already exists. We are not creating something physically, it will be created only in maps,books,constitution etc., everything else already exists (i.e. west uttar pradesh). ////Ch. Charan Singh was born in West U.P. ///// Ch. Charan Singh was born in the proposed Harit Pradesh.//// Both statements seem to be quite valid to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vrgb123 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Consensus on "Suggestion to split Guilty Gear XX/X2 updates into different articles"

Hello, you're invited to vote and express your views about this on the discussion topic. Jotamide (talk) 23:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your invitation, but I know absolutely nothing about Guilty Gear X2 - and very little about videogames in the last 30 years (although I was quite good up to about 1983)
The only edit I have made at Guilty Gear X2 was to correct a misspelling of Rigth > Right - Arjayay (talk) 15:18, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for correcting my mistake in Flypast, even though it was just two characters switching places, I have been wondering what, exactly, is the difference between the two spellings, I think I have the general idea now. Ape89 (talk) 20:46, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

"I before e, except after c" is a poor rule - consider "their", "height " and other common words, but works in most longer words. - Arjayay (talk) 21:40, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Stat Inst

Hi Arjayay, can you have a quick at 2011 SI's I have added a talk, to save that I copy here for your reference.

Replicated from SI 20111

Split article?

Split - Article is over 600 kilobytes, and should be split into articles of between 500 to 1000 Statutory Instruments. Thoughts? --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:40, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Keep Whilst ridiculously long, the article is now complete and should not have m/any more edits, as it lists all the 2011 SI's. As a bare list, there should not be any comments or other changes made. Splitting the article will make searching for a 2011 statute much more difficult. Arjayay (talk) 18:38, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Modify Hi I have made an excel tool to reduce the overall size of the list, it keeps all functionality/links etc, and reduces the base data by more than 6.5%, I have placed a small example on my own talk page for quick reference. I believe ordering by SI number is valid and best practice, so I have placed this in primary position. I believe the TOC adds no value and takes up extra space, hence I suggest we remove this, reducing data a further ~2%. I have saved my tool and work and this can be replicated across all SI lists, whilst not a dramatic saving it allows more effective retrieval of this information. Any comments please feel free to leave here or on my page. The Original Filfi (talk) 03:49, 28 February 2014 (UTC) End Replicated from SI 20111.
Any thoughts? Thank you for your time The Original Filfi (talk) 13:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for copying me in directly The Original Filfi, I have replied at Talk:List of Statutory Instruments of the United Kingdom, 2011 and will watch there for any other comments - Arjayay (talk) 15:29, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Arjayay, can you comment on the Talk:List of Statutory Instruments of the United Kingdom, 2011 latest. Thanks again, again.
The Original Filfi (talk) 23:23, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

My request on the Kiss Talk Page

Hi Arjayay,

Thanks for your reply on the Kiss Talk Page. I've just finished incorporating my edits. Had some trouble with the footnotes, but managed all the same. Have a look and let me know over here if it's okay. I was only worried about the two Egyptian poetry citations but have, nonetheless, included them. The others are all above board. Regarding neutral point of view, it's my belief that others (particularly Hitsuji Kinno) were biased. (They hyped up India and totally neglected the rest of the world. I believe that if one were to do some more digging around, one could even find more examples, maybe from China or Mesoamerica.) My Hawley citation (which is a proper one) contradicts his Lorenzi-Vaughn one (which, in my opinion, is not a proper citation). I'll leave it for you to decide.

You'll notice that I've ordered the entries chronologically, i.e., Sumer, then Egypt, then the Old Testament, then India, then Greece. The time I'd contacted Hitsuji Kinno, he, in typical knee-jerk fashion, changed the order to Vedic first and Song of Solomon later, giving the reason that "the Mahabharata is older than the Old Testament" (see the Revision History). Well, the Song of Solomon was written down ca. 350 BC, while the earliest written version of the Mahabharata is considered to be ca. 450 BC, so he was partially right (without realizing it, most probably). But, I've now quoted from Genesis (events from before 1500 BC), which was definitely written down before 500 BC. Hence, my placing the Hebrew references first. In any case, nobody seems able to actually quote the "kissing scenes" from the Mahabharata or the Vedas, which I'd pointed out to Hitsuji Kinno.

I look forward to your reply and criticisms, if any.

Sincerely,

Andrew Cabral — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.98.181.26 (talk) 17:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I have removed the "essay-style" phrase "Be that as it may" and also corrected a double "by" further down - that was not of your creation.

I am rather worried about the length and number of quotations, as they break up the article before it has really got going, and produce a series of "bullet points", albeit without the bullets. I think one of the Egyptian quotes (probably the longer second one) should be lost, but am not sure that the other quotes can easily be reduced and still say what you want, although possibly the first Egyptian one could be reformatted to have three lines, as any rhyming and metre have been lost in the translation. As these are essentially references and/or examples, rather than the core of the article, if they cause extreme comment/objections, I wonder if they could be included as footnotes, so the section has a better flow?

As for your comments about Hitsuji Kinno, although it is difficult, you must always assume good faith rather than start off by assuming there will be a further disagreement, which I appreciate is difficult. If your edits are reverted - please try to stay calm, and follow the bold, revert, discuss system. As you are the one that has been bold, the discussion should occur after his revert, not after you revert his revert.

I will watch the page for a couple of weeks to see what occurs - but I am only an editor, not an admin, so my opinion carries no more weight, although having been around for a few years I have learnt some of the Wikipedia polices. - Arjayay (talk) 18:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Arjayay, for your reply and comments/suggestions. To be honest, even I felt that "be that as it may" was a little silly. Just thought it could be some kind of juncture between the anthropological theories and the references to the ancient literature part. I do get what you're saying about the length and bullet-style quotations. It's just that I feel that at least here people can get to see actual and diverse examples from the written word in history. If there are objections, then yes, I guess that they can be shifted to the footnotes. As I'd said, I'll leave that for you (and other bona fide Wikipedia editors and/or general editors who are unbiased and cite properly and honestly) to decide.

The lines are as per the sources, so I'm not sure if our fiddling around is right. But, just so that there's no confusion to you, I must point out the following: (i) the first two Sumerian citations are from Ref. [3] (can be checked by the Amazon Look-Inside feature), while the last one is from Ref. [4] (I'd originally got it from humanistictexts.org, which cited ETCSL); (ii) the first three Egyptian ones (two lines each) are from themagentahornet, while the two longer ones are from love-poetry-of-the-world (Have I placed the citation labels correctly? I felt that placing them at the end of each verse would clutter things up considerably.); (iii) the link to the Hawley citation (Ref. [11]) leads to the Leeds International Classical Studies page, from which the article can be downloaded (Should it be the article's page itself?). As I'd mentioned on the Kiss Talk Page, I'm uncomfortable with the two Egyptian references (they are not from a book or a journal). These two websites don't give bibliographic details and I'd written to the Magenta Hornet asking for the same in late November, but haven't received a reply till now. The other one didn't have any contact details. And there are too many books out there on the subject to check (most without the Look-Inside feature and which I couldn't find links to download). Incidentally, I quoted only one line in the very first Sumerian example because the original goes as follows (p. 84 of Kramer):

The lord speaks to her of intercourse (?), she is unwilling,
Enlil speaks to her of intercourse (?), she is unwilling;
"My vagina is too little, it knows not to copulate,
My lips are too small, they know not to kiss"...

Regarding, Hitsuji Kinno, there were no edits of mine that he reverted nor of his that I have, till yesterday, which I'd explained to you. It is true that I'd contacted him on his Talk Page and gave him a long explanation which he probably didn't want to have to read. But I was polite and straight. On his Talk Page, he was curt but not rude, whereas on the Kiss Talk Page, he was downright condescending. So, I naturally gave it back to him. I've put it all together on the Kiss Talk Page so that any third party can read the exchanges and form his/her own opinions. He, of course, didn't (I believe couldn't) reply, and there the matter lies.

Will check back with you over here if there's anything further to be done from my side. Thank you once again for pointing out to me that the page was no longer protected and for your reading what I'd put in and commenting on the same. Catch you later. Till then, take care!

Andrew

Edits on Bani Gala removed

Hello Arjayay (RGA):

My screen name is BaniGallian and certain edits were mentioned - and on certain of them, I agree, that it falls into the section of 'non-information' ie u-turns, soliciting opinion etc - But as a reason for the wholesale removal of ALL of the edit is a bit harsh121.202.251.170 (talk) 12:13, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for leaving a message, but I am afraid I cannot agree, None of your information was sourced to be verifiable, reliable sources, which are independant of the subject. You added 7,700 bytes - about 1500 words - but did not provide any sources whatsoever, for the information you added, so it is totally correct for it to be deleted.

Wikipedia is not Facebook, it is not interested what your, my, or any other editor's, opinion is about anything. It only wants to refer to things that have already been published in reliable, independent sources. If the Daily Times, Pakistan Today, Pakistan Observer, or a similar national or regional paper has commented on what Bani Gala needs, it would be fair to comment, briefly. But what you, a local residents group, the developer, or any other local, non-independent source thinks or says, is not acceptable.

Please read referencing for beginners and make sure that anything and everything you add is covered by an acceptable reference. It is often better to add information piece by piece, including the relevant references, rather than in one big edit - Arjayay (talk) 13:18, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello Arjayay: I completely agree with your assessment. I am in the process of re-editing and as you have pointed out 'references will be provided in the form of a link that is sourced to a credible publication. Also, I was under the impression that Wikipedia was also a source of public information ie Absence of Drainage is a 'negative' point and its environmentally a disaster...so how do we present this point without sounding 'preacher-like' or facebookish? Many Thanks for your guidance...pls keep reviewing as my purpose is to 'inform' I have nothing to sell! Thanks much PAKZindabahd (talk) 13:16, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

But you have simply not done what you said you would do. Other than two External Links, which are not allowed in the body of an article, you haven't added any references at all, but have added back the same irrelevant trivia about road junctions, U-Turns etc.
I have formatted your external links, made your picture show, and deleted the trivia again. Any re-additions of this material are likely to be considered vandalism.
In addition, please do not use CAPITALS as this is considered shouting and contravenes MOS:CAPS and please read WP:Referencing for beginners - Arjayay (talk) 15:11, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Soliciting comment...

Hi! Would you care to review or comment at my FA nomination for the article Misterioso (Thelonious Monk album)? It is a short article about a jazz album. Information on reviewing an FA nomination's criteria is available at WP:FACR. If not, feel free to ignore this message. Cheers! Dan56 (talk) 01:50, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thanks for all your excellent work! MONGO 00:43, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Please contact me

Hi Arjayay. Could you please email me so we can chat privately regarding an edit? Thanks,Volatilis — Preceding undated comment added 16:51, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but no. I have no idea what you wish to discuss, but in general, I think most discussions about Wikipedia should take place on Wikipedia.

If you wish to e-mail me, please do so, but I am not revealing my e-mail address to a totally unknown editor, whose request is only their second edit. Arjayay (talk) 17:03, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Tireless efforts to safeguard FA

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your tireless efforst to protect Hyderabad from random POV edits. --Omer123hussain (talk) 18:30, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that Omer123hussain - Hyderabad has been particularly bad recently, with one particular editor, who clearly doesn't read edit summaries, or their talk page.
We have a lot of editors trying to "promote" their town/city/district/state in India, in particular editors trying to create Telangana state before 2 June. - we Wikignomes just keep plodding away. Arjayay (talk) 19:07, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Template:ESp

FYI, Template:ESp (along with Template:EP and Template:ETp) should be subst'd when used. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:14, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry Jackmcbarn, I'm not sure what you are trying to say - Template:ESp states "This template intentionally has no transclusions because it is automatically substituted by a bot." ? - Arjayay (talk) 17:21, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

You're supposed to use {{subst:ESp|rs}} rather than {{ESp|rs}}. When you don't, a bot has to clean up after you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:22, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I've improved the message to clarify this. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation - I don't know where I initially copied it from.
I haven't done a test-edit, but is the problem that copying the text of something like this, occurs after the substitution, so it has already lost the original text that causes the substitution? - Arjayay (talk) 17:39, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

It wasn't substituted in the place where you copied from. If you copied a substituted version of it, it would have still been substituted when you pasted it. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:42, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

OK thanks - sorry for causing the bot additional work ;-} - Arjayay (talk) 17:48, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Larry Page Edit request

I do understand your reply, no source is needed, I am citing the dictionary!

Larry Page IS a business magnate, & an internet entrepreneur, but Business magnate succeeds over internet entrepreneur, it is in a sense a 'successful entrepreneur'. Are you asking me proof of his success? Or his Power? Concerning the later, it even states in the article that he is listed on Forbes list of most powerful people. Concerning the former, I don't think a reference is needed to prove Page has had success in his field!

Dirac740 (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Firstly, which reliable source states that he is a "Business magnate", and which says that he is an "internet entrepreneur"?
Secondly which reliable source states that "Business magnate succeeds over internet entrepreneur"? Or is this your opinion?
You can only cite a dictionary for the definition of a word. The interpretation, and appropriate application, of the word is an opinion and/or synthesis.
Hence the need for a reliable source - Arjayay (talk) 07:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Business Magnate: a person of great influence, importance, or standing in a particular enterprise or field of business. The term characteristically refers to a wealthy individual who controls through personal business ownership or dominant shareholding position a firm or industry whose goods, products, or services are widely consumed.

Larry Page Net Worth: $29.7 billion, source: Google, Self Made Is Google widely consumed? It is the most visited website in the world: http://www.alexa.com/topsites He is listed no. 17 on Forbes list of Worlds most powerful people http://www.forbes.com/powerful-people/list/, and has been listed 3 time on Time 100 most influential people.

There should be no dispute in adding Business magnate, concerning 'internet entrepreneur', 'business magnate' implies entrepreneur, and following with 'he is the cofounder of Google', gives the field (internet), and again tells you he is an entrepreneur.

Dirac740 (talk) 09:46, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry - you are missing the point entirely. You are interpreting and extrapolating other information, contrary to synthesis, not citing a reliable source for the use of "Business Magnate" - Arjayay (talk) 10:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

That is ridiculous! A half-wit can work out he is a business magnate, it shouldn't need to be stated anywhere. The fact is he fits the definition of business magnate, therefore he is one. Where is a reliable source calling him an internet entrepreneur? There isn't one listed! Does that mean he isn't an internet entrepreneur?

Dirac740 (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

IMHO "can work out he is a business magnate" is either original research or synthesis

If, as you say, "it shouldn't need to be stated anywhere" why are you trying to get it stated in the article? ;-)

I don't know why you are so worried about the semantics, and note you have a broadly similar request at Talk:Elon Musk. I am certainly not going to add it without a reliable source, but another editor might well do so.

To re-activate your request, please return to Talk:Larry_Page#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_14_April_2014 and follow the instructions in the beige box - another editor (not me) will then consider it.

- Arjayay (talk) 15:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Nizo Neto

Thank you for your help in this page! Rei Momo (talk) 15:08, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

NYIT Alumni

Hi, I went through all the NYIT alumni listed on Talk:New_York_Institute_of_Technology#reviewing_the_notable_alumni_list. It does appear most of them should be removed. I'd say

Keep:

• John Antioco, CEO, Blockbuster Video, Chairman, Board of Directors, Red Mango
• Jerry Romano, chairman, New York Emmy Awards
• Itzhak Fisher, executive vice president, Global Business Development, Nielsen Holdings
• Humayun Chaudhry, physician and CEO, Federation of State Medical Boards
• Monte N. Redman, CEO, Astoria Financial

And remove the rest. Thoughts? MlaneNYIT (talk) 18:11, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

MlaneNYIT- thanks for your post, and for researching these names.
Unfortunately, as explained at Wikipedia:Your alma mater is not your ticket to Wikipedia, many, relatively non-notable people, try to include themselves in Wikipedia by adding their name to an alumni list

There are no standard inclusion criteria, covering all academic institutions, but we don't want any article dominated by a long list, especially when the article also refers to a stand-alone list.
To take an extreme example, Trinity College, Cambridge only lists its Nobel prize winners in the main article, whilst the List of alumni of Trinity College, Cambridge only includes alumni with their own article.

With regards to NYIT, there is also the page List of New York Institute of Technology alumni so we also need two criteria levels, or else the two lists will be identical, making one of them redundant.
IMHO the minimum standard for inclusion on the main New_York_Institute_of_Technology article should be a Wikipedia article - those without an article, but still "notable" in Wikipedia terms, can be included on the "List"

This means I would only retain one of your five names on the NYIT page, but move the other 4 names to the "List", and incorporate several names from the "List" into the NYIT page.
Ideally, it would probably be best to sort the List of New York Institute of Technology alumni first, and then select the really notable alumni for inclusion in the main article. - Arjayay (talk) 18:47, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Indeed. I'll go through the other list next and then probably refactor as you suggest. A part of the problem is that a sock did a lot of the additions and the sock liked to add long lists of things and it's a lot of work to convert that both to notability and (in other parts of the article) to prose. MlaneNYIT (talk) 18:52, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

List of guitarists

• Hello,

Thank you for your corrections on my edits. I will now not put unlinked bands no more. As for the full resume, indeed it is quite long, but isn't important to know what other bands they had played in? 173.206.27.173 (talk) 17:36, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

As every guitarist in the list has their own article, or they would not be in the list, readers can easily look them up. Most guitarists are known for being in one or two bands, which are the ones normally linked to. There is (currently) no rule about how many bands, but a long list serves little purpose - if you know the name of the guitarist or band, you will look up the guitarist or band, and find the name of band or guitarist that way. You are unlikely to search a long list like this.
If you want to re-add the linked acts I will not remove them, but please do not re-add "Abercr9ombie" as that does not appear anywhere in Wikipedia at all, and will confuse the reader. - Arjayay (talk) 17:49, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Info needed

In some villages or town pages, people are updating private school names that list is around 40-50 in number. Do we really need that. Also, temples names, they are updating even a small street temple. Also, about separate section on MLA's or MP's of the constitution, also list of banks in their town. Can you give suggestion. Do we really require this info for that specific town? If they can explain, it's ok but they are simple listing to expand the page. Please leave your suggestion. Vin09 (talk) 19:08, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I totally agree, many Subcontinent articles have very long irrelevant lists - I assume this is to try and make a place look more important. The general guideline is WP:NOTDIR but this is fairly vague
These lists include:- Roads, suburbs, nearby villages, train and bus routes, schools, banks, shops, and notable people.

Some of these, like notable people, have fairly clear-cut inclusion criteria:- an article, or significant coverage, in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
Primary schools are not generally deemed notable enough for inclusion, but secondary, and further education establishments are, whether they are private or state
Roads and suburbs are generally not notable, unless they have their own article, which many suburbs of the bigger cities do have
Train and bus routes can be mentioned in passing, but we do not want exhaustive lists and especially not timetables,

What I tend to do is add a template such as the Notable residents template (code is {{alumni|residents|date=April 2014}}) which gives:-

or the General list template code is {{Cleanup-list|date=April 2014}} which gives:-

I then wait a month to see if there are any improvements, after which I reduce the list to the notable entries, or remove the list altogether. When doing the removal I state that the list has been tagged for over a month.
Although you can be WP:BOLD and just remove the list at once, I have found that tagging has led to several improvements, whilst being able to state that a list has been tagged, but not improved, seems to stop a lot of arguments.

Having removed lots of names from a list, I recommend Hidden text, which you can refer to if/when someone adds a name back - so, on lists of "Notable people" I usually add:-
<!-- ONLY ADD A PERSON TO THIS LIST IF THEY ALREADY HAVE A WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE, OR PROVIDE DETAILED REFERENCES FROM RELIABLE, INDEPENDENT, SOURCES MEETING WP:BLP -->
Hope that helps - Arjayay (talk) 17:57, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014

On Guntur page some IP's are reverting almost everyday the tags, population stats. Can you help me on that issue. Vin09 (talk) 08:10, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I have Guntur on my watchlist - but much of the problem seems to occur between 03.00 and 06.00 when, being in the UK, I am in bed.
Please note I am not an Administrator on Wikipedia, so I cannot intervene directly
In order to have a user blocked, they should be reported to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism but before going to AIV you must be able to show that:-

1. The edits of the reported user must be obvious vandalism or obvious spam.
2. The user must have been given enough warnings to stop their disruptive behavior.
3. The warnings must have been given recently and the users must be active now, especially for unregistered users.

Therefore, each time you revert a user, you should put a warning on their talk-page, in an escalating scale of severity.
The standard warnings are at Wikipedia:Vandalism templates. Most warnings require you to add the page in following a vertical line and sign using four tildes.

As an example, the current problem is removing maintenance templates, you would use the template - {{subst:uw-tdel1}} - insert the page and signature giving - {{subst:uw-tdel1|Gudar}} ~~~~ which will appear as:-

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Gudar. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Arjayay (talk) 09:00, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

This is time consuming, but some editors are unaware that what they are doing is wrong, whilst others respond to being warned.
The warnings and vandalism must alternate - revert vandalism + issue Warning 1 - revert vandalism occurring after warning 1 + issue Warning 2 etc.
If an editor has committed 4 lots of vandalism, you can't issue warnings 1,2,3 & 4 in a row - they must have a chance to read the warning, and show they have ignored it, by carrying out further vandalism, before you can issue the next warning.
Editors are allowed to remove warnings from their talk page, but this is seen as proof that they have read them. You may need to look at the talk page history, to see what level warning they have reached.
This is very time consuming, but the only way that AIV will normally block an editor is a track record of continuing vandalism after proper warnings. - Arjayay (talk) 09:00, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Outdent

When using {{outdent}} or {{od}}, like you did at Talk:Jat people, please make sure to include a parameter with the number of colons that the previous post had. For example, if the previous post had four colons (::::), use {{outdent|::::}} or {{outdent|4}}. This makes sure that the line properly connects to the previous post. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 19:24, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Marrecs de Salt

You have removed every reference to raised towers in Marrecs de Salt article. Maybe I wasn't using the right word (I'm not a native speaker), but there are regular towers (no specification needed) where people in the upper levels climb all the others on the lower ones and raised towers in which the whole tower “seems to be” emerging from below, because lower levels are added after upper ones. This would usually become pilar de 4 and pilar de 4 aixecat per sota in catalan hence my translation into pillar of 4 and pillar of 4 raised (from below). What do you suggest? A better wording? Or just revert your last edits? Thanks for proofreading it, anyway. :D (talk) 17:42, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your post JordiGran - I did not remove the word "raised", I removed the word "rised", which is a misspelling (see Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/R)
I don't think there is one simple English word to cover the situation, "raised from below" sums it up best, or just using "raised" is fine, but please don't use "rised" - Thanks Arjayay (talk) 17:59, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Arjayay Oh, I see! My fault. :-| I'll put it back with the right spelling then. Thanks again! JordiGran (talk) 11:09, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Title format

What is the correct title format of the page Vijayawada "Railway Division. Is it Vijayawada "Railway Division"? or Vijayawada "railway division"?Vin09 (talk) 09:02, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Guided in certain occasions on some issues Vin09 (talk) 09:07, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks! But can we get the 'Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (February 2011)' statement removed, as Kranti Kanade's article does not have any contentious or libelous information? Gautam.rayakar (talk) 08:41, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks! But can we get the 'Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (February 2011)' statement removed, as Kranti Kanade's article does not have any contentious or libelous information? Gautam.rayakar (talk) 08:41, 15 May 2014 (UTC)