Jump to content

User talk:UY Scuti

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Awesomeshreyo (talk | contribs) at 14:46, 19 April 2015 (→‎Edit on Python(programming language)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

My local time is: 04:19, 6 September 2024 IST [refresh]

Do not delete Science and Rationalists' Association of India

Hello, Please don't delete Science and Rationalists' Association of India's article. I read all the information. All information are true. If someone write down about Tiger. And someone edit the tiger wiki that 'Royal Bengal Tiger is rare Tiger.' Then do you delete this info for giving Royal Bengal Tiger name? Is it a promotion to giving Royal Bengal Tiger name? Please make sure that what is promotion & what not. This Association do good very well in social angel. I read all things and there I didn't see any promotion. Please judge this very carefully. You have the chair in wiki for reserve good work, association, institution & u did well. So read again all documents, their purpose and aim then choose what will you do. 103.225.177.79 (talk)Deep — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.225.177.79 (talk) 19:47, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

Hi Jaaron95, I've closed your AFD as Speedy Keep as you haven't provided a reason for deletion,
Editors need to provide a reason for deletion otherwise it'll be closed as "Speedy Keep" per Wikipedia:Speedy keep which states and I quote "The nominator withdraws the nomination or fails to advance an argument for deletion or redirection",
If you provide a reason here I'd be more than happy to reopen it for you or you could just renominate it yourself :),
Thanks and Happy editing, –Davey2010Talk 17:25, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Davey2010:, sorry! I didn't know that I had to provide a reason compulsorily. But, the reason I marked the article for deletion is that I was baffled by the number and types of tags for a BLP article. A BLP article with disputed content, original research, 'not on' NPOV, and 'on' FPOV shouldn't be kept on the first place is my reason! And as a fairly new editor, having read the guidelines of Wikipedia on BLP articles, I think Uygar Aktan should be in a serious trouble! Thank You!--Jaaron95 (talk) 17:36, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry Jaaron95 but Tito's right - Your reason can all be fixed with simple editing, Articles should only be nominated if there's no notability .... Not because of the reasons you mentioned above, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 18:40, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Titodutta:, @Davey2010: I doubt if anything will be left when that ~10 line article is cleaned up! Seeing that many Tags on a BLP forced me to place a deletion tag! Anyways, I just follow my seniors! You need not reopen the discussion Page! Thank you!! --Jaaron95 (talk) 18:48, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Hello, UY Scuti. You have new messages at User:Titodutta/CVU/Students/Jaaron95#Questions.
Message added 18:28, 9 April 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tito Dutta (talk) 18:28, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

Information icon Hello Jaaron95. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), or content (CSD A3), moments after they are created, as you did at The Bartley Corporation. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks.Template:Z149 TL22 (talk) 12:48, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ToonLucas22:, thanks for your advice, and I'll take that into account hereafter! Just as a doubt, the right procedure is to save the article as draft before it's published or place a tag {{New page}}, isn't it? As I use Twinkle, the page is auto marked as 'patrolled' when I place a CSD tag on the page. Or, you are mentioning some other pages which I marked as 'patrolled' wrongly? Thank You! --Jaaron95 (talk) 13:15, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well yeah, everytime someone performs an action on an unpattroled page with Twinkle it gets patrolled. But editing an unpatrolled page manually does not automatically patrol it, so yeah. --TL22 (talk) 13:34, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Jaaron95! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 15:47, Saturday, April 11, 2015 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

I fit the criteria for Ratings so stop deleting it.

aNewRisingMusic is a full fledged news and album review WEBSITE. Not blog, and has a writing STAFF and not USERS. Which according to the Wikipedia RELIABLE RESOURCES page means that I am ABLE to edit these pages with my WEBSITE'S rating.

Thank You. Anewrisingmusic (talk) 05:40, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Cite a reliable source"

My website IS a reliable source. It's not a blog. It's a news website that gives unique and adequate news and album reviews, just like Billboard, AltPress, Metacritic and they are all allowed to post in the ratings. Anewrisingmusic (talk) 05:57, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert at Circadian rhythm

I see that you reverted this edit by Murphyant. Murphyant's source, this 2014 review,

  • Zelinski EL, Deibel SH, McDonald RJ. 2014. The trouble with circadian clock dysfunction: Multiple deleterious effects on the brain and body. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 40:80-101.,

appears, as far as I can see from just the abstract, to be a good one.

Why did you revert it? Will you consider reverting your edit? --Hordaland (talk) 15:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Hordaland: thanks for stopping by! I appreciate it... after checking it I found that I reverted the edit because, the user replaced all the references with Template:Medical citation needed... I'm sorry, I didn't notice what was inside the reference tags! And as a fairly new user I didn't know what MCN meant! I'll apologize to the user! Thanks for your help! Cheers! --Jaaron95 (talk) 16:59, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I must admit that I only recently discovered what MCN means. There are so many abbreviations. Thanks for your response! --Hordaland (talk) 17:03, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are always welcome Hordaland!!! --Jaaron95 (talk) 17:07, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aathira

Okay the page for Aathira was previously deleted as a prod and just recreated which I just wanted to point out as you did just patrol it. Thanks. Wgolf (talk) 17:19, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In that case can I add references to get the PROD removed? @Wgolf: --Jaaron95 (talk) 17:22, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like the creator is recreating pages that were deleted-such as one show that was removed per AFD in February which I just put a CSD up for. Wgolf (talk) 17:23, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I've seen that show... But it's your take on that article.. Wgolf --Jaaron95 (talk) 17:26, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John Hussey (American football official)

Thanks for adding the maintenance tag to John Hussey (American football official). I just created the article today. I will definitely add more sources as I find them. Happy editing! Fresh Sullivan (talk) 17:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Fresh Sullivan thank you for your contributions here in Wikipedia! Wikipedia takes Biographies of living persons very seriously! I'd be happy to remove the tag I placed once you add more reliable sources! Cheers! --Jaaron95 (talk) 17:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Conspiracy theories about Joseph stalin's death

no i removed copyrighted infringement sources before from that article now i freshly created that article and i used external websites as a source of information. expect the quotation part. if these time if you still find the article inappropriate please tag it proposed for deletion i will improve the article ..

Controversies and Conspiracy theories about Joseph stalin's death

now i removed the copyright infringement materials from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2292123/Stalin- (Duplication Detector report · Copyvios report) i contest this should be deleted because this page has a good value

Hi, Krishnachaitan thanks for your support... I agree the topic of article is a notable one. But you have copy pasted considerable materials from this link, here, here and here. You should edit and write the article in your own words to get your article saved. As you have contested the deletion, please improve the article as fast as possible, failing to which administrators will speedy delete your article. Ping me if you have more questions. Try to bring it as a behavior of signing your messages on talk pages using , ~~~~ followed by your message, which will help to identify who sent the message easily. Happy Editing. --Jaaron95 (talk) 08:30, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hello

nice to meet you on internet
i too live in tamil naidu, chennai korratur can you give your fb id we can talk how to become an great wikipedian Krishnachaitan (talk) 08:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Krishnachaitan: Awesome!!! --Jaaron95 (talk) 08:20, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Hello, UY Scuti. You have new messages at User:Titodutta/CVU/Students/Jaaron95#Read.
Message added 08:49, 13 April 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tito Dutta (talk) 08:49, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romans (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) 11:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Loomis

Jaaron95 ---

Just wondering what I can do to properly cite the sources for my info on Loomis. What am I doing wrong? I want to add these things before they are lost and no one knows about Loomis and its history. Sorry that I am not a savvy contributor, but I am not finding it easy to contribute information that is properly cited... I thought I was citing appropriately.

Angel Raymond

Hi, Angelraymond thanks for your contribution here in Wikipedia. When you are adding information to articles, be sure to add sources. If you don't, chances are they will be challenged or deleted. Please go through Referencing for beginners to understand how to cite sources of your information. Also, in your articleLoomis, Wise Township, Michigan you have copy pasted text from this link, which is a copyright violation. Please read this article to find how to avoid such violations. Ping me if you have more questions. Try to bring it as a behavior of signing your messages on talk pages using ,~~~~ followed by your message, which will help to identify who sent the message easily. Happy Editing. --†ããrøn95® 18:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ERROR

Thanks for your kind attention and message...actually one of friends got my password and they created the page 'Starlink Group Bd' without knowing the guideline. I'm extremely sorry for that.

Hi, ABHBOSS great to see you! Change your password ASAP to get your account saved. Your friend may bring a black mark to your record. Be careful.. And try to bring it as a behavior of signing your messages using ~~~~, at the end of your messages in talk pages. This can help identify who sent the message easily! Cheers! --†ããrøn95® 03:33, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Patrolling, but no arguments

Hi Jaaron95. Thank you for patrolling the article on Julia Galef. I notice you have added templates that some sources may not be reliable, but have not stated yet on the Talk page which sources are unreliable or demonstrated in what way the information of the source could be considered unreliable. Can you please do that? Kind regards, Timelezz (talk) 10:35, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Timelezz:, I've responded to your query here. --†ããrøn95® 10:56, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Huber (botanist)

You proposed Herbert Huber (botanist) for deletion citing a rule for living persons that are completely unsourced, yet this is a dead person that is sourced - was this a bot error? --Michael Goodyear (talk) 10:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Michael Goodyear that was my mistake! Sorry for that! I failed to notice that the subject is no more and just looking at references I placed a PROD. Which I think is removed by Wgolf! Sorry for that! --†ããrøn95® 10:59, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Although for the record, WP:BLPPROD states "article contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc.), which support any statements made about the person in the biography." --Michael Goodyear (talk) 11:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha! all your references pointed to the same article! Not on a secondary source... this one, this one, and this one. Are they really references? That's the reason I placed a PROD... --†ããrøn95® 11:24, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

project 15b Bangalore-class destroyer

According to a report posted in listfistdefence, project 15b destroyers is named Visakhapatnam-class not Bangalore class report here . i am not sure if this report is right but livefistfdefence is considered as best Indian defence website but i didnt find any other source to confirm this report. someone tried to add this new info to Bangalore-class destroyer page but was later removed claiming that livefistfdefence is not a credible source which I do not believe. Nicky mathew (talk) 09:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Nicky mathew: As far as I know livefistdefence.com news is one of the leading and accurate platform for Defense News and usually the first one to update Defense news. The site is run by Shiv Aroor, a leading journalist in Headlines today, and previously worked with Indian Express.. He excels in Defense related news. And I hardly doubt about the reliability of the news website. The news wasn't reported by other sources doesn't mean that this site goes unreliable. And turning down the edit by stating that the source wasn't reliable is absolutely incorrect. I also passed by a similar news in the Facebook page of Tarmak007, a page managed by Anantha Krishnan, who also writes at oneindia.in... The link is here. But, for the sake of consensus, let's wait for more sources to pop up. Until then the page, Project 15B destroyer remain as it is now.. Regards ---†ããrøn95® 11:38, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've also replied to the editor who reverted the edit in the Talk page. --†ããrøn95® 12:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John Frederick Stockwell

I have declined the CSD A7 tag you placed on this article, as the subject is cited to multiple book sources and a file in the National Archives, and is linked from axe murder. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ritchie333:, that's alright! But I'm fascinated a murderer is notable in account of having reliable sources. It triggers me, but can I create an article for a murderer in my area, whose story can backed up by reliable sources? Regards --†ããrøn95® 17:07, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone can be notable if they meet the sustained level of source coverage. Specifically, this article reminded me of the equally gruesome Mary Ann Britland, though she killed three people. However, I think long term the guidelines in WP:CRIME and WP:BIO1E come into play and it's better to write an article about the event itself (in this case Bow Cinema Murder), and the main thing that stopped from doing a merge / redirect there is I couldn't find enough book sources with that title. In any case, the perpetrator's name would still exist as a redirect, and it's important to remember that "redirect" is a valid outcome from AfD and a speedy means you don't even want that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You @Ritchie333:. I'm thinking of placing an Afd there, to move the article to another topic. Can I? Regards --†ããrøn95® 17:38, 15 April 2015 (UTC)... the article is moved!! Bow cinema murder, that's a good name! Thank you @Ritchie333:!!! Appreciate it! --†ããrøn95® 17:40, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, I think it should be survivable there. You're not really supposed to AfD stuff when you really want a merge / redirect, but requested merges and moves sit for weeks and weeks without comment, while AfDs don't. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:47, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hi Jaaron95. 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) 21:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unsolved murder 'rollback' in text on Sunderland, Tyne & Wear

Interested to know your justification for wanting to include the removed paragraph. In the context of the article on a city and its history, what rationale do you use to include a tragic murder? It could be understood in the context of a page entitled: 'Unsolved murders of North East England' but it seems macabre and unjustifiable here. Are there any other examples on provincial English cities or towns (or any others in the world, for that matter) which have a similar entry?212.83.144.225 (talk) 10:56, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Now I see that this was probably some 'clever' application known as 'Huggle'. Not very clever if it is a substitute for a human being. Or maybe I am a 'vandal'?

Hi @212.83.144.225: thank you for notifying me on my unreasonable revert! I apologize for my mistake! You are absolutely doing a great job! keep up the good work and happy editing! --†ããrøn95® 11:20, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for amending that Jaaron95 - maybe I will start editing.....

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, Jaaron95, 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:

  • The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
  • Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

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 (developer) and Widr (talk) 05:07, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Basal Reader

Hi Mate, my comments where I removed the article (in the Edit Summary) are as below - did I put them in the wrong place?

Removed entire "Critism" section based on a single 25 year old book stuffed with weasel words. Even if the article is to be kept (and I think it should be deleted), this needs to go.

SourAcidHoldout (talk) 12:41, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SourAcidHoldout:, thanks for your contributions here in Wiki. The content you removed from the article Basal reader is required for the article as it is required to meet WP:NPOV. A disputed NPOV is already in place, which means you can either add references to the existing content thus removing the tag or editing the current content thus to make the content meet NPOV, go through WP:PRESERVE... "Weasel words" are not acceptable (in most cases) in Wiki WP:W2W. Remove the content which are simply weasel words and make it a better criticism... Regards --JAaron95 | Talk | Contribs 12:55, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jaaron95:, we're in danger here of creating an Encyclopedia filled with junk just because people won't remove it and it's theoretically possible that it could get rewritten at some point by someone. I think the most appropriate way of dealing with things like this is to remove sections like this, because we always have the history should an expert in the subject with to add some proper, sourced comments. That entire section is no more than someone's biased opinion on something with no sources [technically one source, but that's only one or two sentences of the section, and I believe fails WP:UNDUE. I presume there are some legitimate criticism of these Basal readers, but I believe that including this section makes the article significantly worse, not better. I'll raise a full propose for deletion dicscussion to get some wider community concensus about the overall deletion discussion, independent of the Critism section. SourAcidHoldout (talk) 13:03, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@SourAcidHoldout:, I think that's not junk... And WP:UNDUE does not mention anything about blanking due to WP:UNDUE. It says you can contribute in making the article meet WP:NPOV. You can also remove contents which have no citation or is just weasel words. But, you are free to place a PROD, using the correct template... Regards --JAaron95 | Talk | Contribs 13:15, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:UNDUE If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia, regardless of whether it is true or you can prove it, except perhaps in some ancillary article.. The sources show the viewpoint to be held by three people only - Hare, Rabinowitz, & Schieble. I can't actually contribute to the article because I'm not an expert on Basal Readers or education, but I'll raise for deletion now, thanks. There's quite a learning curve to this wiki! :) SourAcidHoldout (talk) 13:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@SourAcidHoldout:, in that case you should prove how that view is an extreme minority.. A book written by three people doesn't mean that it is a minority view, you also say that you are not an expert in the subject, then how come you express the view as a minority? Yep, Wiki is always about learning! Happy editing! Regards --JAaron95 | Talk | Contribs 13:26, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
With [genuine] respect, I find that attitude slightly concerning. The emphasis should be on anyone who adds information to prove that it's required, not the other way round. Currently the only evidence we all have is that there is one book, written by these three people. who may or may not have the required knowledge or expertise to make these critisms. If I added that section to the article, you'd remove it on the grounds that there was no clear controversy or clearly listed criticisms and responses. I'm researching the source now. It's a little tricky because I can't follow the exact reference - it doesn't appear to give a book title or a journal number or anything. I'm not familiar with the intricacies of academic referencing, can you advise on exactly what Hare, Rabinowitz, & Schieble, 1989, cited in Williams & Snipper, 1990 means? Is there an article or a centralised database that I can find the specific article? Regardless, if it's what I think it is (http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/748011?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21106500829343), it's a single study of less than 300 students. In particular the authors note

The authors suggest that students who have been taught to identify main ideas using only contrived texts such as those found in basal reader skills lessons will have difficulty transferring their main idea skills to naturally occurring texts.

[Emphasis mine]. That's not even a criticism of Basal readers, it's the results of single study and the critism is actually on the use of contrived texts overall, not Basal readers specifically. They might be fantastic but only when used in conjunction with a number of other items. SourAcidHoldout (talk) 13:38, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@SourAcidHoldout:, you have proved me wrong... I've removed the content which bothered you! Check this link. Thank you for correcting me and sorry for wasting your time. Happy editing --JAaron95 | Talk | Contribs 13:47, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How was I involved?

I'm not sure how I got to be involved in this matter: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASourAcidHoldout&diff=657051077&oldid=657048189, which, by the way, you forgot to sign. Oh, well: You can just go back and sign it now. Please inform me. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 16:13, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@BeenAroundAWhile: LOL !! Sorry My Bad! BTW, what did you ask, you want to get involved in the matter? I didn't get it... Can you make it clear please? --JAaron95 | Talk | Contribs 16:44, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Repasting

Trying to figure out how to use this to leave you a message. Well, if you get this maybe you can answer back. My question is if you are the person that does the updates, what's the chance there could be a running total of all wars throughout history combined? like up at the very top or wherever? You know what I mean I'm sure, a running total of all combined wars that you guys have listed, thank you hope to hear back

Edit on Python(programming language)

Hi Jaaron, my edit on Python was not meant to be regarded as a test edit, as I have done this sort of thing before, but I forgot to add some info about the linked article, so had to do so in a successive edit. I understand how this may have been regarded as a bit of a test, but it was unintentional. I think the link would be quite helpful for other readers, but I don't want to revert without a second opinion. Please redo my edit if you think it's helpful, and thanks for noticing the edit :) Awesomeshreyo (talk) 14:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UY_Scuti&oldid=657189265"