Jump to content

User talk:Adamgerber80

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 106.161.219.114 (talk) at 09:04, 10 January 2018. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Why your revert at Indian army

Regarding your revert here, what do you mean by "why these 3 people?". I have added 14 female officers, not just 3, all sourced. Do you have objection to 3 mentioned in my edit comments but not with the remaining 11? I do not understand your comment and reason of revert. Take what to the "talk page"? Re-read all thoroughly and please explain yourself clearly. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 08:52, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That page is about the Indian Army and not about female officers in the Indian Army. Please explain the direct relevance to the subject here. It does not matter if you added 3 or 14. Also most of them do not even meet WP:GNG. If you wish to add more information than I would recommend creating a separate page say Women in Indian Armed Forces/Indian Army. Adamgerber80 (talk) 08:57, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GNG is not a valid argument because several of these are notable enough to have own sourced pre-existing articles created and reviewed by other editors. Women in Indian Army are part of the Indian Army, by your logic then should remove all personnel, weapons, everything from the articles, but that would defy the purpose of having the article. Only thing I buy is, it might be getting too long and will take up the disproportionate space in main Indian Army article as the content grows. Hence, may warrant a separate article on its own, which I have already mentioned in my edit as an invisible embedded comment. Same information on the "Women in Indian Army" is replicated in 3 places: (a) Women in the military by country#India, (b) Women in combat#India, and (c) Indian Army#Female. (c) is the right place to have it. As it gets longer then it warrants a separate article. It is a long winding process for me as ip to submit, have it reviewed and publish an article. Please do me a favor, if you are on laptop now, please copy paste the whole section (including my edits) to a new Women in Indian Armed Forces (catch all branches of military) article. I will take care of the rest, i.e. enhance the new article, pipelink it to 3 pre-existing articles, and clean up all 3 existing articles (condense and make them different). Thanks. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 09:31, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have created the Draft:Women in Indian Armed Forces, please review/approve and add to your watch list. Thanks. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 10:51, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article you have created still needs quite some amount of work. One important point is there is a difference between Armed Forces (under the MoD) and the CAPF (under the MoH). So either the name of the article is misleading or it has content which does not belong there. Plus I am still not convinced on mentioning all those names. Names of women officers for which pages exist like Punita Arora makes sense. Other names are one time events and IMO are not considered notable on Wikipedia. Lastly, if you think editing with an IP is burdensome then I would encourage you to create an account and edit. Adamgerber80 (talk) 18:42, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello Adamgerber80, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

  • The total number of reviews completed for the month.
  • The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]

I would like your input

Hi,

I would appreciate it if you could give your input regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_naval_ship_classes_in_service#Split_this_article_into_multiple_articles Thanks in advanceDragnadh (talk) 20:31, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain your unconstructive edits on List of Wars Involve China section.

Hello,

It appears that you are consistently making nonconstructive edits on that page. Also you removed sourced materials. Please refrain your actions.

I also reverted some of your other edits that appear the same way.

Thank you,

--2600:1700:1020:9A0:6D34:C965:8EF5:97A6 (talk) 00:58, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are currently engaging in disruptive editing. Take it the respective article talk pages if you have issues. Adamgerber80 (talk) 00:59, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Revision

Why was my edit overturned? I have quoted multiple verifiable web / media sources on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chhota_Shakeel&diff=819048718&oldid=819048009 The speculation lies in the manner in which the subject possibly died-Not the death in itself-Please revise your edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandfrontier (talk • contribs) 02:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sandfrontier, The information you have added is speculation since the news reports themselves claim that this is per sources and not yet officially confirmed. There have also been other media reports that Mumbai police is trying to confirm this. Wikipedia has strict guidelines for in WP:BLP for articles which are biographies of living persons. We have to be careful when adding content to these pages. Please open a discussion on the article talk page if you disagree. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 06:52, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do U love your family?

I love you too my friend, thanks for all your help! :)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adamgerber80&oldid=819609559"