User talk:Jai49/Archives/2020

Just a reminder

as you've been around long enough to know better - you can't remove speedy tags from your own article creations. Praxidicae (talk) 13:54, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank You Sir User:Praxidicae, I will take care of it in future. I just need a favor from you. Can you please short out my talk page archive. I just tried but failed. I think there is something missing from my end. You can check my talk page i put ClueBot III code.Jai49 (talk) 17:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Lumiford for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lumiford is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lumiford until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Praxidicae (talk) 17:18, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Praxidicae, i asked for you a favor and in response you tagged my article for deletion, Wow what a help! So you are not here to help others. Sorry if i bother you by asking some help.Jai49 (talk) 17:22, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Sir User:Barkeep49, Need your independent thoughts/comment here. Jai49(talk) 17:35, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Jai49, I was acting in my capacity as a Wikipedia administrator evaluating the speedy deletion tag placed on the article and in my role as new page reviewer just now procedurally reviewing an article up for deletion. I do not have an opinion about the notability of the company itself.

I notice you had a question about archiving. You have Cluebot set to archive after 10 days so you won't know if it's working or not for a few days yet. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:13, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sir, Thanks for the clarification. Is it possible to see my previous talk in Archives Year wise. For example, If i click on 2019, i could see 2019 talk.Jai49 (talk) 18:15, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Jai49, you removed your previous talk page content so Cluebot didn't archive it. As far as I can see you don't have any set archives yet. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:26, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Jai - the archiving doesn't happen instantly. Cluebot comes around a few times a day. So if you want it archived you need to let things sit until Cluebot comes around. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:42, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank You Sir, Noted.Jai49 (talk) 18:43, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Jai49! You created a thread called Need help to Archive my talk page at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Indic script

- Please do not add any Indic script, to any of our India related articles, as you did at Budaun, as this contravenes WP:NOINDICSCRIPT - Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 15:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

OK, got your point. Jai49 (talk) 09:14, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

foto of a theatre programme

Hallo Jai49, just the question, may I link the foto of a theater programme from 1966? I want to publish it as source of an information added to an artical. Henry — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrançoisAllemand (talk • contribs) 10:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi User:FrançoisAllemand, what photo you want to add and where you want to add the photo. If it is relevant to the topic you may definitely add it.Jai49 (talk) 04:01, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Please do a proper research before doing any mass edit on Wikipedia. Colleges that have prefix "RLSY" doesn't mean that they are the same colleges having different branches. GargAvinash (talk) 05:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

User:GargAvinash, The content of all the pages created by User:Vipinahir is same and all the schools are the branches of one school. There must be only one Wikipedia page named RLSY College. The user User:Vipinahir is also blocked earlier. The following pages containing the same tone and content.

• Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav College
• RLSY College, Gaya,
• RLSY College, Nalanda,
• RLSY College Bettiah,
• RLSY College, Bakhtiyarpur,
• RLSY College, Anisabad,
• RLSY College, Paliganj,
• RLSY College Bettiah
• RLSY College Jhumari Telaiya
• RLSY College, Nawada

Jai49 (talk) 12:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Jai49: Hello! User:Vipinahir was blocked because I reported this account for copying my articles. Above is the list of colleges and all have the name "RLSY" but these are not the branches of any main college. These colleges are completely separate from each other, they all have different locations & buildings, different faculty team and different Principals from each other. You can visit the websites of these colleges and also try searching on the search engine for this information. If you think that I am wrong then please provide the sources that prove your point. GargAvinash (talk) 15:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank You for the clarification about blocking details about User:Vipinahir. However i am not reverting your edits, But i am not agree about the pages of schools of RLSY. There must be only one wiki page about the RLSY organization and you can add other branches in one page. Jai49 (talk) 05:19, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Jai49: Hello! Sorry but you have not provided any sources stating "RLSY" is an organization. The information available to me by the websites and other college reviewers is that all are different colleges. You can always check this from inline citations and official websites mentioned in all the articles created by me. These colleges are named in the honour of Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav of Bihar. I request you again to please provide the website or any media coverage of this so called "RLSY" organization. GargAvinash (talk) 08:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

You are correct, RLSY is not an organization but i found one college named after Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav that is Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav College. And all colleges and schools (RLSY) must be redirected here.Jai49 (talk) 08:32, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Jai49 Why are you not trying to understand? There is not any connection between these colleges. Now it's truly the case of vandalising Wikipedia if you are going to do so. If you are willing to do these then please also have a look at these colleges. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital and Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences. This is my last rationale. I am not going to convince you further. Do what you think is right. GargAvinash (talk) 09:10, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

GargAvinash, i think this case is resolved now, The same Wikipedia article is deleted now by other admins. Jai49 (talk) 04:26, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks For Your Message

Dear Jai49,

Thanks For Your Information As of now i am a beginner at Wikipedia but i will try my best to place my knowledge on wikipedia but i have to learn more about Wikipedia guideline. from where caan i learn that.

Kittubindass (talk) 12:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kittubindass:, i sent you a welcome message on your talk page. You can learn most of the things from there.Jai49 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Nexford University for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nexford University is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nexford University until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Praxidicae (talk) 13:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Deleted Article

Why did you delete one of our article (Deentr), is it only the case of being of a worldwide sensation or its just that you only feel like you need to know the artists , isnt all about the world they put in & the experience? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deanvimm (talk • contribs) 07:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Jai49/Archives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Kindly unblock. I am not connected to User:Juston980, Someone wants to block my account by creating my deleted articles. I agree that i created Lumiford earlier and that was deleted as per discussion but i never tried to create this article again as i am aware the Wikipedia guidelines. You may also check my edit history i am a regular contributor on Wikipedia. Jai49 (talk) 11:39, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Not plausible. A new editor pops up and just happens to recreate the article you were working on, with the exact same content? As you are clearly trying to mislead us, I have extended your block indefinitely. Yamla (talk) 14:02, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Dear Sir, @Yamla:, @Callanecc:, Requesting you to Kindly remove indefinite block.Jai49 (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

No. You are welcome to honestly address the reason for your block. Note that your current unblock request does not do this. --Yamla (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

@Yamla:, My Apologies, that was my mistake. I will never do such mistakes again. Please accept my Apologies. Thank You. Jai49 (talk) 19:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Do not ping me again. I want to be very, very clear. If you ping me again, I will remove your ability to edit this talk page. You have refused to address the concerns that lead to your block and there are no grounds to lift your block. This is the last I will say on this matter. Do not ping me again. --Yamla (talk) 19:48, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Jai49/Archives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

My Apologies. Requesting you to Kindly remove indefinite block. I have been working hard on Wikipedia for last many months. Please check my history. Jai49 (talk) 16:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. stwalkerster (talk) 19:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Test edit?

Hi, you said that one of my edits was a "test", can you please tell me which one? MEisSCAMMER (talk) 22:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)