User talk:Araz5152

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Araz5152, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

February 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Qutbi Bohra may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

1044475.aspx</ref> also spelt as '''Kutbi Bohra''' or '''Kutbi Vohra ''' or '''Qutbi Vohra''') is a sub sect of [[Dawoodi Bohra]]<ref>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawoodi_Bohra/</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mohammad Burhanuddin (49th Dai) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Syedna [[Abdul Husain Husamuddin]] appointed Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin as Mukasir e Dawat (The third highest position in [[Dawoodi Bohra]] sect. He was also the Wali of Mumbai.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:27, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Abdul Qadir Najmuddin may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Later when the Mazoon e Dawat (second highest position in [[Dawoodi Bohra sect) passed away Syedna Tayyeb Zainuddin appointed the Mukasir e Dawat (third

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:17, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Abdul Qadir Najmuddin may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

be seen from the fact in Sironge he did a waaz (sermon). In this waaz he used the lisan ud dawat (language of [[Dawoodi Bohra]] sect and urdu together in a such a systematic manner not even a

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Araz5152, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Hi Araz5152! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ushau97 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 12:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your comment[edit]

Walaikum as salam sir, I read all of your message. I will try to keep my advice as brief as possible.
First, keep in mind that even if your article is significant and notable, it's not urgent that it be published now. Theoretically if you wait a few weeks, things will still be fine. The world won't come to an end.
Second, understand that Wikipedia is in need of more editors but it takes time to learn the ropes. If this article is quite significant, then it may be a good idea to keep it on hold for now and edit other, unrelated topics in order to gain some experience in how this is done.
Listen, I edit during my down time at the office so I have to log off now. It's possible to work a lot of these things out but as it is, I think you need to take more time to become familiar with how Wikipedia works. If there is any foul play with this article, there are ways and policies to stop that. Wikipedia:Teahouse can assist new editors as well. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:16, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Changing your own comments on Talk pages[edit]

I'm trying to clean up the Qutbi Bohra Talk page. It's a real mess of overwritten, unsigned, and changed edits by various users. When I'm done please take a look at it and verify that I have not inadvertantly changed anything you contributed. And please read WP:REDACT before modifying comments you have previously made to Talk pages. It's very confusing when you insert comments into the middle of something you have previously posted. Meters (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished cleaning up the Talk page. Please check that i have not made any mistakes. Meters (talk) 02:34, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Taher Saifuddin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kabah (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) 09:00, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. DGG ( talk ) 18:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Taher Saifuddin[edit]

Before you start throwing around baseless accusations of vandalism read WP:VANDAL. Then read up on neutral point of view. Prior to my edits the article was nothing more than a hagiography of the subject written in a very non-neutral point of view. In fact it needs additional clean up.--ukexpat (talk) 01:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Once again my edits are NOT VANDALISM and I resent you characterising them as such.--ukexpat (talk) 02:36, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Taher Saifuddin[edit]

Please stop undo my edits. Khuzaima Qutbuddin was Mazoon, as there is mention of the title of Mukasir after Husain Husamuddin. It's a fact and no one can deny it. I've put reliable reference. Ftutocdg (talk) 12:27, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014[edit]

Please stop assuming ownership of articles as you did at Taher Saifuddin. Behavior such as this is regarded as disruptive and could lead to edit wars and personal attacks, and is a violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ukexpat (talk) 01:49, 1 March 2014 (UTC) Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mohammad Burhanuddin (49th Dai) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.[reply]

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

of a Da'i al-Mutlaq and appointed him as the raas ul hudood (a position of esteem in [Dawoodi Bohra sect).

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mohammad Burhanuddin (49th Dai) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Saifee Mahal. This place was later purchased by his son 51st Da'i al-Mutlaq Syedna Taher Saifuddin] who made it the House of the Da'i al-Mutlaq.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Qutbi Bohra for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Qutbi Bohra 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/Qutbi Bohra (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Summichum (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 10 March[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Abdul Husain Husamuddin page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at Qutbi Bohra, are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage editors. Please read Wikipedia:NOTVAND for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. This diff. Sam Sailor ^Sing 00:25, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Taher Saifuddin. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Sam Sailor ^Sing 00:26, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Taiyabi[edit]

What you added into your article is helpful for the readers.. It will be better if you start writing into Taiyabi section about the belief, prayers, etc.. I mean those things which are common to all Mustaali people.. So that you will be better understood by the other groups since you represent nearly 0.1% of the all muslims, this Taiyabi section should be re-written together with the other Daudi Bohras very nicely. Right now just divisions, splits and other disputes are mentioned which does not look nice!! Thanks again for your contributions.. 68.100.168.97 (talk) 03:30, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Qutbi Bohra. 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. This diff. Sam Sailor ^Sing 21:34, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism etc.[edit]

Hello Araz, I hope this finds you well.

I come to your talk page in the hope that I can help clarify a couple of things. Some of these issues are closely intertwined.

Vandalism[edit]

In Taher Saifuddin and in Qutbi Bohra you have in many cases reverted other editors, and in your edit summary claimed "revert vandalism" or something to a similar effect.

You have previously been asked to read Wikipedia:Vandalism. The unfortunate case here is, that in no instance do you use the term in its correct meaning. Allow me to quote from Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal":

One problem newcomers and inexperienced editors have on Wikipedia, is using popular terms in a wider variety of circumstances than is appropriate. One such word is "vandal". According to Wikipedia:Vandalism, vandalism is "any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." This definition is excessively over-broad, even for the purposes of broad policy coverage. It goes on to restrict what constitutes "vandalism", however, saying emphatically that "any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism."

My best advise to you in this regard is: stop using the V-word all together for now. It is offensive when misapplied, and you show disrespect towards other editors by using this word lightly.

I'd like to hear that you have read Wikipedia:Vandalism and Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal", and that you understand. If not, I will gladly help you get community input on the matter.

Ownership[edit]

When in Taher Saifuddin and in Qutbi Bohra you revert to your own previous version, it may easily be construed by other users as a misunderstood sense of ownership. No one "owns" an article or any page at Wikipedia. If you create or edit an article, others can make changes, and you cannot prevent them from doing so. In addition, you should not undo their edits without good reason. And "vandalism" when misapplied is not a good reason. Please read Wikipedia:Ownership of articles.

Citations[edit]

One of the basic things I did in Qutbi Bohra to form an opinion prior to the AfD discussion, was to make proper citations. Before I started editing the article it looked like this. Let me show you how easy it is to turn a bare URL into a nice looking {{cite web}}. Here the URL was missing, so I put it inside the <ref></ref> tags. Then in the next edit I ran WP:REFLINKS, and the result is a very nice {{cite news}}. Play around with it in your sandbox, you're going to enjoy it.

Original research[edit]

Wikipedia:No original research tells us that

Wikipedia does not publish original thought: all material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not clearly advanced by the sources themselves.

That for instance means that it is original research when you interpret a photograph like you did here or when you otherwise add your own interpretation to citations as you had done here. I see you have restored your version of Qutbi Bohra with malformatted references. I request you fix this either by formatting references the way I did or by more simply taking the appropriate text from a previous version.

The overall impression of WP:OR in Qutbi Bohra is one which has to be addressed, and I will do so on the article talk page.

Neutral point of view[edit]

Wikipedia:Neutral point of view tells us that

Articles must not take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without bias. This applies to both what you say and how you say it.

Some good examples are those I listed on Talk:Taher Saifuddin in this edit before I pruned the article here. In such a case you are expected to join the discussion on the talk page. You did not. You promptly reverted to your preferred version here. As Ukexpat puts it on your user talk page: "Prior to my edits the article was nothing more than a hagiography". And so it was also in my opinion. Again: you do not own the articles. If two or three other editors object to an addition, do not just add it again. Chances might be that they are right.

Civility[edit]

Wikipedia:Civility tells us that

Participate in a respectful and considerate way, and avoid directing offensive language at other users.
Do not ignore the positions and conclusions of others.
Try to make coherent and concise arguments rather than simply attacking others, and encourage others to do the same.

When you crosspost on both Talk:Qutbi Bohra and on the AfD that "Sam sailor has been continously deleting and modifying references of the article just like a child playing with a toy." you are not being polite. Frankly I think you are frustrated because you still have to learn the ropes here, but while that might explain your rude remark, it does not justify it. Your apology would be accepted.

You go on saying "He is the one vandalising the references ... I request the administors to take his vandalism seriously as he is using a loophole in the system by making small vandalising edits and also modifying the same such that if reverted the will accuse the reverting editor instead of the vandaliser like Sam sailor. Please do the needful, request to all editors.". That's some serious accusations you come up with. Neither article talk pages nor AfD discussions are the right places to post such things. But nobody expects you to know. If you really mean what you say: that I am vandalizing, that I am gaming the system, that immediate attention of administrators is needed, then the right place to post it is on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (AN/I or just ANI for short) where admins and experienced editors deal with incidents requiring immediate attention.

In order to not make this post too long, I end here. Let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Happy editing, Sam Sailor ^Sing 01:39, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to see that you return only to continue your usual behavior with another revert in Qutbi Bohra, this time to your own 18 March 2014 version of the article, here with the edit summary "revert vandalism. sycronised vandalism, deliberate blanking, misuse of Wikipedia policies, wrong tagging despite clarification, pov of editors towards Khuzaima Qutbuddin, covering it up with repeated AFD. if you want to put AFDagain do without vandalising". Sam Sailor ^Sing 09:00, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Qutbi Bohra for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Qutbi Bohra 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/Qutbi Bohra (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Mufaddalqn (talk) 06:12, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

general advice[edit]

I am extremely sympathetic to the idea that WP should have coverage of all religious (and political) movements, however small or embryonic, and I understand that it is impossible to cover them without presenting their views, and this will include their controversial views, generally including the reasons why they think their opponents are wrong. But it's very important not to accentuate that part, and concentrate on a plain description. Plain description avoid adjectives of praise or blame. It avoids rhetoric. It avoids saying how good or bad something is,. It draws no conclusions. It presents the straightforward facts, and lets the reader decide what to make of them.

Political or religious advocacy tells the reader what to think. WP does not do advocacy. It can sometimes be difficult for those committed to something to know when they are crossing the line between description and advocacy, which is why we normally recommend against writing on subjects with which one has a close connection. (For example, I have very definite political views, but I never touch articles relating to them.) In general, when people tell you that you have crossed the line, they are almost certain to be right. Others can judge this better than a person can judge their own writing.

I've taken a look at your other articles, and I've started editing some of the advocacy, and especially the repeated statements of how wonderful the people are. Please take a look at my edits, and try to understand why I made them. I found this interesting to do, for I did not previously know about these people. But without knowing them, and without having any particular reason to prefer any of the many branches of Islam, I can tell when description is dso extravagant as not to be suitable for an encyclopedia.

The way you are editing, and the way you are discussing things, is not doing your cause any good. It is much better to be moderate. In its difficult to be moderate when other people are doubting the accuracy of what you are saying, but it is especially important to remain calm in such cases, and jsut present your position without exaggeration, and let it go at that. Others will judge.

If you continue along your current path, you will almost certainly encounter further difficulties, As an administrator, I know our standards for behavior, and yo are coming much to close to our limits. Actually, you are already considerably over our limits, and we have been extending to you an exceptional degree of toleration in the hope that you will learn to be more moderate. You've had enough time to learn, enough unbiased people have spoken to you about it, and you need to show that you have learned if yo expect to remain editing here.

The best way you can show this is to immediately cease making negative comments on other editors--in fact, try to avoid using their names if at all possible. And go back over your articles and remove all the duplication and praise, and anything that cannot be documented from neutral reliable sources. Sources related to their own movement are usable only for the plain facts of their career, not for their importance. For the AfC on Saudi sites of historical importance, the only realistic course is to abandon it, for it reads as a biased attack on their political and religious system. That many others here might agreewith you is irrelevant. We just don't do that. I'd suggest placing a {{db-self}} tag on it.

I'll check back in a few days. I really hope you decide to do things right, and are able to remain here. Otherwise, although I'm too involved to block you myself, others certainly will. DGG ( talk ) 03:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(copied from my talk p.)

The way to post at the bottom from a mobile or a slow connection is to use the "new section" tab at the top of the talk page. (it may show up as a "+" But it's my own fault I have let the page get so long, and I mean to fix it.

If I can get you started right I will not regret the time and trouble. Please do not use the word vandalism to mean anything else than a deliberate attempt to disrupt the encyclopedia. It's much overused, and is best kept for the most serious bad-faith situations. It does not apply to a good-faith disagreement on content, or whether to delete an article. We do delete articles if the basic content cannot be adequately verified by reliable sources. The repeated AfDs were not a good idea, and I have said so in the appropriate places, but they are not vandalism. At present I do not think anyone actually wants to delete the article. They do want to drastically revise itThe best thing you can do is to let that happen. Look at the ref. given by Sam just above "While people are internally calling themselves Qutbi Bohras, it is not likely that there will be an open declaration of the sect as long as there is no power balance within the community." This makes it difficult or impossible to write a full article because WP is limited by what the published sources say. Until things come out in the open, we cannot write about them.

In practice, when there are arguments here, the person is likely to win the argument who keeps calm the longest. Many people find it very helpful when angry, or in a difficult situation, to wait a few hours or even overnight and read over their post carefully and rewrite as prudence indicates before sending it. DGG ( talk ) 09:53, 22 March 2014 (UTC) DGG ( talk ) 10:06, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Qutbi Bohra, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Sam Sailor ^Sing 23:06, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Qutbi Bohra, you may be blocked from editing. Sam Sailor ^Sing 09:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Araz5152 reported by User:Anupmehra (Result: ). Thank you. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 09:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring at Qutbi Bohra and personal attacks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 16:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Invite[edit]

Please participate

There's a voting going on here. It needs to close, but consensus is not certain. We need more participation. The issues can't remain without a resolution. Please, check it out. Closure of the discussion has started. (refresh) Please, hurry. nafSadh did say 14:10, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 07:25, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Saudi Arabia al-baqi[edit]

Hello, Araz5152. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Saudi Arabia al-baqi".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Saudi Arabia al-baqi}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 21:05, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re-initiating INCOTM[edit]

It's been almost an year since "Indian collaboration of the month" was active. Firstly we need to restart this as soon as possible for development of India-related articles to greater heights. The members page was blanked, where many of them are inactive. This mass message is to all the members of WikiProject India, about this and interested editors interested will sign up. After this message gets delivered, we'll wait for 7 days before we start a discussion under a thread on the collaboration's talk page, among the members. The discussion will include what to clean-up of sub-pages, a new set of guidelines for smooth and uninterrupted functioning of the collaboration etc. Please keep all the discussions under this thread only, so that it will easier for future reference. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re-initiating INCOTM[edit]

It's been almost an year since "Indian collaboration of the month" was active. Firstly we need to restart this as soon as possible for development of India-related articles to greater heights. The members page was blanked, where many of them are inactive. This mass message is to all the members of WikiProject India, about this and interested editors interested will sign up. After this message gets delivered, we'll wait for 7 days before we start a discussion under a thread on the collaboration's talk page, among the members. The discussion will include what to clean-up of sub-pages, a new set of guidelines for smooth and uninterrupted functioning of the collaboration etc. Please keep all the discussions under this thread only, so that it will easier for future reference. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Incubator/Indian military history[edit]

You are invited to join the Indian military history work-group, an initiative of the Military history WikiProject. This group is to exclusively deal with the topics related to Indian military. If you're interested, please add you name to the participants list. Ignore if you are already a member. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:06, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Indian defence services[edit]

You are requested to participate in the discussion of Wiki Loves Indian defence services on the talk page of WikiProject India. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India)[edit]

Greetings,

It is being planned to organize Wikigraphists Bootcamp in India, please fill out the survey form to help the organizers. Your responses will help organizers understand what level of demand there is for the event (how many people in your community think it is important that the event happens). At the end of the day, the participants will turn out to have knowledge to create drawings, illustrations, diagrams, maps, graphs, bar charts etc. and get to know to how to tune the images to meet the QI and FP criteria. For more information and link to survey form, please visit Talk:Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:45, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting Indian Wikipedia Program resource distribution[edit]

In 2017 - 2018, the Wikimedia Foundation and Google working in close coordination with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Wikimedia India chapter (WMIN) and user groups will pilot a program encouraging Wikipedia communities to create locally relevant and high-quality content in Indian languages. This program (Code name: Project Tiger) will:

(a) Support active and experienced Wikipedia editors through the donation of laptops and stipends for internet access and

(b) Sponsor a language-based contest that aims to address existing Wikipedia content gaps.

The objective of the program is to provide laptops and internet stipends for existing editors who need support to contribute more actively. 50 basic model Acer Chromebooks and Internet stipends for 100 contributors are available for distribution. Provided resources are the sole property of the beneficiaries and should be used for the betterment of the movement.

If you're an active Wikimedian, and interested to receive support from this project, please apply. It will take around 10 minutes of your time, and will ask descriptive questions about your contribution to Indic Wikimedia projects.

Apply at: Supporting Indian Language Wikipedias Program#Apply for support
Last date for submitting applications is 11th February 2018, 11:59 IST.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Project Tiger Writing Contest[edit]

In 2017 – 2018, the Wikimedia Foundation and Google working in close coordination with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Wikimedia India Chapter (WMIN) and user groups from India, are piloting a program encouraging Wikipedia communities to create locally relevant and high-quality content in Indian languages. This program will (a) support active and experienced Wikipedia editors through the donation of laptops and stipends for internet access and (b) sponsor a language-based contest that aims to address existing Wikipedia content gaps.

Phase (a) has been completed, during which active contributors were awarded laptops and internet stipends. Phase (b) will be a contest in which editors will come together and develop a writing contest focused on content gaps. Each month three individual prizes will be awarded to each community based on their contribution for the month. The prizes worth 3,000 INR, 2000 INR, and 1,000 INR, will be awarded to the top contributors for each month. The contest started at March 1, 2018, 0:00, and will end at May 31, 2018, 23:59 (IST). Useful links are as follows:

Sign up at: Wikipedia:Project Tiger Writing Contest/Participants
List of the articles can be referred at: Wikipedia:Project Tiger Writing Contest/Topics
Submit/report your articles/contributions at: https://tools.wmflabs.org/fountain/editathons/project-tiger-2018-en
For more details, rules, FAQ etc. kindly refer: Wikipedia:Project Tiger Writing Contest

Looking forward your participation, all the best. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) at 22:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC).[reply]

WikiProject India[edit]

WikiProject India

Namaste, Araz5152. We would like to inform you about the recent changes to the WikiProject. As you may know, the old newsletter for WikiProject India ceased circulation in 2010. Now we have re-launched the newsletter in a new way. As a member, you are cordially invited to subscribe to the newsletter. Thank you.

Subscribe

Sent by Path slopu on behalf of WikiProject India. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:55, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject India 10,000 Challenge[edit]

Hello Araz5152. You are invited to join the new WikiProject India 10,000 Challenge, a challenge which aims to see 10,000 improvements, destubs, and creations for Indian articles, covering every state of India and topic. Articles on all related topics are welcome. We need numbers to make this work and do something extraordinary for India on Wikipedia! Every 100 articles submitted will be copied into the wider Asian challenge. Sign up on the page if interested and start contributing!
If you know someone who might be interested, please invite them by:

{{subst:WikiProject India/The 10,000 Challenge Invite|~~~~}}

Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:47, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]