Jump to content

User talk:Hemantha

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2405:201:1006:e03a:1cf3:e10f:b66e:b7c4 (talk) at 14:58, 1 February 2022 (→Thanks for the edits). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome

Extended content
Although some prefer welcoming newcomers with cookies, I find fruit to be a healthier alternative.

Hello, Hemanthah, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

Why can't I edit some particular pages?
Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block.
Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia?
Use the main sandbox or create your own personal sandbox to experiment.
How do I create an article?
See how to create your first article, then use the Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below.
How do I create citations?
  1. Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
  2. Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
  3. In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
  4. Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
  5. Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like <ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing).
  6. In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
  7. If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?
A WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.

Concerning "Jagat Seth"

Yes, I will merge the three articles for Jagat Seth - Jagat Seth, House of Jagat Seth, House of Jagat Seth (Museum) together. I just need some time.

Pls I dank memer (talk) 11:58, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

original thread Thanks! There is no hurry, do take your time. It might have been better if you added on to the existing House of Seth article instead of moving it away, but I do understand why you thought a move might be called for. Two articles, one for Seth, one for his house+museum might also work based on whether there are enough reliable sources for each. --Hemanthah (talk) 12:06, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding sources to article

I added some news references related to that article which have proper sources, but you reverted that edits saying inappropriate external links, why? You can check that sources, they are reliable and correct sources not any invalid or vandalised edit. So, can you give me explanation about reverted edits? 43.242.226.6 (talk) 15:56, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

original thread Here's the revert. Let's go through each.
  • The first sentence already had a source. The marathi link you added was about some cast addition unrelated to the claims made in the sentence.
  • The ToI link about show completing 200eps adds nothing when there's already another saying it completed 500eps.
  • Going off air ToI article contains almost nothing other than a copy of Instagram post
  • Whatever of use Hardeek Joshi ToI article had was already in the existing ToI link.
Also note that ToI is not a reliable or correct source, see WP:TOI. Hemanthah (talk) 16:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anushka Sharma

The edits I did on Anushka Sharma, I did after reading and providing sources such as Hindustan Times, Times of India, Lokmat and the articles saying that Joheb Yusuf was her boyfriend, she was in relationship with him for two years. I did not wrote them. If someone have problem they can contact to these news houses. One article says that, She was in serious relationship with Ranbeer Singh. You are saying like that I wrote those articles. I just read them and added it. You can read I have provided sources behind the line. Everyone knows that Anuska was in relationship with Ranbeer Singh. If your Indian I'm sure you also know that. I never edit before researching and gathering sources to back my edits and I recently came to know that Republic TV is banned on WP, I'll not add it as a source. I am sorry for grammar mistakes, but you saw them, you can fix them. Newton Euro (talk) 06:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

original thread Those are not reliable sources. As I said, the presence on HT/ToI/Lokmat sites is not an indication of reliability. Also WP:TOI says ToI is generally unreliable. That's why I asked you to read WP:RS closely.
Your attitude on grammar mistakes is unproductive to collaborative editing. It's your responsibility to ensure your edits are suitable for wikipedia, not others'. Hemanthah (talk) 06:07, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amitabh Bachchan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:58, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reply for message somewhere else

Sikh Gurus

Moved to User talk:Ravgun Singh § Sikh gurus

I know that brother, But we can clarify the meaning of Jyoti Jyot in some above paragraph... Sikh gurus didn't died nor they will.. Their light just got absorb in the supreme light (God)... Secondly... Guru Gobind Singh Ji got recovered after getting hit by the attackers.... But some wounds were still there and while practicing archery it was opened and that was the reason they left his physical form Ravgun Singh (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: D. Balakrishna has been accepted

D. Balakrishna, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

TheWikiholic (talk) 04:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @TheWikiholic. I apologize for adding to AfC work here, but this article was collateral damage in a purge of Isha Foundation related UPE and since I too edit articles in that area, I wished to be more thorough to avoid any hints of socking. Hemanthah (talk) 04:34, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semrush

dont revert my changes, or at least if you do revert my changes dont accuse me of vandalism. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.225.142.76 (talk) 05:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit in question, my notice) 80.225.142.76 I didn't say you vandalised. I said your edits were breaking WP:NPOV and WP:RS policies. If you continue adding unfounded allegations even after asking for a source, then that'll be vandalism. --Hemanthah (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

Why did you mention me at the Teahouse? ― ItcouldbepossibleTalk 05:35, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to your "Diffs" message with this
@Itcouldbepossible, User:Enterprisey/diff-permalink script adds Special:Diff links to normal diff pages. Hemanthah (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But it seems to have got caught in another issue and got rev-deled. Hemanthah (talk) 05:41, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the log for revision-delete; something to do with copyrighted text somebody posted. You can still see my message at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Diffs, but can't get the diff. Hemanthah (talk) 05:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hemanthah Yeah, maybe that is why, when I clicked the alert, and then clicked your ping, I did not see anything. But I have not done anything that violates copyright. So why did my revisions get deleted? ― ItcouldbepossibleTalk 06:13, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks mysterious Wikipedia Man for helping me getting around here! Vampire 69420 (talk) 09:38, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Erenst Maninng

Hello, I thank you very much for you notifying me. I did double the size of the page so I don't know what isn't covered under the references. I'm pretty sure I cover most of it with the references. if you have any knowledge on specifically the stuff that is problematic then I can just fix, or remove it. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rommel's editor (talk • contribs) 17:44, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for your quick response to my request for an edit on the "Chennai" page.Wendigo Lake (talk) 14:11, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wendigo Lake You're welcome. Catching such subtle errors is very valuable work; the least I could do is to help correct it asap. Hemanthah (talk) 16:12, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moved discussion to Talk:Rashmika_Mandanna

Moved to Talk:Rashmika Mandanna § Restoration of repetitive content, photos

--Hemanthah (talk) 12:54, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion

Since you are aware of Indian-related topics, i need your opinion on Laxmanrao Pandurang Jadhav (Patil). It seems this page has an incorrect disambiguation. It should be Laxmanrao Pandurang Patil, Laxman Rao Patil, Laxmanrao Patil or ? TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 09:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TheBirdsShedTears, it needs to be Laxmanrao Pandurang Patil. I'm going by this from the official parliament site. Marathi (Satara local language) wikipedia also uses the same page name Hemanthah (talk) 09:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 09:32, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vani Bhojan

Hi sir kindly see the article of Vani Bhojan last edit. Some user editing Vani Bhojan page please see. 2409:4072:6295:D498:6630:3229:7D51:EE12 (talk) 12:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have it in my watchlist, you don't have to ping me here. Hemantha (talk) 12:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seri da punda. Soothanaki mokarapundaiya paaru. Kenakuthu — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4072:6C8D:3A41:74F8:C68C:5C9C:6568 (talk) 15:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rudaali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amjad Khan. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Antarctica featured article review

I have nominated Antarctica for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Faisal Rashid (actor) AfD

Hey please don’t delete this page. I’ll improve the concerns regarding this page. It’s a humble request. Inda19712003 (talk) 10:00, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inda19712003 I don't have the ability to delete it; I've only nominated it for a discussion whether to delete it or not. You can say why you think the page passes notability at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Faisal_Rashid_(actor). If there are enough policy based arguments to keep it, it will be kept. The problem is that there are no reliable sources for editors to write anything about. --hemantha (brief) 10:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

Hi Hemantha, I admire your enthusiasm. However you need to carefully read WP:NPOV and digest what it means. Until then, please listen to the experienced editors when they tell you that your statements are too strong for Wikipedia's purpose. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3, This is regarding which conversation? hemantha (brief) 11:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At Talk:Tek Fog and perhaps other pages as well. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The first sentence of WP:YESPOV: Achieving what the Wikipedia community understands as neutrality means carefully and critically analyzing a variety of reliable sources and then attempting to convey to the reader the information contained in them fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without editorial bias. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kautilya3 Okay, but every single editor I've responded to there is less than 6 month old accounts with may be 100 edits at max (except Yogesh who added the tag per these new accounts' claim). hemantha (brief) 11:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, then I suppose they are fast learners, or bring some background from their lives outside Wikipedia. The fact remains that they are stating the NPOV requirements correctly. The Wire did an investigation and reported the findings. So it is a WP:PRIMARY source for us. Unless these issues are widely accepted and reported as fact, we cannot report them as fact. This has nothing to do with The Wire being an WP:RS or not. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. I disagree though. Perhaps you could point it out on the talk page itself. I'm backing off anyway. hemantha (brief) 11:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kautilya3, I see your name on Pegasus associated talk pages, so I have to wonder why the same logic doesn't apply to Pegasus_Project_revelations_in_India. The Wire is, by your argument, primary source there too; nobody else really had anything to go by apart from their reports. hemantha (brief) 12:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Pegasus investigation was worldwide with lots of organisations participating. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, the India related investigation was handled by the Wire. Nobody else, not even Amnesty/Forbidden Stories, linked the numbers to specific persons; that Prashant Kishor/Rahul Gandhi were surveilled is entirely attributed to the Wire. Everybody else, as can be seen from refs on Pegasus_Project_revelations_in_India still says "as The Wire reported", "The Wire published list" etc. hemantha (brief) 12:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If there are any questionable statements on those pages, you can tag them. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's a bit hand-wavy. It's not just India though, the whole of Pegasus investigation was like that - phone numbers were shared with some, often single, media organisations; which then linked them to specific persons. (btw, these arguments had been made in "alternate press" at the time; I wasn't around, but am certain they would have appeared here as well).
That none of those pages are tagged NPOV, shows what community consensus around NPOV and PRIMARY is. Your interpretation of both those policies, is, if I may say so, extraordinary. hemantha (brief) 13:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OSE-type arguments are not seen as proper Wikiquette. Every issue must be discussed on its own merits. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is not an AfD or something even remotely related to deletion? You came here, I assume in AGF, as an "experienced editor" doling out advice to policy-poor newbie me (though this barbed comment was particularly harsh) and I am only trying to clarify interpretation of these policies. The volubility when giving advice, is now petering out, so I wouldn't press any further.
Though as a last request, please look at Steele Dossier where editors, more experienced than both of us, decided on removing NPOV tag on an article sourced solely to a document that multiple WP:RS sources had called unverified. Tek Fog, for something that no WP:RS has disputed yet, has as much "found by", "according to", "reported by"s as needed by WP:NPOV, if not more. hemantha (brief) 16:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3 In your edit here, you've rewritten lead and sourced it essentially to an opinion piece. Samanth is a tech reporter for Qz; Culpan and Mukherjee are opinion columnists for Bloomberg. Those Bloomberg opinions are extremely useful, but it's not the case here. This has led you to introduce a factually incorrect statement right at the beginning - browser-based has a specific meaning and does not apply here as shown by multiple screenshots of the app and The Wire not using it even once. I'm not going to revert an "experienced editor" like you, perhaps you'll clean up yourself (and take a step back here, because if I end up rewriting an article based on an opinion piece I see as a secondary source, that's what I'd do) hemantha (brief) 03:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It may be tagged as an opinion, but there is verey little opinion in it. It is written like a normal journalistic piece. I recall Anand Venkatanarayan using the term "browser" in The Wire programme. And it is one, because the main work is done somewhere else on a server with gigantic computing power. Would you like "server-based" instead? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With every reply of yours, I'm more and more astounded. The only suggestion I can give is to revert and step back. hemantha (brief) 12:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Hello sir, Gadar 2: The Katha Continues and Bholaa Bring these two articles to the Discussion (Delete), Cinzia007 (talk) 14:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinzia007, Both are already nominated to be deleted. There is no need to discuss them as yet. I agree with the nominator that they aren't ready as of now. My suggestion to you is to keep them in draft until more references become available. hemantha (brief) 14:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Sir In draft then put Cinzia007 (talk) 14:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Donaldd23, is draftifying Bholaa and Gadar 2: The Katha Continues, which you prod-ed, okay with you? hemantha (brief) 17:55, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir, Don't put that article in the draft parmanently delete it. By the way I'm new on wikipedia. On wikipedia I 'm learning something little bit new. Cinzia007 (talk) 18:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And tell me little bit about what articles can be creat on wikipedia and what articles can't create.

I have not yet committed anything more articales except the articals of literature academy Cinzia007 (talk) 18:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir, How to do I have to delete login id on wikipedia? Some process for login account delete. tell process Cinzia007 (talk) 18:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinzia007, Accounts can't be deleted, they can only be renamed. For those who wish to leave Wikipedia permanantly, there's something called Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing wherein accounts will be renamed to something like "Renamed user kjdfajdfsjdlfjlasjeruwou" along with some other things like user page deletion. hemantha (brief) 03:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir, Login id cannot be delete... delete all articales created by me. Cinzia007 (talk) 04:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

This user should be reported to the WP:ANI. Clearly WP:NOTHERE, edits Wikipedia with their own set of rules. It is their way or highway. The person will be blocked in a matter of time if reported, edits are all problematic, blatant content removal, vandalism, tampering, misleading edit summaries, arbitrary changes, incompetent in collaborative editing etc.--2409:4073:4E85:4565:818A:13D4:7603:C3ED (talk) 05:39, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, yes. They have stuck close to that grey line where the edits aren't outright vandalism but also haven't generated enough outrage (WP:SYSTEMICBIAS works in their favor here) to get dragged into boards. I drafted a brief report with some effort myself. But later events [a] made me give up, as my report would necessarily be seen in an unfavorable light. Also to be quite honest, I sympathize a bit[b] with their cleanup, so I'm restricting myself to occasional cleanup of their carpet-bombing approach.

  1. ^ my mis-step, their mis-step at AIV
  2. ^ But to be clear, I do not care for their overt POV at all, not one bit.
hemantha (brief) 06:13, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is why it should be reported to ANI (until it is too late), they will understand, ANV is for obvious vandalisms only.--2409:4073:2E98:C26C:9C25:67A3:FD61:AF15 (talk) 09:22, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, to clarify, I did try drafting an ANI report. But the AIV reports might make any of my ANI reports look like revenge or forum-shopping. Plus they have tempered their zeal a bit and there is evidence that they are hearing the expressed concerns, despite the aggressive posturing. If that doesn't stick, I might try ANI route later - in a couple of weeks or so; not enough time right now for dramaboards. hemantha (brief) 09:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That guy is a sockpuppet of [1]. Compare the three dots usage (...) between each lines of a sentence he types in the talk page of both.--2409:4073:188:DE9C:1892:8438:7183:543D (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ellipsis usage is common enough, but there are some other indications as well - like same mobile editing tags, large overlap etc. I'll take a deeper look over the weekend. If convinced and you haven't already done so, I'll open one under Mridul SPI or Eswaran Naveen SPI; watch those pages. hemantha (brief) 03:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked already! Good work there. hemantha (brief) 03:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edits

Hi Hemantha, thanks for the deletion nomination on the Brihans Natural article and your edits on the Mandar Agashe article. I'm the user who had requested the latter' deletion review when I had come across it earlier last month. I have left my comments on the nomination; and I am happy to volunteer improving the articles over the next few months, as my time permits. Thanks! 2405:201:1006:E03A:54AD:9797:B968:CB1D (talk) 06:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is your relationship with Agashes? Your range is singularly focused on related articles. COI policy applies to IPs as well. hemantha (brief) 06:50, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hemantha, thanks for the feedback on the nomination page. I have read up on the COI policies – as such I don't know any of them, nor have I ever worked for any of them. When I came across Dnyaneshwar Agashe's article earlier last month, I happened to remember their bank case from 10 years ago which had been quite prominent in the local news. I decided to participate on just those set of articles, because I naturally found related sources for many of them, and I didn't want to disrupt the project too much by participating on every other topic I found interesting. If my edits are unwelcome, I will back out and let the articles be. If it is ok for me to edit as my time permits, i am happy to work on the articles over the next few months. Good day! 2405:201:1006:E03A:A573:938A:59CF:9934 (talk) 07:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Caste related grandstanding and scam whitewashing have made those articles particularly messy and prompted my question above. From what I've looked, your contributions are clearly neither. I'm sorry that I asked that question before evaluating your edits. I, for one, wholeheartedly welcome them. hemantha (brief) 12:47, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Hemantha. I will look back in to if I can or am interested in improving those articles at a later date, whatever their fate. I don't understand what those terms mean, but I trust you experienced editors will handle it. As a casual reader, they don't read any different from other articles of the same ilk. While I accept your apology, I will suggest you to not be so aggressive to us newcomers. I felt guilty that I had done something terribly wrong by contributing to something that only randomly had my interest. I have seen that happen too many times around this project in the years I've used it. And this happens to contributions especially on topics that are not from Europe or America. Kindly, I will limit my contributions to this project for the time being. I wish you a good day. 2405:201:1006:E03A:1CF3:E10F:B66E:B7C4 (talk) 14:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hemantha&oldid=1069287674"