DSachan

Hello. I really do understand your concerns about the images, but I thought I would do something different structurally, and make the images varied in size and positioning to make the list look more interesting, instead of completely uniform and boring. In regards to the "endemic" species of bird in Egypt - there are none :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

About the endemic species, should this fact also not be mentioned in the list that there are no enedemic species of Egypt? Otherwise how will a random user ever know that there are none? I mean this fact in itself deserves to pe put in the lead. And regarding images, I found them a little hard on eyes and frankly speaking I still find the same, though I see you have tidied a few. Maybe we could wait for the other comments and then work on it. DSachan (talk) 03:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I'll implement it into the lead, and I'll see what others say about image placement. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for adding the FA star. Will you also update the Talk page history stuff? I'm not sure how to do that correctly. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

According to WP:FAC page, a bot updates the article talk page after the article is promoted or the nomination archived. I am not sure how to do it manually, though. Perhaps, you could wait and watch the bot update it. It should not take very long. DSachan (talk) 19:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi DSachan, I tried editing the article to achieve what you described in Wikipedia: Help Desk, I hope this was what you had in mind. Best, Kudret abi^Talk 05:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I note that you have put a lot of work into this article, but I wonder if the facts need checking? For example, the first species listed is Arctic Loon. Is it known by the American name in India? Grimmett, Inskipp and Inskipp, Birds of India list it as a vagrant - no indication that it is anything other than regular in the article. Is the picture appropriate? I'm surprised to see a full breeding plumage bird depicted for India, but I don't actually know whether that plumage has occurred. Avibase generated lists are not totally reliable, and often don't give status accurately. Jimfbleak (talk) 07:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Image was Great Northern Diver anyway, so I've deleted it from article. Jimfbleak (talk) 08:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've not checked all the images, but the flamingo and stilt were of the American species/subspecies, not recorded in India afaik. Jimfbleak (talk) 08:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for pointing out the potential errors. I will look into the whole list once again, and check all the images. But that may take some time. Right now, I am too much caught in the courses. :( DSachan (talk) 13:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Can I invite you to particpate in our new assessment drive? It's strictly for experienced editors and has a degree of friendly competition built-in. It involves re-evaluating around 3500 Milhist B-Class articles to ensure they match our new criteria. As ever, we're offering a range of awards as our way of expressing our thanks. The drive doesn't start until 18:00 (UTC) on March 10 but you can sign up in advance here. It would be great if you can spare the time, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 05:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

One Stripe (200 articles)   Two Stripes (400 articles)   Three Stripes (600 articles)   Chevrons (1000 articles)   Golden Wiki First place

Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 11:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

One Stripe (200 articles)   Two Stripes (400 articles)   Three Stripes (600 articles)   Tireless Contributor Barnstar (1000 articles)   Chevrons (2000 articles)   Working Man's Barnstar (3000 articles)   Barnstar of Diligence (4000 articles)   Third place overall   Second place overall   First place overall

Hi yes I am very sure there will be many times more than 28,000 settlements in India. If you think about it several hundred thousand would seem right. At present google only recognizes the 28,000 of them -I hadn't noticed but that is alarming in comparison to 78,000 in Pakistan. These are settlements considered to be the main towns and villages. While I'm sure 600,000 places in India may have some claim, I'm certain many of those include hamlets or dwellings many of which may not require an encyclopedia article entry although I as much as anybody am firm in the belief that all inhabited settlements have some claim to notability and potentially can be written into an encyclopedia. If you could point to a source which lists 600,000 places in india and has information on where they are located I'm all ears. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 18:46, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Wow thats frightening but the evidence is there you were right. I also found this site which lists over 600,000 locations in India. Thanks for noticing this. I wonder if there is a site which has information on all of those settlements. I'm sure you;ll agree this task to cover the world completely geographically is one of the largest in wikipedias history. If we can combine the right sources I am certain we can cover a huge amount. It makes me wonder how many actual settlements there are in total in the world. PLease actively join in with this, I would welcome your input. Feel free to address this to User:Fritzpoll too ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 18:59, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

But it puts things in perspective. I doubt we have 300,000 articles on settlements at present for the entire world on wikipedia and there are twice as many in India alone. It just shows how important this is ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 19:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I know when you look at atlases like this MSN Encarta included I start to get dizzy because you realise just how much could actually be covered and how little is actually on here. But ones things for sure we can't go on ignoring 98% of the world surface. Even if we never have "full" coverage anything we can do en masse towards this goal is an improvement. So however limited the coverage on google maps is 1.8 million new articles is not bad given the circumstances at present. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 19:55, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Keep in mind that China is over three times the size of India and Russia well over 6 times the size of India.... Well if we ponder to much on that the worse we feel about lack of coverage. I am open to any sources though which have reliable data on further places not included in google maps ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Well I see wikipedia as a summarized guide to our planet and existence and the first rule of thumb in covering our world is ... (the world physically as it is iteself). Why nobody planned something like this five years ago I have no idea. If I had been around here in 2003 I would have proposed it then and by now we may have been 2 million articles better off but the best we can do is work towards the goal in the quickest most efficient way possible, now ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:11, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

That seems like a good feature, anything which identifies the severe inbalance in coverage. Many users seem to think wikipedia is about america and england not the world. Really google and wikipedia, (Internet command centres) should be working together anyway. The internet is still really in its infancy and I am sure things will develop amazingly in the future. I've always envisaged that some sort of virtual map will become available where in reading the article who can zoom in on the location via satellite and see the city at ground level in a virtual world. I watched something the other night with scientists anticipating the increasing popularity of this around 2020. If that goes accordingly. I can imagine some sort of 3d browsing through the encyclopedia in the future. E.g wandering through the streets of NYC, click on a building and then the article comes up. The same I'd imagine for anywhere. An interesting prospect whether it lives up to this or not... ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 17:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. 604? It would be interesting to know what the average number of settlements would be in each district. Creating 604 categories just to categorize settlements seems huge, but if they are to house 638,000 articles this would probably be perfectly reasonable ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 13:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thats not a problem. Category:American films has 11,000 articles in it. Clearly the 604 cateogries are very necessary ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 14:35, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Fritz bot has been approved at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FritzpollBot for filling in a possible 1.8 million articles on settlements across the world. Now dabbing needs to be done for links which aren't sorted as the bot will bypass any blue links. and I need as many people as possible to help me with Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Places to prepare for the bot. If you could tackle a page or two everything counts as it will be hard to do it alone. Thankyou ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 12:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Basically what needs doing is to check each of the blue links in these lists and check to see if they are correct. E.g many places have the same name in Afghanistan etc in several provinces so rather than them being linked e.g Baluch or Baluch, Afghanistan they need to be red linked as Baluch, Helmand etc according to which province they are in. It is a relatively small taks in relation to how many articles are missing. Basically the bot only runs on red links -it bypasses the blue links so we need to check the bluelinks forst to see that they are the corrrespondong articles. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 12:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

But yes what you should do (providing there is only one place in that province with that name is change it accordingly so it is
e.g Kariz, Faryab so it is red linked ready. If you come across links that lead to other pages, you'll have to move the page and create a disambiguation page in which the new link will be accessed from. However if there are two places in the same province with the name please remove them from the list and add them in a section at the top of the page and also list them at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Places/Problematic naming for the names which can't be dabbed. Hopefully we can discuss how to deal with these later ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 13:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

  ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦      $1,000,000?  13:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes thats right -check it now -should be right ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 13:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Note though they are called Ghor and Ghazni ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 13:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Note though with Armenia and Azerbaijan the provinces aren't listed so dabbing may be difficult ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 13:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ah. Note on the lists the second name isn't the district it is in it is just the spelling of the name with diuretics. That link should have been Arai, Armenia. But also on the Arai page Arai, Armenia should be linked ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 13:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ah yes but only if there is more than one place in the country with that name. If there is only one place in the country with that name it should be ..., Armenia. We try to use the biggest area we can. With Armenia the province mentioned seems to cover most of the country. If you check it on a map most of them aren't in Yerevan Province, this is what I mean about the provinces being incorrect ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 13:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks I really appreciate your help ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 17:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thanks for your help but Cambodia will possibly take a few days to sort out. Many of the links are the same and some of the names direct to the districts rather than having an article. Bangladesh is first on my list to sort out anyway ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 14:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've sourced much of the article and have quite a lot of contributions already. It's a project I've put off far too long—let's get going. ceranthor 23:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey DSachan. I would just to apologise for and explain the disruption you may have noticed on WP:Good articles/recent. Following a bot request, it became apparent that it would be handy to have a bot pipe new additions to WP:GA onto the /recent subpage. Now, I admit that the bot's been having a few problems (it's still officially in trial), but I hope these have now been worked out. It should mean that every 5 minutes the newest additions are added automatically, so all users like you have to do is add the newly listed GA to WP:GA and let the bot do the work. Of course, you're allowed to do it yourself, but you don't have to. That's the plan, anyhow, so it might be an idea to add the article to WP:GA, then wait ten minutes. If the bot hasn't added it yet, add it manually and come straight to me so I can fix the bot. Essentially though, you can either carry on as normal or take advantage of the bot, as you wish. Thanks for your patience and sorry for any disruption caused. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 11:03, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yesterday, I put 3 articles on WP:GA but not on /recent, and until today they were not put on the recent list. So, I put them manually. I was aware of this bot, but it did not work so far for my 3 recent additions. - DSachan (talk) 11:07, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, it's been having some problems. Every time I think I've got it all worked out, it becomes obvious that I haven't. That's why I won't take offence if people want to do it manually for the time being! - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 11:09, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I am gonna take note of it when I put few more GAs later today. I will not put them on /recent list on my own, instead will wait for your bot to do the job. - DSachan (talk) 11:11, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Alright Jarry, it is working fine now. - DSachan (talk) 16:29, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for having faith, but I've still got my rollback button at the ready! We'll see, I suppose. If it saves human editors time, I'm happy. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 16:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ya, this bot is definitely worth the effort. If it works fine, it will be good for editors. Well done - DSachan (talk) 16:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, just to let you know that the above dab has been prodded, please have a look and see if you wish to improve the page/contest this. Thanks, Boleyn3 (talk) 19:48, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

No, go ahead with the deletion. - DSachan (talk) 23:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi DSachan - glad you like it. It's actually a place in Scotland (see Grutness). I spotted it while looking through an atlas several years ago and started using it as the name of a small magazine I was editing. It sort of stuck, and now I use it both for my art (see here and as a username online, both in Wikipedia and elsewhere. Grutness...wha? 01:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Because you've contributed to FPC either recently or in the past, I'm letting you know about the above poll on the basis of which we may develop proposals to change our procedures and criteria. Regards, Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 13:00, 30 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

This sort of article is usually autobiographical or penned by an agent/publicist/friend/fan. COI doesn't preclude a Wikipedia entry (there is a discussion about a self-confessed autobiography further down my talk), but it does make it difficult for an involved editor to avoid bias and original research. Most of these articles disappear, but some are worked into an acceptable tone with references that establish notability, and sometimes with negative reviews added as well as positive ones. We will just have to see what version 2 is like if it materialises. Thanks for message, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

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) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2007 ICC World Twenty20 statistics 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/2007 ICC World Twenty20 statistics 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.– Ianblair23 (talk) 13:38, 22 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).Reply

A tag has been placed on Kokir (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 13:39, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

SM UB-14 has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Schierbecker (talk) 21:05, 24 March 2024 (UTC)Reply