User talk:A.amitkumar/Archive 2

3038:

Political History and am an accomplished author - therefore I do not need to supply any reference. In any event, I was at no time asked to supply any references and had I been asked to do so, then I of course would have. Considering some of the fallacious rubbish that I've seen on these pages, I'm astounded that someone with my educational standard can be treated with such contempt,i.e. to have my contribution removed for no valid reason. I reiterate - you did not have enough time to validate my edit and you have Insulted me In a way that I have never before experienced. This Is an outrage. If you would like to discuss this matter further and\or see details of my credentials then I urge you to contact me at your earliest convenience - (stephen.hoyland@mypostoffice.co.uk)

2538:, but didn't you notice all the unencyclopaedic "you" language in that section? And if you're considering a run for admin, a word to the wise: create some articles. However, that's none of my business, really, and I understand the fascination of AN/I: I learnt a whole lot about how Knowledge operates and what policies and guidelines bear on various matters reading there in spare moments, including before I registered an account. But all things being equal, I believe it should be in spare moments, even for admins, and I believe you are now getting told that a bit incoherently in some threads where you have contributed. 2594:? You might get ideas by starting with the cleanup listings there rather than the requested articles, because I notice the articles you created were shaky on things like full reference information (in fact one used bare URLs), wikilinks and categories. And because I find myself that when I clean up articles, it leads me to interesting redlinks. Also I expect you can read one or more Indian languages and there may be things on those Wikipedias worth translating, or which provide material for expanding an article. The same goes for business, but I think your first task in that area should be to do more with 1356:

unless handed out without thorough check always ends up in waste of time and shows bad faith in editors. More over in this case if you notice I did hand out the warnings (10-15 minutes before you posted on my user page) - the edit summaries do show AGF's because until I cannot connect the dots I don't have to assume vandal edits. Bringing the article to better shape is more priority and if the warnings have to wait a few minutes because of that I consider it reasonable.

233: 898: 3521: 1029: 743: 31: 597: 1034: 1014: 1097:

the PHIT legislation which is specific to american region. I from my perspective find it irrelevant for the article. I am not going to be pushy on this point, and would not revert it again if you think my revert is not reasonable and leave it for other patrollers to take a decision on it. Also hope you don't mind I moving your edit into its own section so that I can keep the conversation separate in my talk page from other topics.

1039: 786: 1044: 1019: 2768:

which has a functionality set of X. An RT group exists to cover X. A new code change occurs on the application to make the functionality as (X+Y). The RT will still test X until it evolves at a later point of time. But to cover the extra changes based on Y, a NRT has to be conducted which most of the times is a manual process. I am using the same update in the article talk page, lets continue the discussion there.

1024: 482:, two or more reviews from reliable sources should be enough to show notability. In this case, just a casual search has revealed three such sources to me - Reviews from newspapers which will be considered of atleast a semi-national, if not national level. I'm positive there would be more sources available if one tries to search for it. I dont think the article has a notability problem in the slightest. 2554:

seen a couple of cases going to the gutter). I guess it is all a phase of where I get interested in a particular time period and what kind of time I can give to the project. Depends on my real life work load too. That vandal revert is probably from time when I spend going through recent changes. I do have a minuscule number of articles that I created during the short phase when I lingered around

408: 94: 2534:'s not around to help things flow smoothly), but having many responses to a posting there can be worse than having none or few, since it may make it hard to see that it hasn't yet attracted admin attention, and since it may add to the perception that it's a place where people get piled on. I find the balance of your current edits interesting; for example, you reverted the vandalism at 1052: 949: 3257: 909: 797: 608: 654: 2635:

Aah - I hadn't realised that because you apparently left the "under construction" sign on it; a bot removed it. I hope someone(s) with more knowledge of business than I have come along and fill it out. You could, however, link to it from other articles; I don't see the COI in that. (By the way you're

1397:

Hi Justberry, there is no argument here, every editor has their own ways to tackle vandalism, i don't think mine is at fault, neither i am trying to find fault with you. Some are more aggressive than me and some are more passive. There are no hard and fast rules about it. Every one is working towards

1355:

A Warning general or not always has a tendency to create drama (and it does hurt some peoples ego's who just wait to create more ruckus). I have taken more than 80 vandals to AIV (almost every time ending in a block) and handed out around 2000 warnings in the last 3 months. Believe me, these warnings

1310:

Actually two AGF's, and the second time is what would make it a pattern - the first edit that i noticed alone cannot make it a pattern. The first revert was not by me the second and third were identified by me. Also sometimes it is better to fall back a little and analyse the editors history of edits

1264:

Justberry, for me at a usual pace during page patrolling, a single instance of change like this is considered good faith edits, only when I noticed this repetitive KKK edits are done by the same IP I went ahead with warning the IP in his talk page. Assuming good faith is quite important for me during

3037:

I must admit that I'm rather angry and upset that you removed my edit within a few minutes of my posting It! You didn't have time to check on the validity of my edit and so I can't for the life of me understand why you felt the need to remove It! I have a degree In English language and a Masters In

2300:

Hello Amit jan, thank you for your reply, you can check this source, which is a universitary source. click on the link and you will be directed (I tested it) to the article by that professor. On the FIRST page, the statistics about the Kurdish population in that province is given clearly. Hope this

2194:

Hi Amit, I'm very confused as to why you reverted the changes I made to William Nericcio's page, stating that you didn't feel my additions were relevant. I added information on his MEXtasy traveling exhibition, as well as external links to reviews of his text. This is extremely relevant information

1120:

HI A.Amitkumar... thanks for quick response, I did not receive an email notice that you had responded... not sure how to setup such notifications. This would help me respond quicker. As for the revert and your reasoning. I too am a global thinker, and was surprised to find only USA government links

2585:

Hmm, I don't seem to be very good at that kind of pushing; someone once asked me to help them become an article writer and nothing much occurred to me by way of hints :-) But I do notice that based on the articles you created, you're into business and Indian topics - so probably I shouldn't repeat

1096:

Hi TrueWikifashion, I noticed that you have been adding this link to more than one page(and has been the only set of edits done by you), The addition related to PHIT on the PHIT page (which I noticed too) was valid, but the article of physical fitness is a generic article and not really related to

2767:

I am not sure completely if the content of NRT is valid or not, but RT and NRT are quite separate. RT tests existing functionality and NRT will include new functionality testing and would become part of RT depending at a later point of time depending on lot of variables. Say an application exists

2553:

Hi, Thanks for reaching out to me on my talk page. Yes I did notice what you are saying about my ANI interactions, and I am trying to move out of it too (or should I say trying to not get into a meaningless discussion or start using the ignore card when I see illogical reasoning - now that I have

1382:

have to start the warning sequence on his talk page before the other warnings you may have posted. Please just remember to warn users after a few times; I don't want this to be a large argument over one user, especially when he has been officially blocked. We can put this behind us and move on as

1849:

You just did a undo of a contribution that I had done. The section before my edition didn't appear constructive to me, and your undo didn't appear constructive to me either. If I did such a contibution is because I am a native spanish speaker and because what I wrote is actually true in some

329:

Hi, Thanks for reaching out to my talk page, As for the revert - I don't find anything useful in that addition in the text, The article is already so small and is needing proper addition of details to make it better. There is nothing of importance or proper information in a sentence that means -

417:. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved. 103:. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved. 1121:

on this page (and 1 of the 2 is a dead link). As such, the PHIT America organization and information on fitness should be allowed, and is in fact more appropriate than a dead link, and includes data with significant global relevance. Continued dialog is welcome. best, (TrueWikiFashion)

1987:(soory, both templates, looks odd, but both needs to be done and I'm too lazy to write individual messages ;-) ) Hello A.amitkumar. You recently applied for a Wikimedia IRC cloak, but it looks like you forgot to register your nickname first. Could you please log on to IRC and do: 1749:

BUT to REVERT all my contributions to a version of the page that is so crappy I cannot believe it, is just not ok. JÝou have just erased two hours of my work and I would be happy if you undid this. Thank you (from a person who is writing about a subject that he knows very well)

1142:

is not a real good argument in such content issues. As I mentioned i don't have such a strong feeling on removing the content either and I am ok with other patrollers taking a look and deciding on it too. Also you could control your notification settings from this

1295:

Amit, I understand the fact that you use AGF to assume good faith in others, something that is very important to me as well. What concerns me is that you gave the editor three "AGFs" in a row, for the same edit and to the same vandal. Please reconsider next time.

3434:

the Internet link is temporary changed from www.mc2labs.com to visualqnx.blogspot.com and, if possibile, keep the description updated with: "mc2labs.com - Real-Time ICT Research&Development, Mogliano Veneto IT - Realtime Internet programming infrastructures"

1172:

thanks, i did set my notifications to "as they come in". I would like to find a basic tutorial (maybe even a video tutorial) that shows an efficient way to navigate the core features of WP. Then i could better evaluate a more serious participation with the

1147:. Let me know if your need any assistance around in Knowledge and I will be more than happy to help and if you are interested in having a long term presence in Knowledge I could suggest how to go through an adoption school and get more idea about using WP. 2529:

Hi: I've seen you a lot at AN/I recently and I now see folks starting to push back against your edits there. I'd like to ask you to dial it back, and maybe reconsider what you are trying to achieve. Yes, it can be a chaotic place (especially when

2562:

which you can see in my signature), nothing very notable though. I do wish to contribute in terms of article creation more often but don't have the initiative to find the best path towards it. May be you could push me in the right direction.

354:

My opinion is that the role of tutors might be unclear, and that my addition did add information on that role. Not finding anything "useful" is not a sufficient reason to revert an edit; it is a matter of opinion, not of fact. From

1091:

Hello A.Amitkumar... I'm new to posting on Knowledge. please inform me as to why a recent link I inserted was reverted. it is highly relevant and highly credible within the fitness industry. thanks in advance (TrueWikiFashion).

2612:

That Software in Retail Article was intentionally left out by me as a stub for others to work on, as I might have a high COI on that part which I realized as I tried to expand that article. Probably will try to check other

2323:

Hi IP, I do understand the ref was fine for the population numbers, but how is the text I pointed above adding anything to this particle? Why is adding the professor needed for this article and its context?, Thanks.

1872:

What was not constructive before your edit? I don't agree with your edits because the whole section under which cajeta is used is female genitalia, what purpose does explaining the same for this specific term help?

3632:

Hi!The other user who also happens to be blocked a huge no. of times.But is always back with new accounts.Please do something about it.It is very obvious he/she is doing it with malicious intent. Thank you!

2000:

is your e-mail address? After you do that, please follow the instructions that are e-mailed to you to confirm your e-mail address. When you're done with that, I just need you to confirm your cloak request:

178:, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the 1065:

Whilst this effectively ends the formal part of your adoption, I am still always happy to help you out with any questions, issues or problems you have with Knowledge. See you around - and happy editing!

3469:

Hi Mogliano, the edits to refer to a blogspot is mostly discouraged on Knowledge, if you own the site it would be best to remove it for the time being until which it is down and add it again later.

2032:

Hello A.amitkumar! You requested a wikipedia/ or wikimedia/ cloak on IRC, but didn't provide us a diff (or the diff you provided is not valid for some reason). Please edit your userpage and put in

818:

will be officially completed. Pop over there and explain the distinction between good faith edits and vandalism, and you'll be a fully-fledged graduate. Which reminds me - do you have either

675: 2277:

this doesnt seem valid in this context. The first edit seemed better to me. But please let me know what your intention was for adding this information so that i can check if i am mistaken.

2347:

Ah you mean THAT. Well I did that just in case. I don't know. It's not necessary needed you are right........ It's just about the declaration she made, I preferred to give her name....

566:) only one carried the IMDb rating, but I doubt it will be a problem. The rating should stay, in my opinion. See the external links of these movies for how the link should be, though. 849:

Hi Yunshui, Thanks for pointing that out, I probably missed a couple of questions in that section as it was too late for me that day and was logging out. About the fonts I do have

2636:

welcome to look at articles I list on my userpage to see if there's anything needs fixing or any interesting redlinks, but I'm afraid a lot of them you'll probably find boring.)

698: 180: 2495: 2483: 2413:

Hello Amit, I recently added a change to West Azerbaijan province population details as HochVoltag's edit wasn't taking in account the statistics from the source I included (

424: 110: 3705:

and both of you can propose a text that you want as lead and then discuss this instead of discussing it through comments and reverting each others edits and edit warring.

3534: 756: 532:

Hi Soni, Is there any other generic source which we can use to show the user ratings for a movie? I don't find the user reviews for this movie in rotten tomatoes...

1231:. Please be careful with whether you mark reverts as good-faith or "vandal"; this is the second time I have noticed something like this happen with your reverts. -- 2223:

Hi Backseatbetty, The good Doctor seems to have filled in for me in giving you a valid explanation for this edit. Do let me know if you have any other questions.

1062:

Congratulations. You really hurtled through the adoption school! I'm very proud to graduate you, and look forward to seeing your work on Knowledge in the future.

3060:

Hi Stephen, Please try to understand some policies that editors on Knowledge strive to obey and which helps keep WP clean. One is a policy about verifiability -

2195:

and I have been given the go-ahead by William Nericcio himself to perform these changes. This is extremely frustrating. Could you please put my changes back?

168: 2590:, which I have found a metric ton of references for, but don't trust myself to write neutrally :-) Instead ... how about looking at the requested tasks at 3178: 3166: 1815: 1803: 1653: 3354: 3431:

please roll my change back at line "mc2labs.com - ICT Research&Development, Mogliano Veneto IT - Realtime Internet programming infrastructures"

2805: 2793: 2714: 2702: 496:

I agree, This was the specific reason why two citations were added to the article. I find it unreasonable to reject the article for notability.

2071: 2059: 1652:

I am sorry. It is really difficult to edit now here in Knowledge. Is it okay if I post here the link to the reference? Thank you very much. :)

3350: 2957: 2945: 936: 3750:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 3602:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 3559:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 3397:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 3225:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 3182:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 3004:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2961:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2918:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2809:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2718:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2675:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2499:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2456:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2161:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2118:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 2075:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 1957:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 1914:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 1819:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 1713:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 1616:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 1573:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 1530:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 3661:

Hold your horses, you are crossing the 3RR and have not taken any action to gain consensus either. I have reported this page for edit war.

3598: 3586: 3045: 2914: 2902: 1857: 1341:

Well, in that case, one could just leave a general warning on xis talk page. I understand your logic, but a general warning never hurts. --

1526: 1514: 1746:

Yes it was just ok to removed the stupid hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh :-) I accidentally hit my keyboard and ... yeah a stupid mistake.

814:

You're almost a graduate! There's one question in the Vandals section that still needs answering (I've highlighted it for you), and then

2671: 2659: 2424: 2417:). Please tell me before undo or change if you agree with my contribution or not and if not, what you would like to change. Sincerely. 2399: 2354: 2308: 2258: 2211: 977: 209: 3755: 3607: 3564: 3402: 3230: 3187: 3009: 2966: 2923: 2814: 2723: 2680: 2504: 2461: 2369:

I think that was the addition that made me revert your edits. If you are fine removing it then i have no issues either. Thanks again.

2166: 2123: 2080: 1962: 1919: 1824: 1718: 1621: 1578: 1535: 1910: 1898: 518:

Amit, now that the article's made, you may want to do some restructuring and add a few more sources. Also, remove the IMDB ratings.

260: 2748:

Hi, I should have put more of a note in the edit comment, but I did back up my removal of the content at Non-Regression Testing on

3344: 3746: 3734: 3649: 2114: 2102: 1501: 815: 3065: 2452: 2440: 1766: 689: 400: 86: 76: 71: 59: 3347:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 3340: 3751: 3603: 3560: 3398: 3226: 3183: 3005: 2962: 2919: 2810: 2719: 2676: 2500: 2457: 2162: 2119: 2076: 1958: 1915: 1820: 1714: 1617: 1612: 1600: 1574: 1531: 3741: 3593: 3550: 3508: 3457: 3388: 3216: 3173: 2995: 2952: 2909: 2800: 2709: 2666: 2490: 2447: 2152: 2109: 2066: 1948: 1905: 1810: 1704: 1607: 1564: 1521: 1076: 1005: 838: 685: 634: 1139: 190:, a friendly space on Knowledge where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! 2749: 2591: 1654:

http://www.philstar.com/nation/2013/07/24/1007431/pinay-scholar-stranded-2-days-malaysian-airport-after-discrimination

1569: 1557: 267: 3123: 38: 2598:; I tidied it up a bit but a major section is still empty and it needs references. Do those pointers help at all? 639: 3714: 3670: 3478: 3150: 3081: 3000: 2988: 2886: 2777: 2622: 2587: 2572: 2559: 2378: 2333: 2286: 2232: 1882: 1787: 1681: 1178: 1126: 571: 523: 487: 1850:

contexts, but in any case, I will not do any more contributions and you can feely do whatever you want. Bye.

3049: 2414: 1861: 311: 148: 3331:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

3393: 3381: 3280:

again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on

3061: 2428: 2403: 2358: 2312: 2262: 2207: 213: 1311:

and hence the two warnings too for the user so that the next warning takes him to AIV. Also I try to avoid

1138:

Hi Truewikifashion, I agree there were some dead links already in the article, but in terms of an argument-

330:

Every student is assigned a tutor and what the tutors responsibilities are... Hope you understand. Thanks.

3119: 1174: 1122: 767: 749: 742: 563: 3302:

groups in Kerala for manufacture of high-tin bronze vessels and mirrors and lost wax casting.<ref: -->

2641: 2603: 2595: 2543: 2203: 1485:

Hi amitkumar: Thank you for tweaking my article to make it more neutral looking. Appreciate your help!

559: 47: 17: 3687:

The user in question is introducing blantant purple prose, breaking links and also using bad English.--

249:

Congratulations, A.amitkumar! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the

3692: 3645: 3641: 3637: 3496: 3445: 3317: 3041: 2843: 2836: 2420: 2395: 2350: 2304: 2254: 2199: 1853: 1754: 1497: 1493: 1489: 1447: 567: 519: 483: 462: 364: 319: 271: 205: 1657: 1762: 1661: 1388: 1346: 1301: 1254: 1236: 356: 144: 3500: 3449: 3299:

http://leonardo.info/rolodex/srinivasan.sharada.html From Sharada Srinivasan's profile page on the

232: 3269: 3221: 3209: 3134: 3111: 3103: 3096: 2753: 2535: 1672:

Hi You will get the same editing interface if you use edit source option in editing the article.

1466: 1407: 1365: 1328: 1278: 1203: 1156: 1106: 874: 541: 505: 382: 339: 275: 186: 3106:

because it's not the right name for the article and is very little. I created a few minutes ago

3308:

http://mumbai.mtnl.net.in/~hbfc/cv/DR_SHARADA_SRINIVASAN.html From Sharada Srinivasan's profile

3765: 3617: 3574: 3504: 3453: 3412: 3370: 3240: 3197: 3019: 2976: 2933: 2824: 2733: 2690: 2531: 2514: 2471: 2176: 2133: 2090: 1972: 1953: 1941: 1929: 1834: 1728: 1631: 1588: 1545: 1070: 1028: 999: 897: 832: 763: 628: 184:. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the 3053: 1438:

For chiming in on the WP:ANI thread I started. With the WP:USUALSUSPECTS showing up for the

3707: 3663: 3471: 3143: 3074: 2879: 2867: 2770: 2757: 2637: 2615: 2599: 2565: 2539: 2371: 2326: 2279: 2225: 1875: 1780: 1674: 1459: 1400: 1358: 1321: 1271: 1196: 1149: 1099: 867: 724: 534: 498: 375: 332: 3293:

the theme of 'Archaeometallugical and art historical studies on ] metal icons'.<ref: -->

1013: 449: 135: 3740: