User talk:ImperialAficionado: Difference between revisions

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist and topic subscriptions to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

Welcome to My Talk Page

Feel free to leave me a message or start a discussion. I'm open to discussing anything related to Wikipedia, Indian history, or any topic of mutual interest. Please remember to sign your posts by typing ~~~~ at the end of your message, so I know who you are. Thanks for stopping by!

Topics I'm Interested In: - Indian history - Wikipedia editing - Collaborative projects - Historical research - Fact checking

Please Note: - Be respectful and follow Wikipedia's guidelines in your messages. - I'll respond as soon as I can, but please be patient.

Looking forward to constructive discussions! Imperial^[AFCND] 07:18, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ghaznavid campaigns in India has been accepted

Ghaznavid campaigns in India, 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.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 22% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Seawolf35 (talk) 16:26, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! It is my pleasure to be a part of this. Ajayraj890 (talk) 16:37, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Siege of Ranthambore (1226) has been accepted

Siege of Ranthambore (1226), 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.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Ajayraj890 (talk) 11:45, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chanda Sahib invasion of Travancore has been accepted

Chanda Sahib invasion of Travancore, 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.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:28, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Ajayraj890 (talk) 18:33, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Second Battle of Laghman has been accepted

Second Battle of Laghman, 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.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:14, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Ajayraj890 (talk) 14:17, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Satnami Rebellion

Hello, ImperialAficionado. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Satnami Rebellion, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:06, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello ImperialAficionado and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
• The project Academy has lots of useful information about editing and writing military history articles. One very useful introductory course to get you started is Writing a good stub.
• Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a set of guidelines that cover article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
• If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.
• If you would like to receive the project's monthly newsletter, The Bugle, please sign up here.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 00:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Glad to be a part of this. Imperial^[AFCND] 03:52, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Navsari, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gujrat. 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) 06:02, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

3RR at Lalitaditya Muktapida

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Banks Irk (talk) 17:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Apologies. There happened a similar case like what happened at the Battle of Aror. The editor is not responding but removed the cited parts. I realised that there was mistakes on my side. But later I fixed that by adding quotation from the source and correcting the context. It again got reverted, unfortunately. Btw, you had adviced me to take the concerns of the Battle of Aror to ANI. It didn't work. Imperial^[AFCND] 17:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Voting for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023 is now open!

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

The 12 Days of Wikipedia On the 12th day of Christmas Jimbo sent to me 12 BLPs 11 RFAs 10 New Users 9 Barnstars 8 Admins Blocking 7 Socks Socking 6 Clerks Clerking 5 Check Users Checking 4 Oversighters Hiding 3 GAs 2 Did You Knows and an ARB in a pear tree. -May your holiday season be filled with joy, laughter and good health.--Chris Troutman (talk) 22:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC) This message was generated using {{subst: The 12 Days of Wikipedia}}

Happy New Year, ImperialAficionado!

Happy New Year!

ImperialAficionado,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 14:39, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 14:39, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Bludgeon

You might want to read wp:bludgeon, you do not have to respond to every comment. Slatersteven (talk) 12:54, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Haha. I will certainly do it. Btw I found another recently created article that fails GNG. See Battle of Thane. I am not much experienced creating an speedy deletion discussion. Could you do it after double checking the sources and notability? Imperial^[AFCND] 12:57, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@ImperialAficionado, if there's any discussion to be had, you're not looking for "speedy deletion". That's WP:CSD, and it's only for some very specific conditions like "there is literally no comprehensible text" and "sole author requests deletion". If you think it's very obvious that something ought to be deleted, such that no one is likely to disagree, that's not a speedy deletion (use WP:PROD for that). -- asilvering (talk) 23:16, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes. I found that lately. Thanks. Imperial^[AFCND] 01:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Battle of Thane. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Jonharojjashi (talk) 12:17, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Where did I make a personal attack. Quote that down. Imperial^[AFCND] 12:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Calling a good faith edit "Vandalism" is a personal attack Jonharojjashi (talk) 12:45, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Quote that down here. Or provide the link. I didn't call anyone "vandal" in that article. Imperial^[AFCND] 12:47, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Disruptive editing

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Battle of Thane, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Jonharojjashi (talk) 12:18, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

I gave valid reasoning on the edit summary. Thats a good faith edit. Consider reviewing that again. Imperial^[AFCND] 12:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@Jonharojjashi, and if you are asking the reason for revertion of your edit, it was completely disruptive. From where did the Umayyads came to this event? There was no Umayyad caliphate during 636. I hope you remove both of the warnings when it become clear. Imperial^[AFCND] 12:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

I was supposed to edit it with Rashidun Caliphate instead but it ended with Ummayad Caliphate but removing Rashidun commanders was a non constructive edit Jonharojjashi (talk) 13:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

While there was no sources that explicitly states "Rashidun" and "Uthman", what am I supposed to do on such article where I put the effort? And resolve the above section. It is a matter of my reputation. Imperial^[AFCND] 13:03, 6 January 2024 (UTC)