User talk:Editking100

Welcome!

Hi Editking100! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! -- Toddy1 (talk) 20:42, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Images in articles

1. We do not want several copies of the same image in a single article. So if you decide that Image X that is already used in the article should be in the gallery, then please remove it from the place it was.

2. Do you understand the concept of alt text and images? Sometimes in infoboxes you can see code that looks like: Pune West skyline - March 2017.jpg{{!}}Pune West. What the {{!}} does is to put in a separator, so that the bit before it is the image name, and the bit after it is alt text. It is unhelpful that unknowing editors are destroying the alt text in inbox images. -- Toddy1 (talk) 20:42, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

yes i do. But I didn't edit the image you are talking about here (Pune West) one. You can see it in the edit history too. Peace. Editking100 (talk) 21:14, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

The Pune West image mentioned above was an example. What I was trying to do was to encourage you to put in alt text for images when you make your edits to infoboxes. You can see I did it in this edit.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:24, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

oh that way, yes I'll. Editking100 (talk) 21:27, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Piddi Media moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Piddi Media. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Yelps ᘛ⁠⁐̤⁠ᕐ⁠ᐷ critique me 07:04, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I have a lot of sources and I'll work on this article when I get ample time. Thank you. Editking100 (talk) 07:09, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Civility

Please give a read to WP:CIVIL and not make comments toward other editors like "learn how to edit". It's better for everyone if we treat each other with respect. -- Fyrael (talk) 18:36, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, got it, will never repeat such language.

But you see the user AryanRoy112 's user contributions (to whom I said so) He is treating wikipedia like a newspaper and putting recent news in top of the page while creating a new section. He has done the same in 20+ pages. All his edits were reverted by many different users in those pages now, if you have a look at it now. So I just lost my cool for a second. Will not repeat now. Thank you. Editking100 (talk) 18:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

And I didn't say in a derogatory way. I even mentioned him to learn on Wikipedia: Training/Newcomers/Editing basics link so he can know that WP:NOTNP and WP:NOTNEWS Editking100 (talk) 18:47, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

I see your message on their talk page and that also seems very aggressive toward a new editor. Yes, it's clear that they misunderstood what an appropriate addition looks like, but it's not as if they were told otherwise and ignored it. The first anyone mentioned it to them is your comment on their talk page where you immediately threaten to file a complaint against them. That's not at all how we want to treat new editors who seem to very much be editing in good faith. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Okay, my apologies. I have also updated my comment on his talk page with a more civil tone. Thank you.. Editking100 (talk) 19:21, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

The template messages at Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace were designed to help users. You start with a level 1 message, if they continue you leave a level 2 message, etc. You can always customise the message in a second edit. But try not to template admins, etc.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:56, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

okay got it... thanks @Toddy1 Editking100 (talk) 20:02, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

I also wanted to add here that I recognize you are also new to Wikipedia. You're doing good work and just having to make some adjustments like we all do at the start (and continue to do, honestly), but we're happy to have you on the project. If I could offer one more tiny but meaningful nitpick to make your efforts even better, it would be great if in your edit summaries when you're mentioning a policy if you could make it a wikilink instead of plain text. I've been at this for years, but I still didn't know what WP:NOTNP was off the top of my head. Of course I know it's a policy abbreviation and how to find it, but a new editor may have no idea what that string of letters represents, so just changing it to WP:NOTNP that they can easily click into makes it much, much more helpful. Happy editing! -- Fyrael (talk) 12:43, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Okay, fyrael. Editking100 (talk) 14:07, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

One aircraft, two aircraft etc

Hello. The correct plural of aircraft is also aircraft. Hope this helps, best wishes, DBaK (talk) 23:56, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

can I get to know the context, the related wikipedia page etc you are talking about. It's difficult for me to remember which edit youre talking here Editking100 (talk) 00:20, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

and, yes I know the plural of aircraft obviously Editking100 (talk) 00:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Well to be honest it's not that obvious from this edit, in which you do it twice, "correcting" it from the previous version, which was already right. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 21:49, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

my bad, might have done by mistake that day. Thanks a lot for pointing this mistake. Peace Editking100 (talk) 21:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Cheers! DBaK (talk) 00:03, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

June 2025

Hello, I'm Martinevans123. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Talk:Air India Flight 171, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:58, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Respectfully, I didn't change the main page content. I just put up information in the talk page, as I thought it would help other aviation geeks, and they would be able to connect dots based on what happened.

But I agree with you now. I'll discuss this on Teahouse rather than here. Thanks for pointing this out. Editking100 (talk) 13:44, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:Air India Flight 171 are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:32, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Respectfully, I didn't change the main page content. I just put up information in the talk page, as I thought it would help other aviation geeks, and they would be able to connect dots based on what happened.

But I agree with you now. I'll discuss this on Teahouse rather than here. Thanks for pointing this out. Editking100 (talk) 13:45, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Flag carrier, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jetstreamer I have multiple sources, should I use 1 as a citation and then add? Editking100 (talk) 14:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Proceed. But please bear in mind WP:V the next time. Regards--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:11, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jetstreamer Reverted my edit, the already attached Financial Express source clearly mentions that Singapore airlines hold 25.1 percent and the Tatas hold the rest. Kindly verify information before reverting citing unsourced. The source attached verifies my claims. Peace Editking100 (talk) 14:18, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at Talk:Disney Star. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you very much! — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 00:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to IndiGo, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Jetstreamer ^Talk 02:46, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Koshuri ^(グ) 18:27, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

@Koshuri Sultan Okay Editking100 (talk) 18:46, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 15:48, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

List of airlines of Pakistan

Just for info, the IP is now at 5RR and at AN3, but I’m at 3RR so I’ve stopped. Danners430 (talk) 21:15, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

In fact they’re blocked from that page. Danners430 (talk) 21:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

@Danners430 Good that I pointed it out. The user was solely her for putting the branded content without any sources. Well done by you. Editking100 (talk) 21:43, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Assuming good faith

I just closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shubhanshu Shukla. While it's alright to disagree with the nominator, suggesting without evidence that their motive is highly questionable, outright biased and definitely not in a good faith is not a helpful comment. The fourth pillar of Wikipedia is to respect other editors; meaningful discussions are only possible if everyone acts respectfully. In the future, I'd appreciate it if you don't accuse other editors of acting in bad faith without strong evidence. Thank you, PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 18:18, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

@PrinceTortoise I completely got your point and won't repeat it again. But I'd like to mention that there were 10 odd other editors (before me) who mentioned more or less the same thing as to what I put up. Some of them even raised similar claims like mine. I made my claim considering the user didn't raise deletion in the other 3 astronauts who went in the same mission (nor in any other dozens of astronaut pages who went in other private missions) and raised a deletion here so quickly, even though the source had various WP:RSN sources. Also I corrected the user on what content WP:NEWSORGINDIA clauses (which he was citing) has written against what he was claiming at the deletion request.

Although I got your point, I am adding context of my version here to make it clear.

Thank you Editking100 (talk) 20:48, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for reading my message. I acknowledge that there was context that led you to think that the nominator was not acting in good faith. I also acknowledge that many of your other points were valid and considered in my determination of consensus to "keep". As long as you keep my original point in mind, your contributions are very much welcome. Happy editing, PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 21:52, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. Azuredivay (talk) 18:31, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Attached complaint filed by me against @ViraAndhini (now renamed @NovaEditor82)

You should know you cannot revert all the time. Avoid it or your account will face blocks. ViraAndhini (talk) 03:35, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

@ViraAndhini I have listed the complainants against you and the other IP editor wrt suspicious activities (both in the astronaut page and here) in the Arbitration Enforcement above. Wikipedia: Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. Admins will look onto it now and find out the truth.

The complaint filed by me is mentioned hereby for clarity of the admins: "Even in the astronaut page bought up here I cited to get a RFC because in the dozens of similar pages, such numbers aren't reported. But it was reverted back again by a IP editor with only this being his first and only edit. There were two instances of editors (possibly involved in the discussion??, admins please check) using IP accounts [[1]] and a new account [[2]] adding the content before on-going consensus (surprisingly both have only made this their 1st edit ever in a quick span of time), I also faced personal attacks here by the same (1st edit) editor (somehow they also knew about this case before making their 1st edit) as can be seen below [[3]]. This new editor is reverting the content repeteadly [[4]] and tempering my user talk page [[5]] and adding the Notice of Arbitration Enforcement again in my talk page as can be seen here. [[6]]".

I have also attached, The apology I received from the concerned user hereby [[7]] "Thank you for your feedback. I understand now that my approach was not aligned with Wikipedia’s standards for sourcing and conduct. I appreciate the clarification. I did not intend to engage in any personal attacks or edit warring, and I sincerely apologize if my words came across that way. I will refrain from further discussion here and review the relevant guidelines to ensure future contributions are in line with expectations". Editking100 (talk) 04:18, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

Word limit

@Liz I understand the word count capped at 500 in Arb Enforcement. But when I answered each and every accusation with the context related to it (so that the admins have complete clarity), I happened to cross the limit of 500. Also when the admin there asked several questions? I happened to put the answers below it. (for clarity and flow). Now it's moved above. I don't know what to do as removing content from the existing one will make the plead incomplete and partially context-less. Can you please grant me a extra word limit as done in above cases or atleast suggest me a way to put the full content anywhere else and link it there? Editking100 (talk) 05:40, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

​Translation:
Editking100, if this is your first time at AE, you should really read the instructions at the top of the page that are in the pink section. AE has word limits and diff limits, both of which you have exceeded. Also, you should note that The scope of a discussion is limited to the conduct of two parties: the filer and the user being reported which means that you should not use your limited number of words talking about other editors here as no action will be taken against them. This discussion is about your editing and that of the complaint filer.
=
You must use the word count tool to reduce your statement to 500 words. Check there are no more than 20 diffs.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:03, 28 June 2025 (UTC)