User talk:Alivardi

Two battles of chamkaur were fought. Its title should be second battle of chamkaur. Please edit ^^^^ Ama975193 (talk) 17:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Battle of Chamkaur Ama975193 (talk) 17:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Please check this source ^[1]

. Sir two battles of Chamkaur were fought so the name of this title of Second battle of chamkaur. Please edit it. I would be highly thankful to u. Check the above source ^^^^ Ama975193 (talk) 17:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear Alivardi,

I am trying to be really nice and come to a solution between us when clearly you are disagreeing over and over. I am apparently not the first that you have disagreed with such as users like Tubi719 and TruthSeeker78692. TruthSeeker specifically had the same disagreement I had with you and my most recent edit was thanked by Nithin. You even said for yourself that you would sources and rudely told me not to let others do the work not realizing that I am inexperienced in giving adding citations. I would have preferred a warmer welcome and you tell me often that you wanted to talk to me from the beginning. If you kindly look back at our own conversation history you will clearly see that not once did you suggest a compromise but rather you suggested I get consensus from the Islamic Board and although that is a valid suggestion, it is very wrong for you to say that you were trying to compromise by talking to me directly as I was trying to do. After this final edit where I did as you said (adding sources) to the previous version, you AGAIN have made a revert but this time belittling my opinion with your comment of those views on unity being “mere lip service” as opposed to directly referring to those practices. What makes it an invalid contention because I don’t think a single person will say “stabbing the effigies of the revered Sunni caliphs in Iran by some [not alp]” and “although this may go against the views of Iranians at large about unity, especially due to the emphasis of Sunni-Shia relations by the supreme Iranian leaders” are not directly linked. Please tell me how people stabbing effigies representing those dear to Sunnis is not in direct contradiction to the views of the leaders about Sunni-Shia relations. I think I have a point here I will make a final revert to your change. This time please TALK to me I am open to know what you suggest as opposed to directing me to the Islamic Board consensus page. Physics7 (talk) 02:07, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Alivardi. I just wanted to let you know that I gave a direct piece of evidence of the Iranian leaders being against these type of practices and ironically a good source was the exact same source that was quoted for the effigy stabbing and it (the fatwa about abusing companions) was the immediate next sentence or few sentences from what you mentioned. I included it under a reference number 4 next to the word “fatwa” and hopefully this will finally allow us to stand at mutual grounds. Physics7 (talk) 02:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

​There's a lot to unpack here, so I'll go through it point-by-point:

1. You've had three different editors say that the best action is to open a talk page discussion (see here, here and here). You say you've got backing from other editors; this would have been the best way to prove it. I really don't see why you were so reluctant.
2. You say you were attempting to open dialogue for compromise, yet you forced your changes on the article immediately after each message. This is not conductive to a polite and progressive debate. It suggests to me that you weren't even going to take my views into account since you didn't even allow me the chance to reply. Do you not see the contradiction of you saying "please talk to me", yet not allowing me the chance to respond? This type of behaviour is mentioned on the third sentence of the edit warring page; I really urge you to read this before you interact with any other editors.
3. I wasn't the one that told you "not to let others do the work" (see here).
4. I wasn't intending to belittle you when I said "mere lip service". I was actually describing Khomeini, who was the one doing it.
5. In regards to you asking "how people stabbing effigies representing those dear to Sunnis is not in direct contradiction to the views of the leaders", this goes against Wikipedia's policy of No original research. This means that unless your source outright states something (in this case, being respectful of Muhammad's companions), you can't mention it in the article.
6. With that last point in mind, your latest source which you just mentioned is far more approprate in that regard and I am perfectly happy with its use. I am letting you know now that I will cut down your wording slightly since it deviates a bit too much from the article subject (see WP:ROC).
7. As a final note, I will remind you again that in the future, please use the article talk page to discuss any changes you make that seem controversial. This whole mess could have been avoided if you had done so when I had initially told you.
   Alivardi (talk) 03:45, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

I don’t understand what you meant by number 1. Do you mean I didn’t mention which editors were in agreement with my edits? I mentioned at least 3 and not sure if there were more. For the second point why am I the one forcing something here and not making a discussion? I even double-checked our conversation history to make sure what I was saying is correct in this talk page about the whole compromise issue and sending you messages on your talk page but you didn’t respond and instead told me to get a consensus (the other options being actually talking or a dispute resolution where I neither wanted the latter). I made the edit thinking nobody will disagree and I was shocked that you had reverted it. What I did was revert it back and in my comment asked you why you would do something like that and how wrong it was so from the start I was telling you what was wrong. You only kept saying “not censored” which didn’t really address the problem I had with it and I responded by telling you not to consider it as such. Whether I am wrong or right is irrelevant but I did clearly address your points and I felt very hurt when you kept repeating “not censored” whilst reverting it, especially as you were more experienced on Wikipedia and brought other editors into our heated dispute which was topped off by the whole warring thing. The 3-revert violation rule by the way is within a 24-hour period which we both did so that was out of the line. A revert from vandalism doesn’t count as a violation but this was was more of a dispute and disagreement so that wouldn’t be fair to hold against me either. I was also upset when you told me not to make other editors do my work when I clearly just didn’t know how to properly make references and it wasn’t a matter of not having references because I copy-pasted them my edit comment. Fortunately I figured out how to cite references. Let us put this past us but I am still surprised why would you include such information? There is a ton of information in our everyday life that we don’t mention for a variety of reasons and consequences like the colour of our bodily waste or how many white people in London eat their nasal mucus. We don’t call that censorship if it isn’t mentioned because it shouldn’t BE mentioned. Physics7 (talk) 15:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Accidentally pressed publish too soon so just as a continuation... because it shouldn’t BE mentioned. I agree with you about mentioning it if it has academic or another type of value abd represents the true opinion of the group at large and hence painting a correct picture but something which is 1) from a source that mentions practices and opinions of rejected scholars like ayatollah Shirazi, Yasir Habib and other political thought of such scholars 2) misrepresents (as most do not follow those scholars mentioned above) and paints a wrong picture as these things are disallowed by the Iranian scholars who are taught otherwise in the Islamic seminars of Qom 3) has no academic value under the light of the legal verdicts that surround those practices unless you specifically mention the proponents of those practices and contrast it with the larger view of scholars who are accepted by the wider Shia community on those practices and the view of those proponents by the community then yes this would definitely paint a much better picture, be of greater academic value for those who want to research Shia practice and opinion, and on top of that avoid the consequences of the negative portrayal where a simple-minded reader would not be able to differentiate Shia opinion from the opinion of those who the community are always speaking out against Physics7 (talk) 15:29, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

​I don't know how much more clearly I can explain this to you. I tried to be as polite as I could in my last message, but it's evident that you didn't properly read it since you are still accusing me of saying "not to let others do the work". I repeat, that was another editor, not me.

I strongly reccomend that you listen to what I have said, because I've already had one Administrator suggest that I report you for disruptive editing. Try to familiarise yourself with our policies, otherwise you're going to keep being involved in unnecessary editing disputes.

I have no interest in being involved in this matter any further. I request that unless there are any more issues with the article, that you please stop contacting me. Thank you.
Alivardi (talk) 16:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

That’s fine with me, but you can’t just ASSUME I didn’t read what you said. I have no idea why I thought you were the one who told me “not to let others do the work” in any case that shouldn’t be a reason for a shift in tone in this message. Take care Physics7 (talk) 13:31, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello sir Whts yr problem Jat Community Sunny 12:15, 22 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunny bharat (talk • contribs)

Please support me sir Sunny 12:22, 22 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunny bharat (talk • contribs)

Sunny 12:25, 22 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunny bharat (talk • contribs)

Please help me sir & support me please Sunny 14:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunny bharat (talk • contribs)

You can view it here: Template:Did you know nominations/Pratapgarh Kingdom.

I encourage you to nominate future articles you create, expand 5x in size, or improve to GA, as most of the content in DYK is from North America and Europe. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:28, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Alivardi, The information in bharatpur state about origin of sinsinwar is sourced from a gazetter source of 19th century which is not reliable. In gazetter it is wrongly claimed that Balchandra was a Jadoun Rajput because time line of balchandra coincide roughly with time of Gaurid invasion. no contempory evidence of 12th centuries mentions these jadoun bhatti clan. Moreover geneologies of jadoun bhatti clan itself seems sourced from some Pala fudatories of region during tripatrite confilct. So I request you remove this unauthentic information from bharatpur state. I think you should read original source. I may provide you if you need. Thanking you. - Nightcrawler44 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightcrawler44 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I don't understand why have you accused me of vandalising. If you dont like an edit doesn't mean that it is vandalism. Also, I have seen that you are taking a chance to add something in Babur article, in favour of LGBT. I don't understand it. Was Babur NOT a hetero then? Thanks 83.137.6.245 (talk) 14:50, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I referred to it as appearing to be vandalism because that is what it seemed to be. Describing Aurangzeb as "4/4 Rajput" makes no sense both mathematically and genetically, with the latter being due to his mother, Mumtaz Mahal, being of Persian background. In regards to the short discussion on Babur that I had several months ago, I was advocating for the removal of an LGBT descriptive, not its addition.
Alivardi (talk) 15:03, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Alivardi. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

​I'll do my best. Thank you.
Alivardi (talk) 23:59, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Chauhan clan is of rajputs not gujjar and jats secondly the wiki pages about rajput history are being edited anonymously by anyone and by this wikipedia loses its credibility so please look into this problem Adityarajsingh4033 (talk) 20:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

​The content was sourced and you did not provide a valid reason for its removal.
Alivardi (talk) 20:15, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

And from which source please provide it to me anonymous fake historians are roaming all around the internet please provide me source Adityarajsingh4033 (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Chauhan is a agnivanshi rajput clan Adityarajsingh4033 (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

​Check the end of each sentence you removed content from.
Alivardi (talk) 20:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Just listen go to a trusted source of yours and check chauhan is not just a surname but agnivanshi clan of rajputs Adityarajsingh4033 (talk) 20:27, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Prathviraj raaso and prathviraj Vijay are two ancient books written on chohan family in both book's prathviraj Chauhan father is written Gurjar and his fort gurjargarh. Jogindergurjar (talk) 07:38, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Chauhan are mainly Gurjar not rajput and they are suryavanshi king's not this fake chandravanshi Jogindergurjar (talk) 07:40, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm aware of the Wikipedia rules. I did make a reply to a number of edit requests on Talk:Muhammad, but only one really I think was borderline abusive. The one which you replied too. Alright, I apologize for that, and if the others were also abusive, for them too (though I don't think they were). I'm just getting really tired of this demand like every month (that's been going on for like 10+ years) when Wikipedia has made clear that the Muhammad images are acceptable. --99.245.168.121 (talk) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

For creating the beautiful article Mawlāna Nūruddin Gowharpuri —

Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 15:55, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

On 16 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pratapgarh Kingdom, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the king of Kachar died whilst invading the Pratapgarh Kingdom, his widow Kamala commanded its conquest herself to avenge him? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pratapgarh Kingdom. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pratapgarh Kingdom), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Dear Participants and Organizers,

Because of the COVID19 pandemic, there are a lot of countries’ international postal systems not reopened yet. We would like to send all the participants digital postcards and digital certifications for organizers to your email account in the upcoming weeks. For the paper ones, we will track the latest status of the international postal systems of all the countries and hope the postcards and certifications can be delivered to your mailboxes as soon as possible.

Take good care and wish you all the best.

This message was sent by Wikipedia Asian Month International Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:58, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Alivardi, please check Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. I'm being attacked by users Chaipau and Aman Kumar Goel and being accused of promoting Bengali POV in the Miya people article. The article originally contained barely anything - it was me that revived it. Chaipau noticed this and started causing havoc in the article (check its history). Goel actually reported me once for my involvement in the Bakarkhani incident and got me BLOCKED a few months ago. He STRONGLY opposes everything about me and is bringing up my past interactions with him to use against me. I only mean good but these Wikimenaces are making me look like the bad guy. Would really appreciate your support. UserNumber (talk) 20:08, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Why did you remove the content of the page which I added from reputable source? Sajaypal007 (talk) 20:35, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

​What reputable source? There was no citation.
Alivardi (talk) 21:02, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

​ I was about to add that too, i was working on multiple sources. Also you should ask for citation first instead of removing the content outright. Anyway I added multiple citations and editing it as we speak. So just give someone a little bit of time and/or hint before removing something.Sajaypal007 (talk)

​I had no reason to expect you to add citations over an hour after your initial edit. Why not add the content when you had the citations ready? There's no rush.
Alivardi (talk) 21:24, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

​ I was using wiki on mobile at that time hence the delay, anyway i did add the citations now.Sajaypal007 (talk)

I would be helpful to assist you in WikiProject BangladeshMajun e Baqi (talk) 11:20, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ali-vardi! User:Alivardi - At it's best your warnings on my talk-page for my edits is *cute*! "ONLY! PERSONAL! BLOCK! those worlds carry weight. And, that was a quick edit from a seasoned(?) editor. Unfortunately, I'm not a full-time editor (Is there one? :-)). I suggest we refresh understanding of WP:WHYBLOCK WP:NOPUNISH WP:AC/DS It's not difficult to go back and refresh. I'm a wiki donor, and avid user - At best, you can question my tone, but calling it "personal attacks" on my first ever edits/remarks is a s-t-r-e-t-c-h. I see a pattern here. The editor, whose unexplained edits were questioned could have responded. But, NOpe! It has to be round-robbin pack hunt for showcase neutrality. And, archives are editable for a reason. Wiki discourages it's editing. But, if they really wanted to STOP all archive edits, its less than a MINUTE of tech-effort to change a flag in the code. You retorted to quick acid-washing of all my edits. But, chose to completely ignore the unexplained (borderline) condescending editorial responses of those who have admin rights to Chhatrapati Shivaji) wiki. I expected better! You can BLOCK me, but that may not be adhering to wiki-guidelines. And, the above is not a PERSONAL attack. [CAPS for emphasis] And, not everyone is for HIRE. H2umvee (talk) 22:10, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Hey there, I was wondering if you (and anyone you know that could take part) could help me on the Islami Bishwakosh article. It was a very large project in Bangladesh, and am very surprised that the article didn't exist previously. UserNumber (talk) 15:05, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I went through the Help section to add the reference links, but didn't get much understanding of it. Have added the reference URl, hope that's also the correct way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chetankcp (talk • contribs) 14:49, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Alivardi,

I’d like your help in dealing with the current situation in the page: Kingdom of Jeypore which has been semi-locked by a bunch of British Admins. They have edited sloppily and mentioned many irrelevant facts to disdain the dynasty’s rule. They describe them as a little kingdom in many places despite the kingdom having an area of more than 26,000 km2.

Sir would you please help me and edit that article, I have seen your work in some other history articles therefore decided to seek your help in this matter. Indopaedia (talk) 00:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Respected Alivardi The article about Maharana Pratap is very short, but there is a lot about him in the history ,so I would like and hope that you would help me in this topic and I am going to edit and add more information about this legend. ThanksShiamPothuganti (talk) 15:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello,I notice u made some changes in Wikipedia on ur own without any reF,Like u remove the image of Rana Sanga His Legacy section and also Seige of Mandsaur which are important things u removed from sources.Please ree add it especially his Image. Paul white2013 (talk) 00:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Paul white2013: It's pretty obvious that you are Showbiz826. Continuing to make new accounts after having been blocked for sockpuppetry is not gonna help you get back to editing here.
Alivardi (talk) 01:07, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

On 8th august some IP address removed the citations and a few lines without any ground from Jawahar Singh article. The lines were supported by the source too. Some 10 days later another user came and he removed the whole section of maonda battle with reason that it is unsourced, he didnt see previous edits, if he had seen then he would know that it was not unsourced but someone a few days ago just removed the source. Instead of reverting the edits. This user removed the old section and added a new one which is lot bigger and doesnt make any sense.

The problem with this section is many fold.

• Although it cites source, the section modify the sources to look it like less offensive, mention of defeat of Jawahar singh in later battle at kama is removed. See the page of Battle of Maonda and Mandholi for full information which is suppressed in this article.
• Due to so much info and the offensive terms removed, article doesnt make much sense.
• The article of Jawahar Singh looks more like article of Maonda battle, the whole article is filled with just this event from Pushkar bath to the battle. Nothing much about Jawahar Singh himself.

The article at the time of your last edit on 7th august was good. The info about battle was short and precise. It was backed by sources too which some other user removed. I believe the article should be reverted to that. Sajaypal007 (talk) 10:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Sajaypal007: I don't believe a full revert is the best action here; the article seemed to have problems even prior to that initial edit and some of the subsequent edits have been beneficial. I'd instead advise that you correct any issues that you have spotted in the current version of the article. Perhaps even open a discussion on the article talk page or contact Heba Aisha directly? You seem knowledgeable about this topic so I'll leave the ultimate decision to you. Hope that helps.
Alivardi (talk) 14:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Alivardi: Actually I talked with Heba Aisha earlier for some other page as well and had a long futile discussion. I didn't want to create another long discussion so I asked you. Maybe I should talk to Heba again. Thanks for the reply btw. Sajaypal007 (talk) 20:22, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

See . FYI. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:48, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I heard you don't need to include citation in the lead, or introduction of a wiki article, as the introduction is a kind of summery for the main body of the article. what do you think? Ghazaalch (talk) 10:58, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ghazaalch: Sure, as long as the content in question is cited in the main article and can be considered one of the (to quote WP:MOSLEAD) "most important points". Thanks for the message.
Alivardi (talk) 11:58, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks for your note. I have added additional note to justify removing the content in question. "Removed a statement that is an inaccurate interpretation of a detailed court judgement by quoting a section of the press. A court judgement needs to be reviewed in full to avoid being taken out of context." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdeepakr (talk • contribs) 12:28, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

I am having trouble adding just a single source in the page of Shivaji while mentioning him as CSM. I seem to follow WP:HISTRW but it still being reverted. I think more than one cite should do a better job here. The page of Akbar also overuse citations when mentioning him as The Great. Should that be scrubbed off too? Thanks and please help. Jenos450 (talk) 19:53, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jenos450. Regarding your concerns about being reverted, RegentsPark has already elaborated on their reasoning as well as suggested what sort of source you should be looking for, so I won't repeat what has already been said. Akbar isn't exactly an example of an ideal article and it is easy to find many such problems in its content. I have now corrected the issue you had spotted there and I thank you for pointing it out to me.
Alivardi (talk) 21:36, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jenos450: I actually don't think the bar for a source is very high for "popularly known as ...." - especially given the number of requests we get on the talk page. All you need to do is to find a source that says that he is popularly known as Chatrapati Shivaji or Shivaji Maharaj or Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj or whatever combination is in a source. It doesn't need to satisfy HISTRS because that popularity is not historical. But, the source should be reliable and should clearly say that these are his popular names. --RegentsPark (comment) 23:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Regents and Alivardi, that was kind. Jenos450 (talk) 06:41, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

hello sir I am trying to write on Rao Tula ram but some person called hindushatrana is reverting my edits. he even used a anon account to revert one edit of mine. Is that allowed? please help as I am new and my edits are getting reverted even if I give book name.

Hi Harishbiswal. I don't think there's any reason to be certain that the anonymous user is HinduKshatrana. I recommend for now that the best action is to discuss the edit in question with HinduKshatrana directly.
Alivardi (talk) 12:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

ok thanks.

Hi Am Babur258 why can you change Battle of ghagra article. you not edit at last I report you. Babur258 (talk) 08:15, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

​ Pradeep, you're way too old be messing around with Wikipedia articles for fun. Find a more productive hobby.
Alivardi (talk) 09:48, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I wrote about Shivaji's conflict with Belawadi Samshtana. And he was defeated in the war and there are so many contemporary books Are available that tells about defeat of Shivaji by Belawadi Mallamma. Samodeyar (talk) 02:40, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

@Samodeyar: When an editor adds new content to an article, it's their job to provide evidence for it in the form of citations. You say there are many books that justify your additions; cite them. Just make sure they are reliable. I'd also advise that you be careful with your wording when you add content. I'm seeing some potential neutrality issues.
Alivardi (talk) 10:10, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you . I'll correct it Samodeyar (talk) 17:34, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		Excellent work on the Shah Jalal Dargah article. Interestingly enough, I've been collecting some information on this topic for the past few months though I didn't get the time to complete this project. Awesome that you've made it; making it a lot easier for me to just add any extra information I've found :) UserNumber (talk) 15:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

​ Thank you! I'm glad you like the article, though I am sorry that you didn't get to finish your version. And I will of course appreciate any additions that you make.
Alivardi (talk) 19:07, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh no it's totally fine! My "version" was mostly notes made on the subject - nowhere near as neat and concise.UserNumber (talk) 08:34, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Shah Jalal Dargah at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:08, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

These edits diff, diff seem sock edits (range partially blocked). Would you kindy check them? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:12, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

​Looks like you were right, reverted now. Thanks for the heads up.
Alivardi (talk) 18:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

You are welcome. Which sockfarm is this? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:55, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

​User:Showbiz826; see their sock investigation here. They seem to alternate between creating sock accounts and editing anonymously (see the message from OhNoitsJamie, the admin who performed the range block, here.
Alivardi (talk) 20:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh.. that one. I remember. Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:40, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering whether the title of the article Taraf Kingdom is appropriate or not. I titled it as such, directly translating it from the Bengali "rajjo". However, the modern definition of kingdom is different. Taraf was nearly always a feudal territory, and rarely independent. Do you recommend changing it to Taraf State or something else? UserNumber (talk) 13:10, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

​That's a good point. I'm gonna check if there's much of a precedence for this sort of thing with similar article subjects. Could I get back to you a bit later?
Alivardi (talk) 02:29, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

​"Taraf State" is a good possibility, though I wonder if it gives an impression of political continuity which may not be entirely accurate, considering Taraf effectively ceased to exist a few times throughout history. Articles about historic areas which existed under similar circumstances seem to favour including "region" in brackets after the title [e.g. Bhati (region), Media (region) and Syria (region)]. However, that sort of title may not be a perfect fit here since this article focuses on the history of Taraf as a political entity rather than as a nebulous geographic area. Personally, I think the safest option would be to just do "Taraf (Bengal)"; its technically accurate and avoids the above issues.

Remember, most of this is just my own personal impression so feel free to disregard it and go with whatever you think is the best fit.
Alivardi (talk) 01:18, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

On 5 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Shah Jalal Dargah, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to local legend, the catfish that inhabit the reservoir at the Shah Jalal Dargah (grave pictured) are the cursed and reincarnated soldiers of Gour Govinda? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Shah Jalal Dargah. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Shah Jalal Dargah), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:01, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Hey why can you edit Battle of Ghagra My edit is correct At last you edit I request to blocked you TheHenry123 (talk) 07:28, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Stop your unreasonable reverting of my edits. Don't blame 'grammar errors' made by others on article's image captions on me. I already told you I ONLY added a RELIABLE NEWSPAPER SOURCE to the article, don't confuse the issue by mentioning 'grammar errors' and other irrelevant stuff as your reason for reverting before you get in trouble on Wikipedia. Grammar error is not an acceptable reason for reverting other peoples' edits. For your information, it's not possible for Wikipedia to list each and every reliable newspaper source from all the countries of the world in its guidelines. It would become too lengthy a list, Wikipedia is not a directory. Ngrewal1 (talk) 21:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

@Ngrewal1: I am not blaming the grammar errors on you. I did not believe your edits were in bad faith. I was simply reverting what I believed to have been a mistake and have attempted to be polite in my edit summaries. There really was no need for you to send me such an agressive message, especially in regards to what is really a very minor issue. I do not have an interest in pursuing this further. I just hope you remember in future that even though we can get upset during disagreements, in order for editors to successfully achieve a proper consensus, we need to maintain civility and treat each other with respect.
Alivardi (talk) 22:09, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

I also agree with you. Let's treat each other with respect. I am saying this sincerely. My contributions history on Wikipedia since 2012 will show you that I hardly ever Revert other people's work unless I absolutely had to do it. This fact in itself shows that I respect other peoples' work. Ngrewal1 (talk) 22:35, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

The article cites "Woods (1990)" but no such source is listed in bibliography. Can you please add? Also, suggest installing a script to highlight such errors in the future. All you need to do is copy and paste importScript('User:Svick/HarvErrors.js'); // Backlink: [[User:Svick/HarvErrors.js]] to your common.js page. Thanks, Renata (talk) 04:53, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Ditto re "Beveridge (1922)" in Umar Shaikh Mirza II. Renata (talk) 05:06, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

​My bad, now corrected. Thanks for the heads up.
Alivardi (talk) 12:04, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

[]

You reverted the edits by saying it was case of sockpuppetry. If its allowed to tell, can you tell me whose sock was it? Sajaypal007 (talk) 21:05, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

​Our old friend User:Showbiz826, who you may remember previously contacting you; see their sock investigation here. They seem to be mainly editing anonymously now. The admin OhNoitsJamie performed a range block for the most targeted articles (see the message they left Showbiz regarding the block here), but some manual reverts are still necessary.
Alivardi (talk) 23:31, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I remember. I saw similar range ip address editing Kachhwaha page hence I asked. Thanks for the reply by the way. Sajaypal007 (talk) 06:20, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Alivardi sir, pls have a loot at solanki dynasty and tell me what's the wrong with those reference as I have provided ? Are they not valid ? I have attached governmental and Research book of a historian I think more appropriate than anything else even Britannica itself said that Rajput was sankrit word means son of a king. But govt. and book clearly mentioned that they were gurjars. I have more governmental evidence if you required for the authenticity to check that Rajputs of chauhan, pratihar, solanki etc were gurjars . Ravi mavi (talk) 18:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Hey, I was wondering if you could help me out and make a page on Monraj Zamindari, I know your fed up with me but I have nothing to do. The monraj family was my maternal grandfather's family. There history was written down on books which is no more. But I'd like to post information on our family that I've heard from my grandfather and mother. I have no online sources which is why I could not edit on the prithimpassa family page. But if u could make a page on Monraj Zamindari then I'd really appreciate it. Shamsher Rahman (talk) 13:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

​I'm sorry, but if there aren't any reliable sources which discuss a subject, then Wikipedia probably isn't the place for it. If you really did want to discuss your grandfather's family, I suggest creating your own separate website about them. I know a few former Zamindar families have done so; see this one for instance. Hope you find this helpful.
Alivardi (talk) 16:39, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello and greetings,

This is just for your kind info. Since previously you have participated in an inconclusive RfC discussion at this RfC in year going by, and since some related aspects are under discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Titles, honorifics and appeal to popularity may be you want to join in to share your inputs or opinions.

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 05:49, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Alivardi, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, Heba Aisha (talk) 07:41, 24 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Heba Aisha (talk) 07:41, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Alivardi and merry Christmas (that is if you're celebrating, if not, then good day sir!), I've noticed you've contributed quite a lot to Timurid-related articles. I've recently acquired two sources about them which are rich in information, do you happen to have them? If not, then I would gladly send them to you.

These are the sources:

• Manz, Beatrice Forbes (2007). Power, Politics and Religion in Timurid Iran. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-139-46284-6.
• Subtelny, Maria (2007). Timurids in Transition: Turko-Persian Politics and Acculturation in Medieval Iran. Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-16031-6.

--HistoryofIran (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: Merry Christmas! (I don't personally celebrate it, but it's kinda unavoidable where I live). I think I've actually already got those books. Guess we're both good at hunting down sources! Nevertheless, I appreciate the kind offer.
Alivardi (talk) 08:21, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Alivardi. Merry Christmas and best wishes for 2021 to you, your family, and your friends! --RegentsPark (comment) 16:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Alivardi,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:29, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

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

Assalamualaikum. I think that the lede (Aurangzeb) should briefly mention about the Anglo-Mughal War. As for the section itself, should be changed from child's war to Anglo-Mughal. Could you make these changes or shall I just leave a message on Aurangzeb's talk page and you can then do something? Jzk 79.75.61.14 (talk) 18:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

@79.75.61.14: I'm not very familiar with the conflict to be honest. It's probably better to post something on the article's talk page.
Alivardi (talk) 19:33, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok I will, please do intervene in the talk page, as Kautilya always make problems and might oppose it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.39.81 (talk) 17:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Why have you changed the edit , since I have given proper reference. Don't do this , when given proper reference , if you changing give proper explanation . Divyanshu4226 (talk) 06:14, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Divyanshu4226: Could you please clarify what edit you are referring to?
Alivardi (talk) 12:43, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Saw your SPI report. That's an interesting one, there certainly are some similarities. What makes me less sure is there is some overlap timewise with prior socks, and I'm not sure SB is competent enough to manage multiple socks. That said, I'm not sure CU has been run on the past few socks, so certainly possible. The other thing I spotted from PH is they edit wrestling articles, and I haven't seen SB do that before - checked 500+ edits on each of their two busiest IP ranges. Same caste-pushing though, and pushing and shoving and pushing and cramming and ... I can understand why Sitush threw up their hands. Ravensfire (talk) 01:45, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: @Chariotrider555: I'm certain it's showbiz, the wording is just too similar for it to be coincidence:

As Noted by Indian Scholar Jadunath Sarkar who was first Indian historian to use Rajput Sources while writting about Rajput history conclude that few geneologies upto Lord Rama and few of his descendants upto Athithi are based on list and details given in Hindu Puranas and apart from minor differences they are exactly same relating to the Rathores and other Rajput clans in Medieval Period Like Kushwahas of Amber, Guhilas or Sissdoias of Medapata. -Previously blocked sock

According to Indian Scholar Jadunath Sarkar who was first Indian historian to use Rajput Sources while writting about Rajput Past conclude that the few geneologies upto Lord Rama and few of his descendants upto Athithi are in the list and details given in Hindu Puranas and apart from minor differences of name they are exactly same relating to the Rathores and other Rajput clans in Medieval Period Like Kushwahas of Amber, Guhilas or Sissdoias of Medapata. -Pseudo Nihilist

Alivardi (talk) 02:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Alivardi, totally get why you'd file the report! They've also tried to use arguments from SB's IP socks on talk pages to demonstrate support. Ravensfire (talk) 02:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

​Yeah that's a another level of disruptive. Re my report though, if you and Chariotrider were unconvinced at first, I guess I do need to tweak it a bit to make it a bit more airtight.
Alivardi (talk) 02:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Alivardi, CU has blocked 'em as a SB sock - nice job on the report! Ravensfire (talk) 13:48, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Alivardi, I see you have reverted my changes, on the Page Birbal, in spite of the fact that my source was reliable. I will be indebted to you if you cast light on it. What was wrong with my source? It was Library of Congress. I am saddened. Ayushsinha2222 (talk) 20:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

You are absolutely right. I will find out more reliable-sources. Thank you so much. Ayushsinha2222 (talk) 21:06, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Ali, Aswk. The below part is seen in the edit area, BUT NOT in the article page of Mir Osman Ali Khan. Something fishy going on here. Someone who doesn't want this to be seen in Wikipedia!

You'd brought this up on my talk page a couple of months back, just FYI, I blocked two socks -- ArmdShahAbdali, Shahtahmasp -- there are likely more. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 01:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

This looks kinda POV caste cruft, especially since they have removed some content. Would you kindly take a look at it? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:54, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I request you please review the changes in the article Jagat Gosain made by me as well as another user called historian4050. The latter has been removing my edits as well as the references and adding their own edits without reliable sources. I, therefore, request you please review both of our changes and remove anything that is unnecessary. Manavati (talk) 12:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@Manavati: It looks like they've stopped editing for now but I'll keep an eye out. I recommend next time that you don't unnecessarily call their edits vandalism, it seems to have upset them.
Alivardi (talk) 18:51, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Okay thank you. I'll make sure of that. Manavati (talk) 19:39, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Where it is written in prathviraj raaso that Chauhan is rajput,check the book first then place ur shit.every where Gurjar is written in it Jogindergurjar (talk) 07:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Despite your best efforts to revert the attempts by User:Ashishthakur9752 to change references to Medini Rai to Medini Rai Khangar, this person is still active. He has now created a Wikipedia article with the title Medini Rai Khangar which has identical content to the article Medini Rai (other than the change of title). As you seem to be trying to deal with this user, I thought you might want to take action to address this deliberate evasion of your reverts and this unnecessary duplication of an article. Thanks Chewings72 (talk) 11:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Govvy and Modussiccandi - you both may be interested in my comments, above. Chewings72 (talk) 11:33, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@Chewings72: Thanks for the heads up, just reported them now. Alivardi (talk) 18:28, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, could you please add in the marriage section about Rukmavati Bai, also known as Jodhi Bibi, the youngest daughter of Rao Maldeo Rathore by Tipu Gudi(Paswan/concubine) who was born posthumously to him. She married Akbar in 1581 when she was about 17 (I think) . She was sent to Akbar in dōlō and this marriage was either arranged by one of her half-brothers Chandrasen or Udai Singh. You can find several sources including The Mertiyo Rathors of Merta, Rajasthan Volume II pg-35. I've already request on the main article but it seems like no one has cheak the talked page. Manavati (talk) 22:01, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@Manavati: No problem and thank you for the barnstar. I've found mentions in sources of the dolo marriage and am happy to add it to the article. However, I'm not seeing any mentions for when it happened nor for Rukmavati being Maldeo's posthumous daughter. If you are able, could you send me the links for where you read this? Thanks
Alivardi (talk) 13:05, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

It's my pleasure to contribute. Unfortunately, I am, for the time period, unable remember the genealogical book when I have found it. Although I do remember correctly she is said to have been born in the year 1563( Maldeo died in 1562). But I suggest you to leave the birth thing out for meantime till I find the book. Manavati (talk) 13:21, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

@Manavati: No problem, just added it. Alivardi (talk) 20:51, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Revert Sandhawalia Rax singh (talk) 04:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I tend to draft on the page not of the sandbox because that is easier for me, I might have published it by accident or something, not sure what happened

Hello, Alivardi. Hope you are okay. There is a mention of you in this ANI case concerning the activities of User:256Drg, several of whose edits you have had cause to revert. You may wish to comment but, if not, my apologies for bothering you. Thanks and all the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 12:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

a vast of population of lohan i.e lohani is living in greater haryana, so i request u to add this on the page of lohani Devlohan (talk) 07:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Alivardi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ali Tabar, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: While have almost no Persian. I'm familiar with the term Nawabzada and I assume the term "Shahzada" means something along those lines. If this was the son (however short lived) of a Mughal prince, there is at least a credible indication indication of significance. This article's talk page is empty: use it. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 10:16, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Apologies if the default "I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion" message seems harsh. I have left a message for the user here. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:55, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

@Shirt58: No worries, your message didn't seen harsh or anything. Re the deletion, my reasoning was based on WP:BIOFAMILY, which I thought stated that familial relationships were no indication of notability. As far as I can see, the only information known about the subject themselves is the year of their birth/death. But if this isn't enough basis for a speedy deletion, I'll open a deletion discussion instead. Thanks.
Alivardi (talk) 11:24, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Alivardi. You have new messages at Talk:Muhammad Sani.
Message added 19:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TrangaBellam (talk) 19:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Considering you deleted all amir titles, do you think sultan would be a better choice? Beshogur (talk) 13:46, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Beshogur: Whatever can be cited as the appropriate title according to academic sources I guess. Personally, I thought "ruler" was a safer option because such titles seem to change between Timurid monarchs. For instance, while Timur styled himself as "Amir", I'm pretty sure Shah Rukh preferred "Sultan", and Babur "Badshah".

As an aside, if I caused offence with my reverts or their summaries, I apologise because that was not my intent. I actually very much appreciate your significant contributions to Central Asian history articles.
Alivardi (talk) 14:49, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Alivardi: I think all Mugal emperors styled themselves padishah. Timur also assumed the title sultan. Why shouldn't be? Thanks and no need to apologise, seeking some consensus. Beshogur (talk) 15:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Beshogur: But wasn't "Amir" his primary title due to his claim as being a subordinate to the Chagatai Khan? I'm sure he used other, grander titles, but it's my understanding that "Amir" had the greatest usage.
Alivardi (talk)

@Alivardi: found something: TDV IA mentions that the name "Ulugh Beg" itself means "Amir-e kabir" used by Timur himself. See also this. What do you think? Beshogur (talk) 10:49, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I wish to ask you a question. Recently, the dynasty of the Mughal Emperor (except locked ones) is being changed from Timurid to Mughal. Is it change okay? If yes, then should the locked ones be changed too? Or shall the others be reverted back to Timurid dynasty? Manavati (talk) 15:21, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

You had removed the edit I did, I forgot to supply the source.

https://ir.library.louisville.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1627&context=etd

Page 33 says clearly "Humayun's half-sister Gulbadan wrote her memoir at the behest of her nephew Akbar, and does mention Humayun's opium use on three occasions, though says nothing about him in relation to alcohol. "

Humayun was an Opium user. This should be included in his wiki entry. For everyone else I can think of who consumed such drugs to a notable level have it mentioned on their pages, why not on Humayun? I know he is a Mughal emperor, but we are not in the Mughal Empire and do not need to hide history and make hagiographies of him.— Preceding unsigned comment added by TrivikramaDas108 (talk • contribs) 19:27, July 17, 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)TrivikramaDas108 MA theses are not considered reliable sources. You will need to find a source for both opium usage as well as frequent usage. --RegentsPark (comment) 19:37, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)RegentsPark How is that source not considered reliable? It's from a university, and is a text from his own half-sister. There are multiple other texts that support this too. I get loving a ruler who is of your religion and such, but let's not let wikipedia become a place of hagiographies being described as reality and being used to suppress other views. I myself don't do that for the great saints that I follow, in fact, before I've mad my account, I have on multiple times edited to include what the opposition has said, included some accusations of wrong doing that is just as severe even. Other people's pages will mention drug use even if it's suspected but not confirmed at all, so there's that as well. Can I be told why this one isn't, even though it's from a university and the account comes form his own half-sister? What would be a reliable source then?TrivikramaDas108 (talk) 20:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC)Trivikramadas108

Hi Alivardi, I have been working on fixing dangling references that have no corresponding sources, and it appears you added a ref to Aladdin Imad Shah in this edit. Do you know the source? For now, I have hidden the ref. Let me know if you need any assistance if you do know the source! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 23:54, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Agricultural machinery manufacturers of Bangladesh indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:56, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

ভাই আপনি যদি বাঙালি হন প্লিজ বলুন আমাকে আপনাকে অনেক অনেক দরকার সাহায্যে।

Salaam bhai, I have a question regarding your recent edit on Bengal Subah. I uploaded the cropped images of Karrani and Khan. What makes you think that "the minister" mentioned in the description is referring to Munim Khan? Regards UserNumber (talk) 15:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

​Salam, because I couldn't see how it could be referring to anyone else. See the full description below:

Da'ud, an Afghan contemporary and rival of Mughal emperor Akbar (reigned 1556-1605), ruled the eastern states of Bihar and Bengal and had the audacity to assume the title of padshah (emperor). Attacked and defeated by the imperial troops, Da'ud surrendered to the commander in chief, Mun'im Khan, and accepted Mughal sovereignty. This painting portrays Da'ud donning the splendid golden robe given to him by Mun'im Khan in acceptance of his oath of allegiance and service. The minister sits in front of a freestanding lattice tent--the domed shape of which was an imperial symbol.

Thanks. Alivardi (talk) 22:30, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

The description makes no mention of where they got this information from. It also introduces Mun'im Khan as the commander in chief. UserNumber (talk) 21:26, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Can you check this account Ajrun Amir'za-da (talk · contribs)? His draft (Draft:Amar Space) looks very similar to edits of Rage476 (talk · contribs), and the IPs. Maybe a SPI? Could you do it? Beshogur (talk) 14:20, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry Beshogur I am not know any other then you have conflicton with that Qarachar is about for education purpose if you Don't like me for edit then say don't Qarachar Noyan page it’s not for you, i think you heard me wrong! first check my Profile Draft amar space was my personal infos. actually you mistaking to put me in here. Ajrun Amir'za-da (talk) 14:26, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dharmapala (emperor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bengali.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:27, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alim Industries Limited 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/Alim Industries Limited 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 until the discussion has finished.

M.parvage (talk) 02:44, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Category:11th-century Indian medical doctors has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 17:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

I’ve been working to improve the use of imagery on Wikipedia by addressing files that appear unnecessary, excessive, or potentially misleading — especially in sensitive articles.

One such image appears in Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy: a depiction of a squealing pig. I believe this image may violate WP:UNDUE and detract from the article’s neutrality.

While I’m not approaching this from a religious perspective myself, I recognize that some readers — particularly editors with a religious background — may find the image especially offensive. However, rather than relying on an offense-based rationale, I’m preparing a clear, policy-driven argument for deletion that focuses on editorial standards.

If you’re interested, I’ll notify you when the discussion goes live. I’d really appreciate your participation, regardless of your stance. 39.48.5.94 (talk) 19:53, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 August 28 § Agriculture companies established in $YEAR on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:32, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pir Muhammad (son of Umar Shaikh), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fars.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 3 November 2025 (UTC)