Hemantha

Welcome

Extended content

Although some prefer welcoming newcomers with cookies, I find fruit to be a healthier alternative. Hello, Hemanthah, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page. Check out some of these pages: Contributing to Wikipedia Introduction to Wikipedia How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish) The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 04:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC) Why can't I edit some particular pages? Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block. Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia? Use the main sandbox or create your own personal sandbox to experiment. How do I create an article? See how to create your first article, then use the Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below. How do I create citations? Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for. Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for. In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found. Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button. Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like <ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing). In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied. If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories: ==References== {{Reflist}} What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one? A WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.

Concerning "Jagat Seth"

Yes, I will merge the three articles for Jagat Seth - Jagat Seth, House of Jagat Seth, House of Jagat Seth (Museum) together. I just need some time.

Pls I dank memer (talk) 11:58, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

original thread Thanks! There is no hurry, do take your time. It might have been better if you added on to the existing House of Seth article instead of moving it away, but I do understand why you thought a move might be called for. Two articles, one for Seth, one for his house+museum might also work based on whether there are enough reliable sources for each. --Hemanthah (talk) 12:06, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Adding sources to article

I added some news references related to that article which have proper sources, but you reverted that edits saying inappropriate external links, why? You can check that sources, they are reliable and correct sources not any invalid or vandalised edit. So, can you give me explanation about reverted edits? 43.242.226.6 (talk) 15:56, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

original thread Here's the revert. Let's go through each.

• The first sentence already had a source. The marathi link you added was about some cast addition unrelated to the claims made in the sentence.
• The ToI link about show completing 200eps adds nothing when there's already another saying it completed 500eps.
• Going off air ToI article contains almost nothing other than a copy of Instagram post
• Whatever of use Hardeek Joshi ToI article had was already in the existing ToI link.

Also note that ToI is not a reliable or correct source, see WP:TOI. Hemanthah (talk) 16:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Anushka Sharma

The edits I did on Anushka Sharma, I did after reading and providing sources such as Hindustan Times, Times of India, Lokmat and the articles saying that Joheb Yusuf was her boyfriend, she was in relationship with him for two years. I did not wrote them. If someone have problem they can contact to these news houses. One article says that, She was in serious relationship with Ranbeer Singh. You are saying like that I wrote those articles. I just read them and added it. You can read I have provided sources behind the line. Everyone knows that Anuska was in relationship with Ranbeer Singh. If your Indian I'm sure you also know that. I never edit before researching and gathering sources to back my edits and I recently came to know that Republic TV is banned on WP, I'll not add it as a source. I am sorry for grammar mistakes, but you saw them, you can fix them. Newton Euro (talk) 06:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

original thread Those are not reliable sources. As I said, the presence on HT/ToI/Lokmat sites is not an indication of reliability. Also WP:TOI says ToI is generally unreliable. That's why I asked you to read WP:RS closely.

Your attitude on grammar mistakes is unproductive to collaborative editing. It's your responsibility to ensure your edits are suitable for wikipedia, not others'. Hemanthah (talk) 06:07, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amitabh Bachchan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain. 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) 05:58, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Reply for message somewhere else

Sikh Gurus Moved to User talk:Ravgun Singh § Sikh gurus I know that brother, But we can clarify the meaning of Jyoti Jyot in some above paragraph... Sikh gurus didn't died nor they will.. Their light just got absorb in the supreme light (God)... Secondly... Guru Gobind Singh Ji got recovered after getting hit by the attackers.... But some wounds were still there and while practicing archery it was opened and that was the reason they left his physical form Ravgun Singh (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: D. Balakrishna has been accepted

D. Balakrishna, 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.

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!

TheWikiholic (talk) 04:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @TheWikiholic. I apologize for adding to AfC work here, but this article was collateral damage in a purge of Isha Foundation related UPE and since I too edit articles in that area, I wished to be more thorough to avoid any hints of socking. Hemanthah (talk) 04:34, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Semrush

dont revert my changes, or at least if you do revert my changes dont accuse me of vandalism. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.225.142.76 (talk) 05:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

(edit in question, my notice) 80.225.142.76 I didn't say you vandalised. I said your edits were breaking WP:NPOV and WP:RS policies. If you continue adding unfounded allegations even after asking for a source, then that'll be vandalism. --Hemanthah (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Ping

Why did you mention me at the Teahouse? ― Itcouldbepossible^Talk 05:35, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

I replied to your "Diffs" message with this

@Itcouldbepossible, User:Enterprisey/diff-permalink script adds Special:Diff links to normal diff pages. Hemanthah (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

But it seems to have got caught in another issue and got rev-deled. Hemanthah (talk) 05:41, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Here's the log for revision-delete; something to do with copyrighted text somebody posted. You can still see my message at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Diffs, but can't get the diff. Hemanthah (talk) 05:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

@Hemanthah Yeah, maybe that is why, when I clicked the alert, and then clicked your ping, I did not see anything. But I have not done anything that violates copyright. So why did my revisions get deleted? ― Itcouldbepossible^Talk 06:13, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks mysterious Wikipedia Man for helping me getting around here! Vampire 69420 (talk) 09:38, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Erenst Maninng

Hello, I thank you very much for you notifying me. I did double the size of the page so I don't know what isn't covered under the references. I'm pretty sure I cover most of it with the references. if you have any knowledge on specifically the stuff that is problematic then I can just fix, or remove it. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rommel's editor (talk • contribs) 17:44, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your quick response to my request for an edit on the "Chennai" page.Wendigo Lake (talk) 14:11, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

@Wendigo Lake You're welcome. Catching such subtle errors is very valuable work; the least I could do is to help correct it asap. Hemanthah (talk) 16:12, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Moved discussion to Talk:Rashmika_Mandanna

Moved to Talk:Rashmika Mandanna § Restoration of repetitive content, photos

--Hemanthah (talk) 12:54, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Opinion

Since you are aware of Indian-related topics, i need your opinion on Laxmanrao Pandurang Jadhav (Patil). It seems this page has an incorrect disambiguation. It should be Laxmanrao Pandurang Patil, Laxman Rao Patil, Laxmanrao Patil or ? TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 09:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

@TheBirdsShedTears, it needs to be Laxmanrao Pandurang Patil. I'm going by this from the official parliament site. Marathi (Satara local language) wikipedia also uses the same page name Hemanthah (talk) 09:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 09:32, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Vani Bhojan

Hi sir kindly see the article of Vani Bhojan last edit. Some user editing Vani Bhojan page please see. 2409:4072:6295:D498:6630:3229:7D51:EE12 (talk) 12:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I have it in my watchlist, you don't have to ping me here. Hemantha (talk) 12:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Seri da punda. Soothanaki mokarapundaiya paaru. Kenakuthu — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4072:6C8D:3A41:74F8:C68C:5C9C:6568 (talk) 15:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rudaali, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amjad Khan. 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) 05:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Antarctica featured article review

I have nominated Antarctica for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Faisal Rashid (actor) AfD

Hey please don’t delete this page. I’ll improve the concerns regarding this page. It’s a humble request. Inda19712003 (talk) 10:00, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Inda19712003 I don't have the ability to delete it; I've only nominated it for a discussion whether to delete it or not. You can say why you think the page passes notability at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Faisal_Rashid_(actor). If there are enough policy based arguments to keep it, it will be kept. The problem is that there are no reliable sources for editors to write anything about. --hemantha (brief) 10:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

NPOV

Hi Hemantha, I admire your enthusiasm. However you need to carefully read WP:NPOV and digest what it means. Until then, please listen to the experienced editors when they tell you that your statements are too strong for Wikipedia's purpose. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kautilya3, This is regarding which conversation? hemantha (brief) 11:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

At Talk:Tek Fog and perhaps other pages as well. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

The first sentence of WP:YESPOV: Achieving what the Wikipedia community understands as neutrality means carefully and critically analyzing a variety of reliable sources and then attempting to convey to the reader the information contained in them fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without editorial bias. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kautilya3 Okay, but every single editor I've responded to there is less than 6 month old accounts with may be 100 edits at max (except Yogesh who added the tag per these new accounts' claim). hemantha (brief) 11:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok, then I suppose they are fast learners, or bring some background from their lives outside Wikipedia. The fact remains that they are stating the NPOV requirements correctly. The Wire did an investigation and reported the findings. So it is a WP:PRIMARY source for us. Unless these issues are widely accepted and reported as fact, we cannot report them as fact. This has nothing to do with The Wire being an WP:RS or not. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I disagree though. Perhaps you could point it out on the talk page itself. I'm backing off anyway. hemantha (brief) 11:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kautilya3, I see your name on Pegasus associated talk pages, so I have to wonder why the same logic doesn't apply to Pegasus_Project_revelations_in_India. The Wire is, by your argument, primary source there too; nobody else really had anything to go by apart from their reports. hemantha (brief) 12:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

The Pegasus investigation was worldwide with lots of organisations participating. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

No, the India related investigation was handled by the Wire. Nobody else, not even Amnesty/Forbidden Stories, linked the numbers to specific persons; that Prashant Kishor/Rahul Gandhi were surveilled is entirely attributed to the Wire. Everybody else, as can be seen from refs on Pegasus_Project_revelations_in_India still says "as The Wire reported", "The Wire published list" etc. hemantha (brief) 12:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

If there are any questionable statements on those pages, you can tag them. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

That's a bit hand-wavy. It's not just India though, the whole of Pegasus investigation was like that - phone numbers were shared with some, often single, media organisations; which then linked them to specific persons. (btw, these arguments had been made in "alternate press" at the time; I wasn't around, but am certain they would have appeared here as well).

That none of those pages are tagged NPOV, shows what community consensus around NPOV and PRIMARY is. Your interpretation of both those policies, is, if I may say so, extraordinary. hemantha (brief) 13:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:OSE-type arguments are not seen as proper Wikiquette. Every issue must be discussed on its own merits. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

This is not an AfD or something even remotely related to deletion? You came here, I assume in AGF, as an "experienced editor" doling out advice to policy-poor newbie me (though this barbed comment was particularly harsh) and I am only trying to clarify interpretation of these policies. The volubility when giving advice, is now petering out, so I wouldn't press any further.

Though as a last request, please look at Steele Dossier where editors, more experienced than both of us, decided on removing NPOV tag on an article sourced solely to a document that multiple WP:RS sources had called unverified. Tek Fog, for something that no WP:RS has disputed yet, has as much "found by", "according to", "reported by"s as needed by WP:NPOV, if not more. hemantha (brief) 16:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kautilya3 In your edit here, you've rewritten lead and sourced it essentially to an opinion piece. Samanth is a tech reporter for Qz; Culpan and Mukherjee are opinion columnists for Bloomberg. Those Bloomberg opinions are extremely useful, but it's not the case here. This has led you to introduce a factually incorrect statement right at the beginning - browser-based has a specific meaning and does not apply here as shown by multiple screenshots of the app and The Wire not using it even once. I'm not going to revert an "experienced editor" like you, perhaps you'll clean up yourself (and take a step back here, because if I end up rewriting an article based on an opinion piece I see as a secondary source, that's what I'd do) hemantha (brief) 03:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

It may be tagged as an opinion, but there is verey little opinion in it. It is written like a normal journalistic piece. I recall Anand Venkatanarayan using the term "browser" in The Wire programme. And it is one, because the main work is done somewhere else on a server with gigantic computing power. Would you like "server-based" instead? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

With every reply of yours, I'm more and more astounded. The only suggestion I can give is to revert and step back. hemantha (brief) 12:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

Hello sir, Gadar 2: The Katha Continues and Bholaa Bring these two articles to the Discussion (Delete), Cinzia007 (talk) 14:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Cinzia007, Both are already nominated to be deleted. There is no need to discuss them as yet. I agree with the nominator that they aren't ready as of now. My suggestion to you is to keep them in draft until more references become available. hemantha (brief) 14:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes Sir In draft then put Cinzia007 (talk) 14:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Donaldd23, is draftifying Bholaa and Gadar 2: The Katha Continues, which you prod-ed, okay with you? hemantha (brief) 17:55, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello sir, Don't put that article in the draft parmanently delete it. By the way I'm new on wikipedia. On wikipedia I 'm learning something little bit new. Cinzia007 (talk) 18:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

And tell me little bit about what articles can be creat on wikipedia and what articles can't create.

I have not yet committed anything more articales except the articals of literature academy Cinzia007 (talk) 18:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello sir, How to do I have to delete login id on wikipedia? Some process for login account delete. tell process Cinzia007 (talk) 18:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Cinzia007, Accounts can't be deleted, they can only be renamed. For those who wish to leave Wikipedia permanantly, there's something called Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing wherein accounts will be renamed to something like "Renamed user kjdfajdfsjdlfjlasjeruwou" along with some other things like user page deletion. hemantha (brief) 03:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello sir, Login id cannot be delete... delete all articales created by me. Cinzia007 (talk) 04:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

ANI

This user should be reported to the WP:ANI. Clearly WP:NOTHERE, edits Wikipedia with their own set of rules. It is their way or highway. The person will be blocked in a matter of time if reported, edits are all problematic, blatant content removal, vandalism, tampering, misleading edit summaries, arbitrary changes, incompetent in collaborative editing etc.--2409:4073:4E85:4565:818A:13D4:7603:C3ED (talk) 05:39, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Haha, yes. They have stuck close to that grey line where the edits aren't outright vandalism but also haven't generated enough outrage (WP:SYSTEMICBIAS works in their favor here) to get dragged into boards. I drafted a brief report with some effort myself. But later events made me give up, as my report would necessarily be seen in an unfavorable light. Also to be quite honest, I sympathize a bit with their cleanup, so I'm restricting myself to occasional cleanup of their carpet-bombing approach.

hemantha (brief) 06:13, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

That is why it should be reported to ANI (until it is too late), they will understand, ANV is for obvious vandalisms only.--2409:4073:2E98:C26C:9C25:67A3:FD61:AF15 (talk) 09:22, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Ah, to clarify, I did try drafting an ANI report. But the AIV reports might make any of my ANI reports look like revenge or forum-shopping. Plus they have tempered their zeal a bit and there is evidence that they are hearing the expressed concerns, despite the aggressive posturing. If that doesn't stick, I might try ANI route later - in a couple of weeks or so; not enough time right now for dramaboards. hemantha (brief) 09:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

That guy is a sockpuppet of [1]. Compare the three dots usage (...) between each lines of a sentence he types in the talk page of both.--2409:4073:188:DE9C:1892:8438:7183:543D (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Ellipsis usage is common enough, but there are some other indications as well - like same mobile editing tags, large overlap etc. I'll take a deeper look over the weekend. If convinced and you haven't already done so, I'll open one under Mridul SPI or Eswaran Naveen SPI; watch those pages. hemantha (brief) 03:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Blocked already! Good work there. hemantha (brief) 03:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Returned again.--2409:4073:2E9F:4A50:40B6:AEA9:2CA:D62A (talk) 13:51, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

I see an SPI has already been filed. May be the IP block will be extended beyond a single page now. hemantha (brief) 17:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Do you think PastafarianMonk is one of them? The use of emojis caught me.--2409:4073:4E8E:F963:B961:743C:C3BD:BE3E (talk) 08:28, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

That's a very old account though (created in 2005) and apart from Bhavana doesn't have any recent edits on South India actors. There's some similarities like Kerala but also differences like the overt communal angle and some early Mathematics edits(?), so I'd guess no at the moment ...

I think a list of SPIs categorised by their likely Indian state would help in keeping track of different socks. If there isn't one already, I think I'll make some time to start one. Hemantha (talk) 08:54, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

And only 700+ edits. Could be a sleeper. May be of a different master.--2409:4073:2083:43EE:307C:CB34:92CC:BD43 (talk) 13:48, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the edits

Hi Hemantha, thanks for the deletion nomination on the Brihans Natural article and your edits on the Mandar Agashe article. I'm the user who had requested the latter' deletion review when I had come across it earlier last month. I have left my comments on the nomination; and I am happy to volunteer improving the articles over the next few months, as my time permits. Thanks! 2405:201:1006:E03A:54AD:9797:B968:CB1D (talk) 06:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

What is your relationship with Agashes? Your range is singularly focused on related articles. COI policy applies to IPs as well. hemantha (brief) 06:50, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Hemantha, thanks for the feedback on the nomination page. I have read up on the COI policies – as such I don't know any of them, nor have I ever worked for any of them. When I came across Dnyaneshwar Agashe's article earlier last month, I happened to remember their bank case from 10 years ago which had been quite prominent in the local news. I decided to participate on just those set of articles, because I naturally found related sources for many of them, and I didn't want to disrupt the project too much by participating on every other topic I found interesting. If my edits are unwelcome, I will back out and let the articles be. If it is ok for me to edit as my time permits, i am happy to work on the articles over the next few months. Good day! 2405:201:1006:E03A:A573:938A:59CF:9934 (talk) 07:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Caste related grandstanding and scam whitewashing have made those articles particularly messy and prompted my question above. From what I've looked, your contributions are clearly neither. I'm sorry that I asked that question before evaluating your edits. I, for one, wholeheartedly welcome them. hemantha (brief) 12:47, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Hemantha. I will look back in to if I can or am interested in improving those articles at a later date, whatever their fate. I don't understand what those terms mean, but I trust you experienced editors will handle it. As a casual reader, they don't read any different from other articles of the same ilk. While I accept your apology, I will suggest you to not be so aggressive to us newcomers. I felt guilty that I had done something terribly wrong by contributing to something that only randomly had my interest. I have seen that happen too many times around this project in the years I've used it. And this happens to contributions especially on topics that are not from Europe or America. Kindly, I will limit my contributions to this project for the time being. I wish you a good day. 2405:201:1006:E03A:1CF3:E10F:B66E:B7C4 (talk) 14:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Haha, neither was I aggressive nor are you a newcomer. If anything your experience is possibly more than me, given only one of us has gone to Deletion Review. hemantha (brief) 15:05, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Edits on Hombale Films Page

Hello @hemantha Our team has been trying to make edits on our wiki page but you have been undoing the same. Kindly give a valid reason for doing so. If not please stop tampering with the content. It's a sincere request, thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shyam singh bhati (talk • contribs) 12:03, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

@Shyam singh bhati, you can't say a wikipedia articles is "yours". Anybody can edit any article as long as within policy. The issue with Hombale Films is that there is no coverage of the company significant enough to pass WP:NCORP - the notability policy for companies. For example, Aamir_Khan_Productions was deleted after it was decided in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aamir_Khan_Productions that there weren't enough reliable sources covering it to have a stand alone wikipedia article.

Because of that, I've turned the stand-alone article into a stand-alone list. If I get reverted again, I'll nominate it for deletion where it will most likely be deleted the way Aamir_Khan_Productions was deleted.

I've explained this also at Indian Cinema Task Force page. If you have concerns and require inputs from multiple editors, please post there. hemantha (brief) 16:08, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, the recent edits on Hombale films page are not from our team and from someone else. We are working on uploading new information with relevant source and that conform the Wikipedia guidelines. It will be of great help if you could remove the deletion request until we process our edits.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shyam singh bhati (talk • contribs) 05:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Shyam singh bhati you can add any sources you think would pass WP:NCORP at the AfD page. Community will evaluate their applicability. I won't consider withdrawing the nomination as long as the article isn't restored to a standalone list. I think the AfD would be a good place to discuss the merits of the listify-ing approach on the whole. Hemantha (talk) 06:40, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Plese help me i dont know what to edit or make. HELP!!!!!

Im new and i dont know how or what to do here...HELP ME!!! Polly TheAnimalLover (talk) 13:05, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

@Polly TheAnimalLover, I've added a welcome message at your talk containing links to pages that introduce Wikipedia to new editors. Go through those helpful pages. If you have specific questions, feel free to ask here, though asking at WP:TEAHOUSE will get your questions in front of more editors and might get quicker answers. hemantha (brief) 16:14, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you sooooooooooo much hemantha!!!!! You are an amazing person!!!THX! Polly TheAnimalLover (talk) 22:10, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Ayurveda

User Hemantha, the word inconsistent is mean in the second sense per Miriam Webster dictionary “containing incompatible elements” between countries around the globe. The original wording was awkward as it implied an unstated vantage point when referring to the “rest” of the world. Inconsistent is synonymous with different. Not sure what your interpretation of its meaning is? I don’t find the exact word choice here to be particularly important but I wanted to clarify my intent in using an alternate. However, I do strongly object to your removal of the two RS from the article. The Guardian especially is a necessary secondary source to substantiate the IMA. Cedar777 (talk) 13:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Different is not synonymous with inconsistent. If you insist so, I have to question either your English or your intentions. hemantha (brief) 17:16, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Please assume good faith. To say something is inconsistent . . . means it is lacking in consistency, i.e., lacking in “agreement or harmony of parts or features to one another or a whole”. In other words to say that “Due to inconsistent laws and medical regulations (or laws and medical regulations lacking in agreement or harmony of parts or features to one another or a whole) around the globe, the unregulated practice and commercialisation of Ayurveda raised ethical and legal issues.”

Why did the different laws raise ethical and legal issues?

What legal and ethical issues, specifically, were raised?

It remains unclear what this sentence is implying, regardless of which word is used. It is also genuinely baffling as to why using inconsistent might be considered offensive or problematic. Please clarify. Perhaps there is some other way to improve the sentence . . . Cedar777 (talk) 00:32, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

There are different kinds of trees (not inconsistent). Statements about good faith are inconsistent with actions (not different). Is that sufficient to show why the two aren't same?

Regarding this specific discussion, when you try to push a change that's against a longstanding consensus with an edit summary like that and then say inconsistent is same as different, asking to Please assume good faith seems hollow. Take any further queries you have about this to relevant talk page. hemantha (brief) 03:14, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Invitation to evaluate sources

Hello Hemantha, I wanted to invite you to evaluate sources on this page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gyanendra Pratap Singh. I would be happy to learn from your contribution. Regards: --NeverTry4Me - TT Page 03:50, 13 February 2022 (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. The thread is Hemantha. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 14:57, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Regarding deletion of page Hombale films

Sir, as pleasure please tell me what's wrong in the page (Hombale films). I had made a lot of research on the company, it is a famous film production house of south India that mainly produces Kannada movies, from this production house itself the famous movie KGF: Chapter 1 was produced. Harshel Quill (talk) 16:53, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Harshel Quill, for articles on companies, applicable guideline is WP:NCORP. It is stricter than WP:GNG. Whether it's famous or it has produced famous movies is immaterial. There are no in-depth articles, sufficient for NCORP, from WP:RS covering it. I've said all this before in my previous replies here and at WT:ICTF.

I do not have objection to keeping it as a list only. I gather the reverts of my list-ification were done by somebody else due to a completely different dispute; but as long as the page is in that state, i.e as a standalone article, I won't withdraw the AfD nomination. If somebody were to take it back to a stand-alone list, I'll consider withdrawing the nomination. Hemantha (talk) 06:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Ok I understand about your point,I will take the initiative and I will do more research on it and edit the page the you can withdraw your AFD nomination. Harshel Quill (talk) 18:00, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

oh sorry its then* you can withdraw your AFD nomination. Harshel Quill (talk) 18:01, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Dhani (company)

A very good point raised by you at AfD. Your observation could be expanded into a wider discussion on creating a list of credible CRAs along the same lines as the list of reliable news sources WP:RSP. RPSkokie (talk) 15:18, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

@RPSkokie, On your statement there - In general, my understanding is credit reports can be treated as independent analyst reports if the agency which is preparing them is independent of the listed company, is there any AfD precedent or guideline which leads you to that understanding? I would have thought that in general, given the CRA business, they wouldn't be considered independent. NCORP doesn't mention credit reports.

Also on Brickwork specifically, SEBI were reportedly considering pulling the license altogether. IIRC CARE and ICRA cases weren't that severe. Hemantha (talk) 15:37, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

@Hemantha my statement is clearly based on WP:NCORP rules. When you go this page, visit Section 4-Alternate criteria for specific types of organization within it there is sub section 4.4 commercial organizations and further inside its sub section 4.4.1 publicly traded corporations where it is clearly stated - sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies, so that notability can be established using the primary criterion discussed above. Examples of such sources include independent press coverage and analyst reports. So we can clearly assume WP:LISTED is one of the alternate criteria within the WP:NCORP or else it wouldn't be published within the NCORP page.

In the language of securities, credit reports or equity research reports are nothing but analysts reports which comes with disclosures or disclaimers. For example, refer to this in Credit Suisse report at page 77 - The analyst(s) involved in the preparation of this report may participate in events hosted by the subject company, including site visits. Credit Suisse does not accept or permit analysts to accept payment or reimbursement for travel expenses associated with these events. but contrary to Credit Suisse, the CARE and Brickwork disclaimers clearly contains - Most entities whose bank facilities/instruments are rated by XYZ have paid a credit rating fee, based on the amount and type of bank facilities/instruments. But despite being paid, they cannot fudge rating data or else regulators will pounce on them which had happend in the past. That's why I said at the AfD, you raised a very valid point and it should lead to a wider discussion because on Wikipedia, WP:LISTED is a valid rule for all the companies irrespective to what geography they do belong. But, sanctity of that rule should vary from country to country and regulators to regulators. RPSkokie (talk) 16:19, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I know NCORP says analyst reports. The issue with credit reports (at least in Indian scenario, as well as US from what I understand) is that they are never independent for the reasons you've identified. I totally disagree with your claim that But despite being paid, they cannot fudge rating data or else regulators will pounce on them which had happend in the past

I see credit report as being much narrower in scope than equity research reports as CRA role is limited to monitoring interest servicing. While I read NCORP's "analyst reports" as not including credit reports, I do indeed understand your broad construal. Hemantha (talk) 16:35, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

@Hemantha that's what I am saying - sanctity of WP:LISTED should vary from country to country and regulators to regulators because in US - Fitch, S&P, Moody's are considered gold standard in evaluating a commercial health of a listed company and they all considered as Nationally recognized statistical rating organization. And, again all of them had their own share of controversies in the past but at the same time as per the latest reforms all major American CRAs have to comply with Sarbanes–Oxley Act and International Organization of Securities Commissions's code of ethics. So, one cannot simply discard them because of their scope is just monitoring interest servicing because after sub-prime crisis its now about creditworthiness, and the system out here (in US) now has a pretty strict set of rules of and for engagement. However I cannot comment on Indian CRAs with such conviction. RPSkokie (talk) 16:58, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

DB is not a credible source?

Hi Hemantha. I see you have reverted one of the edits on Mohit Bhandari's page saying that DB is not credible enough. Now I am really confused. How come India's largest print media's portal is not credible enough? Moreover, why can't interview be cited as a source when the portal has published it? Please let me know what I am missing here. Edwige9 (talk) 04:26, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

@Edwige9, as I said in the summary, an interview is a WP:PRIMARY source. It doesn't matter if it is NYT or The Hindu, statements from interviews can't be stated as facts in wikipedia articles. Go through WP:PRIMARY once. Hemantha (talk) 13:56, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

@Edwige9: Statements from interviews in reliable sources can be used in articles and are indeed used in many articles including featured articles but should not be used excessively. From WP:Primary sources: "primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge." and "Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them." imv, Atlantic306 (talk) 01:32, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

@Atlantic306, I wonder if you considered the actual edit, which I'd linked for the benefit of WP:TPS like you. Edwige9 added the text He is also credited with introduction of swallow-a-pill American innovation in India, which is a non-surgical way of weight loss and is claiming this is a credible source (which btw doesn't even support the claim). I don't know if you can read Hindi but me characterising that as an interview was actually understating its promotional nature.

I appreciate valid contributions on my talk but save the nitpicking for main-space. Vacuous advice empty of context considerations are a distraction. Hemantha (talk) 03:37, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Your edit reversion was correct on grounds of promotionalism, and WP:MEDRS but unfortunately you gave advice that was wrong and confusing for a new editor, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 05:32, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

@Atlantic306, he has been here since 2015, almost as long as you. Please, once again, try to familiarise with the context before leaving uninformed comments like that. If you think I gave advice that was wrong (can't even begin to address the stupidity and condescension there), educate him on his talk. Hemantha (talk) 05:45, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

He has only 700 edits so that is inexperienced Atlantic306 (talk) 05:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

He's clearly neither new nor inexperienced. But if you can't read the bright COI/UPE hints there, we might indeed have an inexperienced editor here (if not a wikilawyer) Hemantha (talk) 06:07, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement

See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. You may have some experience with this user. Venkat TL (talk) 08:24, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry @Venkat TL, I'd have liked to comment there but did not have time this week at all. Hemantha (talk) 13:52, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Nevermind. Admins decided to kick the can down the road. I hope the critics have not downed your spirits. Venkat TL (talk) 14:00, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Haha, not so much downing spirits, but avoiding futile time-sinks. Hemantha (talk) 03:39, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Twinkle warnings

Hi Hemantha, I don't know if you use Twinkle, but it has plenty of user-warning messages like this one (uw-tpv1). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:07, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

I generally don't leave warnings for talk page edits (especially in this case where that was the account's only edit), but it was indeed quite egregious and I understand how one might think it deserved one. Hemantha (talk) 02:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

If people not warned, they will do it again. (They might do it even if warned, but that is another matter!) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:59, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian politics § Proposal : Wikipedia:Naming conventions Indian constituencies

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian politics § Proposal : Wikipedia:Naming conventions Indian constituencies. Venkat TL (talk) 10:29, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Cedar777 (talk) 15:38, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I see it has been closed as no violation. @Cedar777, please also take this as a lesson for actually reading the sources you use (policy pages make it exceedingly clear that consecutive edits count as one for the purposes of 3RR/1RR). Since you've come here, let me also point out that the Pharma Forestry A Field Guide book you had used to support an extraordinary claim Some scholars assert that Ayurveda originated in prehistoric times in the edit that led to this, appears to have been authored by an IFS officer and not a WP:RS by any stretch of imagination. Hemantha (talk) 02:57, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Hemantha, you are simply mistaken that I added the Pharma Forestry source to the article. If you take a moment to return to my edit and review it more closely, you will observe that I moved the undisturbed sentence and the existing Dinesh Kumar Tyagi "Pharma Forestry" source out of the lede and into the body of the article, an action that ultimately de-emphasized its prominence.

The Pharma Forestry source has been clearly visible in the article's lede for you to review, object to, and modify for quite some time and it has nothing to do with me, per se. It is not content that I introduced. If you have a problem with that source, why not be proactive instead of reactive? With 150+ existing sources, verifying and updating this article is a sizable and difficult task. I hope you will consider reviewing some of the existing 150+ sources in the article and/or gathering recent high quality sources to add to the article independently from any of my actions. Cedar777 (talk) 18:06, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Ok, sorry, I was wrong about that. The diff viewer highlighted it as an addition, and while I know the viewer's limitations, I forgot to double check when it came to this snippet. I've struck parts of my comment above.

On reactive vs proactive, obviously because it is very time-consuming. The lead being heavily disputed, the 1RR spectre etc also act as deterrents to even try any change. But I do take your point and will look through for any such low-hanging fruit. Hemantha (talk) 02:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Orlandofoster (talk) 08:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Incidents was the proper board, but whatever. (Link to the relevant section for faster access) Hemantha (talk) 09:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Saudamini Mishra

Don't wish to preempt your plans but ping me if you take the article to AFD and I'll add my 2c. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 18:19, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! CSD G5 after the block was the correct route, but I jumped the gun. Hemantha (talk) 05:47, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 2409:4050:2D96:ABC9:9C9F:BE48:65E3:A7EF (talk) 06:52, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Whoever this is, is it too much to ask for the relevant section to be linked? Hemantha (talk) 05:47, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello

Dear Editor, you reinstated the content that I had removed. The content says " In 2010 Koeri's claim mythological descent from Mauryans etc" using Times of India. Can you please enlighten me as to what was wrong in my removal? Akalanka820 (talk) 04:09, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I added no such content. Please read the edits more carefully and be precise in what you say. Your justification for the removal made no sense, which I explained in my revert. Hemantha (talk) 11:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

apologies if you felt I was harsh, I said you "reinstated" my removal of content basically my point is you reverted my edit. Thanks Akalanka820 (talk) 13:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

June 2022

Please refrain from adding, removing or changing genres, as you did to Sanatan Sanstha, without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Series of edits have been reverted as large part of referenced text was removed from the article without consensus, inappropriately stating that unreliable references were used. Docstar95 (talk) 17:23, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Akalanka820. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Your argument that all the caste related issues need to be relegated to Caste violence in India is not policy based and stupid. - this comment on my talk page is open personal attack especially when you never participated in the long discussion. Akalanka820 (talk) 04:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Rajputs in Bihar. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Stop calling other users argument as stupid, this is the second instance that i have seen you doing it within few days and it appears you have this condescending attitude towards other editors , which violates wikipedia policy. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 05:31, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Bhojpur: Naxalism in the plain of Bihar

I have Hindi version of this book in my bookshelf. If you have access to it or in future you get access to this book, please send me some quotes dealing with "Thana Singh", "Ramnarayan Chmar" , the sexual exploitation of latter's wife. Thanks (no hurry).Admantine123 (talk) 02:38, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately no, none of the places I have access to, have this book. Hemantha (talk) 12:42, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Govind Kelkar

[2], you said that she is a journalist, i think. But, i found this. She is associated with a lot of institutions, which work on gender related matters. Tagging LukeEmily, can you clarify? Admantine123 (talk) 18:59, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I didn't say anything about Kelkar. Could've been Akalanka820, but not sure. Hemantha (talk) 03:45, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Admantine123:, she is not a journalist. But I don't think anyone said she was a journalist. Hemantha did not say it and Akalanka820 only asked her qualifications. Akalanka820 also did not say that she was a journalist AFAIK. I assume you are referring to the Bihar Rajput page? Thanks,LukeEmily (talk) 22:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

ping I'm the CBHemantha (talk) 15:30, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Shraddha Kapoor

Hello! Please check out the Filmography section in Shraddha Kapoor's article. The Untitled Luv Ranjan's film has been completed so kindly update this information in the notes. For source, check out that article's talk page. Greatly influenced (talk) 12:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I haven't even watchlisted that article, so no. On the DoB issue, you mention somewhere in the lengthy discussion that there is a twitter post by her team. Can you link it? Contrary to what some editors have held, a self-declared date can be used. I'd even go so far as to say that when it comes to things like DoB, caste, religion etc, self published sources trump paparazzi sources like the ones currently used in that article. Hemantha (talk) 17:24, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Greatly influenced: ping Hemantha (talk) 17:27, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Here it is [3] Greatly influenced (talk) 18:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

July 2022

I have taken care to not even edit logged out. Nobody other than me in the place I stay edit wikipedia afaik. I haven't edited from any proxy ever nor have I edited from a public internet cafe. All my wikipedia edits have been through a single ISP connection, single computer and a single browser. I haven't ever edited from any mobile connection, and the ISP I use isn't even that popular any more so it should be easy to see that I haven't socked. I run a [tailscale.com tailscale] node on my computer for which access is given only to one close relative so they can access geo-blocked Indian govt sites and they, as far as I know, do not edit wikipedia. I have ensured that none of my wikipedia edits go through any proxy. I can unequivocally say that I have no other accounts and that I have never ever edited from any other account, but that of course will be dismissed as what all sockpuppets would say. Is it possible to know what gave the impression so I can try to explain why I might have performed the action which gave rise to this suspicion? Hemantha (talk) 03:31, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

I've only just noticed that the block log says this is only appealable to ARBCOM. So pinging GeneralNotability to clarify which one is correct? Hemantha (talk) 03:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

The first "sock revert" almost immediately after the block was this, so is this something to do with Regstuff? At every point I was involved with recreating D. Balakrishna, I have made sure to link to the Regstuff investigation. My edits to Isha Fdn related articles has been to remove promotion, not add. The latest one where I added revenue and program prices was also to highlight their commercial nature in an article that heavily promotes their voluntary work. I can try explaining in detail if some indication of the suspicion can be provided at least. Hemantha (talk) 05:07, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Ok, another CU also thinks I'm a sock. Since I have no idea who I'm supposed to be sock of or any means of appeal, I've withdrawn this unblock request as useless.Hemantha (talk) 06:43, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Or is this about Kundan Dhayade? Or that I am Walrus Ji based on things like some article similarity, my report of DavidWood11 and some Kautilya3 history?
Or is this simply because somebody as inactive as me for long shouldn't know about so much Wikipedia history from that time? I have been, let's say, underemployed in the past year and I had enough of both time and technical competence for going through things like xtools page history search, editor interaction etc.
Ping Vanamonde93 as a CU with familiarity of India related editors, if they can help me in any way to clear this up. Hemantha (talk) 07:46, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

:::::Hemantha, your block is regarding a sock. You shall approach at UTRS first. _{- Signed by} NeverTry4Me ^Talk 08:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Vanamonde is only an oversighter and they do not have access to CU logs etc. TrangaBellam (talk) 10:41, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Ok, not sure why I thought they were CU. Sorry for the unnecessary ping, Vanamonde.

So, GeneralNotability, I have only one question left. As a 3k+ Indian editor I do not expect the kind of details more established editors get, but Is this based on behavior only or are there technical indicators? I've spent a slightly nervous day trying to audit my pc for signs of hacking, because the possibilities I listed above do not hold up under scrutiny and I am unable to think of any other explanation. I have no interest in editing here anymore, but will be thankful for your reply, however brief, to the above question. Hemantha (talk) 11:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Based on whichever blocked master I'm supposed to be, even the above question might be seen as an attempt to improve opsec for the next sock account or whatever, so I think I'll stop looking for an answer. Hemantha (talk) 12:25, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Hemantha, I'm curious - why do you think I blocked you for being Walrus Ji? GeneralNotability (talk) 00:39, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Concerns your deletion of a section, of Satpal Tanwar Wikipedia page.

I'm quite cognizant of the citation rules, and hadn't attached any allegations or gossip. The video, where the accused had made those statements, have been acknowledged by the Police and I had cited a article thereof, which Wikipedia approves. Would you mind being more specific, why did you remove it? Millsigma (talk) 11:40, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Merger Proposal at Naagin (2015 TV series)

I have suggested a Merger Proposal to merge Naagin 6 with Naagin (2015 TV series) . I pinged you to give your honest opinion. Please give your opinion here. [4] Pri2000 (talk) 11:12, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Requested move

I have suggested a move request for Naagin (2015 TV series) . Please give your opinion here [5] Pri2000 (talk) 10:13, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Users

I think users [6] and [7] (both created on same month) are part of the larger PR group for promoting caste (Thiyya/Ezhava) in Wikipedia, which has been going on since some years now. It could likely be a sock of [8]. 2409:4073:295:3741:9913:F7BA:B1A7:2117 (talk) 08:34, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Swarajya Magazine cover, May 2018.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Swarajya Magazine cover, May 2018.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)