User talk:AlvaKedak

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited East Parade Church, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Neo-classical.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, AlvaKedak! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

If you have questions, just use this link to ask for help; a volunteer will visit you here shortly!

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:37, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you AlvaKedak (talk) 06:14, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse Invitation

Hello! AlvaKedak, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:38, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note about emails and canvassing

Hi AlvaKedak, please read Wikipedia:Canvassing, and in particular the section on stealth canvassing. The sending of emails to other editors asking them to offer their opinion or help at a discussion at an admin noticeboard is generally considered unacceptable, as outlined by that behavioural guideline. I'm sure this is just down to your inexperience with Wikipedia, but please make sure it doesn't happen again. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 08:30, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand @Daniel, this will not happen again. I just wanted to know how to report the users being involved in canvassing (off-wiki). AlvaKedak (talk) 16:49, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Abbey Church of Sainte-Foy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romanesque.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Akash Ambani

Please don't revert decent edits, even on Drafts. We don't use a multitude of sources to verify uncontentious statements, and in any event most of those sources were not "high quality" as you claimed. And you should know that because they were referred to in the deletion discussion that you participated in. There is a reason why that article was deleted and that was its poor sourcing meaning the subject failed to meet GNG. Retaining poor sources isn't going to get it back into mainspace. - Sitush (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To add to my explanation: most sources relating to this person are clearly promotional and "planted", as discussed at the AFD. And many are just plagiarising each other, as the Indian media so often does. - Sitush (talk) 20:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The qualitative analysis of the sources are subjective, we can open a discussion regarding it on RSN. There could be a case of promotion puffs but it should go through a relevant noticeboard discussion. Also can we move this discussion to Draft's talk Page rather than my user Talk Page? @Pharaoh of the Wizards: what is your opinion on this matter? AɭʋaKʰedək (talk) 16:58, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They were assessed at the AfD also and, believe me, I have a fair bit of experience of source appraisal and agree with what was said there. Did you not even notice how many of them used the same bullet points and even the same headline? You need new, better sources. - Sitush (talk) 17:05, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Badami Fort

Please take note of the edit summary here. You copy/pasted, and did so from an unreliable source. - Sitush (talk) 04:15, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ARCA

You are involved in a recently filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Indian military history and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 16:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indian military history case opened

The Arbitration Committee has opened an arbitration case titled Indian military history in response to an arbitration enforcement referral. You are receiving this notice because you are a named party to the case and/or offered a statement in the referral proceedings.

Please add your evidence by June 5, 2025, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage.

For a guide to the arbitration process, please see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

69.118.244.151

69.118.244.151 has once again removed a Beowulf edit with no explanation given. 78.150.15.34 (talk) 20:42, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have reverted that edit now. AɭʋaKʰedək (talk) 05:43, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence phase of Indian military history extended by three days

You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Indian military history. Due to an influx of evidence submissions within 48 hours of the evidence phase closing, which may not allow sufficient time for others to provide supplementary/contextual evidence, the drafters are extending the evidence phase by three days, and will now close at 23:59, 8 June 2025 (UTC). The deadlines for the workshop and proposed decision phases will also be extended by three days to account for this additional time.

For the Arbitration Committee, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:02, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]