User talk:Imdashti

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome

[edit]
Hello, Imdashti! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Why so serious? Talk to me 12:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

January 2011

[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Kuwait International Airport‎, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Why so serious? Talk to me 12:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good Work

[edit]

Hi there, you've really done a nice job in adding references to the Incidents section of Kuwait International Airport. Keep it up! Why so serious? Talk to me 05:01, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The correct coordinates for Alderney Airport

[edit]

To answer you questions. First the degree of accuracy. This is a general encyclopaedia and not a reference work for pilots. If pilots don't require that degree of precision then there is no real need for them in a general purpose encyclopaedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Precision. As to where the coordinates should lie, well in some cases the AIP will say "centre of runway" or as in the case of Canadian airports "Aerodrome Geometric Centre Coordinates". Others don't specify what the coordinates refer to. It may be that the coordinates for Alderney are slightly south of the two grass runways but are in the centre of the airports property. The most important thing though is Wikipedia:Verifiability. The coordinates are sourced, from an AIP, whereas the ones you came up with are original reasearch. By having the coordinates for a countries airports sourced to one reference then it's easier to keep check of them. If you have editors coming up with their own coordinates then you will see airports with coordinates from the AIP, others with coordinates for the centre of one or more runways, the airports terminal, the centre of the main runway, the ends of a runway and I've seen all of those given. Basically the coordinates should be what is given by a reliable source. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 22:27, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Udairi Army Airfield

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Udairi Army Airfield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — Bill william comptonTalk 02:51, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ras Mishab Airport, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arabian Gulf. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

[edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: JZR (disambiguation) has been accepted

[edit]
JZR (disambiguation), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:41, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: DHX (disambiguation) has been accepted

[edit]
DHX (disambiguation), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:30, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Imdashti. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Xij (October 19)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Whispering was:
This is not the correct place to request new redirects. Please follow the instructions at Articles for creation/Wizard-Redirects. Thank you.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Whispering 03:13, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Imdashti, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Whispering 03:13, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Imdashti. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Xij concern

[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Xij, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Xij

[edit]

Hello, Imdashti. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Xij".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 04:01, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Imdashti. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

[edit]

Information icon Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Tick Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cobano Airport moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Cobano Airport. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Frost 16:19, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cobano Airport has been accepted

[edit]
Cobano Airport, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

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

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

ToadetteEdit (talk) 21:40, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm The Banner. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Kuwait International Airport have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. The Banner talk 16:36, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not experimenting. I'm editing the outdated and inaccurate information to reflect up-to-date accurate data about Kuwait Airport. Imdashti (talk) 18:56, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are damaging the article by removing info without any explanation and by systematically removing sources. The Banner talk 20:22, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Kuwait International Airport, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Danners430 tweaks made 10:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Imdashti. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Kuwait International Airport, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. This is based off this diff where you claim to work for a government agency involved in aviation. Danners430 tweaks made 16:45, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Working at Kuwait's Directorate General of Civil Aviation does not mean I'm promoting anything on behalf of Kuwait Airport. I edited the article lately to correct outdated information. All my information is based on public reports issued by the airport, airline websites, and aviation websites. However, since there are so many wrong information, my concentration is first to cleanup everything, then add the sources. Imdashti (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's not how Wikipedia works. You add the sources when you make the changes, not after. If there aren't any sources available when you want to make an edit, then the edit doesn't get made. That's just how this place works. Danners430 tweaks made 19:11, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Many details of the list seem to be ignored over the months (and sometimes over the years). There's so much to change. To go into each single change and lookup its source is so overwhelming, especially when many of these changes come from a single source like airline timetables and airport's overall statistical reports. Imdashti (talk) 19:31, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then leave it - I don't know what to tell you... Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and verifiability is a core policy.
This does not however answer your conflict of interest, which I'm sorry but you do have as someone that works in the industry that you're editing about. Danners430 tweaks made 20:14, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This industry is not closed. There are so many open sources for the information we are talking about. Anyone can fetch this information by knowing where to look for the proper resources. The changes I'm making are verifiable by public sources, some of which are constantly changing without you noticing, unless you know how they work. Imdashti (talk) 20:44, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Great - then they can be added to articles... which is mandatory as per WP:V. Danners430 tweaks made 20:45, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was planning to add the sources after I made all the changes, but it seems that I have to go through the changes one by one and add them in some way, despite the fact that many changes may relate to the same overall source. Imdashti (talk) 21:16, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If it's only one source, then what you can do is add the source once, and give it a name (<ref name="name">) - then add that named ref to everything else that source verifies.
But again - you need to address your conflict of interest at the noticeboard. Danners430 tweaks made 21:18, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Danners430 tweaks made 18:26, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kuwait International Airport

[edit]

Could you please stop with the removals on Kuwait International Airport? Wikipedia information is based on sources, not inside information. The Banner talk 16:56, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean by removals airlines stopping operations, then I noticed frequently that airlines don't usually announce such move. Further, my information is not inside information. It is based on information published by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation in its statistical reports, as well as information available on public aviation resources like airline websites. I witnessed that the list of Kuwait Airport operations is so much inaccurate and outdated. This is why I worked slowly on making the changes I made after verifying every change. Imdashti (talk) 18:48, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Great - so if it's published, you'll be able to link those reports as citations to your edits, won't you? Danners430 tweaks made 19:12, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These are paper reports, not online ones. Unfortunately, the DGCA is still outdated in the format of such reports. Imdashti (talk) 19:27, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can cite paper publications. See Wikipedia:Offline sources. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:56, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Still, it does not warrant the removal of sources in connections that stayed even in your version. The Banner talk 19:27, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Imdashti Please stop removing sources from the article. There’s absolutely zero reason to be removing sources. Danners430 tweaks made 06:48, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no prohibition on the removal of sources if the material cited by them is no longer relevant for inclusion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:12, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Correct - however, in this instance the user is removing a source that verifies a route... but leaving the route in the article, so leaving it unsourced. Danners430 tweaks made 09:15, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Such sources are not necessarily accurate. They talk about adding a route within a certain season. Do they say that the route is continued now? In fact, airline schedules are more relevant to verify the route continuation. Such schedules can be accessed through airline websites that are mentioned in the relevant airline article. They can be verified also by reservation websites. In my professional view, information available on airline and travel websites are more accurate than news pieces like the ones from www.aeroroutes.com . Do we need to list airline websites as source of information for each airline when the websites are already mentioned in the airline article?
I understand that some destinations may be added when there's a news piece about their commencement in the future, but after that, when actual operation starts, the news piece would become irrelevant, and the availability of flights on airline and reservation websites (as well as other aviation resources) is the thing that is relevant. Imdashti (talk) 10:26, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aeroroutes is generally considered as a reliable source by the Wikipedia:WikiProject Airlines and Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports communities. If you feel that should change, then it's best to open a discussion at WP:RSN and notify those two wikiprojects. As of right now, it is considered a reliable source, so we ask that you not make unilateral decisions to remove it without discussing it first. Danners430 tweaks made 10:43, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did not find anything in the communities pages or the RSN page about aeroroutes.com . Could you provide me with a link mentioning this website as reliable source?
I like to clarify that we are discussing the continuation of operation, not initiation of service as usually provided by aeroroutes. Imdashti (talk) 11:18, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The question of continuity is an easy one - is there a source to verify that the route has ended? If not, then the existing source is the best we have; therefore it stays until a better source is found.
As for whether Aeroroutes is a reliable source or not - as a general rule, sources are considered reliable unless they are obviously unreliable (in this case there's disagreement, hence the suggestion to start a discussion about it), or they're listed at WP:RSP. Danners430 tweaks made 11:21, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relying on aeroroutes is an example of how there might not be a source for service termination. Aeroroutes concentrates on route additions and changes, not on terminations. In fact, most often, airlines don't announce service terminations because it is a sort of negative publicity. In certain cases, additions are just for seasonal demand, which aeroroutes might not mention.
My way of verifying operations relies first on information extracted from flightconnections.com which seems to fetch information from online reservation resources. Since flightconnections relies on an interactive map to convey this information, it is not possible to quote a specific link as a source for a certain operation. Next, I verify this information with published DGCA reports and airline websites. I might need to check several DGCA reports for several months to verify continuity and seasonality. In most cases, airline websites are a good source for future termination and addition, but they also might have some sort of a search engine that cannot be quoted specifically. They might rely on user input in some sort of form, and their results might need to be scanned to verify the needed information. This methodology is not a straight-forward way like is the case with aeroroutes, but it is more accurate and reliable. It ensures that the information about Kuwait International Airport's operations is almost accurate and encyclopedic. However, they don't provide clear link to the required information. Imdashti (talk) 16:17, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's nothing whatsoever wrong with your approach of using flightconnections (although I haven't checked WP:RSP) - the concern is with you removing otherwise valid sources without replacing them. If you have a better source, by all means go ahead - but the edit which prompted my original message was you removing an aeroroutes source and leaving an entry in a table completely unsourced. Danners430 tweaks made 16:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Future connections can only be added with a firm date. And connections must be sourced with independent sources, ruling out the airport and airline websites. The Banner talk 11:05, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So, airline websites are not reliable source about their own operations? Imdashti (talk) 11:20, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They are not independent and therefore not usable, per WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT. The Banner talk 11:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Newspaper articles, f0or example, per perfectly fine sources in most cases. The Banner talk 11:46, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I might disagree with you. Yes, I don't rely on airport websites because they don't seem to convey the actual operation in schedules. However, this cannot be said about airline websites which can face serious consequences if they provide wrong information. Yes, they might not be independent, but they are checked by authorities in case of any misinformation. This makes them very careful about what to publish on their websites. As for newspapers, I know that many airlines request articles about their operations for a paid fee. It is another publicity scheme that invalidates independence of newspaper articles. Again, such articles might aim at publicity in case of additions or certain changes, but not continuity, which is something that one assumes when referring to Wikipedia articles. Hence, newspaper articles might get invalid in few months with no source for their invalidity except by verification from airport operators and other aviation resources that provide up-to-date information, and such information might not be available in a simple format like a newspaper article. Imdashti (talk) 16:36, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I agree on the point that airline websites should be considered reliable. However, it does go against existing consensus, so to use them you need to start a discussion at the WikiProject - guidelines can and do change, it just needs a good discussion on the matter and agreement that it should change. Danners430 tweaks made 16:38, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just to take a step back to try and see the wood from the trees...
Please bear in mind @Imdashti that Wikipedia is built on community consensus. The community works together to write, edit and maintain articles. One part of that are the so-called WikiProjects, which are almost like "focus groups" for specific areas of the encyclopedia. For airports, that is Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports. They have established consensus in place around how to cite routes, which is WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, which @The Banner linked above. Of course, guidelines can always change - but to do that, we discuss at the relevant talk pages (in this case the talk page for the WikiProject) so that a new consensus can be gained.
Put simply - discussion is at the core of Wikipedia, as is community consensus. Danners430 tweaks made 11:36, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Angoram Airport moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Angoram Airport. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability, it is promotional and reads like an advertisement and in particular, the article needs at least three reliable independent sources with significant coverage of the subject. There's useful information about how to choose good sources and avoid bad sources here.. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. SunloungerFrog (talk) 22:41, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Angoram Airport (August 20)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Aviationwikiflight was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Aviationwikiflight (talk) 23:50, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Angoram Airport has been accepted

[edit]
Angoram Airport, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

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

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

TurboSuperA+[talk] 04:04, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Kondavattavan Tank Waterdrome

[edit]

Hello Imdashti, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Kondavattavan Tank Waterdrome, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kondavattavan Tank Waterdrome.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 10:51, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]