Misplaced Pages

User talk:PadFoot2008: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:18, 3 August 2023 editPadFoot2008 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users9,657 edits →Indian Army: ReplyTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit Reply← Previous edit Revision as of 11:47, 3 August 2023 edit undoDrKay (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators159,623 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 371: Line 371:
::I will start a discussion on the article's talk page according to your suggestions and also revert to the older version of the article that had been in use for a long time until a consensus is reached. ] (]) 08:58, 3 August 2023 (UTC) ::I will start a discussion on the article's talk page according to your suggestions and also revert to the older version of the article that had been in use for a long time until a consensus is reached. ] (]) 08:58, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
:::I don't care about the Indian Air Force. All Misplaced Pages articles are independent of each other. You can't use one to source the other. Aren't you familiar with Misplaced Pages guidelines. ] (]) 10:18, 3 August 2023 (UTC) :::I don't care about the Indian Air Force. All Misplaced Pages articles are independent of each other. You can't use one to source the other. Aren't you familiar with Misplaced Pages guidelines. ] (]) 10:18, 3 August 2023 (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 ] regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on ]. <!--Template:An3-notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 11:47, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:47, 3 August 2023

This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: He should not be given alerts for those areas.

May 2022

Information icon Hello, I'm PerpetuityGrat. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Quadrilateral Security Dialogue 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. Thanks. PerpetuityGrat (talk) 04:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@PerpetuityGrat Okay, No problem PadFoot2008 (talk) 06:26, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Misplaced Pages. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Misplaced Pages:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Misplaced Pages:

The Misplaced Pages tutorial is a good place to start learning about Misplaced Pages. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 14:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

RegentsPark (comment) 13:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Next time

... you make disruptive edits when the whole world knows the words "king emperor," you are looking at being penalized. Think about it seriously. Very seriously. Study File:EdwardVIIKingEmperorIndia1903and1908.jpg again and again, and then again. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:24, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

@Fowler&fowler Sorry, didn't had an idea what King-Emperor is. Don't call it disruptive though, sounds a bit harsh, just a misunderstanding.
Pardon. PadFoot2008 (talk) 11:24, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
I understand, but that is all the more the reason that you should not be directly editing the leads of high level articles such as the British Raj. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:36, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

September 2022

Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Military uniform, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. If you have issues with the link take it to the talk page. This is already the second revert and your entering edit warring territory if you continue per WP:BRD Leventio (talk) 14:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did at Military uniform. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Again, take this to the talk page if you want to discuss, not through edit summaries. Or I will report you for edit warring. Leventio (talk) 14:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Mrwhosetheboss

As I stated in my edit summaries, the introductory sentence should only refer to the person's nationality, not their ethnic origin; see MOS:ETHNICITY. ... discospinster talk 15:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Sevastopol

Hey. Please note that there is a new general sanction; only extended-confirmed users are allowed to edit articles related to the Russo-Ukrainian War (WP:GS/RUSUKR). Prolog (talk) 17:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

British India/British Raj vs. India

I understand your emotions but British India/British Raj one one side and India are not the same. Not political and not geographically. Could you please stop with pushing this personal view? The Banner talk 20:03, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

@The Banner It isn't a personal view. British India refers to provinces of India during the Raj. British Raj refers to the period of British Crown rule over India from 1858 to 1947, sometimes the rule itself. While the entire country including "British India" and the princely states during the Raj, was called India or Indian Empire. This is a really basic thing, any editor working on articles related to modern Indian history should know this.PadFoot2008 (talk) 09:34, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Do you have reliable sources for this? The Banner talk 20:10, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
@The Banner Of course, I do.

Interpretation Act, 1889 of the UK parliament (PDF link)

(4.) The expression "British India" shall mean all territories and places within Her Majesty's dominions which are for the time being governed by Her Majesty through the Governor-General of India or through any governor or other officer subordinates to the Governor-General of India.
(5.) The expression "India" shall mean British India together with any territories of any native prince or chief under the suzerainty of Her Majesty exercised through the Governor-General of India, or through any governor or other officer subordinates to the Governor-General of India.


You can refer to the Imperial Gazetteer of India for the term "Indian Empire" (link).
PadFoot2008 (talk) 10:55, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the Gazetteer does not support your stance. And the other link is totally unclear as it lacks page and article numbers, so impossible to verify. The Banner talk 12:15, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
The Imperial Gazetteer is a government record, so I don't get why it doesn't support my stance. If the link isn't workable for you, you can search elsewhere for pdf copies of the Imperial Gazetteer of India. Also, I don't think you dispute the validity and content of the Interpretation Act. So I'm assuming you've accepted the definition for "British India" and "India", but are still in doubt with the term "Indian Empire". Correct me if I'm wrong. Also here are some references I borrowed from the Misplaced Pages article on British Raj, listing the definition of British Raj as given by historians and scholars. All of these describe the Raj as a period or era, or in some cases, the British Crown rule itself, but not the country.
PadFoot2008 (talk) 01:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
What I doubt are your claim that:
  1. British Raj = India
  2. British India = India
  3. British Indian Army = Indian Army
  4. some other claims that I don't remember now.
It is loud and clear that in 1947 British India was split into two (now three) states. Therefore, present India is not identical to British India but smaller. By naming it all India, you suggest that you are talking about the present state. That is not correct. The Banner talk 09:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
No, I'm definitely not making such claims except the one where you said 'British Indian Army = Indian Army'. The real and nominal name for the British Indian Army is Indian Army. The British prefix was added only in certain cases in Misplaced Pages such as the article name as there can't exist two articles with the same name. I'm now going to make a talk page in the article to explain rest of my edits.
PadFoot2008 (talk) 03:10, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @The Banner and PadFoot2008: This is not the place for such a conversation. You have edit-warred over content. PadFoot2008 has earlier unsuccessfully suggested some edits on the British Raj page, related versions of which they are now attempting on other pages. The Banner, please post on Talk:British Raj. User talk pages are useful for warnings about behavior, not usually about protracted discussions on content. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:24, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Starting a discussion is also an attempt to stop editwarring/POV-pushing. That you think it needs a wider audience is something I agree with. Beside that, PadFoot2008 started a discussion here: Talk:Allies of World War II#Incorrect usage of term "British India" in many cases; argument for my case.The Banner talk 11:37, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
  1. *Hirst, Jacqueline Suthren; Zavros, John (2011), Religious Traditions in Modern South Asia, London and New York: Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-44787-4, As the (Mughal) empire began to decline in the mid-eighteenth century, some of these regional administrations assumed a greater degree of power. Amongst these ... was the East India Company, a British trading company established by Royal Charter of Elizabeth I of England in 1600. The Company gradually expanded its influence in South Asia, in the first instance through coastal trading posts at Surat, Madras and Calcutta. (The British) expanded their influence, winning political control of Bengal and Bihar after the Battle of Plassey in 1757. From here, the Company expanded its influence dramatically across the subcontinent. By 1857, it had direct control over much of the region. The great rebellion of that year, however, demonstrated the limitations of this commercial company's ability to administer these vast territories, and in 1858 the Company was effectively nationalized, with the British Crown assuming administrative control. Hence began the period known as the British Raj, which ended in 1947 with the partition of the subcontinent into the independent nation-states of India and Pakistan.
    • Salomone, Rosemary (2022), The Rise of English: Global Politics and the Power of Language, Oxford University Press, p. 236, ISBN 978-0-19-062561-0, Between 1858, when the British East India Company transferred power to British Crown rule (the "British Raj"), and 1947, when India gained independence, English gradually developed into the language of government and education. It allowed the Raj to maintain control by creating an elite gentry schooled in British mores, primed to participate in public life, and loyal to the Crown.
    • Steinback, Susie L. (2012), Understanding the Victorians: Politics, Culture and Society in Nineteenth-Century Britain, London and New York: Routledge, p. 68, ISBN 978-0-415-77408-6, The rebellion was put down by the end of 1858. The British government passed the Government of India Act, and began direct Crown rule. This era was referred to as the British Raj (though in practice much remained the same).
    • Ahmed, Omar (2015), Studying Indian Cinema, Auteur (now an imprint of Liverpool University Press), p. 221, ISBN 9781800347380, The film opens with what is a lengthy prologue, contextualising the time and place through a detailed voice-over by Amitabh Bachchan. We are told that the year is 1893. This is significant as it was the height of the British Raj, a period of crown rule lasting from 1858 to 1947.
    • Wright, Edmund (2015), A Dictionary of World History, Oxford University Press, p. 537, ISBN 978-0-19-968569-1, More than 500 Indian kingdoms and principalities existed during the 'British Raj' period (1858–1947) The rule is also called Crown rule in India

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Copying within Misplaced Pages requires attribution

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. It appears that you copied or moved text from Yama (Hinduism) into Yamuna in Hinduism. While you are welcome to re-use Misplaced Pages's content, here or elsewhere, Misplaced Pages's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Misplaced Pages, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from ]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Misplaced Pages:Copying within Misplaced Pages. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 16:01, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me about this. I can assure you that I haven't copied materials between pages before and this was a first, so I was unaware the attribution rules. I'll make sure to do it from next time onwards. Thanks a lot!
PadFoot2008 (talk) 16:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

January 2023

Hello. This is regarding your recent infobox edits on articles regarding the Trimurti and Tridevi, a few of which I have reverted. I appreciate that you wish to make edits to them, but would also like to offer you the following points to bear in mind: Please add a short description whenever you're making edits on articles, because it often comes across as a disruptive edit if you don't. Next, when making infobox edits, especially regarding such significant topics, please do discuss your proposed changes on the talkpage and gain consensus before implementing changes. There could very well Lastly, do add citations to any changes that you make to support your contributions. Thank you. Chronikhiles (talk) 05:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Information icon Hello! I'm 1AmNobody24. Your recent edit(s) to the page Dyaus appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 1AmNobody24 (talk) 06:05, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

April 2023

Information icon Hello! I'm Vif12vf. Your recent edit(s) to the page Deccan States Agency appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The term "Indian Empire" is a false term that should not be used for the British Raj. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 14:34, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

No, literally, what do you mean? Princely States were never a part of British India. This is such a basic thing I'd expect ever Wikipedian who regularly edit Indian articles to know. I respect your concern regarding unconstructive edits, but I can assure you that it's not an unconstructive edit, which you'd come to know if you were to research just a bit of modern Indian History. I agree with you on the fact that Indian Empire shouldn't be used for British Raj. British Raj refers to the Crown rule over India between 1858 to 1947 itself or the period, while Indian Empire is a term mentioned in the Imperial Gazetteer of India used to refer to territorial extent of India during this time. Almost all Government maps during the period label it as such.
Again I'd request you to please go through Indian history PadFoot2008 (talk) 14:41, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did at Dir (princely state). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 14:34, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Princely States weren't a part of British India. If you still aren't ready to accept that, then I'm gonna put some citations as well.
Dir was a Princely State and princely states were not a part of British India according to the Interpretation Act 1889:
(4.) The expression "British India" shall mean all territories and places within Her Majesty's dominions which are for the time being governed by Her Majesty through the Governor-General of India or through any governor or other officer subordinates to the Governor-General of India.
(5.) The expression "India" shall mean British India together with any territories of any native prince or chief under the suzerainty of Her Majesty exercised through the Governor-General of India, or through any governor or other officer subordinates to the Governor-General of India.

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you continue to disrupt Misplaced Pages, as you did at Baluchistan Agency, you may be blocked from editing. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 14:36, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

You don't need to tell me the definition of British Raj.
It referred a period and
"Hence began the period known as the British Raj, which ended in 1947"
the Crown rule itself.
"Between 1858, when the British East India Company transferred power to British Crown rule (the "British Raj"), and 1947"
You haven't been able to provide any sources explicitly stating that it was the name of the state itself. Please also go through the Imperial Gazetteer of India and the various acts passed by the UK parliament.
Also why are you reverting all my edits to every page I've edited? Would you like someone else to blindly revert all your edits without even stating a reason? Until and unless you state a reason for reverting all my edits without any reason, I'm going to revert back all my edits.

PadFoot2008 (talk) 14:45, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Your attempt to have the name changed from British Raj was rejected back in Summer , however I see you are still changing its name in various articles. That is disruptive. See WP:COMMONNAME and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. If you're dissatisfied with the name of x article, make a move request/discussion in said article. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:49, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Holy moly, A LOT of your recent edits have been reverted. Actually the vast majority of your edits from this Summer seems to be have been reverted. And they mostly seem to have to do with terminology. In that case I'll be more blunt and harsh; Continue and you will be reported to WP:ANI, it can't be right that our users have to spend that much time on you. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Com'on it's not my fault. I'm even providing sources. I think ] has taken my edits too personally. I'm just trying to make the encyclopedia more accurate. And you need sources to do that. Which I am providing. And also which Vif12vf doesn't care to provide. In fact, many don't care to provide. PadFoot2008 (talk) 07:55, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Misplaced Pages, as you did at List of Indian princely states. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 06:59, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

ANI notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is PadFoot2008 - LTA RGW editing. Thank you. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 07:15, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pradyota dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Avanti. 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) 07:26, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

I've fixed it, now. Thanks. PadFoot2008 (talk) 10:13, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of monarchs and ruling houses of Magadha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kingdom.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

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

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

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

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

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

— DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 18:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

@DaxServer Hello, thanks for notifying me. Actually I've been notified before and I'm already aware of that. Can I do something so that people know that aware of it as I frequently edit such pages? PadFoot2008 (talk) 01:59, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi. You can put {{ctopics/aware}} at the top of the talk page — DaxServer (mobile) (t · m · e · c) 04:35, 1 June 2023 (UTC) — DaxServer (mobile) (t · m · e · c) 04:35, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I've done that now. PadFoot2008 (talk) 05:27, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Cut paste moves

Please refrain from making cut=paste moves. See WP:CUTPASTE. Instead request page moves at relevant talk pages. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:04, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk, I apologise for the cut paste move. I wasn't aware that it could lead talk page issues. I have put up a technical move request now. Thanks for informing me. PadFoot2008 (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
That's OK. You are welcome . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:31, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
@Fylindfotberserk, I've ran into a problem. A user told me that the move wouldn't be considered an "uncontested move" and thus I have had to open a discussion here Talk:Shunga_Empire#Requested_move_5_June_2023. PadFoot2008 (talk) 08:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
I saw that comment. He is right, we have to go through that process. We already have a few RM discussions in the talk page before. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:09, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
So we can have another? (The one I've linked) PadFoot2008 (talk) 09:30, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

June 2023

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Emperor of India shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. DrKay (talk) 05:41, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

I apologize for edit warring. I'd forgotten the three-revert rule. PadFoot2008 (talk) 11:29, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Uttar Pradesh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page United Provinces.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me, I've fixed it now. PadFoot2008 (talk) 11:45, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

June 2023

Information icon Please engage in constructive edits. Your recent edits to the Bengal Presidency are duplicating content and removing longstanding information without a valid or reasonable explanation. Please also be aware of Misplaced Pages policies regarding WP:COMMONNAME, WP:BIAS and WP:VANDALISM. Thank you. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 14:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Please see the corresponding discussion in the talk page of Bengal Presidency. PadFoot2008 (talk) 14:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Bengal Presidency

This edit is pure fantasy. The Bengal Presidency at one point stretched from the Khyber Pass to Singapore. This is an established, well-known and undisputed fact. As this book by the historian Rosie Llewellyn-Jones lays out, "The Bengal Presidency, an administrative jurisdiction introduced by the East India Company, would later include not only the whole of northern India up to the Khyber Pass on the north-west frontier with Afghanistan, but would spread eastwards to Burma and Singapore as well." Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 14:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Contentious topics area the Balkans or Eastern Europe

Information icon You have recently made edits related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe. This is a standard message to inform you that the Balkans or Eastern Europe is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Misplaced Pages:Contentious topics. TylerBurden (talk) 01:07, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Mughal Empire lead

@PadFoot2008 mind explaining your revert on Mughal Empire? Also, where you saw edit warring there? Don't make baseless claims. The lead sentence was stable for a pretty long time till some IPs changed it, and page-watchers would have restored it anyway.

Once again, please don't make any such claims when you can't provide evidence. Sutyarashi (talk) 06:48, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello editor @Sutyarashi, you've been attempting to change the long standing lead for a long time now. The lead was made by an administrator-supervised consensus a while ago. You can open a discussion on the Mughal Empire talk page if you want to change that. Please see WP:BRD. Thank you. PadFoot2008 (talk) 06:58, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
@PadFoot2008 Sorry, but you should see page history. The lead sentence got changed only a couple of months ago, and there is no consensus regarding it at the talk page. Sutyarashi (talk) 07:03, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
@PadFoot2008 it does seem that you were in a dispute with other editors regarding whether it was Muslim or Islamic empire. Well, I have no problem with it. Though I am of view that it should be removed entirely as its vast majority was not Muslim. Sutyarashi (talk) 07:06, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, I wasn't aware of that. Checking this edit of 1 March 2022, it appears that neither Islamic nor Muslim Empire was present. Let's just remove both, shall we? PadFoot2008 (talk) 07:07, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
@PadFoot2008 like I said earlier, I have no problem with removal of its mention. Sutyarashi (talk) 07:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

refactoring

You should not remove comments or alter then if they have been replied to. Slatersteven (talk) 12:27, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, again. Can I use {{strikethrough|}} then? PadFoot2008 (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
That is the correct way. Slatersteven (talk) 12:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I've fixed it. PadFoot2008 (talk) 12:49, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Also read wp:bludgeon and WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. I cannot keep saying "I disagree with your suggestions". Slatersteven (talk) 16:02, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorry. I have never had to say sorry this many times ever before. I'm looking for rs. PadFoot2008 (talk) 16:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Indian Rebellion of 1857, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Hodson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Walenty Dembiński moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Walenty Dembiński. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it 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 your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 10:57, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. I've added required sources and references and submitted it for reviews. Cheers! PadFoot2008 (talk) 12:46, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Antoni Sułkowski (chancellor) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Antoni Sułkowski (chancellor). Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it 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 your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 11:36, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. I've added referrences and submitted the draft for review. PadFoot2008 (talk) 13:14, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Unreferenced creations

Hello, Please do not create articles without any references. While working on a new article, use draftspace.   𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 11:38, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me. I have add ed necessary references and submitted the drafts for review. I do not plan on expanding them further, I created them because articles on those topics were missing. PadFoot2008 (talk) 12:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Deputy Chancellor of Lithuania

Hello - I see that you recently created the article Grand Chancellor of Lithuania, with the explanation, "The offices of Grand Chancellor of Lithuania and Chancellor of Poland were seperate." Would you be interested in doing the same for Deputy Chancellor of Lithuania? Gjs238 (talk) 15:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Gjs238. I do plan on creating articles for Chancellor of Lithuania, Vice Chancellor of Lithuania and Deputy Chancellor of Lithuania too after conducting adequate research on the topics and finding relevant information (such as first holder, last holder, etc). PadFoot2008 (talk) 16:02, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited States and union territories of India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Agent.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 24

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Eastern States Agency
added a link pointing to ICS
Rajasthani languages
added a link pointing to Marwari

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Walenty Dembiński (July 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was: Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Misplaced Pages. You can find it and improve it at Walenty Dembiński instead. The comment the reviewer left was: Two copies of this page have been created, in draft space and in article space. It is not necessary to create two copies of the same page, and it annoys the reviewers. This is sometimes done in order to bypass Articles for Creation review. However, if a submitter is ready to have the article in article space, it can be moved into article space, rather than creating a copy. It is common for a page that has been duplicated in draft space and in article space to be nominated for deletion or proposed for deletion.

If the article is kept, this draft should be redirected to the article. If the article is deleted, this draft may be kept for future improvement.

This draft is either essentially the same as the article with the same name, or a subset of the article with the same name. The draft will be replaced by a redirect from draft space to the article. 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. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Teahouse logo Hello, PadFoot2008! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation 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 Misplaced Pages where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Antoni Sułkowski (chancellor) (July 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Red-tailed hawk was: The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Antoni Sułkowski (chancellor). Since anyone can edit Misplaced Pages, you are welcome to add that information yourself. 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 after they have been resolved. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eastern States Agency, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ICS.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Indian Army

Hello

I understand that Indian Army was called as so before independence also and the term British Indian Army is only used so that pre-independence army could be distinguished from the present one. But using only the formation date of the British administered Indian Army would deceive readers in thinking that present organisation is same as the old one without being a separate entity, but that's not the case.

You may see other articles infobox which have same format for the dates like United States Air Force, United States Marine Corps, United States Navy. Even article about Indian Navy and Indian Air Force use the same format, even though Indian Air Force at it's time of formation in 1932 was just called Indian Air Force and only between 1945-1950 the term Royal Indian Air Force was used.

Regards Job Chodh Du (talk) 17:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Your examples are not valid. Those entities had name changes or had been independent entities earlier. (Even RIN had a name change in 1950.) The same thing doesn't apply to the Indian Army. Organization structure changes have happened even after 1950. The Indian Army has seen no such name change. Please open a talk page discussion and see WP:BRD. PadFoot2008 (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
What about Indian Air Force, it was formed as Indian Air Force and only used the prefix Royal for a brief period between 1945 to 1950 but still the article states it was formed as Royal Indian Air Force. Also other organisations like German Air Force called Luftwaffe was formed during Nazi German time in 1933 but to distinguish that air force from the present German one, 1956 is given as the date of formation. Another example could be of the Russian Army which was formed in 1550 but the current form of it was formed in 1992.
I will start a discussion on the article's talk page according to your suggestions and also revert to the older version of the article that had been in use for a long time until a consensus is reached. Job Chodh Du (talk) 08:58, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't care about the Indian Air Force. All Misplaced Pages articles are independent of each other. You can't use one to source the other. Aren't you familiar with Misplaced Pages guidelines. PadFoot2008 (talk) 10:18, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 11:47, 3 August 2023 (UTC)