User talk:Nicky mathew

Archives

1

hello there. you mentioned that you find the article deltapath inappropriate for a few reasons. could you please elaborate on the reasons. otherwise please reactivate the page, as the article is no more than a description of a rising telecommunications company, similar to polycom and avaya. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicaabc (talk • contribs) 13:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jessicaabc:Hello Jessicaabc, your article on deltapath was deleted multiple times for A7 and G11 violations. please read them very carefully and you will understand why your page was deleted. This is the 4th time deltapath got deleted for the same reasons. deltapath is currently not notable enough to have a Wikipedia page of its own and looked more or less like an advertisement for the company. we know exactly the value of having a Wikipedia page for a company, but deltapath is not notable enough to get a wikipedia page. your page was reviewed and recommended for deletion by multiple new page reviewers like me and deleted 4 times by 3 different admins. we have rules and regulations just like any other organisation and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a facebook or youtube page that can be used as a tool for improving public relations and brand image.i will take a look at polycom and avaya later and will take necessary action if required. thank you. Nicky mathew (talk) 16:33, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

.global is a new internet domain name extention, TLD, not a registrar as commented by you in your deletion. The article clearly explains what it is and when it became available. The article also mention Name Collision, which has been an important issue this past year, when it comes to the expansion of the name space. Other new extentions have been introduced on Wikipedia, so this is in no way a promotional article, simply informative and objective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeasoderlund (talk • contribs) 11:21, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Article is so important for who is care on Middle east Affairs ( Alizzi ) tribe and specially in Iraq play an important role in war against ISIS and the second man in Iraqi Army Abdulkarim Alizzi is responsible of Baghdad security, all in all who caring on Arab affairs knows that the linage of Arabian tribes playing an important role in understanding their abilities and their role in wars and their effect on decision makers, i hope you re-activate the article --Arabi alizzi (talk) 10:54, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appriciate few pointers which make it unfit for Wikipedia and should be changed. I'm willing to work on the article and wanted it to be neutral. (Ramram206 (talk) 13:22, 31 March 2015 (UTC))[reply]

I mean it is a system that almost an entire country is using hence I feel it is important to have the information available. Ramram206 (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ramram206: hello Ramram206, Admin will you review Ekool before deletion and add more inline citations or references to prove your notability claim and remove external links. Nicky mathew (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicky mathew: thank you for the input. Would you mind having another look. PS. The External links were in fact non-profit government owned foudnations. Nevertheless would you mind having another look?Ramram206 (talk) 15:13, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for deleting it! (please see edit summary of that page for details)SoSivr (talk) 13:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This only applies when an article is created while an editor is blocked. That means that the account used MUST be a sockpuppet (and probably not blocked...), as the blocked account cannot create an article. It's a bit misleading in wording is this, and you aren't the first to misread it. In this case, the article was created, the user blocked, and the speedy tag applied - in that order. I don't know why MER-C didn't tag it when he blocked the account. If you are sure it's a sock, do say whose. Some, like Ryan kirkpatrick, are fairly easy to spot. Ones like Morning277 rather less so. (Others, like Unorginal, usually just tell us by their choice of name...) (All spellings there are correct.) Anyway, it WAS spam so I deleted it as that. Peridon (talk) 14:08, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above comments don't apply to accounts violating a topic ban - that's a different kettle of fish and quite tricky at times. And probably best to pass on to one of the regular admins at WP:AN or WP:ANI. A topic banned editor isn't blocked, just barred from certain (usually controversial) areas. Usually, someone will be watching them anyway. Topic bans are one of the less friendly parts of Wikipedia. Peridon (talk) 14:18, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding the template, but the two references in the article cover everything. There is no need for it :) Tetra quark ^{(don't be shy)} 22:40, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tetra quark: thank you for your tip. i I'll keep that in mind :) Nicky mathew (talk) 23:00, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tetra quark: The banner was justified; the issue isn't whether or not all the content is sourced, but that the article should source multiple sources, ideally independent (gaming news sites, etc.) ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SuperHamster: The sources are from the official website of the space simulator, which I'm helping to develop, btw. There's no other relevant source. Also, note that the simulator is still under development. Tetra quark ^{(don't be shy)} 23:01, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tetra quark: then conflict of interest is also another problem Nicky mathew (talk) 23:05, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tetra quark: That's awesome - I've played the first and really enjoyed it. Depending on how involved you are, however, Nicky is right about the conflict of interest.

Back to the article: if there are no secondary sources, then the simulator isn't notable enough to have an article. The reason the "one source" tag exists is that articles must cite multiple sources, of which the majority should be secondary coverage (i.e. not from the developer's official website). ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tetra quark: when you find two or more secondary sources we can consider removing the tag .Nicky mathew (talk) 23:13, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky ...This page should not be speedily deleted Because 'Karan Singh Chhabra is the correct page while karan singh chabra (with a single 'b' was made by mistake and I did not how to edit the spellings. Please delete 'Karan singh chabra' to remove duplicacy but not on karan singh chhabra as I have worked hard on it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karan yps (talk • contribs) 11:42, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky,Sorry i just posted this on your user page by accident. I tried to delete it but i'm not sure it allowed me to. Anyways, I'm just writing to let you know that i re-wrote Ché Aimee Dorval's wiki page, taking out everything that was not properly cited on reputable sources and leaving only Fact. I hope that you can now take down the speedy deletion notice, I'm trying really hard here. Let me know if there is anything else i need to focus on. Thanks for your help. I am slowly learning the wiki ways. @socrates1985 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Socrates1985 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Did you even look at the changes made to this page before you deleted it? I completely reworked the whole things according to your guidelines. Completely. There was nothing promotional in it at the end, there was only fact and everything was cited properly. Instead of just continually saying, "you're page is getting ready to be deleted" can you respond to this post with information as to why, after all of the revisions, it was still deleted.

reply please check your talk page Nicky mathew (talk) 06:04, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Gaff. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, User:Abidyunuskhan, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Gaff (talk) 21:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Gaff:hey Gaff, no problem . Nicky mathew (talk) 21:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky, I added a bunch of additional information about the history of Hebrew Free Loan Association of Northeast Ohio. This is a 110-year-old charity that's served over 25,000 people in Northeast Ohio. It's absolutely worthy of a page and was shocked it didn't already have one. Please let me know on that talk page what information you feel is promotional and I'm happy to remove it. I have made every effort be factual and provide a reference for each statement included. Davide101 (talk) 16:57, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I do not believe the Mach7 Technologies page should be deleted. It is a global technology company in a growing industry and I believe it deserves its own page. I used only factual information about the company and their products and did not include any promotional language. You'll see that other pages exist for similar companies, like Perceptive Software and BridgeHead Software. I believe Mach7 deserves a similar page. If you have specific suggestions for improvements, I would be happy to make some additions to the page. Healthcaretech (talk) 13:37, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky, Can you please reply to my question above? Thanks, Healthcaretech (talk) 19:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Healthcaretech: hello, sorry for not replying to your question. i was busy with some other things and about mach7 Technologies,i had many reasons to tag that page for deletion, one among them was it seemed too promotional but if you are interested to rewrite then its alright, u can do that but again if you are trying to promote mach7 technologies in any way that may be considered as a conflict of interest and now about Perceptive Software and BridgeHead Software both of the pages are already tagged as advertisement, some discussion about BridgeHead Software and an associated page is going on in a talk page . if you are representing mach7 then please let me know, it will be considered as a conflict of interest as well as promotional but if u giving proper reference from newspaper articles about the company and its achievements and writing both positive as well as negative side of the company with reference to prove your claims then you can rewrite mach7 Technologies. Nicky mathew (talk) 20:24, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the additional insights. I would like to edit the page to add more news sources and information. Is there a way to edit the page I had created? Or do I need to create a new page? Healthcaretech (talk) 15:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Healthcaretech: you can create a new page with the same name. if mach7 is a new company founded after 2005 and didn't achieve much then i don't think its worth giving mach7 any wikipedia article at all. remember if u want to prove that this company is worth having a wikipedia article then it should have some news paper report on it in a national or regional news network article about it, don't make it too long and don't base your article on citations from official website, it is not considered as a very reliable source.Nicky mathew (talk) 16:35, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are a.o. in the "Links / sources" section – ist that ok with you? If so, would you remove your template? Best, wiki-vr.mp (talk) 20:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would you kindly reply, explain? Thanks:-) wiki-vr.mp (talk) 20:51, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hello wiki-vp.mp, please add Additional citation in the article as it is about a living person additional citation can help such as news paper article about him etc etc and if u want more questions please write down or come to my talk page (best choice) and post your questions just like you did now.thank you Nicky mathew (talk) 20:55, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Nicky mathew – some articles added – ok with you? wiki-vr.mp (talk) 21:06, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki-vr.mp: yes,looks fine. wiki-vr.mp i will post a welcome note in your talk page that its like a beginners guide for rookie editors so i strongly recommend you to read all that properly before doing future edits to wikipedia articles. please post something in my talk page to confirm that you saw the welcome note in your talk page and if u any questions please post it down.thank you and welcome to wikipedia. Nicky mathew (talk) 21:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nicky mathew, here's that "posting something in your talk page to confirm" of mine :-) wiki-vr.mp (talk) 21:31, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, would you kindly remove that "sources" template? If not, what must be done? wiki-vr.mp (talk) 21:48, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki-vr.mp: if possible add more inline citation anyway i removed BLP template.thank you and happy editing.Nicky mathew (talk) 08:22, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicky mathew:, I'll do my very best, wiki-vr.mp (talk) 09:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on User:Nicky mathew requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ToonLucas22 (talk) 21:32, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed this tag as it is not applicable on any level to your user page. As a general word of advice, though, you may want to consider not posting your email address here. You can turn on Wikipedia email from the "preferences" button up top to allow users to email you. --B (talk) 23:54, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky, Why have you tagged my article on Mimoza Nestorova-Tomić for deletion? And as this is the first time I have written an article on Wkipedia - can you delete my article for no reason? This is a little strange? I am not sure who you are and what you know about architecture? Are you an expert? Just in case you are not, Mimoza Nestorova-Tomić was a significant architect involved in the reconstruction of Skopje after the 1963 earthquake. She worked alongside the internationally acclaimed Japanese architect Kenzo Tange. Yesterday was International Women's Day (8th March) and we were encouraged to write an article on women architects who have made a strong contribution. It would not now be a good idea to delete these article - and for what reason? I am an architectural academic and have been for 30 years, the article is supported by research and written in a scholarly way with citations. Thank-you for not deleting it. 110.33.189.111 (talk) 21:14, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @Mirjana lozanovska: Nicky didn't delete the article, though he suggested that an administrator should "Speedily delete" it because he said that the article did not "credibly indicate" Mimoza's "importance or significance". I think that the article does indeed indicate such importance or significane, not least the Andrey Damanov award, so I have removed the "speedy delete" template and various other tags I disagree with. Welcome to Wikipedia, and good luck with your future editing here. Don't forget to log in and use your username all the time - you didn't do so above, but I'm sure that you must be the same editor. Best wishes, on International Women's Day. PamD 22:09, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky! I just wanted to tell you. I really enjoy Wikipedia, and when I type in the search box for something, and it isn't there (which means it wasn't created by Wikipedia), I try to create it myself. Now, I don't want to insult you in any way, but after I create and save an article, you write me a message telling me that the article was deleted. I don't always know why, but sometimes I have to admit that what I wrote was too strange, short, or inappropriate. So, can you please give me some information about writing articles and how to make them interesting and eye-catching? Snowy Eagle. Snowy Eagle (talk) 02:00, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nicky, you appear to wholly misunderstand the terminology "primary source". A primary source constitutes letters, diaries, journals, notes etc. Books written from these as in Boog Watson's essay on Patrick Heron Watson is a secondary source. Arguably, because it is reprinted by the British Medical Journal it is a tertiary source. It is also impossible to argue that the British Medical Journal is not a reputable and reliable source. PLEASE use your terminologies accurately and correctly and avoid misleading and inaccurate tags unless you truly understand the nature of sources. The Wikipedia rule against primary sources is to avoid unrepeatable research. Nothing which can be sourced online will normally fall into the category of PRIMARY. I am unimpressed by your inaccurate tag and will report this to higher level--Stephencdickson (talk) 21:47, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky! I'm new to Wikipedia (please don't laugh), and I don't exactly understand how to edit articles, make new articles, download images, etc. I heard Wikipedia's really good, and can you please help me understand the basics and turn me into a Wikipedia Fan? Thank you, Snowy Eagle. Snowy Eagle (talk) 21:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Snowy Eagle: Hello Snowy Eagle, please check your talk page i have already posted a welcome note explaining all basics. please go ahead and read in detail all linked pages, if you are interested. Do not vandalise any wikipedia articles, always give citations/reference from news paper links or scientific journals on every edit you make to prove your edits are authentic because other wikipedians will check every edit you make, also discuss with other editors before making changes to articles in the talk page of the article if possible and ONLY EDIT ON SUBJECTS WHICH YOU DEEPLY UNDERSTAND, NEVER EDIT ANY ARTICLE IF YOU ARE UNSURE IF ITS CORRECT OR NOT. i am posting your welcome note here in my talk page also but i will removed it after 2 days ,i have also posted it in your talk page also please refer that.

Hi. Thank you for patrolling new pages. However, with only 300 or so edits to mainspace I am not convinced you have sufficient experience for this task. Even the less important project at WP:AfC requires 500 undeleted mainspace edits and a solid knowledge of policies to be able to review new articles. Please be sure to read WP:NPP and WP:DELETION before tagging any more pages and please place the tags on the top of the articles unless they are specifically designed to be used for sections only. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:38, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky mathew, and thanks for your contributions! I just wanted to give you a heads-up regarding your tagging of Anuraga Devatha ; the article is not a copyright violation of http://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Anuraga%20Devatha , because that website has copied their content from the Wikipedia article. There is an attribution on the revolvy.com page acknowledging this. I think it's quite possible that the plot summary in the Wikipedia article is copied from somewhere else - that's not uncommon in movie articles, where enthusiastic fans, who don't know about copyrights, copy and paste entire plot summaries in good faith - but I haven't found any source for it. It would be perfectly ok to just remove the plot summary if you do find that it has been copypasted from somewhere else. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 13:45, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea: Hi bonadea, yes you are right revolvy has copied their content from the Wikipedia article. thanks for explaining your side .happy editing...have a nice day Nicky mathew (talk) 14:01, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please also note that the G-12 CSD tag "applies only in unequivocal cases, where there is no free-content material on the page worth saving and no later edits requiring attribution – for more complicated situations, see Wikipedia:Copyright violations. " If the plot section appears to be a copyright violation, then tag it as such - we don't need to lose the whole article, on which editors have spent time creating infobox, categories, perhaps incoming redirects, all of which would be lost if the article was speedily deleted. If, as in this case, you believe that even the lead paragraph is a copyright violation, then re-word the basic facts into a new lead sentence. But, as suggested above, when you see something which looks very like a Wikipedia article, you need to wonder in which direction the copying has been done: there's a clear indication here, when you look to the bottom of the article and see the acknowledgement to WP: sometimes it takes a bit more thought and detective work, but the very Wikipedia-like first paragraph would have made me think twice before claiming the WP article to be copyvio. PamD 15:28, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Nicky;
Thank you for curating Made in Cork during the past hour; your help is much appreciated.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^(talk) 19:07, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pdebee:,YOU’RE WELCOME :)

@Nicky mathew: Dear Nicky;

Thanks!

By the way, please would you be kind enough to help with this situation, whenever convenient?

Thank you very much, in advance.

With kind regards;

Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^(talk) 20:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pdebee: hello Patrick,

I've voted keep there and please consider adding more citations to support your notability claim. Nicky mathew (talk) 21:34, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicky mathew: Dear Nicky,

Please know that I am very grateful to you for your helpful intervention and also for your encouragements. I have followed your advice and, regardless of the fate of my article, I will always appreciate your willingness to help a fellow editor, as we all strive to improve our encyclopedia. Thank you once again for your thoughtful assistance, Nicky.

With kind regards for now;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^(talk) 09:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to know why you want to dele the Queremos wikipage? There is no promotional content on the page. I just stated the facts and infos and cited all the external references from newspapers and websites.

cheers Tp2015 (talk) 20:34, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Queremos! I wanted to know why you want to dele the Queremos wikipage? There is no promotional content on the page. I just stated the facts and infos and cited all the external references from newspapers and websites.

cheers Tp2015 (talk) 20:34, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear Nicky Mathew,

I just created a wiki page "panism" an hour ago and just got your respond about "This biographical article needs additional citations for verification." Thanks for the respond. I know this photographer in person and would like to help him to create a page, so would you mind to help me to improve the page, or let me know what kind of source need for the verification.

Walter

Walter 17:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter0121 (talk • contribs)

Panism is a street photographer in Hong Kong, he started using compact camera for snapshot shooting for over 20 years. He is a well known person in street photography field in Hong Kong. I think his work is good and documenting the ordinary life in Hong Kong, and I think people should know more about this artist from wikipedia. I could provide more sources for the article improvement, I just want to keep the page short and simple reading.

Walter (talk) 18:19, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nicky, May you suggest what should I do for fitting the wikipedia's guidelines ? I am trying to adding more reference link, but not sure is it what you want. I am sorry to asking this, but I am new on this. Walter (talk) 19:59, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Walter0121: Hello walter,most of the things i did and all other autoconfirmed user like me do are all standard procedures of Wikipedia. as this article is about a living person so extra care will taken and Neutral point of view means you must mention what did the Critics opinions and assessments and by credible sources i mean local or national news articles not facebook page or iTunes or official website.and clearly this person is not notable enough to have a wikipedia article so you must prove he is notable by adding more citations to support your claim of notability and do not make multiple user accounts, that can get you blocked from Wikipedia. Nicky mathew (talk) 20:40, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Nicky, got your point and thanks for the advice. I will try my best to make it better. Since most of the press coverage of the artist is on local printed news reference, I am a bit hard to collect them and posting here. anyway, thanks for the reply. Walter (talk) 21:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky! Not sure if this is how to respond, I'm new to this! I noticed you left a few comments on my page, and I was just wondering how I could improve it. With the advertisement comment I was thinking that it had to do with the "kickstarter" section so I tried to use more neutral language. I'm not sure how to improve the "original content" as I tried to add as many citations as were available. If you have any helpful advice I would really appreciate it as this is for a school assignment and I want to ensure the quality is great. Jessie Jessielaurenza (talk) 16:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jessielaurenza: please go to your talk page.

Hi Nicky, Its unfortunate that the wikipedia page that was not even created properly (due to my ignorance about wikipedia citations and my unstable internet) was deleted within an hour or so. And as this is the first time, I have written an article on Wkipedia - can you delete my article for no reason? I wansn't even aware that "save page while drafting" means its gonna be published or something. This is a little strange and I am shocked. I have been following e-learning forums and have taken up e-learning courses on Coursera. And I plan to take up the IIMB online courses too. After seeing the Harvard Prof joining this team, and while I was searching on net about this company, I didn't find a wikipedia page. Thats when I decided to log into wikipedia and draft an article. I would love to hear for you esp now that I have recreated the page with proper links to refs and citations from news article and a journal. Warm Wishes Amtrips84 (talk) 18:27, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Amtrips84: Hi Amtrips, your article was about a company so extra care was taken and found it to be written like an advertisement so it was deleted clearly this company is not notable enough to have a wikipedia article so you must prove he is notable by adding more citations to support your claim of notability and add credible sources such as local or national news articles not facebook page or itunes or official website Nicky mathew (talk) 18:40, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicky mathew: refer users Amtrips84 talk page

Hey Nicky! Just wanted to thank you for helping me out with my page. I really think you've helped me improve it a lot. I have completed my editing and tried to add some external links into the entire article! I have also only left one link to the kickstarter in order to cite some of the information I received. Thanks for making my first wiki experience a good one and I will definitely continue to contribute in the future! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessielaurenza (talk • contribs) 15:26, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and ty for your message. I have contested your suggestion of a speedy delete of Iris Kurdica (artist) page. KurdsForKurdistan (talk) 19:34, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your question on RHaworth (talk · contribs) talk page.

Hi! Thank you for giving your advice on patrolling new pages! I appreciate your help! I've decided to stop patrolling... But you mentioned that I have less than 150 edits in mainspace,and I find in preferences that I have 207 edits.. How did you mention that data? What should I do, wait 2 months performing edits or just wait 2 months? Please give me a detailed explanation! Thank You! :D --Jaaron95 17:48, 30 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaaron95 ([[User talk::@Nicky mathew:|talk]] • contribs)

@Jaaron95: Hi again first of all thank you so much for replying kindly back to me. stats page is currently down so I was unable to see your exact number of edit but contribution page showed me its less than 500 edits and i been seeing your edits in Active ships of Indian navy and your interaction with Antiochus the Great. you are doing a great job and please continue contributing. edit more pages that you have deep knowledge about and slowly learn Wikipedia guidelines such WP:NPP and WP:DELETION in detail. don't edit to increase your edit counts,just do exactly what you were doing some days ago and monitor talk pages of other experienced user talk pages to learn more and also see WP:AfC and again take it as an advice from a fellow wikipedian .if you have any question please don't hesitate to ask :) Nicky mathew (talk) 18:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicky mathew: Thank you for your reply! I decided to go on your word! Thank you for getting me on the right track! I am just lovin' to edit Wikipedia pages day by day! Also if I do something against the community guideline please do remind me! I'll appreciate it! And I tagged this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felipe_Henrique_Jose_dos_Santos) for speedy deletion and the author is yelling on me! Please do check the page and inform me whether have I taken the right decision or not! --Jaaron95 18:16, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@Jaaron95: The article is created by an experienced editor with 80,000+ edits. don't worry admin will take care of it,don't talk to him for now and leave it. anyway the article only have 2 citations and not a very notable personality. leave it and work on projects you like and please dont forget to add citations with your edits to support your claim. sea harrier 2016 decommissioning also require citation to prove your claim,please add that if you can Nicky mathew (talk) 18:33, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaaron95: Just came across this, for future reference sports teams/sports people often have their own notability criteria, so for (association) football, anyone who's played in a fully professional league is automatically notable. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nicky mathew. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of .global, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The credible assertion that this is a generic top-level domain is backed up some references, howsoever good or bad. This article is also not entirely promotional. Test this at an WP:AFD? Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 13:15, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Shirt58: Hi Shirt58, can you consider merging all new 1300 domain extension into a single page because as they all have the same background only difference is the private intermediaries which holds the license sell them. giving an individual page to all 1300 extension only serves as a promotional tool for new companies rather than any meaningful use to the readers.they all have same background story and by merging we can produce a detail page on the new changes made by ICANN .thank you Nicky mathew (talk) 13:36, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nicky mathew, and thank you for your message.

I think you make a very good argument for deletion, but not one for speedy deletion.

My job as an admin is to assess whether there is some "significance" of an article, broadly speaking. Being a generic top-level domain does assert at least significance, but as you point out, not necessarily notability.

My advice is to start an Wikipedia:Articles for deletion discussion about .global, and see what people other than you and me think. If it is deleted (or redirected, or merged), this would be a good starting point for dealing with the "new 1300 domain extensions".

Do you have WP:TWINKLE in your user preferences? Twinkle automates a lot of processes that are otherwise time-consuming to do. I use it a lot, especially when starting AfD discussions.

Any problems or questions, please let me know!

Peter in Australia aka --Shirt58 (talk) 08:53, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Barnstar for helping me edit the newly created article. Cheers Dormantos (talk) 14:44, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not why the permissions has been set for [[1]]. Please help me out. Dormantos (talk) 14:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dormantos: I am really sorry, I do know much about wiki commons.Nicky mathew (talk) 14:51, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've detagged it for now. Firstly, you can't use A7 for recordings. A7 is for people and groups of people, named animals, web content and organised events. Recordings have to use prod or AfD. Secondly, I can't see an attack there. The bit about cheating on people is stated to be in the video, and therefore isn't an attack as it's a story - a bit like Michael Jackson's Billie-Jean. If I'm missing something, please let me know. Peridon (talk) 14:54, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Peridon: sorry, you are right, maybe a G11.I unreviewed it anyway.Nicky mathew (talk) 15:03, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky mathew, I was patrolling edits and pages when I came across this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RBL_Bank) which was edited by most probably by the bank itself (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:RBLadverb&action=edit&redlink=1)! I'm not sure whether the edit they made is promotional or not. Can you please review the edit? Thank You! :) --Jaaron95 (talk) 12:09, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaaron95:, well i think its partially promotional but notable enough to have a small Wikipedia article. i am not sure its the right candidate for speedy deletion, if you want, try AFD (article for deletion) but best option is tag it for advertisement, conflict of interest and remove all non-cited claims. i think the username of the editor is against Wikipedia policy, I will take a deep look later when i get some more time. bye :) Nicky mathew (talk) 19:27, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky

Firstly , Thankyou so much for going through the article and leaving your views on my user talk page : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Karan_yps

I needed your help in the below issues that I face when I see the page  : 

"This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.

This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (January 2015)

This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations"

So Can you please help add inline citations and introduce links and an Image of Karan Singh Chhabra?

Will be of great help

Regards Karan_yps — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karan yps (talk • contribs) 07:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am grateful and thank you for your advice but as I edited earlier about the kalvari class sub , i still stand on my words as it is actually a scorpene class french sub. I have a proper source citing that it was undocked and would now undergo sea trials. As on the page itself there was a entry, the INS Arihant which is undergoing sea trials was mentioned , that prompted me to include my content in that list. PS - If you wish to view the source

     [2]  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shwetabhsingh71 (talk • contribs) 15:58, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]  

Speedy deletion reason a7, no indication of significance, does not apply to schools. It also does not apply if the article gives any plausible indication of importance--it does not have to prove notability. G11 applies only to articles which are "Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic.", not to those which merely have a promotional intent or could be fixed by normal editing. See WP:CSD for the rules, and WP:Deletion policy for the general rules for deletion. Please re-read those pages, and learn the details if you are going to do tagging for deletion; don't just go by the summaries in the templates. The details have been worked out by long discussions at WT:CSD and elsewhere, and they matter. DGG ( talk ) 18:21, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@DGG:,Ok thank you again. I will re-read them in detail and I will edit page which could be fixed with minor changes. Nicky mathew (talk) 18:35, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nicky mathew. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Karan Singh Chhabra, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  12:22, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have contested your deletion tag please look at it when you have a chance.thankyou

Antiochus the Great (talk) 10:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited STOBAR, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Admiral Kuznetsov. 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, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need your input in the discussion here Talk:INS_Vishal#Dispute:_Contradiction_to_neutral_point_of_view standardengineer (talk) 14:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nicky and thank you for your review of the page "Kelly Heaton." I have added numerous inline citations. If you have additional concerns that I can address, please let me know. Thank you again for your help! OrphaVG (talk) 16:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 17:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your claim that I placed unreferenced view is inaccurate. I removed an unsubstantiated Islamophobic claim.

Salatee

• The criterion you stated that article was under was false and I fixed it. Just letting you know. The StormCatcher (talk) (contribs) 11:46, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more professional and less biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salatee (talk • contribs) 23:54, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hii, I understand your point. But it is seriously not the just one kind of ordinary testing of INS Arihant. If you read Indian Newspapers, you will notice that this is the first onboard missile testing from the submarine, which is cruicial to give it the title of SSBN. So it must br described in a seperate pararaph under seperate heading. With Regards Deepanshu M. (talk) 08:23, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepanshu1707: Hey deepanshu, if we start giving a separate long paragraph and sub head for every major achievement made in the development of ins arihant then we will end up 10 to 15 head and 1,00,000 words article, everything from confirmation of the ATV project, miniaturization of the nuclear reactor, integration of missile with sub, nuclear reactor declared operational etc, and DRDO Already tested missile from submerged pontoon 7 years ago so these test are just a follow on to that and not the first time such capability of launching missile from underwater platform is performed. This test is important enough to be mentioned and we did mention it in progress or Current status and that's enough.Thank you Nicky mathew (talk) 14:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicky mathew: Hello friend, I know we both are trying to build a better wikipedia. So, it's fine. I agree with you in this talk and make the article as short as possible. After all you are more experienced wikipedian. Regards. Deepanshu M. (talk) 14:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Nicky mathew,

I would like to create one entry about "Pavilion of Portugal in Expo'98" as this purported article -referenced in the article Expo '98- is actually redirected to the "Expo '98" itself. Any suggestion would be appreciated! Manudouz (talk) 14:57, 11 December 2015 (UTC)Manudouz[reply]

@Manudouz: Hello, you can expand the existing article expo 98, if something is missing or you want to add more content.you should not create new article about existing topics,just expand the current page. Is that what you want ? Nicky mathew (talk) 15:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky. No, I do not wish to expand existing english article expo '98. I would like to have an english version of the corresponding french article : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavillon_du_Portugal_de_l%27Expo_%2798 This article is already referenced in the french version of expo '98: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expo_%2798

Manudouz (talk) 15:35, 11 December 2015 (UTC)Manudouz[reply]

@Manudouz: sorry you cannot do that and the page you created on french Wikipedia also should be deleted, anyway in English Wikipedia you cannot make corresponding pages as you asked.Nicky mathew (talk) 16:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Nicky. Some misunderstanding here: the french page already exists since 2007 (I haven't created it), but without English counterpart ... The goal is therefore to add brief content in the "Expo '98" page (i.e., update the list of buildings), then create a new article devoted more specifically to that building (following the model of "Utopia Pavilion, converted to MEO Arena, Lisbon's main multi-purpose indoor arena"). I hope this will help. Manudouz (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2015 (UTC)Manudouz[reply]

What's wrong with the sources in Fuad Gahramanli? Curro2 (talk) 02:20, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Curro2: add more reference. thank you Nicky mathew (talk) 02:26, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the feedback on this new article (Fueter-Pólya theorem)! I saw your tag regarding the references. Do you find any one in particular to be unreliable? What parts of the article, specifically, are you concerned with? Ultracoffee (talk) 02:30, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ultracoffee: please add reference from articles or research pages or any source which can be easily verifiable. provide links to them if u have any. Thank you Nicky mathew (talk) 02:37, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The references are all indeed academic research articles or textbooks. In that sense, I believe them to be easily verifiable. It is true that there are no links, but most of these sources are likely still under copyright. Cantor's paper is probably not, and I will check and look for preprints or other sources for the others. Ultracoffee (talk) 02:51, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky,

Since i have just joined wikipedia to attempt and write my first article,I'm still a bit lost. You stated on my talk page that the reason for deletion of my article was that it doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia. However, i wrote in my article that it was about a notable athlete in my country. Is it the lack of sources and information about the subject that got my article deleted?

Thanks, fdazzle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdazzle (talk • contribs) 03:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

Athletes are given automatic notability on wikipedia, so I shall go ahead and attempt to remove the request for deletion. Orlagh Davies (talk) 09:46, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nicky,

I have just seen that this article has been deleted; you have been informed on a previous occasion that athletes are given automatic notability on wikipedia; can you please cease deleting such pages in future? Your personal prejudices in regard to what is considered to be notable and what is not are becoming unprofessional. Thank you, Orlagh Davies (talk) 09:48, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hii Nicky, I do not have direct reference but will put down the video link for verification. I think we must add this into his page. Regards Deepanshu M. (talk) 09:31, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nicky, you note my article as inappropriate for a variety of reasons. Can you please specify the reasons so i can improve my article. The article is a description of governmental company.--Kabubaker74 (talk) 05:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please point to the particulars of the discussion which let the deletion of the earlier page? There are news media reports of this class under planning stages. This is not any different then the future SSN class page for the Indian Navy. I do not see a reason to delete this page in the presence of multiple references. -- Adamgerber80, 4.49pm December 27 2015, UTC.

Dear Nicky,
Thank you once again for all your wonderful help, back in March! I send you my best wishes for a great New Year in 2016!
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^{(talk)(guestbook)} 13:56, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nicky, I created a new article since I hadn't, to my knowledge, received a response regarding your speedy deletion talk message. Can you refer me to a way where I can convert the new article's title to reflect the old title? Thank you. Mrenytfall (talk) 23:54, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mrenytfall: Hello and welcome to Wikipedia, are you talking about speedy deletion of The Ambassadorz ? if you are can you clarify your question. which is the the old title ? and does this article about The Ambassadorz have any connection to the band X Ambassadors ? Nicky mathew (talk) 04:10, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed that you're putting up Presstitute reports from diplomat and removing content mentioning those junk. What's happening? Not only that why did you remove content on Astra page even the ibnlive link clearly mentions that the Ku-band seeker is under development and will be tested from 2016. I think its for you to realize that western media and their junk need not be given priority because they have a newspaper and they can write any shit .Deltadive (talk) 06:39, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Deltadive: Hello and welcome to Wikipedia, The diplomat is a reputed and regularly used on Wikipedia as sources on multiple articles and not blacklisted. In Astra missile head Active Radar Seeker was removed because the source was from CNN IBNLIVE Blog and not from CNN IBN LIVE, In wikpedia blogs cannot be used as source. thank you and bye Nicky mathew (talk) 13:39, 27 February 2016 Mathew

I appreciate your work on Wikipedia and you're following those rules laid out by these idiots. But that's ok. Atleast have some commonsense when it comes to differentiating between a presstitute like diplomat, whose main achievement will be peddling the western nonsense and hence the reputation which is far less than that of a local prostitute. You must have considered the effort of someone who goes and conduct an interview and gets its published. Be it in a blog type or article that a very good source to begin with. Hope you have the common sense to understand this and dont end up as a moron peddling western nonsense.Deltadive (talk) 05:11, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Deltadive: Hello again, i already gave you a explanation regarding both Astra Missile and The Diplomat kindly even through i have no obligation do so. there is no point in continuing to post regarding this topic anymore as i already addressed your issue, you will get the same reply from any other Wikipedians who edits pages on air and naval systems and subsystems. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a forum so kindly find somewhere else discuss your issue. Finally Wikipedia have strict rules against harassment and use of offensive language, I have issued you a warning if you choose to ignore that warning and continue using offensive language then i will report you. Thank you and bye.Nicky mathew (talk) 16:09, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for writing to me. Do appreciate it. But would like to inform you that there is nothing inclusive in Wikipedia. It's totally Exclusive of anything other than the western views. Have you addressed the issue. Not at all. Within the rules it mentions that a source can be be considered even if it's a blog. You did not consider it. This is the problem with Wikipedia. Rules are there but no one follows it as per laid down standards and everyone follows the rules that suits them. That's why all the western nonsense is piling up in Wikipedia. Offensive language or use or words are not against you. its against the same Wikipedia that's a source of western propaganda machinery since it's infiltrated by western morons of the first kind. And the credibility of it is Zilch at the moment as a source of information. More or less it portrays a western view of the world. That's it.Deltadive (talk) 08:24, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Deltadive: please refrain from such offensive language. I am from the UK, and have never caused you any harm. I have received an extensive education and can inform you with clarity and certainty that I am not a 'western moron'. Please refrain from placing such ignorant and hateful comments upon what is a fantastic global source of knowledge. Orlagh Davies (talk) 09:52, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nicky Mathew can you please clarify which part of HAL Amca contains original research in order to improve the article. I am the same person from Hal Amca talk page references section.

1.39.46.104 (talk) 04:44, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nicky mathew. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), content (CSD A3), or significance (CSD A7) moments after they are created, as you did at Harrow (software). It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 17:44, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam9007: Hello adam9007. I Nominated Harrow (software) for deletion because i saw a clear case of A7 AND G11 and i believe did the right thing. yes giving more time for creators is necessary but in most cases of non notable organisations, non notable individuals it is just a waste of time. Most of the time I myself add information, repair, find sources and work with creators to improve the articles they started if I saw clear sign of notability. i have reviewed nearly 600 new pages 95% or more were marked and deleted for G11 and A7 violations those pages were either about some company or a product or self promotion. anyway thank you for your advice i will definitely consider it. BYE :) Nicky mathew (talk) 18:33, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

... is just a quick translation from the Georgian Wikipedia. I assume the content is sourced to the Kazbegi bio link. Aide Pikew (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• re: your edit summary; I reverted all of "Aide Pikew"'s edits per WP:BANREVERT, given that you had not responded yet. You're welcome to restore the message, however they won't be able to reply to you.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:19, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo: thank you for the explanation. Good bye :) Nicky mathew (talk) 17:23, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here's a more credible source, but it does negate my numbers for a set of fresh ones. ignore the image on the page, it's from the old one. But the article body is from a russian magazine that talks of Neva Design bureau, who actually worked on the IAC-1 project.

Here: http://in.rbth.com/economics/2014/10/31/st_petersburg_enterprise_to_supply_arresting_gear_for_ins_vikrant_39439

It says 17 Mig-29's. What that means about the rest of the aircraft, deduce for yourself. AND KINDLY MAKE THE CHANGE IN NUMBERS. When we say it's going to accommodate so many aircraft with its hangar size, it looks unprofessional. India has an image of exaggerating whatever it makes. let's not do that here.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.161.216.208 (talk) 16:37, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

already found better reliable source and made changes.bye Nicky mathew (talk) 16:42, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

---

Hah...got up this morning and saw so many changes happened overnight. Gave me a comic feeling and a giggle :)

Just to clear the confusion. I'd read a while back that Vikrant (10,000 sq m) will have more deck space than INS Vikramaditya (9,000 something), which is a modified and rebuilt carrier. The thing with Vikramaditya was that they couldn't move the island structure. It was permanent. Instead they had to improvise and shift certain features/duties like refuelling to the smaller side of the island, most probably to clear deck clutter.

Whereas Vikrant as a fresh design, wouldn't need the same hull structure as Vikramaditya and compartment sizes can be modified to make space for aircraft in the hangar. You could not do that on Vikramaditya as Kiev class carriers were originally double decked and this might have had an impact on spacing below the deck. I don't know for sure how that translated into design as I never worked on it. But from an outsider's viewpoint, you would've needed something to keep 2 decks from crumpling.

Moreover, Vikrant will have more compact machinery and instruments along with a smaller island structure. So in the end, it does make sense to assume that there will be 30 fixed wing and 10 choppers. But for now, you've done the right thing. Let's wait for it to be commissioned.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham Charity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NHS. 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) 10:39, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why do I need consensus for righting the factually incorrect? Did India fight alone in that war?--118.148.129.141 (talk) 11:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've noticed DGG commented a while ago regarding A7 and G11 use, but just as a second reminder: A7 is only for articles within its very narrow scope. Educational institutions such as the Global Development Institute do not apply. Additionally, G11 is only intended for use when an article is unambigiously and nearly exclusively promotional (at which point the article would need a rewrite anyway). Remember that speedy deletion, especially hasty or incorrect speedy deletion, can discourage newcomers, so it's important to use them only in required cases. Appable (talk) 16:59, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Appable: Hello Appable, The only reason used A7 is because the article Global development institute now now moved to Global Development Institute was previously speedy deleted by an admin for A7 and G11 violation. Global Development Institute is not a obvious case like school or a collage, yes technically it is a part of MOU so you are right. G11 on the other hand is something that I disagree with u.anyway page is now in AFD as you asked and i have no personal interest in this page so whatever the outcome maybe I will not have any issue with you, just wanted put it out there.I work with newcomers regularly and i help and support them like I helped User talk:Jessielaurenza in Nisha Pahuja. Most of the time I myself add information, repair, find sources and work with creators to improve the articles they started if I saw clear sign of notability. Global Development Institute is created by GDI UoM (Global Development Institute University of Manchester) so clearly trying promote the page. see Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia this is a major issue facing wikipedia. when we see such clear case of col there is nothing much we can do about it helping the editor to be better coz the only reason that editor is here to promote the page. Nice meeting you Appable Bye :) Nicky mathew (talk) 04:36, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky mathew,

I have updated with more citations to Clayton Chitty.

Emoquinn76

I wanted to contest the speedy deletion nomination. Mining is a very huge part in enhancing most African Countries GDP and as such, publications that cover what goes on in the Mining industry across the continent are vital in creating awareness. The Publication is listed online and is tracked by independent news monitoring agencies in south Africa for its consistency which can be verifiable by doing an online search. The Publisher can also be found online and can be contacted to get verification of the information posted for authenticity.

Chris CaplingChris.capling (talk) 06:38, 6 April 2016 (UTC) http://www.targetmedia.co.za/media/print/9807/africa-mining-tribune http://www.magzter.com/ZA/Elite-Publishing-(Pty)-Ltd/Africa-Mining-Tribune/Business/[reply]

Again came to notice that you're removing sourced content. Source http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/indias-undersea-deterrent/ Content "The Arihant class boats themselves will be followed by a new generation SSBN that will be appreciably larger and will be propelled by either a single unit of a much more powerful reactor or two units of a later version of the existing Arihant class reactor. The first of these new generation SSBNs is designated S-5 and will be launched by the mid-2020s. Incidentally, these boats will be built in parallel with the six new nuclear attack submarines (SSNs) that were given cabinet approval last year.

The S-5 and its successors will also be armed with a new three-stage SLBM that will be able to carry a 2 ton payload consisting of up to four MIRVs out to a distance of more than 6000 km. This “heavy” SLBM, likely called K-6, with a length of 12 meters or so, is meant for the 12-16 launch tubes that will feature on the S-5, enabling it to carry out deterrence patrols from the Southern Indian Ocean."

Now you'll put all these information back in there. Or else you'll be reported for vandalism.Deltadive (talk) 15:31, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Deltadive: Hello Deltalive and welcome back. That was a mistake from my part as did not see the reference from The Diplomat and only saw new indian express reference and not intentional. I will be adding back removed content and also will be making some more addition based on given source. next time if possible kindly use the edit summary section to give a short description of what you have done example in this case you can say- added more content based on given reference from The depolmat. Also see Wikipedia:Vandalism and finally please stop threatening people a simple explanation is more than sufficient.Bye Nicky mathew (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicky mathew,

I do not see how it is necessary to state that the writer of this article 'appears to have a close connection to the subject'; as the article is neutrally composed, why does this matter.

I also do not see why the article needs additional citations for 'verification'; all statements that need to be verified have been. Orlagh Davies (talk) 09:31, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Nicky,

Hope you're doing alright.

You should see this and the second part of it as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_QFvoaq9RI

Regards,

Anuj Narula

@Anuj Narula- Welcome to Wikipedia. I have seen this media documentary sometime in the beginning 2014 and yes both part 1 and 2. Reffing is word used by most of the media sources and that is technically correct. no one said that ins vikramaditya did not cost 2.3 billion, all it was an extensive reffing process that's all and it took roughly 14 to 17 years to complete after including negations and sea trials. Reffing process usually involves modifying, improving, rebuilding and adding new capabilities on an existing platform so there is no point in telling modifying and rebuilding as reffing encompasses all that. Thank you and Good Bye.Nicky mathew (talk) 07:26, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicky - With all politeness, kindly pardon my insistence young man, but re-building is "not" a part of refitting. A standard shipyard cannot rebuild an existing ship, without very major hassles and burnout. Refitting instead is very common these days in most yards. Refitting spans:

a) Modification of weapon stations and in certain cases torpedo tubes and sonars.

b) Replacement of old malfunctioning equipment with repaired equipment, and if a better, more technically advanced version of the same is available, then that would be installed instead, subject to the ability of the crew to operate it.

c) Bringing back to life damaged sections that interfere with the standard operating procedure of the ship and obstruct the execution of the captain's orders. An example of this would be inner plating in the ship's keel and rudder area. It has to be checked, since the rudder oscillates between port and starboard often, extensive use of which in a rigorous manner can result in cracks that are very dangerous. As a ship gets old, this section must be restored to it's original condition, else the ship will develop a weakness that can sink it despite being very stable in design otherwise. And it's generally not easy for the crew to detect while engaged in battle or exercise.

d) Changing of engine tubes, meters and piping, as well as modifying the stokehold to work at higher capacities. This is not done often but if a certain deployment demands greater speed and risks overheating the already heated engine, then it would be done as part of an extensive refit process for a conventional carrier. CVN carriers however do not need this type of refit. They need a method by which their reactor can cross safety limits and provide the requisite speed without risking the ship and crew of a nuclear hazard.

e) Upgradation of computers, radar sections, motors, and installation of new software to work with the new machines. The software part, in fact, is quite challenging and very difficult to perfect. There are not many yards that will have the contractors with expertise and experience needed to perform software upgrades for a carrier, or even a frigate for that matter.

f) Addition of fresh hydraulic pumps and pressure-based components to keep the ship's hydraulic circuit active or improving it.

g) Refurbishment and galvanization of the outer hull from the side that is exposed to the sea. This is very common. It is done to combat corrosion.

h) Part repairs of the deck and of the hull-structure in places that have a high weight load and are responsible for balancing the beam. This is very difficult and not always possible. But it would be done for very old ships. It does involve some amount of replacement construction, but only in sparse amounts. Not more than 4% of the ship would actually end up being touched in this process, if the yard keeps safety in mind.

All of the above I have illustrated to explain what refitting involves on ground. If you read carefully, you will notice that none of these things actually extend the service life of a ship more than 5 years, or 8 years probably if all of it is done properly. You do not disturb the compartment design of the ship to perform such a refit either. Most of the cabling can remain intact. The hull of the ship again, does not change shape and bouyancy.

To make that kind of extreme modification, you will need to break down a lot of the ship and re-build it in the true sense. And it all has to be done without damaging the hull.

Hence, the huge amount of time and huge cost overrun that was needed to complete the Work on R33 - INS Vikramaditya. More than a 1000 compartments were re-made. Over 2300 kilometres of cabling was re-done. And if you closely examine the hull of the Baku and INS Vikramaditya, you will start to notice the difference. If you have the good fortune of being able to proceed into the carrier, you will see even more of a difference. In the end, it has all come to fruition and we now have a carrier that can go for at least 3 decades since commission and if maintained well, a bit more. It is not just a 5 or 8 year extension.

So there you have it - "modify and refit" vs "modify and rebuild".

Regards,

Anuj

@Anuj Narula- Ok Anuj now you are just listing everything you heard and know about INS Vikramaditya. If you want to make changes from refitting to modifying and rebuilding then you need reliable references using those exact words. Take the matter to the talk page of the concerned subject page with reliable references and gain consensus. also always sign your post by using four tides like this (~~~~) in the end of every comment or let the automatic bot do it for you. please do not remove the sign and date added by the bot.Nicky mathew (talk) 12:03, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicky: No, I am not giving you everything I have "heard" of the carrier. I don't need to "hear" about it to know it. Indeed if I gave you everything that I have seemingly "heard" of it, you will be reading a book young man, not a message. I am not a wikipedia writer, so kindly excuse me the intricacies associated with bots and signatures. As for sources, most sources in the Indian media and on the web are at best unprofessional. They copy from each other and believe it or not, a lot of them quote news by reading encyclopaedias like this one. I have seen it time and again with news on the Tejas aircraft, both in writing and on the television. Of course, that is not to say every source is horrible like that. But aside from this, naval magazines do serve as decent sources. I am yet to find an issue however, that goes into the complete re-construction process. It is understandable to me why this has not been opened up by the navy, for there would be too much to discuss and very little to render de-classified. In the end, the pennant number of the carrier is "R33". That is because it was reborn after being extensively built again. If this was not the case and it was only going to be extensively refit before handing over, the pennant number would not have been "R33". There is a special meaning to that number. Beyond this, I will not argue or disclose details. Whether to accept what I say or not is a decision left to you and to the staff and writers at your website.

Regards,

Anuj

Can you pls help me, why i am not getting "edit source' for editing the wiki page. i am only getting "edit". thank youIravikorthanan (talk) 07:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Iravikorthanan: Hello Iravikorthanan, Please try contacting New contributors' help chat as it is a technical issue.Nicky mathew (talk) 08:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nicky mathew,

what exactly WAML and AutomationML have in common except being markup languages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Build-failure (talk • contribs) 20:05, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

could you please explain why you tagged Hilary Brown for deletion in 2015? As I noted on Liz's talk page, when I requested userification, User:Geo Swan/Hilary Brown]] the New York Times explicitly named her as one of the 15 most notable female war correspondents.

The other 14 all have articles -- Brown is the only red-link -- thanks to you.

Am I missing something? Perhaps you could explain why you tagged it for deletion, in the first place? Geo Swan (talk) 06:07, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay, I think I have waited a reasonable period of time for your explanation. Since I am seeing none I ma putting the article back in article space. Geo Swan (talk) 02:51, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Hi,

I would appreciate it if you could give your input regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_naval_ship_classes_in_service#Split_this_article_into_multiple_articles Thanks in advance Dragnadh (talk) 21:12, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]