User talk:Raghuvansh r

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for asking for help. Please feel free to ask anytime. :)

As for the Kuruksastra article, the main problem is that it cites no sources for its content, which is what the {{unreferenced}} template indicates. It is placed there not as a personal attack, but both so that readers are aware of the lack of source citations and so that others who may know of sources or have found them know the article needs them. Please note that we should not write articles solely from our knowledge of the subject but should cite reliable secondary sources such as newspaper articles, Web reviews not authored or influenced by those connected with the subject, and the like. You may find the guidelines in WP:RS and WP:V helpful. If you need any help in finding sources, evaluating whether they're reliable, or properly putting the code to cite them in the article, please don't hesitate to ask. Seraphimblade 08:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daksh[edit]

Well one of the main problems with it is its highly speculative nature; it seems that this is a planned event and as such has nothing verifiable written about it. It is not only that it is unsourced - a problem with many articles - but it seems 'unsourceable'. If nothing else, then, I would advise you to repost the article as and when it it becomes sourceable.

The reason I used the short-hand 'advert' was simply because that without soruces and without any context - what is a technical festival, why is this one notable etc - then it becomes an advert for the event.

My advise for you would be that this article could be reposted if:

More context was given about what a technical festival is and why this one is notable
A website has been developed for it, so that the information is verifiable
It includes reference to the writings of someone about the festival - to show that this is not just being included for self promotion

As for other pages on technical festivals - well I'd have to see them first to comment on their individual circumstances. Could you provide some links for me? As a general rule, though, I'd point out that admins just delete stuff that other users have tagged as inappropriate - so if something is on Wikipedia, that doesn't necessairily mean it would survive a vote for deletion. --Robdurbar 12:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well thanks for that. I must admit I still believe those articles to be very 'borderline' as to whether they should be included on Wikipedia. That aside for the moment, then, I think an improved and sourced version of Daksh explaining what a technical festival is would probably be just about OK (though I'm not promising anything!).

By the way, you might consider creating a page at Technical festival? If these are an importnat part of Unviersity life in India, they probably deserve and article! Robdurbar 12:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes[edit]

I took it away for two reasons.

You put an example image, which shouldn't be there.
You were on the wrong page, here is the link. [[1]]

If I am correct, you wanted a userbox to be found or made for you. The link above has users who would be glad to make one for you. Ok? Thanks!-BlueAmethyst .:*:. (talk) 23:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I did not undo your edit again, so you can copy and paste your userbox idea again on the other page.-BlueAmethyst .:*:. (talk) 23:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Dakshlogo.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Dakshlogo.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Kuruk08logo.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Kuruk08logo.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}}

Grand Cross of the German Eagle[edit]

I put an unreferenced template on the above article quite a while ago, but it hasn't been fixed (or seen any sort of action) since. Obviously the article can't be deleted straight away, so what is the next logical step, since no sources have been put forward by the article editors? While on the subject, you may also want to take a look at this where I just put a nofootnotes template not very long ago _(talk)raghuvansh^(contribs) 22:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you would want this article deleted - it could do with referencing and a quick copyedit, but is otherwise notable enough. You're right that Wikipedia articles are supposed to have references for all major points, but where an article is notable and you aren't able to reference it yourself, it is usually better to add a reference template (as you did here) rather than delete the page entirely. Of course this doesn't apply to offensive, extraordinary or libellous claims, especially in biographies of living persons.

I've added a couple of references to the article myself. There should be plenty more in military history texts and online, if you have an interest in hunting around for more. Euryalus (talk) 22:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to delete it! I said it can't be deleted just because there are no references! Obviously because it is a known award - I knew of its existence before I came across Wikipedia. Just that the fact that there are no references for a subject like that was a little odd. As editors, we could go looking for sources ourselves and find some for most of the important information. But there's a bit of a problem with finding references for someone else's work - it's not so easy for someone to go looking for a reference for minor details in an article like that. So do we delete possibly true details that aren't referenced? Or do we leave them there till someone references them, no matter how long it takes?_(talk)raghuvansh^(contribs) 05:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a hard question. The theory - Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source. Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors may object if you remove material without giving them sufficient time to provide references.

Fine, but what does "sufficient time" mean? In my view its relative to the likelihood the material is contentious, makes unlikely claims or is about an obscure or poorly documented topic. A contentious or unlikely claim about a mainstream subject should be removed very quickly if no sources are provided - it can always be restored when the sources are found. A minor detail about an obscure issue can be tagged as unreferenced and left for months while waiting for someone to hunt down that elusive source. And regrettably, Wikipedia being the big place it is many unsourced claims effectively survive forever.

Of course, this is just my view. Other editors are much stricter, and remove unsourced content within a few days. If a removal involves a substantial body of text its usually worth proposing it on the article talk page for a week or so, then going ahead if consensus agrees or no one complains.

One particular thing does concern me about the Order of the German Eagle article, and that is the unsourced list of recipients. While none are alive (so WP:BLP doesn't apply), the suggestion these people received a major Nazi award is a damaging claim. Every name on the list should be sourced, either singly or by reference to a reliable list. If these sources cannot be found there would be a good argument for at least pruning the section. But once again, this is just my opinion and I'd be interested in your view as well. Euryalus (talk) 11:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asking the other editors would be a great idea - they must have got the material from somewhere, so it shouldn't be that hard for them point out where. If they don't want to do the formatting perhaps just noting the source on the article talk page and you or I can look after adding the actual citation. Euryalus (talk) 22:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citation request: you are mistaken. I added no recipients to this article. I simply disambiguated a link. Rklawton (talk) 17:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

merge[edit]

I commented on the talk page for the article on the universityDGG (talk) 01:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:Dakshlogo.JPG)[edit]

⚠

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Zoo Fari 00:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello from one Clemson grad to another[edit]

Hello from one Clemson grad to another in the English Wikipedia. Chris (talk) 04:13, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non Free Files in your User Space[edit]

Hey there Raghuvansh r, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some files that I found on User:Raghuvansh r. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

See a log of files removed today here.

Shut off the bot here.

Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kuruk08logo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kuruk08logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:21, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia meetup Chennai[edit]

Hi, I guess you are living at Chennai and hence posting this message. We are planning to organise Chennai wikimeetup coming Nov 14. We need some help in organising it. Please ping me back if you are interested to help us out. Thanks. Srikanth (Logic) 04:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Safri duo origins.jpg[edit]

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:51, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sastra logo.png[edit]

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]