User talk:Logical1004/Archives/2014

Delhi election

Iis there a source for this0? As you didn't explain it when changing.(Lihaas (talk) 04:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)).

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kabir Kala Manch concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kabir Kala Manch, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

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

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

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

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 21:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Declined speedy

I declined the speedy on Opinion polling for the Indian general election, 2014 for two reasons: first, it is different enough from the main page for the election that it could warrant a separate entry and second, this is more something that should be discussed at an AfD than a speedy. There is precedent for articles about opinion polls for specific elections and because there is controversy over the polling, there might be enough notability to warrant a separate one for this election. However that said, I am concerned about the way the article is written since it comes across as a news report more than a neutral piece.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:41, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Categories in Indian election articles

Hi, We use Category:Elections in India by year and Category:Elections in India by state only in Category namespaces. See WP:OVERCAT, WP:SUBCAT. Please don't add these categories in Article namespaces. Thanks. --Gfosankar (talk) 08:25, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Gfosankar. I will remember that. Logical1004 (talk) 13:23, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Goa Legislative Assembly

Hello Logical1004, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Goa Legislative Assembly, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: It's fine as a re-direct page. The Legislative Assembly of Goa calls itself that - see http://goaassembly.gov.in/. I don't understand why you are asking for it to be deleted. . You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 10:46, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly

Hello Logical1004, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Again, this is a good WP:REDIRECT. Again, the Assembly refers to itself as "Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly" - see: http://arunachalassembly.gov.in/. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 11:39, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

RE: Opinion polling for the Indian general election, 2014

Sory took so long to reply. BUt I agree with you totally on merging it (leave a hidden note) and so does the other person who replied on my talk page.(Lihaas (talk) 13:50, 10 March 2014 (UTC)).

Talkback

Namaste, Logical1004. You have got at least one new message at the Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Please continue the discussion there!
Message added by RRD13 (talk) 16:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time.

T. Siddique Kozhikode listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect T. Siddique Kozhikode. Since you had some involvement with the T. Siddique Kozhikode redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Logical1004 (talk) 12:53, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For creating and regularly updating List of United Progressive Alliance candidates in the Indian general election, 2014. Skr15081997 (talk) 08:11, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	For List of United Progressive Alliance candidates in the Indian general election, 2014, Karan Kamath (talk) 13:51, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

UPA Candidates for Indian General Election, 2014

I appreciate creation of the page, List of United Progressive Alliance candidates in the Indian general election, 2014. If you are interested, Indian National Congress organised primary elections in some contituencies, a separate page is needed to show the results of these primaries. The results are uploaded on the Congress website, if you need references. I will be happy to help you.
Thanks,
Karan Kamath (talk · contribs)

Karan Kamath (talk · contribs) Give me the references and I will try to do that. Also I am busy these days, I need help in updating regularly List of United Progressive Alliance candidates in the Indian general election, 2014 and the page you are asking. So can you help in putting the candidates names as the lists are coming out? Logical1004 (talk) 10:37, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I will help you. References: [1] Karan Kamath (talk · contribs)

Talk:Indian general election, 2014

Okay, so from what edits you've shown us on User talk:BrownHairedGirl#Help Needed, I've only noticed some slight edit warring taken place a week back and related heavy talk page discussions--this is all pretty normal for such a page. I've checked the recent history and there isn't any on-going conflict. So the page is PC protected, there isn't any current edit wars...what's exactly the problem then now...isn't everything fine? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:40, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Ugog Nizdast. Last edit was reverted on 21st March. Right now, there is no on-going edit reverts. The user has replied on the talk page and now everything has been sorted. Thanks. Logical1004 (talk) 18:29, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

2014 elections in India

I noticed you reverted my last edit. For your info I did not commit vanadalism but simply removed a pair of empty ref tags which you may easily confirm for yourself by looking at the history. The empty ref tags were causing a cite error.  Jodosma  10:43, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. I reverted the edit before you. No jodosma, you haven't done any vandalism. Sorry again for this confusion. Logical1004 (talk) 10:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.  Jodosma  10:52, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

No probs with this edhit, can you just do it in the consistent format as that for the NDA (itll also take slightly less kilobytes). Thx. and Kudos.(Lihaas (talk) 04:27, 17 April 2014 (UTC)).

do you have sources?Lihaas (talk) 23:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Lihaas, I will provide the sources. In Kerala, INC is already under the UDF, and in this Lok Sabha election, they are contesting as UDF. Logical1004 (talk) 08:28, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Lihaas, I am very much aware of WP:A. But you should not remove each and every comment that are un-sourced. Just cross-check first what should be removed and what shouldn't. If you feel some particular thing need citation, so place citation needed template instead. It take a great effort in each and every time to look where the particular edit was reverted by looking in the history of the page. So please be careful in future before reverting each and every edit. Logical1004 (talk) 10:22, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Good point, apologies. And udosLihaas (talk) 17:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Regarding your suggestion to remove Infobox in Indian General Elections 2014

Thanks for your participation in the Infobox discussion. However, it would be a great help if you could give some reasons behind your suggestion --Wikishagnik (talk) 13:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikishagnik replied there. Logical1004 (talk) 07:12, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Category:Legislative Assembly elections in India

Category:Legislative Assembly elections in India, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shyamsunder (talk) 11:54, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Election article titles

Hello Logical1004. The year in election article titles refers only to the year in which voting took place. As as result, I will be moving all the state election articles back to the 1952 titles. If you could help clear this up, it would be appreciated - thanks! Number 57 10:42, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Number, In all official records, these elections have been mentioned as 1951-52 elections, so to avoid confusion, the titles have been named as per official records. Logical1004 (talk) 10:45, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Official records are irrelevant - our naming criteria is what matters. Number 57 10:46, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok, no probs then. Logical1004 (talk) 10:49, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Could you also please not add "1951-52" to the articles like you did here. It makes a mess of the sentence, and is confusing to readers. Thanks, Number 57 11:32, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

At least somewhere you have to mention that? If not, then undo all the changes. I am not adding that again. I think, it should be mentioned. Please clarify. Logical1004 (talk) 11:35, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

If you want to mention it, you could add something like "as part of the 1951–52 elections in India." at the end of the first sentence. Number 57 11:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. Logical1004 (talk) 11:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews

Hello Logical1004/Archives. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Talk:List of political parties in India/Archive 1#Relevance of registered unrecognised parties list

I've raised two issues over there and since you've contributed to that article before, I would appreciate you helping me clean up that page. Looking forward to see you there, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:00, 8 December 2014 (UTC)