Pratikus

My recommended sources for specific areas

NEWS

• The Washington Post : For USA and Global topics
• Huffington Post : USA
• CNN : USA
• Sina: Domestic news of PRC China
• Global Times : PRC China's viewpoint on global issues
• Der Spiegel International: High calibre editorials on global events
• Economic Times : Domestic news of India
• Le Monde : Domestic news of France
• CBC : Domestic news of Canada
• RT: Russian viewpoint on global events

Data and Statistics

• Opensecrets.org : US Campaign Finance data
• MIT's OEC database : Macroeconomics
• Stockholm International Peace Research Institute : Weapon sales

Expert opinion that can be cited

• Brookings Institute : Geo-politics
• Mckinsey Quarterly : Economic trends

My Hall of Fame

A shout-out to those special editors that I think make Wikipedia great!

• Tom

Constructive Critics

A shout-out to those editors that suggested constructive improvements to my edits!

Send me a message here ⬎

BOLD, revert, discuss cycle

On List of countries with overseas military bases ensure that you follow Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. More than three reverts will be considered edit warring and can constitute a block in editing privileges. Achive consensus on the discussion you started before continuing with your edits. Garuda28 (talk) 20:05, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Garuda28. The same applies to you.

Further disruptive editing will result in notification to administrators. And it does - only if I am the one who made the bold edit. I reverted. The onus is now to discus, not for you to continue reverting. Garuda28 (talk) 20:16, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Garuda28...once again the same applies to you buddy.

Gazoth I did no such thing. This is not my talk page.

March 2018

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Assumption Island. Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —Gazoth (talk) 21:07, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Gazoth I shall exercise control of my talk page. Especially so because, I have noticed that a passe of disruptive editors including Adamgerber80, Garuda28 (there may be more in the woodwork) collective engage in broadcasting narratives as opposed to factual content. Behavior like this undermines the open nature of Wikipedia. Feel free to raise a formal dispute with Wikipedia admins. I would love for them to take a notice of the edits that your group is making...they are so absurd. If you would like your content to stay on my talk page, please post it under this section 'Badge of Honor' -Pratikus (talk) 21:25, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

@Pratikus: While you are free to remove content from you own talk page, you may not do so on article talk pages. It is also unacceptable to edit comments by other editors even in your own talk page. Please read the talk page guidelines carefully. Also, please assume good faith on the part of other editors. Everyone is here to improve Wikipedia. It is best if you follow Wikipedia etiquette and avoid accusing other editors. —Gazoth (talk) 22:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

@Gazoth: Appreciate your comments. Even if there was no such Wikipedia guideline, I would assume good faith on behalf of others by default. That should not be mistaken to mean that even after being presented with concrete evidence of mischievous edits, one should ignore them and continue to assume good faith. That would be unwise. If you care to, please review my section on misleading content on Talk:Assumption Island. It describes how the edits made there were blatantly malicious. So logically, i did change my opinion about some of these editors. As far as the undo on the Islands talk page is concerned, I wasn't even aware of it until you pointed it out. I have been trying to preserve content from vandalism from those undo-ing it without discussion and may have inadvertently made that edit on the talk page instead.

Gazoth your comments have been relocated to the appropriate 'Badge of Honor' section. In future, please post your thoughts under this section--Pratikus (talk) 21:58, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: IAudited (June 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ToBeFree was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:IAudited and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:IAudited, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:16, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Pratikus! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:16, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

WP:POLEMIC

I have removed the "Badge of honor" section from this talk page per WP:POLEMIC. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:19, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Draft:IAudited concern

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

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

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

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

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:30, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:IAudited

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

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Bkissin (talk) 14:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)