User talk:RegentsPark/Archive 36

Archive 30

←

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

→

Archive 40

Claude Monet - Protection

Hi! This may be a blast from the past, but, back in 2010, you placed the article on Claude Monet under indefinite protection. 11 years later, I don't really know if it is deserving of that status and--as seen today--could potentially hold back those helpful MEs that the site relies upon. So this is just a simple request for demotion. Thanks, anyway. DMT biscuit (talk) 21:42, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done--RegentsPark (comment) 21:45, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Why is Indian Rajput not reliable ?

I need an explanation on why Indian Rajputs is not a reliable website ? Which policy of Wikipedia does it breach ? It is used by numerous pages and no administrator has removed it. Therefore, if you can’t provide a proper explanation then I will have to file a complaint against you for continuously removing sources from one particular page as per your own wishes. RudolphHitz (talk) 13:50, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

(moved to Talk:Kingdom of Jeypore. Apparently you're not getting/seeing your pings!)--RegentsPark (comment) 21:44, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Tipu Sultan Dispute Resolution

Hey there! I saw you undid my edit on Tipu Sultan Page. My edits were related to revisionist narrative (which I removed). Though those revisionist part in the page had citations those hold no primary source merit and are very well known in academia as revisionism and above all that part which I removed was contradicting remain parts of the section. Please reinstate edit edit. Thanks GeekShowHistory (talk) 15:32, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@GeekShowHistory: I'm not sure I totally understand what you are saying but could you please use Talk:Tipu Sultan to explain why the sources are "revisionist" and not WP:RS? Get consensus for the removal and you should have no problem. Best. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:37, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

List of Saini people

Hello, RegentsPark. List of Saini people needs some sort of protection. Inexperienced editors are introducing many BLP violations. Today I have removed a large number of unsourced claims as well as BLP violations. And it still contains many such entries. - NitinMlk (talk) 23:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I've extended confirmed protected it. If a new editor wants to add a name, they can use the talk page.--RegentsPark (comment) 23:28, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

NitinMlk (talk) 23:32, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Constant Vandalism in Harekrushna Mahtab Page

Hi, There is constant Vandalism going on by an user named Anand Singh Deo in Harekrushna Mahtab Page. The user is pushing Rajput POV in his every edit. He violated 3 revert as well. Can you please take some action ? Thank you Peacepks (talk) 06:57, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Sikh Regiment

Hello, RegentsPark. The Sikh Regiment article has been continuously disrupted by socks as well as disruptive editors. The semi-protection never works when socks of Punjabier starts targeting any article. So it needs higher protection. I am requesting this here as you have blocked a few socks on that page and may have noticed all the ongoing disruption. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 20:13, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protected. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:40, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:55, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Request for protecting the article on Debnath

Hi RegentsPark, can you please check this article. It's been a subject of vandalism for a long time, and a particular user is actively doing the same now. Please help! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 07:04, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ekdalian: I've dropped a note on the user's talk page and added the article to my watchlist. Let's see. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:03, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Regards.Ekdalian (talk) 15:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Please delete Nirṛti (god)

This article was created as a redirect to Nirṛti (Dikpala) by me minutes ago. Now I want to move the target page there as it is a more appropriate name. Please help .245CMR.•^👥📜 15:57, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done--RegentsPark (comment) 15:58, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much..245CMR.•^👥📜 16:01, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Thiyyar history

Hi your recent redirect of Thiyyar history, it is a history page of Thiyyar caste and malayalam (language of Kerala, where the caste is from) wikipedia already exits for years :

https://ml.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B4%A4%E0%B5%80%E0%B4%AF%E0%B5%BC

Can you please reconsider your decision? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.39.78.237 (talk) 15:35, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi. The history is included in the article Ezhava. Feel free to edit that article. --RegentsPark (comment) 19:50, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

But it is a mixed up history of both Thiyyar and Ezhava. Thiyyar in Malabar have a different history. If you can translates the malayalam wikipedia you can see. Malayalam Wikipedia from kerala, where the caste is from exist for years. So if it is any pov fork, malayalam wikipedia would not even exist for years as people from kerala know better about thiyyar and Ezhava. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.39.78.237 (talk) 01:42, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

https://bcdd.kerala.gov.in/reservation/educational-reservation/

Please see this Kerala state government reservation criteria. They have added ezhava, thiyya and billava in same category for reservation, but that doesn't mean they all are one. Billava have their own wikipedia see:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billava#:~:text=The%20Billava%2C%20Billoru%2C%20Biruveru%20people,reform%20movement%20to%20upgrade%20themselves.

It is not redirected to ezhava.

File:Malayala Manorama news report on Kerala state government's order to record 'Thiyya community' as such and not a subcaste of Ezhava.jpg

Malayala Manorama news report on Kerala state government's order to record 'Thiyya community' as such and not a subcaste of Ezhava

File:Kerala state government's order to record thiyya community as such and not as a sub caste of Ezhava.jpg

Kerala state government's order to record thiyya community as such and not as a sub caste of Ezhava

Link to order kerala government's order from their official site : https://education.kerala.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/govt.order_3072020.pdf

1.39.78.237 (talk)

Kerala state government has issued an order to record thiyya as thiyya and not as a part of ezhava nor its subcaste. In india converting or portraying one caste as another is a criminal offense.

Malayalam Wikipedia from kerala, for years record thiyya as thiyya and Ezhava as ezhava in separate pages.

I request you to consider your decision in redirecting Thiyyar history page to Ezhava

Thank you.

Hi. Pinging @Sitush:. --RegentsPark (comment) 11:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

It should not happen. There is a longstanding consensus that academic sources, and many others, treat Ezhava and Thiyya as synonyms. Furthermore, the government lists are known to be ambiguous, politically-based and generally unreliable. This discussion has been had many times over the years, across numerous pages. Every attempt to promote Thiyyas as a separate, distinct ethnic group etc has failed even when loads of angry people claiming to be Thiyya have tried to organise a concerted attack on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines via Orkut, Facebook groups and so on. - Sitush (talk) 12:20, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

... for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:56, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Why one sided !!?

I want to know why many Wikipedia pages have only one sided view!!? SakiraTaqila (talk) 17:48, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

@SakiraTaqila: If you think a page has only one sided views, you should use the talk page to explain why you think so. Whatever you do, please do read WP:V and WP:RS first because Wikipedia is a reliably sourced encyclopedia. Material without reliable sources will be deleted. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:50, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Ok. Are you the office bearer of Wikipedia? SakiraTaqila (talk) 17:54, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

And what are the parameters of being reliable, because I see some citation are vague but still protected by Wiki staff SakiraTaqila (talk) 17:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

@SakiraTaqila: I am not an office bearer of Wikipedia (and office bearers have little control over content). Wikipedia is a community built encyclopedia but everyone must follow the policies and guidelines that the community has developed. If an edit is not in accordance with those policies and guidelines, any editor can remove it. You should go through these policies and guidelines if you plan on continuing to edit. If you need help, ask at the tea house. Aabout sourcing, generally sources that are recognized news source (e.g., The New York Times, The Hindu) are reliable as also are peer reviewed academic journals. When in doubt, leave a note on the article talk page or ask at the reliable sources noticeboard. --RegentsPark (comment) 18:15, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I've dropped a welcome note on your talk page. The links may be helpful. Best wishes. --RegentsPark (comment) 18:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Have a look at this

Please have a look at the Talk:Ezhava page, irrational allegations are going on. I believe this is in response to the recent article redirect (Thiyyar History to Ezhava). Obviously, there are some ongoing Thiyya PR works on numerous articles and is handled by anonyms and probable sock farms [1] [2] [3],[4], [5]. Also, these might be a part of their strategy to get back their Thiyya page by projecting both as incongruous to one another. R.C^{Outlander07@talk} 05:50, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@Outlander07: I can see that this is becoming problematic. I've dropped notifications on the two registered editors - Worldofknowledge121 and Redbutterfly0987. You might want to investigate if they are socks of Kambliyil (@Ponyo:).--RegentsPark (comment) 14:05, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

It seems they are unrelated to User:Kambliyil as the topic is not one of his edit interests. For me, these guys are a part of a campaign against the ethnic Thiyya vandals who want supremacy over Ezhavas and into caste promotion on Wikipedia articles. As I said above it would also be the plan of Thiyya POV sock farms to get back their redirected page by splitting the Ezhava article. Sitush can help here. R.C^{Outlander07@talk} 14:43, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Hmm. I thought Kambliyil had created thiyyar history but I was wrong. 365Arithamatical study created that. They've been warned anyway, so let's see what happens. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Note

He is surely trolling. and a prostitute engaging in sexual work such as penis vagina insertion - I missed this. WTAF. TrangaBellam (talk) 20:24, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I notice that @SpacemanSpiff: commented on SumeetJi's talk page. Hopefully, this is now under control.--RegentsPark (comment) 22:35, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

INDICSCRIPTS and Urdu

Hi, I recently removed some Bengali and Urdu text from the article Jama Masjid, Nerul with WP:INDICSCRIPTS as justification. However a user added back the Urdu text saying that it did not count as an Indic script. To my understanding the policy applies to Urdu as well (you once reverted my edit of adding Urdu text to Charminar's lead with this justification), but I'm unable to find an explicit policy on Indic languages that use non-Indic scripts. Hoping for some guidance on this if possible! Thanks. Gowhk8 (talk) 19:06, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gowhk8:. I've clarified the meaning of Indic scripts at WP:INDICSCRIPTS and reverted the TheAafi's addition of the urdu script. Best. --RegentsPark (comment) 20:10, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Request

Hi RegentsPark.. you have recently informed the user Arthur1277 about the discretionary sanctions. Recently many socks have come up in the article on Baidya, and all of them have been blocked as the sock of User:Banglawikit / User:Bengaliwikipro. Arthur1277 has been editing Talk:Baidya and related articles; his edits clearly indicate he is not a new user, rather a sock of Banglawikit/Bengaliwikipro. I would like to request you to please get the same checked, and take necessary action. Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 10:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

You're right. About as obvious as they come. I've blocked them. You might want to start an SPI next time, it will be easier to catch future socks. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much, RegentsPark. Ekdalian (talk) 15:44, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Thanks! 14 years - I guess I'm in for the long haul!--RegentsPark (comment) 14:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Urgent action needed

Hi, Regentspark.. Recently I have come across a different type of edit on "Ramachandra Deva I" wiki page. The creator of the article added unnecessary sources to confuse editors and to push his POV. The claims made in the Personal life/Early life section actually have no mention in any of the Sources. I have corrected the claims as per the sources but there are chances that my edits will be reverted. Hope you will check the references and Claims as it will help to deal with such edits in future. Thank you Peacepks (talk) 10:23, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Caste warrior

Hi RegentsPark, you have recently warned user ‎Dr.SunBD for his edits on Talk:Baidya. Please have a look at his edits (which I have reverted), articles on Vaidya‎, Sena dynasty, Maulika Kayastha. All are POV edits meant for the glorification of his own caste; he has been doing this for quite some time now in spite of several warnings. Would request you to take necessary action. Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 13:11, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ekdalian: I'm not sure what I can do here. The editor is sourcing their content so you'll probably need to show either that the sources are not reliable or that the statements or undue. @SpacemenSpiff: who might have a better idea.--RegentsPark (comment) 16:56, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: (better!)--RegentsPark (comment) 17:20, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 18:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Attacks

Can you take a look at User_talk:TrangaBellam#Mr.? Thanks. TrangaBellam (talk) 11:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

What does this mean? The talk-page reads like a forum. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:06, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Blocked the first editor and warned the second. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:59, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @RegentsPark: for your advice. I would surely take care of your advice. Abhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 05:46, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Change the page name

From Nishtha to Nistha. Nishtha Chakraborty . Wikifulness (talk) 17:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done --RegentsPark (comment) 18:42, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Wikifulness (talk) 01:58, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Disruptive editing in Baidya page

Hello RegentsPark.I am sorry to bother you.An user named Advaita2222 is active in edit warring in the Baidya page.I have requested him to initiate discussion in the talk page.But, He is repeatedly reverting the last consensus version which was approved by one of the Senior editors Ekdalian.I have warned him.I have informed this to Ravensfire , who is a pending edit reviewer,But come to You also as You are an admin.Can You please help to handle this.Thanks.RegardsAbhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 16:25, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@Abhishek Sengupta 24: Looks like LukeEmily is cleaning this up. I'm busy in RL for the next few days but will check in often.--RegentsPark (comment) 22:51, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@RegentsPark: Thanks for Your prompt reply.I am grateful to You for your decision to check the page often.Thanks from the bottom of my heart.Abhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 10:21, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello RegentsPark I am extremely sorry to bother you in Baidya page a person named TrangaBellam editing and deleting sources. You know a constructive discussion is going on the talk page of Baidya. LukeEmily is helping a lot. This person is editing, ignoring sources which he himself attached. Apart from this he citing badly with out page number. Some are non verifiable. Can you please help me to check his edits. ThanksAbhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 08:56, 23 July 2021 (UTC).

I can't comment on content issues so you'll need to deal with this on the talk page. Please do also take heed of my note on your talk page. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:01, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks RegentsPark. At least you take care my requests, it's enough for me. Have a great day. Thanks Abhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 17:19, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello RegentsPark.I am extremely sorry to bother you.I am worried about the Baidya article.It's caste article and hence under hyper sensitive coverage.Many sources added by TrangaBellam is under Paywall,which can be used under wikipedia guideline.These articles are not easily verifiable.I and LukeEmily have requested him that, under WP:QUOTE he should quote the sensitive and biased content like "He is telling Baidyas sudra but many reliable authors mention them ex brahmin or fallen brahmin".His answer to Luke is "I have a general apathy against using quotes" see here.Apart from this, he is involving in removing reliably sourced contents of myne ( see here and here ) and LukeEmily ( see here ).Today he added content which is false according to the source.He mentioned Baidyas were below the kayastha and above vaisya, which is false. see the journal page 319.Latter it is corrected by our fellow editors see the changes.I have checked his talk page and found he has a record of disrupting editing see here.After calling editor Ekdalian, I got no result,Hence come to you.He is calling Eminent Historians as "Fanciful"see here.I have complete faith on your judgement.Thanks Abhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 03:50, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Abhishek Sengupta 24: I'm probably not going to be able to look at this today (RL issues). But, @TrangaBellam:, if you're using sources behind a paywall, do make sure you provide the necessary quotes to back up any content changes you make. LukeEmily can also take a look. Everyone should aim for consensus on the talk page if any edit is contested. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@RegentsPark: Thanks for your prompt reply and advice.I am obliged to you. Thanks from the bottom of my heart.Abhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 16:28, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Literally, this person named TrangaBellam using Bṛhaddharma Puraṇas reference which was written in the 13th century in every line. Most of his sources were written by the rivals of the Baidyas(kayasthas,priestly brahmins).and he is deleting statements written by neutral authors along with citations and giving the baidya article a completely new look which was before edited by One of the senior admin named sitush. please, sir, I request you to take action against him. he already misquoted some lines and after getting caught he is telling it was just a human error. almost every reference given by him is so hard to verify. The baidya article is very sensitive and I request you to look at that because you are so senior and respected on Wikipedia.Sir I believe you will serve the justice. thank you Safron710 (talk) 21:31, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Safron710: The article talk page is the best place to discuss the reliability of sources or "neutrality" of authors of cited content. You can also take your doubts to WP:RSN. I looked over the talk page and it appears that the disputes are over content and sourcing and these are best addressed on the talk page or through the dispute resolution process. My suggestion is to clearly specify the content that is in disupte, give clear reasons why the sources are not reliable, and look for consensus. If a consensus does not emerge, then look to WP:RSN for specific source reliability (e.g., to see if Banglapedia is RS), or to WP:DRN for content disputes. At this point, I don't see a behavioral issue that needs admin action. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

You don't find accounts, specifically created to oppose my and Ekdalian's edits, a "behavioral issue"? This is the latest rant.

@LukeEmily: If I were you, I'd file a WP:SPI. But, I'm going to go ahead and extended protect the article. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

How many times do I need to tell each newbie that I am not using Puranas as a source but their analysis by modern scholars (published by Oxford University Press, Chicago University Press, and others)? TrangaBellam (talk) 14:48, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I saw that. You're doing a good job explaining this so I'm not worried. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome! TrangaBellam (talk) 14:58, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)For an example, over here it has been claimed that I had question[ed] the neutrality of an author because he/she belongs to that particular community and treat[ed] it as unreliable in a prejudiced way. I asked him to provide evidence in support but nothing came.

Over the same thread, female Professors of history, who have published multiple books with Brill, Manohar etc. are claimed to be "young guest professors" whose views don't matter much. The caste-details of Projit Bihari Mukharji, Martin Meyerson Professor in History & Sociology of Science at the University of Pennsylvania, are emphasized to project him as anti-Baidya. TrangaBellam (talk) 14:57, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

If someone is demonstrating a pattern of questioning the neutrality of authors based on caste, they will be sanctioned. Could you please provide diffs rather than pointing to the discussion? Walls of text are impossible to parse. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

This is the diff where they claim (without evidence) that I had question[ed] the neutrality of an author because he/she belongs to that particular community and treat[ed] it as unreliable in a prejudiced way.

This is the diff where they write, ...This is all but a joke. And Hiteshranjan Sanyal and PB Mukharji, both Bengali Brahmins, simply quote Brihaddharma Purana (not only Kayasthas, all the three castes are rivals of each other, something you pretend to be ignorant of, or at the best surprisingly ignorant of)...

The above diff also includes refusal to read a cited source (Curley; open source) and engaging in meaningless commentary on how a line shall be removed, if not categorically described in any of the reference cited. Minutes later, in the next edit to the talk-page, a set of obtuse remarks prove that they had indeed read Curley. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

MR. Regentspark thank you for your valuable suggestions. even after your advice TrangaBellam is not providing quotes in his editings. he is adding some sensitive words like "raped", "illegitimate" without giving the quotes. Please check his edits. and once again thank you for your suggesions.Safron710 (talk) 23:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Safron710: Please provide diffs. Without diffs, I cannot evaluate anything. --RegentsPark (comment) 23:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

MR. Regentspark check here "Ashvin had a Brahmin pilgrim raped, and she (along with the illegitimate son) were driven out by her husband" he cited that statement with reference no 14, but he didn't quote that specific line neither he provided any readable link along with the page no .Even there are many more but I am just waiting for his reply on the talk page as advised by you. thanks Safron710 (talk) 00:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

WP:PAYWALL requires me to neither make accessible a resource for all editors nor provide quotes.

Majumdar, Ganguly, and Hazra write, Asvinikunara, the son of Sun-god, forcibly ravished the wife of a Brahmana while she was on a pilgrimage, and a son was immediately born. She returned with the child to her husband and reported everything to him. The angry Brahmana drove her out with her son.

What does forcibly ravish mean? TrangaBellam (talk) 03:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Keep in mind that if material is not verifiable, it can be removed and that the onus of verification is on the person adding material. Merely adding a citation is not always enough for controversial material. (There is a good reason why WP:PAYWALL points you to WP:OFFLINE.) --RegentsPark (comment) 03:24, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

This is the page. What more evidence do you need? This is a lucky find but Internet Archive has hardly scanned all books held in my library. TrangaBellam (talk) 03:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

(ec)Yes. I searched for and had no problem finding a pdf of the the Majumdar book online and verifying the content. @Safron710:, did you try to look for an online version of the book? --RegentsPark (comment) 03:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you TrangaBellam for providing that source. and Mr RegentsPark yes I also searched but unfortunately could not find that. once again thank you guys for your efforts and time. Safron710 (talk) 03:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

About the word "forbidden":

Furui writes in detail (p. 204, last paragraph) about how Venu proceeded to have his subjects marry with total disregard for varna rules despite Brahmins advising him that it is a path for adharma and way to hell. Eventually, Venu will be deposed by Gods for facilitating these mixed marriages and their union, and a Vishnu reincarnate installed (p205, first paragraph). Even he will fail to restore dharma and be plagued with a famine, until the samkaras are integrated back. (p205, second paragraph)

The story is a classic retelling of the Dharma-Danda tension. And, unions across varna was forbidden in this version of the myth. TrangaBellam (talk) 03:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

You have been pinged at the talkpage. TrangaBellam (talk) 05:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

• he is refusing to add quotes or links in the article see here he is not even obeying you. --Safron710 (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Manage the two

Subha Venkatesan and Venkatesan Subha. 2 pages on same person. Wikifulness (talk) 08:41, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wikifulness: I assume Subha Venkatesan is the correct ordering? --RegentsPark (comment) 13:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes. So delete "Venkatesan Subha". Wikifulness (talk) 14:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I've redirected it. Note that the India Today article appears to be about Subha Venkatarman. Is that a different athlete or an alternate spelling? --RegentsPark (comment) 14:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Subha Venkataraman is a cricker https://www.espncricinfo.com/player/venkataraman-subha-54187.

Subha Venkatesan is an athlete. The newspapers did huge mistakes to identity them correctly. Wikifulness (talk) 09:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

POV forking

These series of Thiyyar caste promoting socks are continuing with WP:POVFORKing, now with List of Thiyyars against List of Ezhavas after failing to justify split at Ezhava, [6].--2409:4073:4E00:8008:E038:5705:C5BC:CDBD (talk) 12:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@2409:4073:4E00:8008:E038:5705:C5BC:CDBD: .Hey boss you should help me here at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rabt man. I believe it's you the fool Adithya Kiran Chekavar vandal is referring to. R.C^{Outlander07@talk} 11:42, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Looks like that is resolved. Let me take a look at the lists.--RegentsPark (comment) 19:55, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I've redirected the fork and protected it. Someone needs to merge the two asap. --RegentsPark (comment) 20:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

New message from TrangaBellam

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement § BengHistory. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Commented. --RegentsPark (comment) 20:59, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Ranjit Singh article vandalised by editor Hind ji who is jat by caste try to show Ranjit Singh as jat

• Ranjit Singh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)[Singh&action=history]

Reason: vandalism by user Hind ji.

• RegentsPark, Ranjit singh Article has been conflicted by editor see user:Hind ji,he always edit jat caste related articles or I think he belongs to jat caste please see the log of user:Hind ji[[7]]So your involvement requested to resolve the conflict ,there are variety of resources available on the internet but recently University had his researched on criminal tribes shows Ranjit Singh belongs to sansi caste :Hind ji try to declared Ranjit Singh as jat ,I have added that link as reliable source or as reference but one of user:Hind ji has reverted my edit without informing me .I may also have been wrong ,kindly resolve our issues.hope for early reply Thank you.

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/features/research-on-tribes-dubbed-criminal-by-british-397524 He trying to create influence of jat caste .Grayson Indica (talk) 17:03, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

I've dropped a note on their talk page. However, please do note that their edits don't fall under the category of vandalism, which has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia. Labeling even disruptive edits as vandalism is frowned upon and can get you into trouble. --RegentsPark (comment) 18:16, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Grayson Indica: I also notice you've added an extended confirmed userbox to your user page. You're not extended confirmed yet!--RegentsPark (comment) 19:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

[[8]] I may also have been wrong keep guiding me,ihave removed extended confirm userbox I have written it according to autoconfirm user now I have learnt difference between autoconfirm and extended confirm users Thanks you for your valuable information and guidanceGrayson Indica (talk) 03:25, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

AS24

Now we have Abhishek Sengupta 24 misrepresenting D C Sircar to claim that he finds them to be Brahmanas, when Sircar states something otherwise. When I asked for a quote, he chooses to give some warped logic where the view in Ambasthapurana become Sircar's. If that was not enough, he is now bringing colonial anthropologists like Alexander Wise.

At this point of time, we need to realise that the editor has no other job other than advocating that Baidyas be mentioned as Brahmins. TrangaBellam (talk) 08:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

"At this point of time, we need to realise that the editor has no other job other than advocating that Baidyas be mentioned as Brahmins" is this not a personal attack?? once you already misquoted a line and after getting caught you told us that was only a human mistake,thats why admin told you to provide quotes with your citations, you are not doing a favor to us, understand that.TrangaBellam it is a very sensitive caste article not a random car or bus article you have to respect that ok.--Safron710 (talk) 10:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

ambasthas and baidyas are the same and they have the same profession already mentioned by many authors. you are adding some purans references on baidya page that described ambasthas as sudras, but when ambasthas are mentioned as brahmins or brahma-kshatriyas by some scholars you are showing a problem regarding that??Safron710 (talk) 10:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Safron710, that's not a personal attack. Looking at this and this, it seems like a reasonable conclusion. I'm pinging @SpacemanSpiff: to take a look. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Yesterday we had LukeEmily make a set of quite-agreeable comments in response to a dozen pings from AS24 and BengHistory. 30 minutes later, today, AS24 repeats his arguments about how Baidyas are Brahmins (as of now). There is no real engagement except posting the same few sources cyclically and repeating the same point. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I am telling that Baidyas are sudra is controversial. I have given many sources and here I am giving another reliable source. Please check it Pages 145-146.In calcutta sanskrit college only Brahmins and Baidyas are allowed and sudras are not allowed. It is clear indication that Baidyas are not considered sudra.Today He provided a 1960 book. Where as I have provided latest books in talk section. Here I have provided another one.I can't understand while I am talking with him in talk section also engaging Ekdalian, another editer then why he is coming here and disturbing you? Abhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 08:24, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

mr.RegentsPar Deliberately making a mistake three times(TangaBellam) Then let the accused write Not indicating anything else? Sources that have not been read have been inserted Are these shots normal or abnormal?— Preceding unsigned comment added by BHATTA4 (talk • contribs) B06:55, July 28, 2021 (UTC)

literally, that guy trangabellam made THREE clear-cut controversial mistakes. all three mistakes were made to REDUCE the status of baidyas.is that not indicating something??? from the beginning he is using some purans reference to write this caste article. now he used a 1953 old reference over the modern reference to describe the status of baidyas. doest that make any justice to a caste which is so respected in Bengal?? I mean he used the sudra word 5 or 6 times by using some purans reference which was written in the 13th century by some priestly brahmins as a tool for some hidden works. The sanskrit college allowed only brahmins and baidyas to enroll there and restricted Sudras from admission. doest that not indicate the status of baidyas??but he completely removes that from the article's main section. many respected authors mentioned baidyas as ex brahmins, semi brahmins, equal to brahmins but he has problems with these also. last but not the least PURANS are myths and should not be considered in this sensitive caste article. Safron710 (talk) 15:00, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Safron710, I would like a list of the THREE clear-cut controversial mistakes [that] REDUCE[D] the status of baidyas. You fail to provide diffs and you are ending up at WP:AE. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

1.you misquoted baidyas are below kayasthas 2.you misquoted RC Majumdar rejected Dutt 3.at first you wanted to not include Dutt and later included

  give me some time I will add more mistakes of you Safron710 (talk) 15:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

The article (Baidya) talk page has become a playground of WP:SPAs, fighting with neutral & genuine editors like TrangaBellam only in order to glorify their caste. Also, would request for a CU for user Safron710; seems like a sock of User:Bengaliwikipro / User:Banglawikit. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 15:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

you already have made a complaint against me of socking.stop doing this in every talk page.I am not a sock of anyone. Safron710 (talk) 15:46, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

This is getting ridiculous. I've blocked Safron710 as a suspected sock of Bengaliwikipro. I couldn't find an SPI, @Ekdalian:, was there one? --RegentsPark (comment) 16:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, RegentsPark. Actually, Bishonen first blocked Bengaliwikipro as a caste warrior, then there was a bunch of socks and CU proved that another user was a sock of Bengaliwikipro, who was then obviously blocked. Most of the socks had same agenda, tone, writing style, etc. and almost all of them were blocked as suspected socks of Bengaliwikipro. Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 18:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

• Apologies for making yet another post at your talk page but this is a well-coordinated attempt at trolling. BengHistory is already aware that I had provided page-numbers (and quotes) for certain "challenged" words. Today, he repeats the very same demand and says that I am yet to provide quotes for those words. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

  AS24 is back after a name-change having deleted their talk page.

  Majumdar notes eight-century inscriptions in S. India to mention of a Baidya group. In the opinions of H. Shastri, they enjoyed similar stature as Brahmins. AS24 think that an appropriate summary of these observations is that the inscriptions regarded Vaidyas as Brahmana. I don't know why he chose to insert them in the middle of a line on Ambasthas, fwiw. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:43, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello RegentsPark, FYI, CU had confirmed User:Ashish413 is a sock of Bengaliwikipro. Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 09:24, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ekdalian: Thanks. At some point, you should consider starting an SPI if you see a new sock. It will make the process a lot easier. --RegentsPark (comment) 20:59, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Sure, will do that. Thanks & Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 06:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

New message from TrangaBellam

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement § অভিরূপ দাশশর্মা. You had blocked the editor. TrangaBellam (talk) 20:30, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Grayson Indica

• RegentsParkHello Administrator you have blocked my account as Sockpuppetry to punjabier also check*User:Harmanjatt 00 this account not blocked I am having only single account and I have never registered an account on Wikipedia es before I request you kindly recheck my account and unblock it if you find I am correct,one thing more I have copied content of other users as I am new on Wikipedia.@RegentsPark:.2409:4055:515:3606:20FB:5970:368C:28F (talk) 03:30, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Order of British India

HI Regents Park, I am sorry to take your extra time and it is regarding my editing on Wikipedia page. I am trying to add my grandfather army history in it, named Zaman Ali Khan title of Sardar Bahadur given by Viceroy Of India, was received OBI first Class medal, OBI second class medal, stars and recognition letter during his service with British India Army. unfortunately by some mistakes in a past i can not find his any letter or medal but his son was in a army if his history may could help. i asked to British Army about my grandfather and they said you can upload picture on Wikipedia and further more they will help you. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hunting Squirrel (talk • contribs) 09:42, August 23, 2021 (UTC)

@Hunting Squirrel: Unfortunately you'll need to find a reliable source that can be used to verify that your grandfather received the OBI. I believe that there are online versions of gazettes that announced these awards (you'll find examples on the OBI page) and you should look for one that lists your grandfather. See WP:V and WP:RS for more information on sourcing. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:48, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello Regents Park [[ I sent you a very long message before about my grandfather army history please help me on Wiki page to upload his picture and his British Indian Army history i have some. thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{2}}}|{{{2}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{2}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{2}}}|contribs]]) 09:52, August 23, 2021Hunting Squirrel (UTC)

Without sources, this isn't going to happen. Please also remember to sign your posts, preview them before posting so that the formating works, and, perhaps get some idea on how to use Wikipedia. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:56, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Question

Alha

Why did you remove the reference Archaeological Survey of India has proved that Alha Udal belonged to the Ahir caste, then why are you showing fake propaganda to people? Please answer.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4053:70e:a27b::15a8:18a5 (talk • contribs) 16:21, August 29, 2021 (UTC)

Please use the article talk page for questions. --RegentsPark (comment) 20:40, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Regarding addition of Ahir

Please see the source, most don't mention Ahir as any major source of recruitment of soldier in 1857. RS6784 (talk) 20:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Removed Ahir. While I'm not sure if that's the case here, we do have a Ahir socking problem. --RegentsPark (comment) 20:14, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Regarding addition of Ahir

Please see the source, most don't mention Ahir as any major source of recruitment of soldier in 1857. RS6784 (talk) 20:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Removed Ahir. While I'm not sure if that's the case here, we do have a Ahir socking problem. --RegentsPark (comment) 20:14, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

enemy of ahirs Wiki editor

Do you hate Ahirs? Then why so much hatred who does not even believe in the source, Yaduvanshi are only Ahir, then why are someone making Rajput a Yaduvanshi forcibly? There is no source or evidence, then why are you making Yaduvanshi, check the history of those who are making Yaduvanshi, Jadeja half Muslim half Hindu, Jadaun is Banjare, Bhati also half Muslim half Hindu, only Chudasama Ahir, after that Alha Udal is making Rajput history By stealing, the Government of India has proved that Alha Udal was Ahir, then why are you stealing history? ok you want to erase the history of the ahirs ok delete history want to steal do we will say something i will never come from wikipedia now but after today i will never trust wikipedia bye Yaduvanshi ahir's (talk) 00:04, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Yaduvanshi ahir: You need to read WP:RS and WP:PRIMARY carefully. Also, please do not make multiple accounts. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:56, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Protection needed

Hello, RegentsPark. The list of Rajput dynasties and states is subjected to disruption and edit warring. So I guess it needs semi-protection. Note that the IP range used today for edit warring has been previously used by the socks of Showbiz826. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:05, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done--RegentsPark (comment) 21:16, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:17, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Warning needed

I think this user will misuse his rights : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:MiguelP91&action=view Wikifulness (talk) 18:00, 6 September 2021 (UTC) Already did here. He removed some important points.

@Wikifulness: Bit early to think of this as a problem. --RegentsPark (comment) 19:02, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Change page title

from Kalamer Shakti to Pratibadi Kalam. Wikifulness (talk) 06:57, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done--RegentsPark (comment) 13:13, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Wikifulness (talk) 14:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

It is a different suggestion then the above move title so it deserves a new space

i will also chime im above but it is a different move suggestion so i think it should also have it’s own section Tonyjohnsonhere (talk) 21:32, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tonyjohnsonhere: Typically, you can propose alternative titles in an open move request. I agree that people are being rather harsh with you since you're a new editor and not necessarily used to the ways of Wikipedia, but opening a new section on the title while a move discussion is in process is frowned upon. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:34, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

ok, how do i delete it? Tonyjohnsonhere (talk) 22:37, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

You can't delete it so, I guess, just stop posting there. I'll collapse it again. --RegentsPark (comment) 22:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Ok, i stated that i want to delete it & im sure i will get other angry senior editors bullying me but i already stated on if my intentions were good and i have no problem deleting it & senior editors should be more respectful so i will leave it at that & maybe some good will come of it cause maybe some senior editors will try to be more respectful of new editors & issue polite constructive guidance rather than just disrespectful insults which i’m sure you agree is not appropriate way to handle a newbie’s accidential mistakes Tonyjohnsonhere (talk) 22:53, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree that it is not the best way. But, keep in mind that other editors don't necessarily know you're a new editor! I'd just forget about it and suggest you make your case in the move discussion. For example, in the move discussion, add a "Comment: Move to Gandhi" and give your reasons there so that it is clear to other editors you're suggesting an alternate title and what your reasons are. --RegentsPark (comment) 22:55, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Sanctions

LALAJI1234 is up to no good. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Nehadixit123 - Editing her article as well as her spouse's. TrangaBellam (talk) 12:58, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Questions regarding the recent changes that you made to the Paravar page in wikipedia

Hey RegentsPark, I added some notable people to the list of notable people in the Paravar wiki article. I'm a paravar myself and the things that I added are facts and not just some story that I made up. For example, Fidelis Fernando is currently the bishop of mannar and his ancestors are from Vembar, a paravar village. You can refer to this article too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidelis_Fernando . And you also removed the addition of Senhor Gabriel d'cruz from the article. Every Parvan in Thoothukudi knows who built the Golden car of Our Lady of Snows. We recently celebrated his remembrance event last year. Why would you delete that? I agree that there's not a lot ot proof out there in the internet but we do have old writings and other physical proofs to prove his presence. Here's a list of the kings of The Bharathas/paravars (https://www.heritagevembaru.in/2017/01/blog-post_81.html). It's in Tamil. I hope you can read that. I'm way more knowledgeable in this subject since this is a part of my identity. I'm just trying to document our history to the Internet so that other people and the future generation will get to know about the ancient Paravars. And another thing, I dont know who added Tamil National Leader V.Prabhakaran to the Notable people list. He belongs to Karaiyar community. You can refer to that here. I agree that Karaiyar and Paravar share the same ancestry but bear different names due to geographical and other historical events but still this would be a false claim. I hope you will answer all my questions that I put forward. If you need additional pieces of evidence, I'd be happy to help you with that too. - Costa da Pescaria (talk) 05:39, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Costa da Pescaria:. On Wikipedia, everything needs to be verifiable and needs to be sourced to reliable sources. Claims of personal knowledge in an area are not considered meaningful (because this is the internet!). If you can bring reliable sources for the people you mention, then you can add them to the article. If the sources but note that neither wikipedia not blogs (like the one you link to above) are considered reliable. If you have tamil language sources that are reliable, then perhaps you could post a note on WT:IN asking someone to verify the information and also to get consensus on reliability? --RegentsPark (comment) 14:07, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey @RegentsPark:, I do have reliable sources which prove the existence of Senhor Gabriel D'cruz and other kings of the Paravars. Korkai, a Tamil Novel written by Joe D'Cruz has a lot of information about the history of the Paravars and the Pearl Fishery Coast. But since it's a Tamil Novel, I know you cant verify it. But, Could you help me verify this? I'm pretty new to wikipedia. If you can help me verify it, That would be great.

@Costa da Pescaria: It's a novel, therefore fiction. I see that someone has written at Joe D'Cruz's article that it's considered a well-researched historical book, but that is sourced to this so it's just one person's opinion, and that person is not a historian, see his credentials.[9]. So I'm removing it. Don't forget to sign your posts. Doug Weller talk 11:04, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, Thanks @Doug Weller:. I will find a way to collect other evidences. I will reach out to some of my locals. I'm not sure about what would qualify as a reliable source. We have some physical evidences like the king's grave etc. We do have some pictures that are very old but I'm not sure how you would verify it. No historian has ever tried to research about our history. Costa da Pescaria (talk) 08:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@Costa da Pescaria: Read WP:RS to get a sense for what qualifies as a reliable source. They don't have to be in English but, if they are not, make sure you get the translation verified. Unfortunately, old pictures or pictures of graves are not RS so do look for published works. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:11, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Vandal

Just wanted to bring to your attention that one of the user (Noorullah21) is vandalizing [Third Battle of Panipat page]. He removed below tags: Multiple issues|POV|date=August 2021 and Unreliable sources|date=August 2021 from the page. Also he added unsourced information such as Supported by Jats in the infobox and also added some Amb state and Suba Khan Tanoli which is unsourced as well. Looks like deliberate attempt to promote the article on those two by linking them to popular articles. Can you take a look and add the tags along with reverting the unsourced changes? 199.82.243.95 (talk) 16:13, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

The sourcing does look weak to me but perhaps @TrangaBellam: can provide some perspective. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:23, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Sign

Hi. You forgot to sign Talk:British Raj/Archive 10#Ensigns — DaxServer (talk to me) 17:24, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks - and done! --RegentsPark (comment) 18:28, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Webbe

Hi, the phrasing perhaps could have been better but if you Google "Claudia webbe abolish rich" you will find numerous mainstream UK news sources that mentioned the thing you recently removed from Claudia Webbe. She does seem to have a bit of a habit of not engaging brain first (and also a habit of being unable to comprehend English, despite being British-born and having at least two degrees - I think she perhaps sees what she wants to read rather than what is written). - Sitush (talk) 10:38, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sitush: I removed it solely because of the "despite". £81,000 per annum doesn't sound like rich to me :) Probably should have asked for it to rephrased if necessary in my edit summary. --RegentsPark (comment) 12:45, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm not fussed either way but apparently 81k puts a person in the top 1% of earners, according to some of those news reports. It is certainly a figure I have never come anywhere near, though I am worth it! - Sitush (talk) 13:47, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

This is interesting, though a couple of years out of date. Clearly yet another example of a multitude of interpretations. - Sitush (talk) 15:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Seems kind of low to me. That's about $110,000 which, while it would leave someone comfortably off, is not a lot of money. I guess we're now living with a meaning of "rich" in the stratospheric world of Bezos and Musk! Regardless, the "despite" word is gratuitous. The linked article hints at it by the juxtaposition of her income and the quote but doesn't explicitly link the two. At best, that's what we should do but, even that, sounds a bit much. Even a rich person is allowed to hold the view that the rich should be abolished!--RegentsPark (comment) 15:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

A edit you reverted.

Hi you reverted an edit made by me on page Vyasa. Can you please tell me why did you do so? The info is totally correct and is supported with sources. But you still have reverted it. I am new here and don't know how to do proper referencing. Some of the mistakes were corrected by an admin/bot. Would request you to kindly put it back there or tell me how I can correct it. GreaterGud (talk) 13:03, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

@GreaterGud: You need to include the sources inline with full citations (including links to the source). See Wikipedia:Citing sources for help. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:05, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

George Mandel edits:

edits: I appreciate your care, but they are an interference. I am Mandel's daughter and attest to the truth of my edits. Please honor them, thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirsdaughter (talk • contribs) 17:37, October 7, 2021 (UTC)

@Sirsdaughter: A couple of points. First, if you are indeed the individual's daughter, you have a conflict of interest and should not edit the article directly. Second, regardless of your relationship, you need to provide reliable sources, use neutral prose, and not remove existing maintenance tags. But, that's all moot since you shouldn't be directly editing the article but should propose your edits on the talk page instead. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:42, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

History Chor Regent's Park

The real Yaduvanshi is Ahirs, the truth can be harassed but not defeated You Rajput Yamaguchi is also a Rajput Your and Yamaguchi's work is to degrade the Ahir Yadav community, erase their history, steal their history, You are spreading the truth and hiding the truth which you people are making as Yaduvanshi. Chudasama belonged to Abhir dynasty. Jadeja is a descendant of Muslim Jam. Bhati is also a descendant of Muslim Bhupat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4053:D:4FA4:0:0:CE6:D8AD (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Reverse a move

Check out the recent move of AmarnathJi Mandir. I tried to reverse it but failed. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:55, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Reply to your comment

Hello, thank your for your comment on my talk page. I have no conflict to declare. I am researching on colonial India. I tried to follow this page while making the article, which was rated good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Calcutta_Turf_Club Looking at this page, I too mentioned notable visitors and club presidents, and quoted Geoffrey Moorehouse. But I used a lot more detail. In view of your comment, I will remove details. Anderson1970 (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Anderson1970: Okay. The easiest way forward for you is to reduce the article to its bare essentials. You can always add detail later. The topic is notable so a short factual article will have no trouble getting accepted. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)