User talk:Deavenger

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

• News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
• Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may edit it now.Here are few link whiich might be useful,India's External Intelligence Agencyl,Full of holes,Recruited by RAW, trained by Army: LTTE,Has to Take a Look in the Mirror to Understand the Mumbai Attacks.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With well over half of its population living in the slums, what reason could you possibly give to omit my pictures, which I believe are fair representation of the city? Remember, this article is not about the financial importance of the various cities, it is about their populations. If you want to gloss over the slum population of Mumbai, then why insist on listing Mumbai as #1 on the list? If you subtract the slum population, Mumbai's population would be reduced by at least 50%, and it would drop out of the top spot. I don't understand your tendency of glossing over the slums of Mumbai. I for one appreciate them because people who dwell them contribute significantly to Mumbai's economy. $7.00 Billion dollars are generated in the slums annually, and people who live there earn honest living and contribute to Mumbai's diversity and charm. Just because these people don't have a better place to live does not make them unsightly. There is a lot to be admired about their perseverance, entrepreneurship, and hard work. I think they really represent what India is all about: despite the utmost of hardship, people succeed and never fail to strive for a better tomorrow. By78 (talk) 01:48, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :) --Novis-M (talk) 03:49, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deavenger, I noticed you using the phrase "non-OR sources" a couple of times on WT:INB, and stopped by to find out what exactly you are referring to ? Note that, WP:OR refers to "unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas", and by that definition published sources never violate OR. To state it another way: it is perfectly fine to use reliable sources that report "original research" (such as scholarly papers and books, newspaper reports etc); onle we (wikipedia editors) are disallowed from original research or synthesis on wikipedia. Hope that explanation makes sense! Let me know if I am missing something in your statement, or if you would like further clarifications. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 17:17, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Most of the articles I work on are highly sensitive articles where people bring lots or sources that they usually synthesis. For instance, someone brought an article from The Economist, a reliable source overall. The article said a specific country could be considered an economic superpower, and used that source to say that country was a potential superpower. Though an economic superpower and an emerging/potential superpower are two completely different things. As a country doesn't need to be a economic superpower to be considered a potenial superpower, and vice versa. Also, I just use non-Or as SYN technically falls under WP:OR. Deavenger (talk) 17:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC) copied from my talk-page to keep discussion consolidated. Abecedare (talk) 17:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree with your conclusion, only the particular wikipedia policy you cite to reach it. In the example you give, the Economist saying that "X is considered an economic superpower" does not violate WP:OR or WP:SYNT. However if a user uses that statement to claims that "X is a potential superpower", that violates several policies; chiefly the statement misquotes the source, i.e. the source does not verify the statement being made.

If the statement in the article is changed to, "X is considered an economic superpower;^{Economist article} and since economic superpowers are potential superpowers, ^{some other source} X is a superpower", that would be an example of synthesis (since it uses two different sources to draw an unpublished conclusion that advances a POV) and disallowed on wikipedia.

Essentially WP:OR, WP:SYNT (just like WP:NPOV) apply to content on wikipedia, and not to sources.

PS: I have your talkpage on my watchlist now; so you can add any reply here itself. Abecedare (talk) 17:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thanks for explaining it to me. Deavenger (talk) 17:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, I've moved your vandalism report from the Administrator intervention against vandalism page to the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents page here because your report seemed to contain complex vandalism requiring a range block. Thank you for your report! Malinaccier (talk) 00:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the map you requested - do you have any other comments or suggestions? I hope it meets your expectations — in the mean time I've marked it as resolved. ChrisDHDR 09:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a topic at the Admin notice board about the IP user that keeps on removing content from the Great power and Middle power articles. I was wondering if I could get you to comment about the situation so that we can get this situation resolved. Thanks. -- Phoenix (talk) 06:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I was just wondering how the subsections for the potential superpower page is going. 81.229.73.179 (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, (are you Swedish Pirate) I finished the the India subsections a while ago, and have made changes to get rid of OR and SYN sources, and adding new ones. However, the other ones, I haven't really worked on them for a while. I could finish China easily as I have started on it, however, I can't do EU or Russia, as I have only one source I was able to research for EU, and none for Russia, not too mention, Russia has to few sources. Plus, real life is getting pretty hectic for me, so I might be able to finish China, but I'm hoping someone can do EU and Russia, get reliable sources that aren't OR or SYN, and put them up hereDeavenger (talk) 23:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm Swedish Pirate (I was on another computer and forgot to log in). It's great that you're still working on them, but I understand that real life issues are the number one priority. What's the source you do have for the EU? Swedish pirate (talk) 10:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 21:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I see you've tagged J-manza's smashing flash games plus for deletion based on a closed AfD. Which discussion is it? I can't find one that relates to this article. —C.Fred (talk) 04:27, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that explains it: it went one further down the list and put {{db-afd}} on the article. Personally, I'd have called it db-web; that's the rationale I used when I deleted it. —C.Fred (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was pretty well in the realm of advertising also. However, merely rewriting it wasn't going to cut it; they were going to have to assert notability. —C.Fred (talk) 04:37, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it might be a good idea to run a contest or two through the Countries WikiProject to attract editors to improve country coverage on Wikipedia, especially the country outlines.

I noticed you are a member of the WikiProject, and was wondering if you could help.

I've posted a message at Countries WikiProject talk page to get discussion started on what the awards programs should be and how they should be run.

Your ideas and feedback would be greatly appreciated.

The Transhumanist 23:47, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You maybe interested in the fact that a user opened a sockpuppet case against the anon 151.... IP's who edited EU talkpage. Based on your comments and a review of his talk pages edits I added WORLDPOWER27 to the list of suspected socks. You can have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EU 100%. Arnoutf (talk) 17:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I get your point, however in my opinion the later edit made by me was relevant to the concerned issue being discussed — "millions mired in poverty and ineffective government prevents China or India from rivaling the EU or the US". Just because the article does not specifically talk about India's overall "superpower" potential, it doesn't mean that it is not relevant to the topic. The concerned article takes a more general approach and clearly says that India's stable democracy increases its economic potential and government efficiency. Therefore, I find your argument against the article unconvincing.

Also, the section on Russia clearly discusses its stature as an "energy superpower" and the sources mentioned supporting that argument are either outdated (pre-economic crisis) or do not explicitly link Russia's "energy superpower" status to its overall superpower potential.

To conclude, commonsense says that a superpower needs to be an "economic superpower" but not necessarily an "energy superpower". Discussing the economic potential of these countries is very much relevant to the concerned topic. --Nosedown (talk) 01:19, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. I rest my case. And thanks for making these edits. Cheers --Nosedown (talk) 02:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference if you see any pattern of one edit, revert by other editor, second edit, revert by you, then your next course of action should always be a {{3rr}} template. Then if the third edit is three seconds after your warning you can start a 3rr report, but a 3rr report requires a warning. The upside being that if they do a fourth edit then they will be blocked, and the tone of your edit summaries or anything you say on a talk page does not matter, four edits (with a warning) is an automatic block. Of course it is especially helpful of another editor does the first revert because then you cannot hit 3rr yourself. Darrenhusted (talk) 23:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

while learning Farsi whenever you need help you can count on me :-) --Mardetanha ^talk 22:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently taken a bit of an interest in the entire topic of Great Powers etc, etc, etc. I noticed that you had a Potential/Emerging Great Powers subpage going there that hasn't been edited in a while. Just wondering what the reason for that lack of activity was, and if there's any way that I can help (though seeing as it appears to be your pet project, you can decline that offer). I just think that if we have a Potential Superpowers article then we should have a Potential/Emerging Great Power article too. Comics (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Just asking. I've seen one site - Great Power Politics - that has a list of great powers - maybe that could be a starting point for listing current/possible emerging ones? It says that Turkey /is/ a current one, but I at least doubt that. Anyway, just tell me when work begins on it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Comic master (talk • contribs) 22:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that too. Anyways, just leave a note on my talk page when work starts up on that article Comics (talk) 06:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey nice to see you're still active with the project. I'll definitely continue to help with reverting vandalism and POV pushing. I'll also see how much I can contribute to the overhaul of the other articles but I may not have that much time on my hand to write articles these days. Hope you're well. Nirvana888 (talk) 17:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I was GA reviewer for the above article. I believe you and Phoenix79 were the main editors on this page. Phoenix has gone AWOL for a while and the article has been on hold at GA review for quite a few weeks now. I'd like to either pass or fail it and clear it from the list. Do you want to look at it and discuss further edits, or shall I fail it for now. I'm happy to help out if either of you wants to revisit it at a future point. Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - let's get it to GA status. I would say major power is similar to great power; however it really depends on how the author defines it. Some authors may see major power as more of a regional power and others as great powers with truly global influence. For example, see this academic paper: [[1]]. The author sometimes uses major power and great power interchangeably. Generally, I would be reluctant to say major power is the same as great power. Hope this helps. Nirvana888 (talk) 18:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 08:45, 28 July 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. We are being chased about closing the GAN for Great power. Can you look at this ASAP? Thanks. hamiltonstone (talk) 23:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean to be a WP:DICK or anything, but ideally, GA reviews should not take longer than 3-4 weeks, so those that take 2-3 months are pushing the limits. If there had been more evidence of ongoing discussion on the actual review page, it wouldn't be as big of a deal, since we can see the evidence of active discussion and review. But the most recent signed comment there is from July 11, which is over a month ago.

Please try to finish up as soon as you can! Thanks! Dr. Cash (talk) 00:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I'm sorry to hear you are unlikely to continue as an editor. I will go ahead and fail the GAN, but I hope you will have an opportunity to play a role again one day. Things don't sound too good, so best wishes to you. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:26, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:49, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 16:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey how are ya pal? Haven't heard from you for along time after your retirement. I've been trying to keep the articles up to standard while you've been gone. Let me know if you ever come back the Project misses your presence. Nirvana888 (talk) 18:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. Sorry to bother you, but you are (titularly at least) a member of WP:WikiProject Economics, as defined by this category. If you don't know me, I'm a Wikipedia administrator, but an unqualified economist. I enjoy writing about economics, but I'm not very good at it, which is why I would like to support in any way I can the strong body of economists here on Wikipedia. I'm only bothering you because you are probably one of them. Together, I'd like us to establish the future direction of WikiProject Economics, but first, we need to know who we've got to help.

Whatever your area of expertise or level of qualification, if you're interested in helping with the WikiProject (even if only as part of a larger commitment to this wonderful online encyclopedia of ours), would you mind adding your signature to this page? It only takes a second. Thank you.

Message delivered on behalf of User:Jarry1250 by LivingBot.

Hey there Deavenger, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Deavenger/Potential Superpower former subsections. 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) 00:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.

As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.

If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.

You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.

ssriram_mt (talk) & AshLin (talk) (Drive coordinators)

Delivered per request on Wikipedia:Bot requests. 01:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 01:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Deavenger/Potential Superpower former subsections, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Deavenger/Potential Superpower former subsections and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Deavenger/Potential Superpower former subsections during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 19:06, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Motto of the Day (WP:MOTD) is in a state of emergency and really needs your help! There are not enough editors who are reviewing or nominating mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review, and this probably means that you will notice a red link or “This space for rent” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to review the nominations and nominate your own new mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been sent by pjoef on behalf of Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category).

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 04:56, 23 May 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) 17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ART+FEMINISM EDIT-A-THON

• Saturday, March 5th, 9:30 a.m. – noon
• Madison Public Library (Madison, Wisconsin)
• Bring a laptop! There will be snacks and daycare

RSVP on the event page if you plan to attend or have any suggestions. czar 00:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You received this message because you are a member of Category:Wikipedians in Wisconsin. To opt-in to future Madison event messages, add yourself to the mailing list.

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:42, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 05:42, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deavenger,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (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 Deavenger,

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 (talk) 16:38, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]