Although some prefer welcoming newcomers with cookies, I find fruit to be a healthier alternative.
Hello, DeepstoneV, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.
Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block.
Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like <ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing).
In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?
A WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.
Edit warring
Hi DeepstoneV! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Bajirao I several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistan-Israel Dogfight (1967) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:
We're sorry, but we cannot accept blank submissions. If in fact you did include text within the article, but it isn't showing, please make sure that any extra text above your entry is removed, as it may be causing it to hide and not be shown to the reviewer.
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 after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:DeepstoneV/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, DeepstoneV!
Having an article draft 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't distort sources
Hello, I'm Worldbruce. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Sher Shah Suri seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for January 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Siege of Moscow (1382), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Timurid. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Do not change sourced content as per your pov/beliefs
Hello, I'm Salman Cooper Mapping, I've recently noticed your removal of sourced content such as that from the article of Tipu Sultan, please refrain from doing so. I can already see that you've been warned against edit warring and editing without a neutral pov, please try to avoid doing so again. Regards Salman Cooper Mapping (talk) 23:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Opinion is Disputed, There are also Many sources that Describing him A Sunni Muslim. So for not Causing Edit War, Only Muslim would be Perfect DeepstoneV (talk) 10:16, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any source by Oxford is automatically qualified as a WP:RS and is valued over all other sources, sources that call him Sunni seem to be from people writing a book and publishing it under their own name or unknown/non WP:RS publishers, please do not change the sourced info and repl with any substantial counter to this reply itself rather than changing info beforehand. Thank you, Salman Cooper Mapping (talk) 15:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disruptive Editing on Tipu Sultan
Would you please stop removing sourced content from the article? The source provided by you has neither a link or any details (name of the publisher, author etc), please stop doing this or you will possibly face sanctions for disruptive editing Salman Cooper Mapping (talk) 15:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't Know much about citations Format but the Source was also A Wp:Rs and I have Found Five More Wp:Rs Sources for his Religion and its sect, So now with the proper citation format can I replace it? DeepstoneV (talk) 16:28, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, Oxford is the most reliable WP:RS, the sources presented by you seem to be from irrelevant publishers, even if WP:RS sources are present. We only take the most reliable one which in this case is Oxford's Salman Cooper Mapping (talk) 17:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
Hi @DeepstoneV You have removed a image of territory of sisodiyas which is sourced and cited from A History of Rajasthan by Rima Hooja, Maharana Sanga Last Great Leader of the Rajput Race by Har Bilas Sarda and Mewar and Mughal Emperors by G.N Sharma.
Making image from territorial extent given by authors is acceptable. Hence,Please do not remove the image next time as I have reverted it back. Rawn3012 (talk) 10:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't the architecture section look ugly, now that you have restored the images? Please at least resize the images, and give the locations of the places. At present, it seems, the Bahmani built structures mostly in Bidar but obviously that is not the case.I hope you get my point.Thanks.
Hello, I am being banned from wikipedia due to sockpuppetry but another sock master guy Based Kashmiri is reverting and deleting even my Productive edits, if you can save them please do it DeepstoneV (talk) 20:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
You have found your answer in the article about Shivaji's Southern Campaign, so please consider carefully before writing such a lengthy paragraph. DeepstoneV (talk) 11:58, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Found my answers? I wasn't the one who was looking for it, and it's not a lengthy paragraph when you need quotations for verification. Sudsahab (talk) 12:18, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, you recently made an edit in the "Siege of Moscow", deciding that I am the that "vandal", but this is not the case.I have nothing to do with this user.Don't call me that, please. I have written many articles in Russian. Онеми (talk) 18:19, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 10
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mewar-Malwa Conflict, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conqueror.
I made a mistake, I confused it with WP:RAJ, But the First one is Correct. You need to stop labeling everything as vandalism. A Editor tagged to change the Name and I did it DeepstoneV (talk) 14:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello DeepstoneV! Your additions to Deccani architecture have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:
Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 20:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Wiiformii (talk) 19:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to Gunpowder weapons in the Bahmani Sultanate, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 21:37, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While there's nothing technically wrong with it, there is already nine images on the article which is well over the amount of images needed for how short the article is. Not every image on Commons that shows something related to the Bahmani Sultanate needs to be on this article. Please also listen in that image captions do not need to be italicized, even if it looks better, as you have multiple times reinstated this MOS error. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 14:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please Revert the edits of Based Kashmiri and he's selecting my contributions for deletion, save them if you can wether from which account (Deepstone, Kemelo..., Aryaputram7) it is made by DeepstoneV (talk) 13:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Gupta Empire. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
Your edit to Qin dynasty has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. – dudhhrtalkcontribssheher14:14, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit to Bahmani Sultanate has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Ratnahastin (talk)11:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Continued distortion of sources
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Sher Shah Suri. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. The cited source says "the most skilful [sic] general the Afghans ever produced". Do not inflate that to "most skillful genrals [sic]". The set of Afghan generals is a small subset of all generals from anywhere. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't edit an article as per your POV
You continue to add or remove information as per your POV in an article despite many warnings which is clearly evident on your talk page. Recently you removed information added by me in Nizam's Carnatic Campaign (1725-1727) without any valid justification. Should I gift you a dictionary so that you could make yourself familiar with words like Commanders and Leaders? The conflict section as well as the source I cited there clearly mentions that Stewart Gordon disapproves of his command in this particular battle that's why it becomes a necessity to add disputed in the info box. In case of disagreement of different sources we have to display it in a manner such that all views are shown without a bias in the article similar to Maratha invasion of Deccan 1739. I just did that. I didn't remove his name, just added disputed to it. If you continue doing such edits I will make sure you get a ban for an indefinite time. Also, I did like to mention this is my second warning to you regarding your unjustified edits. So, edit cautiously from the next time. Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May 2024
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Battle of Kherlen, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that.
It is further not constructive to claim that it's not described in the references while it is described in the references, indicating (along with similar issues in other articles brought up here by others) that your edit was nothing more than an effort to blank. Cold Season (talk) 03:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(1) You tried to misrepresent sources (your edit summary: "Source didnt described"), without actually checking the sources. Now the references even has quotes in them.
(2) You had exactly zero references; that is zero research. Meanwhile, the content that you blanked was fully cited.
(3) The sources are about specific populations (Eastern Mongol, Oirat Mongol), not Northern Yuan. This coincides with the disunity among Mongols, as is highlighted in the sources too. --Cold Season (talk) 20:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Mihira Bhoja, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Mnbnjghiryurr (talk) 09:29, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Hey!
I have noticed that you changed the title of the article "Deccan Sultanates-Vijayanagar Conflicts" to "Deccan-Vijayanagar wars" without providing any citation or requesting a move. I have reverted this change and moved the page back to its original title. Please refrain from making these types of edits without proper justification or discussion on the talk page. If you wish to change the title of an article, please make sure to add a citation or request a move. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Thanks!! Kemilliogolgi (talk) 03:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At this point I can't tell if this is some elaborate scheme to delegitimize the claims of sockpuppetry of you two or if there really is two separate accounts with very similar interests and opinions, but either way, this is quite humorous. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 05:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. Humours indeed, because it's the old school methodology and I'm still finding more proof so I can connect it to the sock master. @Flemmish Nietzsche if you find more proofs/edit diff of their sock/meat then please add it to their case. Your help would be appreciated. Based Kashmiri (talk) 04:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Flemmish Neitzshe, this Another Sock Master Based Kashmiri is reverting my edits and selecting them for deletion even that of Kemel account, please revert those and save them as they are fine contributions DeepstoneV (talk) 12:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Maratha raid on Delhi (1737) and Nizam Carnatic Campaigns 1725-1727. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree.
I would like to mention here on your talk page all the related information about the changes done by me in the last few days besides certain other information.
All the sources mentioned there, none state Maratha defeat in the raid as a whole, infact none of them talk about the result explicitly for Maratha raid on Delhi 1737.
Here are your sources along with the quotations which you claim resulted in a Mughal victory but in contrast none mention the Maratha defeat in the raid on Delhi 1737 conducted by Peshwa Bajirao I.
1st Source: Marathas and Panipat by Gupta, Hari Ram
There were 10,000 horse and 20,000 foot in the fort. An action was fought at Rikabganj in which the imperial troops were worsted. The Mughals lost 600 men in killed and wounded, 2,000 horses and one elephant. Meanwhile Wazir Qamr-ud-din Khan was hurrying towards Delhi. SBajirao checked his advance at Badshahpur, 33 kilometres south-west of the city and 10 kilometres south of the spot where Gurgaon railway station now stands. The Peshwa followed by his mistress Mastani “‘seated on one saddle cover” on a tall horse “riding stirrup to stirrup with him, as seen by Ashob’s two elder brothers fighting in Janish Khan’s corps under the Wazir, delivered the assault. He lost thirty men. Finding himself unequal to the Wazir’s army, and fearing the combination of Samsamud-daulah and S’aadat Khan with the Wazir, he slipped away from the field early in the night, this being the seventh day of the dark half of the moon, on 10 April.
2nd Source: Bajirao the Great Peshwa by C.K. Srinivasan
When the news of the defeat of the Mughal troops by the Marathas spread, a sudden fear seized the citizens of Delhi who expected the attack of the Maratha conqueror any moment. But Baji Rao did not proceed with his vic¬ tory although he could have taken the city unopposed. He had received intelligence that the Vazir with his army was coming towards Delhi in rapid marches when he heard that Baji Rao was before the gates of the capital. The Peshwa realised that any further stay in the city would greatly imperil his position and endanger the lines of com¬ munication with the Maratha mainland. He was content with the imperial offer of the Viceroyalty of Malwa. He, therefore, left Delhi with his soldiers towards the south. The Peshwa suspected that the Nizam was active. He directed Chimnaji Appa that “ if he (Nizam) attempts to cross the Narmada, fall instantly on his rear and put heel ropes on him.” 3 Twenty miles from Delhi at a place called Badshahpur the Mughal soldiers of the Vazir were sighted. In fact an advance party of the Mughals saw Baji Rao and Mastani “ seated on the saddle cover, drinking and singing while they rested.” Now the Peshwa had to retreat as quickly as possible as a combination of the Mughal forces would prove disastrous to the Marathas. Passing through Rajputana he reached Narnol and then Ajmer. The Mughals could not pursue the Marathas and the Emperor had recalled them to Delhi. The Rajput princes once again affirmed their loyalty to the Peshwa and solicited his protection.
3rd Source: The reign of Muhammad Shah 1719-1748 by Zahiruddin Malik
As I don't have access to this book, kindly quote the information regarding the fancy defeat which you claim in context to this particular whole event but I have access to another book written by the same author which contradicts the claim you make. Also same author can't have different opinions in different books written by him of the same particular event here the raid. Here is the exact quote from the book;
A Mughal Statement of 18th century by Zahiruddin Malik
Baji Rao in order“to teach the Emperor a wholesome lesson’, appeared at the gates of Delhi on March 28, 1737, when the imperial generals were still absent.This caused great consternation and dismay in the capital. Although the Peshwa left the city suddenly, he exposed the weakness of the government. The demoralizing effect which the Peshwa’s surprise attack produced on the army and the citizens of Delhi was permanent.
So, in short none of them talk about the result of Maratha raid on Delhi (1737) but the result of individual battles fought in the whole event. The only source which talks about the result of the whole event which I know (till date) is The New Cambridge history of India Vol 2 Part 4. Here is the exact quote from that book about this particular event:
The campaign of 1737 was indecisive, though Bajirao attacked Delhi, even briefly holding the Emperor to ransom.
So, I reverted your edit. Now Don't argue about Badshahpur as that single war's retreat doesn't imply a similar result for the whole event here theMaratha Raid on Delhi (1737). Now you might have been familiar with what I want to convey to you after reading so much which I talked about above.
2*) For Nizam's Carnatic Campaign one I would recommend you to see; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_military_conflict, it clearly states only commanders of the particular battles involved are to be mentioned not anyone else in the COMMANDERS AND LEADERS section. Now you argue why I put disputed there, in a similar manner if I want to ask why did you put Bajirao I as the commander in the infobox then. This will not make sense as different sources state different commanders so the best way would be to mention the commander's name here Bajirao I and put disputed beside it. That's why I did that edit. Moreover see yours as well as Imperial comment on your talk page in this section; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DeepstoneV#Disruptive_Editing_on_Tipu_Sultan This discussion clearly shows that you already know if two WP:RS shows two different outcomes then you must display both in the infobox.
So now you get my point?
Now, If you revert or do an addition of information as per your POV in an article without reliable sources, I would report you to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and you will most likely get a permanent block. Also this is my third warning + talk about the article for which we are having edit disputes.
So, at last I would request you to contribute to Wikipedia not disrupt it and also I would be glad to have your cooperation rather than having edit fights which not only troubles me but you.
Hello deepstone ,
There is recently going a dispute in the Mughal Empire's talk page, Whether we should add "Indo-Muslim" before the empire in the lead or not, Though there are several WP:RS by well reputed historians such as [1]
which calls it Indo-Muslim, it still remains a matter of dispute and a RFC is held there. You can consider going there and give your vote/opinions on that. Thank you.
Malik-Al-Hind (talk) 07:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
^Richards, John F. (1995), The Mughal Empire, Cambridge University Press, p. 2, ISBN978-0-521-56603-2, archived from the original on 22 September 2023, retrieved 9 August 2017 Quote: "Although the first two Timurid emperors and many of their noblemen were recent migrants to the subcontinent, the dynasty and the empire itself became indisputably Indian. The interests and futures of all concerned were in India, not in ancestral homelands in the Middle East or Central Asia. Furthermore, the Mughal Empire emerged from the Indian historical experience. It was the end product of a millennium of Muslim conquest, colonization, and state-building in the Indian subcontinent."
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Based.Kashmiri(🗨️)08:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Based.Kashmiri(🗨️)08:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, DeepstoneV. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Battle of Pangal, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
A tag has been placed on Draft:Battle of Pangal, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GarudamTalk!22:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gunpowder weapons in the Bahmani Sultanate until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Pangal until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
