Dear Greatuser,
Thank for your contributions to Kuch Toh Log Kahenge. However, your edits have been reverted as the plote section is too long and there is already a summarized section titles as plot. And secondly more than two non-free images are not allowed in a single article. Please respect the policies of Wikipedia. For more information please visit the following articles:
Deleting references is pure vandalism. Stop or you may be blocked from editing. And "opening credits of the show" is no citation. And logo means the LOGO (Hope you know the meaning) and not the "BODY of the protagonist". And not even when the show is to air. Just the Logo. --Tamravidhir (Jiva is Shiva!) 15:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are so stubborn! Man...what long edits? Please read the mentioned articles. Phir zaban ladana. "Removing images" can't you read more than two non-free images not allowed. I am being polite don't start a fight, or else you may be permanently blocked like Dadjan. --Tamravidhir (Jiva is Shiva!) 15:16, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Galli galli.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article is not too long and references are copy pasted directly from main article.Information is given about film in lead section but not regarding awards.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hello Greatuser. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Blackton, Arkansas, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 15:49, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On the page of 2013 Bollywood movies, would you be able to explain your reverts of the addition of 100 years, as it is sourced with an acceptable source? gwickwiretalkedits16:15, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you meant of course, but anyways: The Bollywood page says this: "Raja Harishchandra (1913), by Dadasaheb Phalke, was the first silent feature film made in India." and the source provided for the edit confirms that. I'd suggest that you take a look, as 100 years is 2013 according to these two sources. Provide a source for the 2012 date or else please stop reverting. gwickwiretalkedits23:27, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm not Reviewer" - WP:Reviewing is for the Reviewer right for pending changes, not the process of reviewing pages for statuses (GA, FA, B class etc.) - Also, just a suggestion, as the reviewer, you might as well finish the job of updating the status. -- Cheers, Riley16:39, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As Thine Antique Pen stated "[..] if the reviewer believes that the criteria are met, then the reviewer should list it as a Good article." (WP:RGA). Thank you for your time. -- Cheers, Riley18:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Greatuser, it has been three days since I informed you the above. There is no reason for you to be delaying this process and as I can see from your contributions, you obviously have had time time to do this action. Please finish the review or remove yourself as reviewer. -- Cheers, Riley05:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am confused as to why you are "thinking of reviewing the page" since you have already reviewed the page. -- Cheers, Riley05:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Claimed good articles
I noticed that you claimed credit for Rani Mukerji. The first two edits you made were reverted. Same for the third. This happened again with the fourth, fifth and then your final edit. You cannot claim GA credit for this. All edits were also made after the article was promoted to GA.
I see that you also claim GA credit for Kajol. Almost all of your edits were reverted here, with a single edit staying on the article. (One and Two.) Again, all of your edits were made after the promotion.
The final article I looked at was Vidya Balan - which you claimed GA credit for, despite the fact that it's a featured article. Here almost all of your edits were reverted and you started an edit war. See 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18.
You just shouldn't and can't claim GA credit (or FA) for any of these, with contributions as minor as these and edit warring on the article. Please do not claim credit for them, or any articles where you make minor changes, in the future. Thanks. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 17:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have not claimed that these credits (GA or FA) goes to me, I just have made more contributions rather than others See the page and User:Greatuser#Articles I've Worked on The Page says that the articles i have worked on (not articles i have promoted to GA or FA) and i just have given the status to the page to define page's status, Thank You Greatuser (talk) 12:38, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you shouldn't state that you've worked on them. It is wrong to say that you are a significant contributor to an article where almost all of your changes were reverted. Also, explain the following?
"This user has contributed to many good articles."
"This user has contributed to many Featured articles."
It's interesting that I have been a major contributor for all the 3 articles that he has taken credit for. Even more interesting is that all of his edits were non-constructive and were reverted back. So, 'Greatuser', kindly remove such claims from your profile. smarojit(buzz me)06:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
License tagging for File:Zara Nachke Dikha.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Zara Nachke Dikha.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.
To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:05, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kaali - Ek Punar Avatar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Show (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello. You have a new message at Benhen1997's talk page.
Hello. You have a new message at Benhen1997's talk page.
Parineeti Chopra GA
Hey, you haven't provided exact reasons for nominating Chopra's article, pls do so to complete the actual nomination.so, we'll review it.ThanksPks1142 (talk) 13:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
False claims
Greatuser, I see that you claim to have "worked" on Shahrukh Khan, Salman Khan, Vidya Balan and other such articles. Let me remind you that all of your edits on Balan's page were non-constructive and were removed. Also, your edits on Shahrukh and Salman's pages are minor (you have less than 13 edits) and mostly non-constructive. Keeping that in mind, I request you to remove such claims from your userpage. Also, i see that you have nominated Shahrukh's article for GA without consulting with any of the major contributors. Please refrain from doing so in the future. --smarojit(buzz me)07:01, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You recently nominated Sapnon Hai Pyaar Ki Kahani for speedy deletion. Please note that the category you tagged it under(blatant hoax/vandalism) was incorrect, as the subject of the article is verifiable and notable. Please also note that an article's quality is not criterion itself for deletion, and we should always try to improve articles than deleting them.
The article under question undoubtedly belongs here, and I suggest you please look into Wikipedia:CSD before nominating any further articles.
The Problem is not that article is not improved, unreferenced, oudated or any other thing.. The Problem is that the article is Blatant/Hoax and please don't create hoax(es), A hoax is an attempt to trick an audience into believing that something false is real. Since Wikipedia is an "encyclopedia anyone can edit", it can be abused to create hoaxes Greatuser (talk) 15:23, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake. I apologize. I really should have seen before I brought that article from AfC to article-space. Thank you for pointing that out.
The article has failed to meet GA criteria. However, some suggestions are there in the review page. The article has potential. Please consider re-submitting it after appropriate improvement. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 22:08, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A suggeston for you
Hello,
While it is nice to see a new editor (especially from India) who is actively interested in editing Wikipedia, I would suggest that you get to know a few things around here before you actually work extensively. For example, it usually is not a habit for users to add articles they have nominated or reviewed to their user page [At the same time, please also note that since we are talking of user pages, it would not be that much of a problem]
However I am quite concerned over how you reviewed Bade achche lagte hai, for example. It might do you good if you learn up on how the system works before diving headfirst - One of the reasons why i do not do GA reviews. Also, you might be interested in this programme - Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user.
I was undoing edits like this [1] by 2.24.45.207, so your recent edit seem to be a mistake. Please check out the article's history 2.24.45.207's edits and revert yourself. Thanks. --182.185.45.108 (talk) 17:05, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your removal of content at Sunil Gangopadhyay was inappropriate as the text added was not vandalism. Please be more cautious in your use of STiki, as we want to minimize errors as much as we can. I have reverted your edit back.
With regard to your request , as you are using Stiki anyway, I have now accorded you the use of the rollback tool. Please note however that rollback may only be used for clear cases of vandalism and can be revoked if misused. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:19, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Galli galli.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:09, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to STiki!
Hello, Greatuser, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Greetings Greatuser. You've surely seen the concerns raised here and elsewhere about your use of the STiki tool. For 150 edits yesterday you reverted 95% of the edits you reviewed. STiki has some pretty good performance, but not *that* good (we're used to seeing rates < 50%). We have to ask that you voluntarily stop using the tool for a period until you demonstrate better judgement (if this is not respected, you will be blocked, but I trust it will not come to this). The most direct route to achieving this is to enroll in the Counter vandalism academy and find a mentor there. Thank you, West.andrew.g (talk) 16:28, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Greatuser. I originally declined your request for rollback but having seen that Andrew accorded you the use of Stiki, I granted the right. In hindsight, I should have still declined. However, I will not be revoking the right at this time, but I will be closely watching your edits. If they do not improve, I will have no option but to remove the right again. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Greatuser. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:STiki. Message added 10:13, 15 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Orphaned non-free media (File:Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:09, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A cup of coffee for you!
Enough of misunderstandings already now!!! Lets just enjoy a cup of coffee and look forward to your happy editing stay at Wikipedia. Just be sure before making any edit which you are doubtful of, and ask me or any of the editors when in doubt.
Hello, I am new to wikipedia and can't get my head around the referencing. I work for East Street Arts and I'm trying to edit the out-of-date information on the current page. I spent a whole day on it and now my edits have been removed, even though they are factually correct. The version you have reverted to contains incorrect information. I need to change many sections and remove old material, but I'm not sure how to do that without you removing them. It's all new to me so might need to give me advice. Do I need to archive everything, rather than delete it? Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.25.239 (talk) 11:26, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good/Featured Articles
I'd just like some explanation here. See, every review/nomination you've listed on your talkpage you review/nominate as "in my view it meets the criteria". Then, in the case of the nominations, they are opposed quickly. In the case of the reviewers, other editors quickly come and point out major glaring problems with the articles. I'd like to request that you take a look over the Good Article Criteria and Featured Article Criteria before making any more nominations or reviews, or explain your previous actions here. Thanks. No need for talkback messages, I'm watching this page. gwickwiretalkedits03:35, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am newly user so I can't easily point out mistakes for the articles but slowly slowly I am getting aware about Wikipedia, So I am reviewing nomination so that i can get aware about WP:WIAGA, WP:GA, WP:FA and such pages.. Thank You Greatuser (talk) 04:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Basically our point is that you shouldn't be reviewing or nominating articles for GA or FA status unless you are confident you can finish the review/nomination. It's a lot of work to get an article to GA status. People spend weeks getting feedback on the review page and updating the article to make it work. It's not something that can be done in just a "I'm opening this review and I see no problems I fix them myself if I see any". You need to spend probably hours looking at every word in the article to make sure there aren't any problems. I'm not sure that there's any articles that have passed with absolutely no concerns ever. Please sit back and watch some reviews by others without commenting, and then maybe you can start reviewing articles when you have a better understanding of how the process works. Also, I noticed that users have suggested adoption for you in the past. I think this would be a great idea for you, as it does show you the different areas of Wikipedia in a way that is pretty hard to do on your own. gwickwiretalkedits20:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Resilient Barnstar
Hello Greatuser! I've been seeing you a lot months and days ago at WP:PERM. I'm impressed with you because after all your works in this encyclopedia and those "Not done" that you were receiving at PERM, you still proving on how you will be a good editor. Well-deserved on you now have rights on rollback. Kudos! :) Mediran (t • c) 03:19, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Greatuser. You have new messages at Jim1138's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Orphaned non-free media (File:Pyaar Kii Ye Ek Kahaani.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Pyaar Kii Ye Ek Kahaani.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:23, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rollback
Hi Greatuser. I'm just letting you know that I have removed your use of the rollback tool. I am very concerned that you are incorrectly reverting edits as vandalism. Also, I'm asking you to stop using Stiki now, until Andrew has been able to review the situation. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:03, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But, Why? After I claimed that give me a chance to re-prove, My edits really improved please don't rv this right after that i used the right properly please Re-grant me this right I will no more do such works, Thank You Greatuser (talk) 13:10, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry I've had to do this Greatuser, but you clearly still do not yet understand what conqstitutes vandalism. You can continue to do manual reverts, but please be extremely carful which you label as vandalism. Please stop using Stiki until Andrew has spoken. It's better for you stop now before someone raises an issue on an Admin noticeboard. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:20, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You TheOriginalSoni for your great suggestion but now it's the time i want to be Semi-Retired So I wanna leave Wikipedia, Any other day i may join back wikipedia But Really I can't understand rules and regulations of Wikipedia, Thank You Greatuser (talk) 18:24, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
December 2012
Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at Poacher (fish), are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage newer editors. Please read Wikipedia:NOTVAND for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. Psychonaut (talk) 17:22, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The use of the Double Feature font actually requires that you credit the author. Its much like a Creative Commons license. See here and here. To avoid issues, please add Double Feature font by David Shetterly somewhere on the page you are using the font. In this case on your front user page. If you fail to do so, it will be subject to editing and changing back to a regular font or having the attribution added for you.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:39, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is that true? IANAL, but wouldn't any attribution requirement be invoked either when the font is installed or when printed in hard copy or some device independent format. All Greatuser's page does is make a modest request to render certain text in the Double Feature font, if available - a request that my browser can't honor because I haven't installed that font. Shetterly's right to attribution would apply when the font is displayed, but not when it is merely mentioned. Kilopi (talk) 07:11, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is simple. It is being "used" on Wikipedia in "any manner" which, means I, having the font (as many Rocky Horror fans do) will see it displayed...and prominantly. This is about allowing any use on a site that as well requires attribution. I don't think this is controversial. However we can simply remove it from showing up at all and return it to a regular font no matter who has it. The same is true with fonts that may have a copyright. It displays because the code is written to display it.--Amadscientist (talk) 07:30, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I really have had bad contributions to Wikipedia, my intention was not to disrupt Wikipedia But now i have decided to re-join wikipedia and will try to improve Wikipedia, Thank You Marry Christmas to you too Greatuser (talk) 15:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No Problem dude!!! ShIt happens!! The only reasons your contributions were not as good as the others was because you were not trained in the various policies that things are done. You are much more willing to help Wikipedia than I am and we need exactly that sort of enthusiasm in our new editors!!!
I believe that if you are guided properly, you shall become one of Wiki's more active and most contributing members (like the ones whose names you see everywhere.) That way, you will be way more constructive that you are right now. If you are willing to, I (and other editors) can quickly help you do that. That way, you wont have to learn by making mistakes over which others have to stop you every time you make a mistake. What do you say to that? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:30, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thats brilliant. Good luck and I hope you have a nice stay at Wikipedia!!! Feel free to ask me if you have any questions (FYI I pride myself on making quality replies on the moodbar feedback. You may want so see some good replies there just to get a good clue.) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:01, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Greatuser. You have new messages at Kashmiri's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I needed the C.I.D. logo for the Bengali series (the article is just started, but it'll be expanded over time): C.I.D. Kolkata Bureau. I have added your uploaded image and added a second rationale for the use of the Bengali TV series article! --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For future reference.."If the proposer of the merge did not start a discussion for the merge, and it is not obvious why the articles should be merged, it is acceptable to remove the tags. If the reason for the merge is obvious, you can either merge the articles boldly, or start a new discussion." If you don't begin a discussion as the merg proposer...it is almost immediatly a stale merge. So unless it is obvious..the tag could have been removed without it being considered an edit war. See Wikipedia:Merging, Help:Merging and Wikipedia:WikiProject Merge.--Amadscientist (talk) 07:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"If it is not obvious". I believed it was more than obvious, but seems I was wrong and some people did not notice the great deal of overlap between the two articles. My fault, next time I will explain everything like to schoolchildren. kashmiri09:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have not claimed that it's not obvious or any thing else.. But i just have claimed that when you merge or do any other action, you have to give a valid reason so it can be clarified to every user, and can be done (not)against the page which you want to do an action, Thank You A Great User✉✉10:42, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If an editor is using the merge proposal process, it is up to them to do it correctly or it creates a huge backlog....like there already is. Calling other editors "Schoolchildren" is a sign of NAGF Kashmiri. Tags are routinely removed for lack of discussion. No discussion created means no one discusses and no consensus is determined.--Amadscientist (talk) 11:04, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would have been a good idea to check this user's edits Special:Contributions/Turtlees which is a vandalism only account before thanking them for a feedback in which they were happy to vandalize Wikipedia (where the feedback provided was after that account had vandalized various articles). Next time, try not to blanket copy paste messages on each feedback before checking the person's contributions. Thank you. TheGeneralUser(talk)23:39, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you are trying to nominate List of awards and nominations received by Vidya Balan. I just breezed through the nomination that you sent, and I found that there were many places you marked "Done" but did not edit the article appropriately. Do you want me to co-nominate the article? I could help address all of those concerns.
If your answer is a yes, first remove ALL the "Done"s you have posted. Let me check if they are actually done or not
No no no!! The article is primarily yours, and I wont interfere in it unless you specifically state so. I just saw you might be needing help, so i asked. If you want me to co-nom, then please remove all the "done"s from there, or allow me to. Then I shall look into it. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:36, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
STOP! Dont edit before I say you can. I am in the middle of an edit, and you editing the article will lead to non-recoverable edit conflicts! Just wait before doing anything to the page or the FLC nomination page. When I say you can, only then edit please.
Alright. I am taking a short break for now. There are way too many problems with the article. See what changes I have made, and please learn from them. See which are the problems that I have marked as solved, and how I have solved them. Make any edits you want in the next few minutes. When I want you to stop and allow me to do them, I'll tell you. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. apparently you forgot to close the PR before you went to FLC. NO ARTICLE CAN BE AT PR AND GA/FA/FLC AT THE SAME TIME. In any case, I have withdrawn the nomination in favour of getting the PR done. Once that is finished, only then will we go forward with the FLC again. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please read twice and thrice before making a single change here. I said I was preferring PR over FLC. This is because the article will not go through FLC if it remains as is. It needs to go through PR once properly before FLC. Please remove your last comment, ans re-open the PR. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:41, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So what? Thats not a problem. [See my Withdrawing of the FLC]
The thing is there are way too many problems in the list to be able to stand FLC [As you have already seen]. A PR helps solve 90% of them before you go to FLC for that very purpose. Close the FLC, re-open the PR; let it run; and then lets come back to FLC. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 09:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I rollbacked both your closing of the PR and your comment at FLC. I hope you dont mind. Please wait patiently and let the due process run its course. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 09:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
HAPPY BIRTHDAY
A very HAPPY BIRTHDAY to you GreatUser!!!!
From Soni.
TheOriginalSoni (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year and a very Happy Birthday!! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
){kind=link}
_2){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}