The Developing Countries WikiContest has now been running for two months, and we've seen tremendous improvement in the encyclopedic coverage of several underrepresented areas from a wide range of editors! The coordinators would like to highlght some of the newer faces who have been making notable contributions in the contest, including but by no means limited to:
Only one month remains until the end of the contest, so it's time to make your remaining nominations! Please consider answering some review requests, particularly the older entries, as a way of helping out your fellow participants and moving up the leaderboard. Good luck!
I added a discussion regarding the reliability of the source cited in the article which has discrepancy in population and area data. Kindly go through it.
@MVDR Enthusiast While it is appreciated that you had started a conversation, it has nothing to do with your edit on the page. You had removed information for a specific city from a list which was properly sourced. This was undue and unwarranted. Meanwhile, let the discussion evolve and please refrain from making non-constructive edits to the page without consensus. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 12:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I aware of it, that's why I didn't edit the page further, while I have opened discussion. At the same time, I sure about data of Tiruchirapalli, that is the reason to remove the particular city, meanwhile, I not aware about other cities. Anyways, seeking for constructive discussion for the better result. Thanks! MVDR Enthusiast (talk) 16:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the following articles to which you have significantly contributed, are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted:
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 Tamil Nadu Premier League until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
Hi Magentic Manifestations. Thank you for your work on Bommalattam. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Nice work
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
WikiProject Cricket's annual newsletter titled The Stump Sapient is slated to be launched in December 2024. Following is a list of things that are to be included in the newsletter. Your contribution by editing the newsletter is appreciated.
Project news: Project news from WP:CRIC including the list of Awards presented in 2024 and the final results of Contests held in 2024.
Article news: Article news from WP:CRIC including list of FAC, FLC, FPC, PR, GAN, ITN, RD etc. from 2024.
Cricket news: Summary of International Cricket events took place in 2024 from T20 World Cups to WTC pathway.
You're receiving this message because, you've been added to the mailing list and will receive the newsletter. Tell others about the newsletter as well. Thank You!
Upcoming contests
Cricket Picture of the Year 2024: Nominations will open up in mid-October.
Cricket WikiContest 2025: More details will be revealed soon.
You're receiving this message because, you've been added to the mailing list and will receive the newsletter. Tell others about the newsletter as well. Thank You!
For successfully promoting 15 good articles in the Developing Countries WikiContest, the most of any participant, here is a special award! Thank you for making the encyclopedia more Complete.
The 2024 Developing Countries WikiContest has come to a close! After a thrilling finish to the event with a slew of submissions on the final day, we have our winners. With 608 points, Thebiguglyalien (submissions) comes in third with his series of Kiribati and Botswanan submissions; BeanieFan11 (submissions) flies into second place at the last second with 771 points after a string of good articles about sportspersons; and after leading for much of contest's three months, Generalissima (submissions) finishes with a whopping 798 points to take home the Gold Belt Buckle. Congratulations to our winners!
In addition to his spot in the top three, BeanieFan11 (submissions) also wins the special awards for submitting under the most countries (44 countries) and for writing the most articles about women (15 Did you know? nominations)! Magentic Manifestations (submissions), after making 16 submissions under the Indian flag—15 of them good articles—receives the awards for most submissions for a single country and most featured or good articles promoted. For their submission of one FAC review, five FLC reviews, and 20 GAN reviews, Simongraham (submissions) wins for most article reviews.
The results of the contest have far exceeded any expectations the coordinators had for it at the beginning: among the submissions to the event were 3 FAs, 10 FLs, 88 GAs, dozens of article reviews of every kind, and more Did you know? submissions than we can count! Regardless of your level of participation, every contestant can be proud to have contributed towards a major step in countering the systemic bias on Wikipedia. Every year, millions of readers and editors around the globe use Wikipedia to educate themselves and communicate with others about parts of the world that often receive less attention than they deserve. Thank you for participating with us in the contest and contributing to this effort. The DCWC will return next year and we look forward to seeing you contribute again! However, before that...
We need your feedback! Join the conversation on the talk page to discuss your reflections on the contest (even if you didn't participate!) and help us make it better.
I saw this on my talk page, "Magentic Manifestations (submissions), after making 16 submissions under the Indian flag—15 of them good articles—receives the awards for most submissions for a single country and most featured or good articles promoted."
Regarding the article Tamil culture, as you could have seen during the GAR, there is quite a lot of differences of opinion with some of the other editors. In my experience, articles such as this often end up in repeated discussion loops and take a lot of time if indeed it makes it to GA. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 09:39, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cricket Picture of the Year 2024 – Nominations open now!
Hey, I noticed you reverted my edit on the Canada–India relations page. I understand that I shouldn't have included the whole quote, so I'm sorry about that. I've rephrased the line using a reliable source this time. Could you take a look and let me know if it's okay now? Thanks! राजकुमार(talk)13:27, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Magentic Manifestations, I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to express my appreciation for the good-faith revert you made on the Andaman and Nicobar Islands page with respect to NLC Dolly Gunj Solar Power Plant, which were added by me after the merger discussion. Unfortunately, I didn’t include this in the edit summary, which may not have given you the full context. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused. Your role in the editing process is crucial, and I would greatly appreciate if you would consider revisiting your edit if you would be open to it? Charlie (talk) 17:25, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CharlieMehta Appreciate you reaching out. While I can see that the article was deleted after a due discussion, deletion is altogether different from a merger. A deletion of the article does not mean an as-is copy-paste to the relevant parent article. I have not done a good faith revert but have rather re-phrased it into a single sentence which captures the requisite information related to the context of the overall article. I am not sure what exactly is your concern here. Would be great if you can elaborate. Cheers! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 17:35, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have just carefully read the sentence, 'Commissioned in June 2020, a 10 MW photovoltaic power station is operated by NLC India in Port Blair.' I apologize once again for any confusion caused. I really appreciate your patience and kindness in clarifying this for me. Charlie (talk) 17:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Formula One car, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Formula One car, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
I'm not sure if you're misunderstanding or deliberately adding incorrect information. Indian Railways is NOT a statutory body (where’s the source for that?) or a railway company (source?). Such claims are purely WP:OR, factually incorrect, and contradict existing sources. This article cited for this claim explicitly states that "Railways are a department" and suggests it should be registered as a "section 25 company under the Indian Companies Act or a statutory corporation by an act of Parliament", which means it is currently neither a company nor a statutory body, but they urge it should be made one. Understand the difference? On the other hand, Railway Board is a statutory body established as per the Act of the Parliament (1905), which is also structured as a de facto company, that's why its top official is called a CEO. The IR formation date in your infobox is also incorrect, which I had corrected per the officially recognized date. There is no “superior” or “inferior” infobox, only the appropriate one. 117.230.85.195 (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My points below:
a. Company vs. Department: Basically IR is a company which provides railway and allied services. For one, It is as such mentioned in the Government source 1, as a railway company under the purview of the Ministry of Railways. So, if it is used by a Government source, it is rather right and not an original research to use the term rather than a TOI/ET article which is not a reliable source (See WP:TOI). This modification from a statutory body to a railway company was part of my last edit. If you had paid attention to it, rather than doing a wholesale non-constructive and blind revert, you would have got that. As large state-owned enterprises such as post, railways etc. are organized as departmental undertakings, I had modified the statement to be clearer and unambiguous with a note stating that it is one of the three ways public sector companies are organized in India (departmental undertaking, statutory body, and public company). This should solve the conundrum.
b. Infobox changes:
While as such there is no inferior/superior infobox with respect to the infobox itself, the earlier infobox captured much more information, which you conveniently removed in the name of changing the infobox. This was unwarranted, is not constructive, and serves no purpose. Technically, a government agency is different from a department, so I do not see a rationale to change it.
Do agree that the rail transport began in 1837, and IR is considered to have been established in 1853, when the first passenger train ran. The corresponding edits have been made, with the appropriate source.
You had changed the employee count without giving a updated source. You can make the change if you have an updated source for backing it up.
d. Railway board: The Railway board consists of only five members, which is explicitly and clearly mentioned from the press release by the Government on the reconstitution of the railway board 2. I am certainly not against the mention of the chairman as the CEO, as it is mentioned in the infobox as such already. There are four additional DGs, who are on special duty, and I have made corresponding edits to be more clearer on the same. The chairman can have "n" people reporting to him and that does not mean that all are members of the board. So, it seems that you are the one doing WP:OR here.
Hope I have been pretty clear with the points. While I appreciate the corrections/updates that came out of it such as the DOE and the expansion of the railway board, the other changes were non-constructive, and not backed by sources. It could have been better if you had engaged in a discussion before changing the status quo, rather than doing a wholesale revert and discussing later. I would also suggest creating an account, as the changes and comments are made from different IP addresses and not sure whether you are doing it, or multiple people are involved. Would be happy to discuss in case you have further queries. Thanks! M2 (talk) 06:34, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clarification on Removal of Al Jazeera Citation
Hi Magentic Manifestations,
I noticed that you removed the Al Jazeera citation I added to the Gukesh Dommaraju article, supporting the statement:
"He earned the title of grandmaster at the age of 12 and remains the third-youngest grandmaster in the history of chess."
The Al Jazeera article explicitly states:
"By the age of 12, Gukesh had become a grandmaster – the highest title a chess player can attain – making him the third-youngest grandmaster in history and the youngest one from India.source link
Since the source directly supports the claim and Al Jazeera is generally regarded as a reliable source on Wikipedia, I believe it was a valid reference. Could you clarify the reason for its removal? If there are specific concerns, I’d be happy to discuss or find a resolution.
@Sheikbaba36524 Hi! Couldn't revert as I was away for sometime. I had done a general clean-up and copy edit of the page. It could have been removed as the statement had been cited by other sources. Do let me know in case if it has been done to the contrary. Thanks! M2 (talk) 06:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This message was sent to you because you have been added to the WikiProject Cricket's news mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for good article nomination reviews will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog.
Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age of nominations reviewed.
Each article review will earn 1 point; for each 90 days an article has been in the backlog, an additional half-point is awarded; one extra point will be awarded for every 2500 total reviewed words.
@Jagadeesh93, While I appreciate your effort to reach out, your text is slightly confusing as it is a combination of links without an explanation of what you had tried to convey. I will elaborate the reasons why your edit has been reverted:
General comments:
If you are updating data from other sources, it should be consistent across the infobox and body of the article. You removed the data and citation from the infobox, leaving an orphan to the citation "C40".
While providing a source, please make sure it is cited properly with relevant page numbers rather than bare links to pages/documents.
The infobox has a certain way of arrangement and is meant for key parameters to be conveyed. You had introduced multiple confusing GDP numbers across three different sections of the infobox (existing one, one below the languages, other separate section) with notes, which is confusing and introduces a clutter.
Coming to the data and sources,
b. If Government source is available, it can be construed as an official source for the same. However, as the source gives GDP estimates based on districts and as the Chennai district was aligned with the city limits only in 2018, and the data is based on old limits, it rather introduces a confusing third different number.
c. While the source provides the data for the district, not sure where you had taken the number for the metropolitan area. You had quoted the same Government source, but the data seems to be non existent.
d. Regarding PPP conversion, while your methodology might be correct, the source does not explicitly state either the numbers or the conversion methodology. Any data updated has to be explicitly stated by the reliable source, and conversion needs to be done using standard templates if the methodology is specified with numbers in the source. Do not include calculations based on individual assumptions and conversions from other sources, without proper citations.
e. The C40 data mentions as corresponding to the city area (426 sq. km.), and basis your computations, it matches with the Government projections for old city limit. So this means that the C40 data might as well correspond to only old city limits.
To conclude, the official data can be mentioned with a note for the old city limits. If there is proper citation for the metropolitan data, it can be included under the same section in the infobox. The PPP data and conversion is unwarranted, not explicitly stated, and confusing.
Generally I think most people (except economists) seems to have no idea on economics. I just wanted to show people accurate data. Please guide me how should I include in infobox without confusing general visitors.
The source i added from tamilnadu govt has real GDP both nominal GDP.
Regarding PPP there are no readily available sources which will show gdp of city in USD because just like I explained -
As of 2023 1 USD = 82.181 INR
(Chennai city = 289481.19 Crore/82.181 = $ 35.23 Billion)
But there are no sources which shows converted exact value in USD 35.23 Billion.
But in Wikipedia if we use INRConvert shortcut then it'll convert INR to current ( 2024 rate ) i.e, wikipedia has inbuilt currency converter.
In the same way wikipedia don't have PPP converter. So I used implied PPP rates from imf to convert INR to USD PPP rate.
Regarding C40 cities I can explain calculation on how it came to its GDP number but it will be more complex that people who are not from commerce , maths , economics background will gets confused . Still iam explaining.
The previous calculation that I have shown you where Nominal GDP-PPP of old chennai matching Real GDP-PPP of C40 present chennai purely coincidence. Let me explain by reverse engineering of C40.
.jpg)
