User talk:RationalPuff

Hello, RationalPuff, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Crisco 1492 Happy editing! Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)Reply Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard - a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Your edit to South African Council for the Architectural Profession 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 more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. 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. — Diannaa (talk) 11:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Venkatesh Gattem. Why are you going too fast in adding Speedy deletion templates without going through the regulations? Seen a multiple requests submitted by you were reverted in hours, its just creating a panic and loss of time for other experienced editors. I suggest you to go through the Speedy deletion regulations and requirements. Deleting unnecessary articles is a great job on Wikipedia, but its not a playful thing to do. iMahesh (talk) 10:47, 27 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

iMahesh Your message appears to be WP:BULLY. Calm down. Merely nominating for speedy deletions do not construde disruptions. You may not like the action, however, anyone intend to contribute to the Wikipedia to improve it must be prepared to have their work scrutinized, analyzed, and criticised. Assuming moral high ground is not the right approach rather than refuting objectively. You are of course well within your rights to report violations/violators.RationalPuff (talk) 12:06, 27 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

@RationalPuff: Thanks for reply, it confirms your attention towards the talk-page and I don’t think NOMINATING RANDOM ARTICLES for CSD is a common task on Wikipedia. CSDs are controversial in some cases. I can see all CSD tags added by you were removed by other editors. Please go through the criteria of speedy deletion. As I said removing unnecessary pages on Wikipedia is a good job, but nominating random pages isn’t. Its just random act to nominate pages for CSD and later for PRODs and AFDs. Please go through WP:FIELD for learning more about Deletion requests; when and where to place them. And the above message wasn’t only concentric towards article I’ve mentioned, I went through all your contributions to place the appropriate template. By the way, Iam amazed for your knowledge on WP policies in such a short number of edits in workspace despite being a Wikipedian for many years. —iMahesh (talk) 18:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. iMahesh (talk) 16:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Closing Note: Article Venkatesh Gattem the user above was propogating eventually deleted via AFD. RationalPuff (talk) 10:57, 9 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate.

Thanks for including a link to the site's terms and conditions but those terms and conditions are not compatible with Wikipedia requirements. Please let me know if you do not understand.

S Philbrick(Talk) 20:31, 9 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, I noticed you reverted my edit on the article (which was a minor text change and a regional language source) as "non contextual". Would you mind explaining how that is "non contextual" to warrant a revert? The article is clearly under sourced and is only afloat because of WP:GEOLAND, and the source which states "medium sized planes" is not entirely reliable either. Thanks! Bingobro (Chat) 07:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your message. The source you have included and changes you made to say airstrip will be "extended for operation" didn't agree. The airstrip in it's current state already operational. The source already in the article has mention of the plans for "medium sized planes". Your source may have some relevance. Please feel free to add that back in if you can capture the content of it. Agree WP:GEOLAND kept it alive. The article originally touted it as an airport. RationalPuff (talk) 08:31, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

I doubt the airstrip is operational (even for GA aircraft), the source I found states that the strip has no infrastructure and is used for recreation and cattle grazing, the few photos available online are mostly of people randomly roaming around the airstrip and satellite imagery show the airstrip to be in a rundown state (there's no perimeter, runway is unmarked and has vehicle tire tracks all over it). Bingobro (Chat) 06:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

It is not a Civil Aviation asset and not meant for operation of commercial flights. It's nothing more than small patch of paved area in use only by choppers/GA on-demand. But the the main point is, you would need a "source" for citing anything beyond what is currently known. RationalPuff (talk) 11:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

I closed this as soft-delete, but an editor asked for it to be undeleted which I am compelled to do per the policy.

Up to you if you renominate it.

Cheers, Daniel (talk) 00:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

RationalPuff I do not know the reason for your nomination to delete Sanaa AlSarghali article, as she is the first Palestinian woman to obtain a doctorate in constitutional law, and she represents a large segment of Palestinian women and Arab society, and she is the first woman to participate in the editing of the Palestinian constitution, and she is the most prominent Palestinian researcher, and she is the first founder A center for constitutional studies, the first of its kind in the Arab world--Osps7 (talk) 17:27, 2 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Listen, I am no fan of the way our A7's are handled or worded but the last two you've tagged very much don't meet the low bar for A7 and there are several more in your recent edits that are incorrect as well. I'd encourage you to re-read the speedy criteria before continuing to tag. CUPIDICAE💕 17:52, 2 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Praxidicae: On a learning curve here. Agree, A7 may not be strong enough but I do think nobility criteria for these articles are weak, may be AfD is more appropriate than CSD. Thanks for pointing out. RationalPuff (talk) 13:23, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

It appears my comment didn't really sink in. I suggest staying away from speedies for a bit. this is absolutely not an A1, even in it's initial edit and this isn't g2 or g3 CUPIDICAE💕 19:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello, RationalPuff,

Just a reminder that whenever you tag a page for deletion (CSD, PROD or AFD/CFD/TFD/etc.), you should post a notice on the talk page of the page creator. If you use Twinkle, the program will automatically post a talk page notice for you once you set up your Preferences which makes things easy. Thank you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:40, 9 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Liz: Thought always do as I tag using Twinkle unless something went wrong. Did you spot any where notifications were not posted? RationalPuff (talk) 22:07, 9 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi @RationalPuff:, I was pretty much in the same situation when I was early into new page patrol. I too started nominating too many pages, and was eventually the subject of a administration board discussion. The Advice I got was that CSDs are usually reserved for articles that have zero hint of any notability. If you have even a single claim of notability, it might be better to not CSD it. There are other routes the article can take

• Draftify - If the subject is notable but article is written bad, this is the way to go.
• PROD - you can mention your concern, it will last for 2 weeks on the page. Then if there is no action taken on it, a single admin will make the final decision.
• AfD - A proper debate, I guess you are already aware of it.
• CSD

Try not to be biased when nominating things, say for example , If Biswaroop Roy Choudhary's article is created. Don't CSD it. It deserves a debate, even If you think an article about him would not benefit the world. Daiyusha (talk) 05:26, 10 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Daiyusha:(talk page stalker) I don't think this advice is quite right - for example, an article can be speedy deleted per WP:G12 and still talk about a notable topic. A better way of looking at it is - can any neutral editor fix this article? For example, the archetypical A7 example I give is "Timmy is my pet cat. He has nice black and white stripes and enjoys catching mice". User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to A7 has further information. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:00, 18 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello, RationalPuff recently my article Dr. Hemant Sonare is nominated for deletion. could you please undo deleted article so I will improve it and as beginner I need some help in how should I will correctes my mistakes.(Thank You)--AmanMsonare (talk) 17:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

@AmanMsonare: From what I remember you have to rewrite it completely ensuring it meets the Wikipedia WP:N and WP:RS criteria. If not, it will be deleted again. Please remember repeatedly creating articles that do not meet these criteria will be permanently salted. Also be aware of WP:COI if you are creating articles about yourself, family, friends and other relationships, which is generally not permitted unless you disclose it appropriately. RationalPuff (talk) 17:38, 11 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've noticed you getting uppity and cross over some trolls and vandals. Please don't do that. At best it doesn't do at anything; at worst it means the whole point of these editors - attention seeking - is working and they are getting through to you. Do not insult the vandals. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:54, 18 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please review WP:G6. That page did not meet those criteria. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:59, 18 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

When reporting socks, please note, the oldest named account is considered the master. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 19:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

You have been bent on getting Mr. Ravi IPS's page deleted. You have belittled all his achievements. You also mentioned the award seems to be awarded at least in part merely for long routine service. Then why do we have a wikipedia page for the award alone?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Police_Medal - This award page that we are talking about interestingly has Mr. Ravi's name mentioned under the state of Tamilnadu.

Citations - Articles and news have mentioned him as the ADGP and not Ravi.

A.Abraham.A (talk) 10:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

@A.Abraham.A: Merely receiving awards doesn't warrant an independent Wikipedia page. Job related awards are generally considered run-of-the-mill. Wikipedia:RUNOFTHEMILL. Please familiarise with the nobility guidelines WP:NBIO and how you support claims in the article WP:RS. Also it's important to understand what Wikipedia is not for WP:NOT WP:NOTLINKEDIN. Your article didn't meet any of these criteria was the reason for deletion. Hope this helps. RationalPuff (talk) 12:33, 19 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi User:RationalPuff I need your attention to the below discussion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cheman_Shaik

• I have provided more secondary citations as evidence for WP:GNG, importance of the invention, authenticity of the invention in the discussion.
• Improved the article.Wisdomwiki 40 (talk) 14:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

doesn't yet meet RS, unfortunately. There are already usful comments from the other editors on the AfD page. Do you have CoI with the subject? If you do, you must disclose it appropriately.k RationalPuff (talk) 09:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello, RationalPuff. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Prashant Gade, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:01, 3 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi User:RationalPuff, your edit to List of unaccredited institutions of higher education has been reverted because it lacked reliable sources. Please familiarize yourself with WP:RS. Thank you. jfeise (talk) 19:38, 11 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

In this edit, you look like you're not just citing Wikipedia, YOU'RE CITING THE ARTICLE YOU'RE PUTTING THE CITATION INTO. That is as circular as you can get, and a hard, hard "no" for that edit. Or am I missing something? --Calton | Talk 09:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Calton: It was just a copy/paste error. Corrected now. Thanks for spotting, however could have been corrected from the target article where there are whole bunch of valid references. Thanks. RationalPuff (talk) 10:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Nope. Not my job nor anyone else's job. Your job. Something you should have done from the very beginning. It's YOUR responsibility to justify additions to Wikipedia. --Calton | Talk 14:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

I also note that you blindly reverted the deletion of an obviously bad edit, THEN fixed it. Knee-jerk reverting without bothering to check what you're doing is a bad habit to get into. --Calton | Talk 14:34, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

::@Calton: It wasn't a knee-jerk. I just thought it's easier to revert and edit the link. Of course there are different ways to skin a cat. You may not have thought it was your 'job', I would have however would fix any errors like that if I spot any. Thanks for your contributions anyway. RationalPuff (talk) 16:47, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello, RationalPuff. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Prashant Gade".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:43, 1 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

H 2402:3A80:DB5:5E07:FBCD:A0A8:5DE8:ED8B (talk) 22:42, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi there! I see you recently changed P3M3 from a redirect to an article. You've used {{Infobox standard}}, which is a redirect to {{Infobox song}}. Since P3M3 isn't a song, could you please use a different infobox? Could you also please add some categories? Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:45, 13 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

@GoingBatty thanks for pointing. Didn't realise it was redirecting to an incorrect template. Fixed now. Cheers! RationalPuff (talk) 07:35, 15 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Bhuban Badyakar requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhuban Badyakar. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. Wikishovel (talk) 13:24, 3 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi RationalPuff. Thank you for your work on Lichfield & Hatherton Canals Restoration Trust. Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for creating this page for a charitable trust. Clear and appropriately sourced. I've built the Wikidata entry from this, another step that can be helpful when you build and article here.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 05:37, 18 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi RationalPuff. Thank you for your work on Coventry experiment. Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for creating an article on this study, which has had impacts with the field of 'consent' over several decades in the UK. Overall, I though that the tone was a little sensational, feeding into the hysteria over radioactivity; I have made some edits towards what I think is a more Neutral point of view. From my point of view, it seems to have been a small study (22 people) run by a local Coventry GP (J.U/ Shah) that seems to have been hyjacked to stoke modern political campaigns. Regardless, its certainly worth an article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 06:10, 19 January 2026 (UTC)Reply