User talk:Arjayay

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

E-mails[edit]

You can use "Email this user", but I will probably reply on your talk page, or the article talk page, as discussions should be open and on the record.
I have experienced problems with e-mails not being delivered, so please leave me a message on this page if I have not replied within 48 hours.

Broadcasted[edit]

The Wiktionary definition of Broadcasted states the use is sometimes proscribed, so it should not be used. The word also appears on Wikipedia:Lists_of_common_misspellings/B

Broadcasted appears in some dictionaries, but others, e.g. Chambers state "Sorry, no entries for Broadcasted were found".
Broadcast appears in all dictionaries, and should be used as COMMONALITY - "Wikipedia tries to find words that are common to all varieties of English".

A May 2023 search for Broadcast gave over 234,000 uses, compared with a search for Broadcasted which gave just 99.
Of these, 16 are redirects to "Broadcast" articles, 14 refer to a 2015 Canadian TV award and 5 relate to a 1924 cartoon. The rest are in quotations.



Thanks for your work, and a question![edit]

Hi Arjayay, I've come across your username multiple times now doing the tireless work of cleaning up in article space. First of all, thank you for all your contributions: editors like you give me something to strive for in the long-term!

I have one question: you seem to be particularly quick to find duplicated words, such as "the the," in article content. I'm just starting to get acquainted with tools like Twinkle, and I was wondering if you use a specific editing tool or script to identify these errors?

Despite priding myself on my experience with copyediting, I still find it somewhat easy to overlook this type of error, so when I do more formal copyedits of larger articles in the future, it would be valuable to run such a tool in addition to my manual review.

If it's just the case that you have an eagle-eye for such repetitions, then I doubly congratulate you for your skills! Either way, thanks again and know that when folks like me come across your edits, we smile and are grateful that you're doing *more* than your part. Happy editing and best wishes! Chiselinccc (talk) 10:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chiselinccc, thanks for your post, and your appreciation of my work.
I am unusual (some would say I'm very unusual!) in that I do not use Twinkle, or any other tools, preferring to make all my edits manually. I did try a tool about 12 years ago, but didn't like it, and only made about 4 or 5 before abandoning it (I've just tried a search for my automated edits, but X Tools timed out after 900 seconds). I make daily searches for the most common duplications, using the standard CTRL+F "find" command, and cover the entire Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/Repetitions at least once per month.
As for checking extensive copyediting, I often paste the article text (not the edit page text because of the mark-up) into Word, check I'm using the correct variety of English (my version has 18 choices from Australia to Zimbabwe) and let it find the problems. On a multi-screen set-up this is less laborious than it sounds. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 11:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing, and indeed, your skills are next-level with all you accomplish without tooling! Thanks for your great response and advice, and best wishes to you as well :-D Chiselinccc (talk) 11:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thank you for your work, too. And you comments on this page are very entertaining. It reminds me of my mother talking about Bob Dylan and Lay Lady Lay being smutty. I am wondering if you are not using tools, can you verify that you are not a bot? And could you cite a proper source on that? A few hours ago, starting at 15:58, you made 63 edits in 37 minutes. Anyway, thanks again. P.S. I will probably move the text you corrected on Brodmann area 9 to a better location. Bodysurfinyon (talk) 03:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bodysurfinyon, thanks for your post. I can verify I'm not a bot, but of course I am not a reliable source, and I'm sure you can programme self-denial into a bot.
The best way to demonstrate it is probably that I only did 63 edits in 37 minutes, which is really slow. Compare this with this edit history where there were 57 edits in a minute at 06.50 - that's a bot in use - and why that user has over 5.8 million edits. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 11:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

I noticed that you keep removing duplicate words whenever I accidentally make mistakes across several articles. Thanks for removing those unnecessary words! Would you mind sharing your secret about how you immediately found them? It would save you some work.--+JMJ+ (talk) 18:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi +JMJ+ - Thanks for your post, it is appreciated when the Wikignomes, including me, are thanked. As for the "secret", the only secret is not being bored doing repetitive tasks! I make at least daily searches for the most common duplications, and cover the entire Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/Repetitions at least once per month. Thanks for your thanks and happy editing - Arjayay (talk) 18:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lok Puram Public School[edit]

I've noticed that you removed my entry of lok puram school yesterday. It is one of old schools in thane, & I see no reason to have it removed. I'm re-adding it. 117.228.168.122 (talk) 05:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP - as stated in my edit summary " Rm addition without an article = no inclusion - as it clearly states". This was further explained on your talk page User talk:117.228.165.132, but you have since changed IP address.
The edit page of that article clearly states "♦♦♦ Only add a school to this list if it already has its own article on the English Wikipedia ♦♦♦" both at the top of that section, and 4 lines below your addition, so you could not have missed it, but just ignored it. I will revert your re-addition for the same reasons - Arjayay (talk) 10:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who drafted such instruction in first place ? Doesn't make sense. If the school exists, it should be included. I provided school's website link. If you want you create school's page, I don't mind. But removing entry because of some nonsensical instruction is dumb thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.228.206.162 (talk) 16:16, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory. Wikipedia does not aim to include everything that exists, just the things that are notable enough to merit their own Wikipedia article.
There are over 1.5 million schools in India,[1] so we need to be selective about which are included. If you wish to create an article about that school, please ensure it meets WP:NSCHOOL - our notability criteria for schools. Many people try to create articles about non-notable schools and are frustrated when the articles are refused, or subsequently deleted. As an indicator, there have been more deletions from, than additions to, the List of schools in India this year. - Arjayay (talk) 17:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Catalysing transformational change in school education". UNICEF. Retrieved 15 September 2022.

Dorcas Muthoni[edit]

Sorry for the edit war I meant to revert the whole paragraph when I reverted your edits. :) Tescomealdeal1 (talk) 13:37, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Tescomealdeal1, we all make mistakes, me probably more than most. - Happy editing - Arjayay (talk) 13:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Shabir Ahluwalia's entry in War 2 and YRF Spy Universe[edit]

despite giving a source from Pinkvilla website that Shabir is in War 2, you still don't believe it. I am not entering this for fun, my friend who's works in YRF told me so it's an insider's claim. Makers are not confirmed with Shabir Ahluwalia's involvement in the future projects. Once they get confirmed, they will automatically announce it by big critics like Taran Adarsh and Himesh Mankad. 112.196.181.76 (talk) 16:20, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

112.196.181.76 your edits at YRF Spy Universe as seen here very clearly did not include any references. You did not edit Draft:War 2 using that IP address and I can't see any nearby IP addresses editing that article. Furthermore, I have not deleted any references from that article since at least last September (I got bored checking back at that point).
As for your "insider's claim" we have no interest in that whatsoever, only what has been published, as fact not rumour, in WP:Reliable sources - Arjayay (talk) 16:40, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yes! the spin-off one did not include source, but removing Shabir Ahluwalia's name from everywhere was necessary for you right, despite providing a Pinkvilla source(and it was not important for you to check it also). 112.196.181.76 (talk) 17:46, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As you have admitted, you did not provide a source, so you can't claim "despite providing a Pinkvilla source" because you didn't - Arjayay (talk) 18:24, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have made yet another unsourced addition. The source must be given as a reference in the article, which is what people read, not mentioned in an edit summary. - Arjayay (talk) 18:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Independent of general ENGVAR (first-mover, inertia, local ties), WP:SULF is specific to this one spelling detail across all chemistry-related articles. DMacks (talk) 10:59, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a Brit, I am pleased to see the IUPAC got Aluminium right! - Arjayay (talk) 17:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Racquet and Racket[edit]

Hi Arjayay, Thank you for taking an interest in this page. I see from the above that you are particularly interested in correcting mis-spellings on wikipedia—thank goodness someone is! However, this is one of those cases where you might have needed to read the wikilinked article to Prince's Club. If you had been able to do so you would have found that the club's name is spelled as I spelled it: raquet. The point here is that it was a mid-nineteenth century club and spelling was not as rigorously static as it became (before the advent of social media began to upset the apple cart). If you look at the article on p.5 of the Morning Post dated 20 May 1889 you will find the spelling I used. But if you look at the article published on page 6 of the Pall Mall Gazette dated 18 May 1889 (only two days earlier), you will find the club's name spelled Racket. Much to my surprise, when I checked this morning on the 2023 edition of Collins English dictionary, the entry indicates that either spelling is still correct. I will, therefore, be reverting to my original spelling.

However, I am extremely grateful for your bringing this up because in checking the spelling this morning I noticed, after unchallenged use on a website for over a decade, that Racquet (or Racket) appears in the club's title in the singular rather than the plural, and I am now changing this also. Best wishesIshpoloni (talk) 15:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ishpoloni, thanks for your post. I remember Googling "Prince's Club" before making my change, but if both spellings were being used within 2 days, it was probably just "pot-luck" which version I ended up with. I think the note you added to Victorian Turkish baths explains the situation, and should avoid, or at least reduce, future changes (although racquet/racket being knocked back and forth seems rather appropriate !). Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 17:45, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like the back and forth!Ishpoloni (talk) 20:20, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]