User talk:ProdigyUpdates

PSL Map

Hi,

I just reverted this again. The teams are not in any way located in the cities represented on the map. That's what the caption f the map says. It's a joke to suggest that they do so - and it's, frankly, a joke to say any more than they nominally represent them - they certainly don't represent them per se but are simply named after them. Perhaps if, one day in the far distant future, home and away games are played (as in the BBL for example) then there's a case for the map. Until then - and despite the fantasy that a number of editors keep on pushing regarding the PSL - that simply isn't the case and the map is simply misleading editors who may have only a basic knowledge of the PSL, cricket or Pakistan. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:32, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The location of the city that the team represents is of major relevance as it exhibits where the largest fan base of each team lies. I'm sure that was the intention behind the caption to let users with a "basic knowledge" know where the location of most fans is. If you do not approve, then change the caption rather than commenting out the entire map. - ProdigyUpdates 12:58, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does it? Is there any evidence whatsoever that there is a large fan base in any of those cities for that franchise? If there is then cite it! Frankly it seems nothing other than nominal to me at present - as I say if they ever play in Pakistan then I'd be entirely happy.

I'm going to revert I think and go to the article talk page to see if we can find consensus on this - I'll change the caption as well. If we don't get any responses on the article talk then I suggest we take it to WP:Cricket (say in a week or so - there's not a lot of history of talk on PSL pages (although we can take it to that wikiproject as well if you wish)). Thanks for responding here though - as I say, the history of responses on talk pages (or even sensible edit summaries) on PSL articles is almost nil. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Please check the talk page on the PSL talk page. I have cited sources that clearly display the link between each franchise and its respective city. Thank you for holding this debate in a civil manner but I do not believe it is necessary to take this to WP:Cricket although you may certainly do if you wish to. However, till then, please do not revert the change again. Thanks. - ProdigyUpdates 20:58, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:19, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Sheffield Private School for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Sheffield Private School is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sheffield Private School until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Pinkbeast (talk) 13:26, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:The Sheffield Private School logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Sheffield Private School logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:04, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

English proficiency map

Hi ProdigyUpdates, where did you get all the numbers in File:Percentage of English speakers by country as of 2014.png from? That English proficiency report is missing many countries you colored (see e.g. Uganda) and I don't find English proficiency in the CIA factbook. --mfb (talk) 14:53, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Your recent editing history at Belal Muhammad shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Nswix (talk) 20:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of UFC champions. Stop edit warring until a consensus is reached Nswix (talk) 20:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that there is an extended confirmed restriction in place for this topic area. This means that, until you obtain the extended confirmed user right, you may not:

Make any edits to articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted; nor
Make edits relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, to pages and discussions in all namespaces with the exception of userspace.

The sole exception to this is to make properly formatted edit requests on a talk page. Editors ordinarily receive the extended confirmed user right when they have contributed 500 edits and their account has been open for 30 days.

Please let me know if you have any questions about this.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:44, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Nswix (talk) 21:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for edit warring and casting aspersions ([1], [2], [3]). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]