[[User:SunDawn|<span style=”color:orange; background-color:black;”>✠ ”’SunDawn”’ ✠</span>]] [[User talk:SunDawn|<span style=”color:white; background-color:#2a3f7a;”>Contact me!</span>]] 12:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
[[User:SunDawn|<span style=”color:orange; background-color:black;”>✠ ”’SunDawn”’ ✠</span>]] [[User talk:SunDawn|<span style=”color:white; background-color:#2a3f7a;”>Contact me!</span>]] 12:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
== Your submission at [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|Articles for creation]]: [[Siege of Ponda (1666)]] has been accepted ==
<div style=”border:solid 1px #57DB1E; background:var(–background-color-success-subtle, #dff2eb); padding: 0.5em 1em; color: inherit; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;”>[[File:AFC-Logo.svg|50px|left]] ”'[[Siege of Ponda (1666)]], which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.”'<br />
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions. <br />
The article has been assessed as ”’B-Class”’, which is recorded on its [[Talk:Siege of Ponda (1666)|talk page]]. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top {{AfC talk/B percentage}} of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Grading scheme|grading scheme]] to see how you can improve the article. You may also consider [[Template_talk:Did_you_know#Instructions_for_nominators|nominating a fact from the article]] within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page’s [[Main_Page#mp-dyk|”Did you know” section]].
<div class=”autoconfirmed-show”>Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now [[Wikipedia:Your first article|create articles yourself]] without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|Articles for creation]] if you prefer.</div>
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the ”'<span class=”plainlinks” >[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Siege_of_Ponda_(1666) help desk]</span>”’.<span class=”unconfirmed-show”> Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to [[Wikipedia:Your first article|create articles yourself]] without posting a request to [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|Articles for creation]].</span>
Thanks again, and happy editing!
[[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 14:59, 26 October 2025 (UTC)</div><!–Template:AfC accept–>
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Old-AgedKid was:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
 |
Hello, Beylarbey!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we’d love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Old-AgedKid (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2025 (UTC) |
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Mir Jumla II, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless that text is available under a suitable free license. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed. For more information on this, see:
If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.
I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:18, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the valuable information. Beylarbey (talk) 13:27, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Imwin567 were:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Not so notable even within the country.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
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. Somajyoti ✉ 08:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- Your own edit history says the radical idea that you are trying to spread. Trying to manipulate Wikipedia, vandalise and removing truths. Covering them with misinformations. Look at yourself first. Beylarbey (talk) 08:28, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Sack of Somnath, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Hionsa (talk) 07:55, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2025 Shahbag protest, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Daily Star, Independent Television and International Crimes Tribunal. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It’s OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, —DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
The article Mir Jumla’s invasion of Assam describes an invasion, not a conquest. Please do not change it. The article name itself is about an invasion. Even during the occupation of the capital, Mir Jumla had no control of Assam; and control was non-existent after he left Assam. The Koch king recovered his capital in 1662 itself. Chaipau (talk) 06:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Please avoid engaging in an edit war over minor issues. I have reverted your edit. What is the point of removing content from the beginning and then adding the same thing at the end? Also, there’s no need to add excessive wikilinks. The 2013 Shapla Square protests are already linked through the Siege of Dhaka article, and the Commissions have already been wikilinked multiple times.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 09:28, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Here [1] you removed the failed verification tag without addressing the issue. Please look WP:TEMPREMOVE on when you can remove maintenance tags. Chaipau (talk) 17:22, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- Scroll through the pages and then judge what is disruptive and what’s not. Thanks. Beylarbey (talk) 07:36, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:
It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia’s policies, see Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines.
See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.
Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Kherua Mosque saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.
Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! UtherSRG (talk) 21:06, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
- Got it. Beylarbey (talk) 06:22, 10 June 2025 (UTC)
You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
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.
Chaipau (talk) 22:12, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for your efforts, I have a question about a person named Abul Qasim Simjuri that you mention in your articles.
Was he closely related to Abu Ali Simjuri?تبرستانی (talk) 05:15, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. Abu’l Qasim Simjuri is the brother of Abu Ali Simjuri. Check — The Life and Times of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazna (1931), p. 32 Beylarbey (talk) 11:35, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello. Can you add Mughal Central Asia campaign and Siege of Nagpur to the history section of Army of the Mughal Empire?
Thanks before 118.136.204.158 (talk) 23:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
hello again. Could you help more? Please insert Battle of Tilpat (1669) just under the Gokula Singh rebellion 118.136.204.158 (talk) 22:31, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi Beylarbey. Thank you for your work on Gumti Darwaza. Another editor, Bakhtar40, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Need more citations.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bakhtar40}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:32, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Two quick things: articles older than 90 days can’t be draftified, and the article clearly has sources that it cites, those short citations just lack certain information about said sources. Remsense 🌈 论 14:15, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- The short citations does not link to any works. They don’t target the corresponding books or any sources because there is no sources. So how are readers going to verify information? Just last name and year is not enough for general readers. Beylarbey (talk) 14:17, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RangersRus was:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ghaznavid campaigns in India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chamundaraja.
(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 6 September 2025 (UTC)
You have recently edited a page related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
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.
Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 19:05, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Third Maratha invasion of Bengal. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and require WP:RS, WP:IS for WP:V and refer to WP:REFB on how to cite sources properly.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page.
When the article is ready for publication, please click on the “Submit the draft for review!” button at the top of the page OR move the page back. QEnigma 论 07:47, 12 October 2025 (UTC)
|some_param=some_variable does not always mean that variable will display. The |some_param= must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance.
Thank you. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 09:05, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
Hi Beylarbey. Thank you for your work on Siege of Barabati (1745). Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Thank you for this article about the Marathas! Have a blessed day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
