User talk:AlvaKedak

Badami Fort moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Badami Fort. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it is empty. 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 your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. TheWikipede (talk) 20:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok AlvaKedak (talk) 05:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Badami Fort has been accepted

Badami Fort, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Baqi:) (talk) 12:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contribution Appreciated

Your contribution to the Delhi Sultanate article is highly appreciated, I have improved it a bit more on my part Qaiser-i-Mashriq (talk) 08:20, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you AlvaKedak (talk) 11:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

Your recent editing history at Pala empire 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.CharlesWain (talk) 08:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair, I will discuss it in the talk page then, I apologize for edit warring and also for sounding a bit aggressive in the summaries, I did not intend to. But I will say, that map should not have been added without consensus from other editors. AlvaKedak (talk) 11:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will not repeat this behavior again. AlvaKedak (talk) 11:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ghurid dynasty. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Mr.Hanes Talk 05:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your point here, I wouldn't call it Vandalism. As I stated in my edit summary, there is no need for such a large paragraph in the Infobox, it's unnecessary as it is the article job to elaborate, not the Infobox (excluding cases like the Map of the Maurya Empire, which is complicated). You don't have to say "Ghurid territory extended to Nishapur and Merv, while Ghurid troops reached as far as Gorgan on the shores of the Caspian Sea. Eastward, the Ghurids invaded as far as Bengal." in the infobox. In the article ? Sure, but not the Infobox, why ? Because they can just look at the map, the description is redundant. AlvaKedak (talk) 11:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 2025

Hello, I'm NXcrypto. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to List of palaces in India have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. NXcrypto Message 04:00, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@NXcrypto, I see your point, but the page is just a list of palaces in India, it doesn't explain anything, it doesn't need to cite sources, which is why I removed the tag. AlvaKedak (talk) 13:43, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

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:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
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.

NXcrypto Message 04:17, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]