User talk:Aman.kumar.goel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 22:11, 4 December 2018

  • Thanks sir, I will make sure that I comply with same.

Regards Aman (talk)

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Aman.kumar.goel, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to DRDO Anti-Radiation Missile have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. —Gazoth (talk) 17:24, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

My bad. Didn't know that it has to work in that way. I'll modify the language. Regards Aman (talk)
Hi Aman, it was the first bullet under Bear these points in mind in the welcome message above. Please look through all the points mentioned there. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:07, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

March 2019[edit]

Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Surgical strike. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 08:08, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

ARBIPA sanctions alert[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svgThis is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Kautilya3 (talk) 08:09, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, the issue I think have started post my edit on February 27 which was followed by its revert. Though there have been debates, I have been getting same response repeatedly and nil change in article. I am able to debate and would appreciate to settle it if someone meddles instead of messing up with a number og users. Regards Aman Goel (talk) 08:35, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
When there are disagreements you need to discuss them on the talk page and aim to achieve a WP:CONSENSUS. If discussion alone doesn't achieve it, you need to use WP:Dispute resolution procedures. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:29, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Tibetan people[edit]

You didn't explain your edit, so with those recent edits there is really no justification for reverting them. Please explain what you're doing, esp. in contentious areas. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:28, 19 April 2019 (UTC) Tibet is an autonomous region of PRC and has earlier existed as independent for long period. Tibetans are concentrated in China, especially concentrated in Tibet region of China. I thought, specifying that will be better. And sorry, didn't know the Tibet topic is that contentious. Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 01:32, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

May 2019[edit]

Information icon Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing an article on Wikipedia, you will see a small field labeled "Edit summary" shown under the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)


I noticed your recent edit to Bharatiya Janata Party does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → check Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Kautilya3 (talk) 12:57, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello, the shuffling I conducted was only based on order of letters. Hindutva was an India specific version of Hindu nationalism and I added one more vital part of party's ideologies Cultural nationalism with ref. I will make sure that summary is there next time. And wondering if allowed to restore it. Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 13:50, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
You mean alphabetical order. But, no, the current order is based on prominence in reliable sources, and that should not be altered. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 13:52, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
I understand and will take care from now on. Regards Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 15:51, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for the update on 35A GSwarnkar 09:11, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

S5-class submarine[edit]

Hello there. I see that you have created article S5-class submarine. I just want to mention that the article has previously been deleted a number of times (1; 2; and 3) for a number of reasons. Please have a look and make sure that such issues do not reappear, or the article will again be nominated for deletion by someone. Thanks. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 07:19, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I will make sure that only sourced content finds its place in article. Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 07:45, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aman. I have explained on the talk page of the article about why a source in the article is highly credible. Since you created the article, it would be nice if you could agree or disagree to my opinion by writing on the talk page. Regards, VaibhavafroTalk 07:49, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey Aman. In your recent edit in the article S5-class submarine,you added that four boats are planned to be built as per the Rajya Sabha TV discussion. When I watched the discussion, I didn't find any mention of 4 boats. Could you please clarify.--VaibhavafroTalk 16:50, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Watch flash at 10:59.Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 19:55, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks for clarifying.-VaibhavafroTalk 01:30, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@Aman.kumar.goel: I have created and added an image of S5 in the article. Just notifying you.--VaibhavafroTalk 07:20, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Is that credible + do you hold copyright for the same?Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 07:25, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Yes I do. I have created it using Paint-3D on Windows-10. I have explained it's credibility in the description of the Image. And models of INS Arihant that are present on Commons since a decade ago were made using the same assumptions.--VaibhavafroTalk 07:43, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Look at this image. This was created on MS Paint using the same assumptions back in 2009 when only 1 grainy pic of Arihant in dockyard was available that didn't even show its back portion. It is still used today. Any questions?-VaibhavafroTalk 07:54, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

@Aman.kumar.goel: Unofficial drawings have been used since time immemorial on Wikipedia. See this as example.-VaibhavafroTalk 12:20, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of S5-class submarine[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on S5-class submarine 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, such as at Articles for deletion. 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. --Nahal(T) 08:36, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

@NahalAhmed: As an administrator has removed the speedy deletion tag, I would like to learn why article was immediately put for speedy deletion without even apprising the editor about any problem? The article had WP:RS. Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 00:33, 6 September 2019 (UTC)


Though the names are revealed you never know which ship is going to get what name. Specially when there are 2 builders maybe the first ship from GRSE is named what in wiki as Himgiri. So naming ship now is kind of misnomer.

Shashpant (talk) 02:49, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Ship names have been cited by a navy personnel. They will continue in same order they were built earlier. FYI, Nilgiri-class frigate was first ever made in India frigates of Indian way. Their nomenclature legacy is being repeated just. It's safe to assume previous order as it was cited as it is by official and "last ship" was called INS Mahendergiri by him. Still, if anything changes, we will correct it. It's better to keep ship names than pennant number when they have been cited already. RegardsAman.kumar.goel (talk) 08:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

A small request[edit]

Hi Aman. I won’t be on Wikipedia for a while. Can you add this article to your watch list? I have created it recently. (Just incase vandals try to disrupt it.) Regards—VaibhavafroTalk 06:59, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

I will. I was myself looking for such an article after revision of National Security Strategy & doctrine. Thanks Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 07:04, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks!—VaibhavafroTalk 07:07, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
(tps) Hey Vaibhavafro, nice work on that article. Kudos. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 13:19, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
@Sarvatra: Thanks!-VaibhavafroTalk 15:30, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

@Sarvatra: It would be unfair if I don’t give credit to @Naval Gazer: I have copied a portion of the article from Gazer’s work in Defence Cyber Agency.-VaibhavafroTalk 15:44, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]

Thanks for creating S5-class submarine.

User:Fitindia while examining this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

I have unreviewed the page as source is relying on a Twitter tweet nothing official from the Indian navy WP:CRYSTALBALL

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Fitindia}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

FitIndia Talk Mail 15:26, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

The particular part of development (submarine design) only relies on tweet. As source is a WP:RS and doesn't claim to confirm the design (calls it probable) on the ground that this design hasn't ever been built in India earlier and the tweet itself was from Vice President of India, I will only suggest to just have a second thought on that image only. Regards Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 15:59, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

hi there[edit]

Nice to meet you.

It has become apparent you are targetting me by reverting or challenging my edits specifically, oft without proper standing. It would be helpful if you could avoid doing so.


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. (talk) 20:34, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:18, 30 September 2019 (UTC) 
I actually once reverted one of your edits (Regional power where talk had concluded Pakistan as rather a sub-regional power) and coincidently opened your contributions where I witnessed a series of disruptive edits with no reasons or actual summaries rather complete PoV pushing. As those articles pertain to the topics I'm interested in, I exercised my rights to revert the ones I don't agree with a summary. I hereby, reject all your accusations of targeting "you" specifically and maintain my nature of surveillance of article. I rather propose WP:DR to reach consensus for those edits and not the accusing me of attacking you to keep those edits alive. Mine & those talk pages are open. I had proper standing in what I reverted instead those edits didn't have any ground. Regards Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 01:01, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

I find it ironic to accuse me of "disrupting editing" whilst no other editors had issues with my edits except my contributions to This was resolved without problem.

Regardless, I do not wish to engage in any edit wars so I am happy to discuss my edits with you on our respective talk pages or better yet, on the talk pages of the articles in focus. I see you are an experienced wikipedian and would be happy (and obliged) to engage in meaningful conversation with you, given that we both strive our best for advocating a neutral stance rather than POV pushing knowing our sincere interest in these topics.

Happy editing bro — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:33, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

You may start to adding me to ping me on talk pages topic by topic.

Talk on List of Highest Mountains[edit]

Hi bro,

Regards to your reversions of my edits on this page:, I'm slightly confused.

You said "Wikipedia articles mention only territories under control & not territorial claims. If we do for one country, we're supposed to do for all." However, on that page previously, the article mentioned territorial claims of India wherever China and Pakistan were mentioned. I therefore did exactly as you said and added territorial claims for all countries. If this is not satisfactory then perhaps we should remove all notes about territorial claims.

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:25, 1 October 2019 (UTC)


May I suggest with respect that you not tinker with India, especially on its WP:TFA also. Please read WP:OWN#Featured_articles and raise the issue on Talk:India first and wait for some consensus to emerge. Note also that the edits on the India page are subject to discretionary sanctions imposed by ARBCOM. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:14, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Thunberg edit[edit]

Please fix the sentence you recently edited. In it's current form ("Thunberg is known for her blunt, both in public and to political leaders and assemblies...") it is improper. I'd fix it myself, but would probably just add the text you deleted. Thanks, Geordie (talk) 06:24, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I never added such a comment. I removed the other one.Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 06:29, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Actually, it was a set of boastful comment by some fan of Greta where he/she admires her to "brave", "blunt" and "matter of fact speaking" etc. It shouldn't have been added in a WP article at first place.Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 06:33, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Your edit left the sentence broken--what does the adjective "blunt" refer to now? Geordie (talk) 06:40, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

The sentence earlier too wasn't any less inappropriate. It was nothing more than a juvenile boasting with totally unencyclopaedic language made without any consensus or high quality source citing any events. Let me refer to source to replace those sentences.Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 07:00, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
The material has been in the article for at least a month; you're going to need consensus on the talk page for your change. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 07:12, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
I'm starting to realize that this may be a language barrier thing. Don't worry about it. Have a good day. Geordie (talk) 07:17, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Just the language used and framing of sentences. I've left my response on talk page.Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 07:49, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi. It isn't a "language barrier thing". The boastful comments are, as you say, unencyclopedic, and should be removed. The other editor says we need consenus to remove it. Why that would be, I have no idea. If you remove it again, I will back you up (ie publicly thank). Cheers MartiniShaw (talk) 12:41, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Defence Space Agency[edit]

Thanks for adding this to your watchlist.— Vaibhavafro💬 13:18, 7 October 2019 (UTC)