User talk:RangersRus

Problems with articles fixed + Existing references satisfy conditions + Please help review

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Nagarika

All of these conditions are already satisfied for references.

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject

Yet, the reviewers are showing untoward behavior, just because it is Indian or Regional.

I have given the official mentions from the governments 1947 Gazeteer to 2020's official newspaper list. This is a newspaper that has existed for 75+ years.

If longevity is not enough reason, I have given credibility with secondary references by listing articles from India's most widespread newspapers.

The following 3 references should satisfy both significance and credibility from independent sources

• The Gazeteer
• Times of India
• The Hindu

For visual evidence, have uploaded newspapers from 50 years ago to until now.

Even after this much evidence and credibility, if Wikipedia does not accept articles, then Wikipedia should not call itself an open and free encyclopedia.

There are much unreasonable articles, which have been published.

Also, the reference to death has been removed.

2409:40F2:31D:A97B:2CD7:18B6:C082:18DD (talk) 09:32, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Request for review: Draft:Kinto_Europe

Dear User:RangersRus,

thanks for reviewing my contribution! I kindly ask you reconsider the decision, based on the following input.

1. Kinto is the mobility services brand of Toyota, one of the two largest automobile makers in the world.
2. The quite comparable brand/subsidiary of Mercedes-Benz, Mercedes-Benz_Mobility has a dedicated Wikipedia lemma.
3. Kinto and its role towards future mobility is the subject of a Harvard Business case-study (as referenced in the draft), authored at IMD Lausanne, see here for the IMD version.
4. Kinto is also covered in academic research regarding future mobility (references are in the draft).

In my understanding, the Harvard case study and the academic works are reliable, secondary sources; they are quite in depth, and they are independent of the subject.

It would be very nice if you could re-evaluate the contribution, in particular based on #3 and #4.

Thanks! Your help is sincerely appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Transistorradio (talk • contribs) 11:59, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Amit Kumar Das

Hello @RangersRus! Thank you for taking the time to review my article, Draft:Amit Kumar Das. Could you please elaborate further on why it was declined? I believe the sources are reliable, significant and independent, so your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Once more, thanks for the support! Allakas (talk) 13:41, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Independent should be independent of the subject's comments and interview. Some of the sources are also promotional like TOI and others are routine news. This is same reason it was declined by other reviewers. RangersRus (talk) 12:12, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Request on 00:45:53, 4 August 2025 for assistance on AfC submission by Pineapplethen

• Pineapplethen (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Vichenzo Tahapary (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

How could the article be improved? Should there be more sources or Bibliography?

Pineapplethen (talk) 00:45, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft Ade Permana

It passes WP:NMMA as he is ranked in the top ten by fightmatrix SpainMMAfan123 (talk) 05:54, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

But in addition to meeting criteria, the article must still eventually provide sources indicating that the subject meets the general notability guideline. If you have done so after the review, you are welcome to resubmit the draft for review again possibly by another reviewer. RangersRus (talk) 14:57, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

How many sourcses do you think? SpainMMAfan123 (talk) 17:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Re: declining submission at Articles for creation: Preston Cook (July 30)

Thank you for the feedback. I apologize if you've already read this, but I haven't heard back. Anyway, I feel like my mistake is I buried the lede here, because I don't mention why Preston Cook is noteworthy until the INTEREST IN EAGLES header. where I explain that his journey and accomplishment received SIGNIFICANT COVERAGE in multiple reliable national and international sources. Should I move that to the top? Mr. Cook discovered the omission that the Bald Eagle wasn't the official national bird, wrote the legislation, found the congressional co-sponsors, and created the movement that ended up getting his bill signed into law by President Biden. He pursued this because of his deep interest in eagles - as witness by his 40,000 piece collection of eagle artifacts, memoribilia, and historical items, a collection now on display at the National Eagle Center. I sequenced the article this way because I was encouraged by an earlier reviewer to break up my first article into three - Preston Cook, National Bird Initiative, and Preston Cook American Eagle Collection. Was that my big mistake here (among other smaller ones)? Please help, thanks. Tmcfarlandpr (talk) 17:57, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

[

What is the issue with [ at [1]? DareshMohan (talk) 19:42, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

No multiple critical reviews. Only one source. Needs better multiple sources. RangersRus (talk) 17:34, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Briire

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft_talk:Bariire&action=edit&redlink=1 Dear Wikipedia Review Team,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to kindly request a review of the Wikipedia draft page I created for Bariire. The draft has been under review for some time, and I believe it meets Wikipedia’s notability and content guidelines for promotion to the main article space.

The page covers important information about Bariire, including [insert key points: e.g., its history, geography, culture, significance], and is well-sourced with reliable references. I have carefully followed Wikipedia’s guidelines to ensure the content is neutral, verifiable, and encyclopedic.

I would greatly appreciate it if the review team could re-examine the draft and consider its promotion. Please let me know if any further edits or additions are required to meet the necessary standards.

Thank you very much for your time and assistance.

Best regards, link: https://sonna.so/en/snas-ground-forces-commander-visits-recently-liberated-town/ https://www.hiiraan.com/news/2025/Aug/wararka_maanta11-191067.htm. https://www.bbc.com/somali/articles/c987wwj5g1xo

Isma4l (talk) 12:05, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Please add these sources in the article and resubmit for review. RangersRus (talk) 12:12, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Request for Re-Review – Bariire Article Updated with Reliable Sources

I have carefully reviewed and updated the Bariire article in response to the previous feedback provided. Specifically, I have:

Added the requested sources from reliable and independent outlets.

Ensured that all references are properly formatted according to Wikipedia’s citation standards.

Revised the text to maintain a neutral point of view and avoid promotional language.

Verified that the content meets Wikipedia’s requirements for both notability and verifiability.

I believe the article now fully complies with Wikipedia’s content guidelines and is ready for publication. Kindly review the draft again at your earliest convenience, and please let me know if any further improvements are needed.

Thank you for your time and support in this review process. link: https://sonna.so/en/snas-ground-forces-commander-visits-recently-liberated-town/ https://www.hiiraan.com/news/2025/Aug/wararka_maanta11-191067.htm https://newscentral.africa/somali-army-peacekeepers-retake-bariire/ https://garoweonline.com/en/news/somalia/ugandan-au-forces-suffer-heavy-losses-in-battle-to-retake-barire-from-al-shabaab. https://trt.global/afrika-english/article/21ca9bf8adb2. https://sonna.so/en/sna-aussom-forces-capture-strategic-town-of-bariire-after-week-long-offensive/ https://chimpreports.com/updf-somali-forces-recapture-bariire-from-al-shabaab-after-21-day-offensive/ https://ugdiplomat.com/updf-somali-troops-recapture-bariire-from-al-shabaab-after-week-of-fierce-fighting/?amp=1

Isma4l (talk) 17:05, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Request for review of Draft: Dr Himanshu Pathak

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to kindly request a review of the Wikipedia draft page I created for Dr Himanshu Pathak.

I believe it meets Wikipedia’s notability and content guidelines for promotion to the main article space as the person is indeed a recipient of several academic accolades including his current presidency in National Academy of Agriculture scientists. There are atleast 6 wikipedia page where he is mentioned or referenced Trilochan Mohapatra - WikipediaAgricultural Research Service (ICAR, India) - WikipediaInternational Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics - Wikipedia Nithya Sre Sivan - WikipediaBorlaug Global Rust Initiative - WikipediaControlled burn - Wikipedia

Thank you for considering. Parkavikumar (talk) 06:27, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

I have made edits inline with Wikipedia's Notability and content guidelines. Please review the same. Parkavikumar (talk) 07:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Requesting your inputs on Draft:Chatha Pacha: The Ring of Rowdies

Hi @RangersRus - Thank you for your feedback for the article sources. I have now added articles from media portals like "Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, Gulf News, The Times of India, Filmfare" in the sources. I kindly request to re-examine the article and let me know what else I can improve.

Regards, Soumyaveer (talk) 07:17, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

The film is WP:TOOSOON to have an article. Best to wait near release date or till release for significant coverage to generate and with multiple critical reviews to pass notability. RangersRus (talk) 21:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Got it. Will wait. Thanks Soumyaveer (talk) 05:41, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @RangersRus The film first look is out already and the teaser has been playing in the theatres. I feel the page can be made live now.

(PS: Saw many other Malayalam movie pages which are still in production stage and are targeting 2026 release and have got the page live)

Requesting you support. Soumyaveer (talk) 02:34, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Request

I'm busy due to commitments irl, can you create the Malayalam films in my sandbox (has 2 reviews)? [2]. DareshMohan (talk) 06:40, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Copyright

Please make sure that you are checking drafts for copyright violations when reviewing. I found copyvio in Draft:Atlantic balloon fiesta from [3] which you reviewed. — Tenshi! (Talk page) 20:28, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Came here for the same reason! I found significant copyright violations in State of Firsts (film), which RangersRus approved through AfC. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Significa liberdade: @Tenshi Hinanawi: Is there a tool you run to check copyvio. Please let me know if so. I focus more on sources and coverages in it to check for notability. RangersRus (talk) 16:49, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Earwig's Copyvio detector, though I checked after a report from CopyPatrol. Do note that the detector has problems which are listed at WP:NOTEARWIG. Tenshi! (Talk page) 16:54, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Regency Park Branch Library

Hello, I was wondering on why the draft for the Regency Park Branch Library was declined. there are several reliable sources that go in depth, and the information on the page is plenty. Jimbocarnia (talk) 23:54, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation review on Cube Creator 3D

Hello RangersRus. This is a reminder that your Articles for Creation review on Cube Creator 3D is still marked as ongoing for over forty-eight hours. After seventy-two hours, Cube Creator 3D will be returned to the review queue so that other reviewers may review the draft.

If you wish to continue reviewing the draft but need more time before the bot returns it to the review queue, you can place {{bots|deny=TenshiBot}} on the draft so you can continue your review. Also, if you do not want to receive these notifications, you can place the same template on your talk page. TenshiBot (talk) 09:39, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thai

I noticed you reviewed and declined Draft:Assawongrat Assarangchai. Can you read Thai? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:55, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

No, I apply translating tool. RangersRus (talk) 14:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Survivor 49

Hello, I am here to voice for Survivor 49 to be moved from a draft space. I am not sure if i should being this to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Reality television task force or not but we have a few other season of differnt shows in the same place as Survivor 49. Examples: The Amazing Race 38, The Traitors 4, The Celebrity Traitors, Big Brother 2025, The Voice 28, Special Forces: World's Toughest Test 4, Law & Order: Special Victims Unit 27, Boston Blue, Sheriff Country etc. that have not aired but are heavily sourced for premier dates and cast. Id even include Draft:Survivor 50: In the Hands of the Fans into this. Is there another way to make the draft pages ready to move from draft space? TIA JoyfullySmile (talk) 03:36, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Announcement, promotion, dates and cast are not enough to meet notability for an upcoming show. Significant indepth coverage is required. This is also a case of WP:TOOSOON especially for Season 50. I have not looked at the other pages that you mentioned but very likely they did not went through the AFC review and were created bypassing AFC that can lead to such articles being moved back to draft or getting nominated at AFD. Best action here to take is it to keep in draft till close to release date or till release itself so that significant coverage could be generated that you can then add to the article and resubmit for review. RangersRus (talk) 16:34, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Coolie

The Financial Express did not state that Coolie has a ₹400 crore budget. Instead, the ₹400 crore budget refers to War 2. Epicion (talk) 12:31, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Reverted. I also noticed now that Financial Express boxoffice is unreliable because they got the report from Sacnilk. Bottom of the article Industry tracker Sacnilk predicts that releasing two such big-budget films on the same weekend has impacted their overall box office potential. So you will need to find another source or revert back to last boxoffice source. RangersRus (talk) 12:37, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

The Financial Express did not attribute its information (box office figure) to Sacnilk. While Dina Thanthi and another source, News18, reported a figure of ₹500 crore.[4] Epicion (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

It is very clear that they are reporting from Sacnilk so you can remove financial express and keep the others like Dina Thanthi and News18. RangersRus (talk) 12:47, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Fine. Epicion (talk) 12:48, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

London United Busways v De Marchi

Hi, why did you move London United Busways v De Marchi into draft space and add a redirect? I don't understand the edit comment. Thanks. Void if removed (talk) 11:32, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Your article was moved to mainspace by a blocked Sockpuppet account without AFC review and acceptance. Please submit the draft for AFC review. RangersRus (talk) 12:05, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Ah ok, thank you. I had another article pass at about the same time, I didn't notice this wasn't legit. Void if removed (talk) 12:13, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Late Night! The Genius Bakabon

hello, today i found out that Late Night! The Genius Bakabon was reverted back to its draft status is there any way to reapprove the draft for review? VenezuelanSpongeBobFan2004 (talk) 03:51, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Your draft was not approved by AFC reviewer. Before AFC reviewer can look at it, a sock editor moved it to mainspace and that us why it was moved back to draft. Please submit your draft for AFC review. RangersRus (talk) 11:41, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

but I don’t see the afc approval template anywhere in the page…. VenezuelanSpongeBobFan2004 (talk) 17:33, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Siege of Gwalior (1232)

Draft:Siege of Gwalior (1232) was submitted through AFC review and accepted by @Utopes. It was removed to draftspace because the article was created by @Shaban-ul-barb a blocked user. I rechecked the article's sources, added information found important in the cited sources. Then moved it to main space. Does it have to go through AFC submission again? Although it was gone through once before. Beylarbey (talk) 12:57, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes it needs to go through AFC review. I also see problem with significant coverage that maybe I will check for further review if I have time unless some other reviewer gets to it first. RangersRus (talk) 13:00, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

2008-09 Season.

hi, just saw that the page Draft:2008–09 Mohun Bagan FC season was moved to the draft space again, so could you pls tell what else do I need to change? (If any*)
Thank You.
Aban05 (talk) 00:45, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

The draft was moved to mainspace by a blocked editor without letting your draft go through AFC review. This is why it was reverted back to draft and I see you have submitted for AFC review and either me or some other reviewer will review it. RangersRus (talk) 21:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Declining submission

Do you realize that the team plays in the third division in a major football country like Italy? There are articles about seasons of English, French and Scottish clubs in the fourth division. Your rejection of articles that are continuously being improved is unjustified. 2A01:799:AE4:FA00:896C:381C:2A40:D768 (talk) 13:50, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Sintela review

Hey, thanks for the quick review! Just checking in for a bit of clarification about that review. I know you listed it as having insufficient sources - basically, just trying to get a bit more input on that. The article currently has major coverage from The Sunday Times (here), The Times (here, here, and here), DeeperBlue (here), as well as in academic journals Earth and Space Science and Nature.

If these sources aren't sufficient, is there an estimate you could give about how many more will be necessary - or what about the current sources is lacking? The sources in use now generally all offer in-depth, independent coverage in reliable, secondary sources. Toa Nidhiki05 (Work) (talk) 17:35, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

In sources, you can not have just passing mention of the subject and should be independent of the interview and comments of the executive or ceo or employee of the company. You are again welcome to resubmit draft for review once you make these fix or still you can resubmit if you do not accept my suggestion and would like another reviewer to review it. RangersRus (talk) 18:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I understand these, I'm just trying to get an understanding of how these sources don't count. They secondary sources that aren't passing mentions, cover the subject in detai, aren't direct interviews (WP:PRIMARY), and aren't directly tied to the subject (ie. press releases, website, etc.). That's more or less what I'm trying to get clarity on. It's harder for me to do that without more direct feedback. Toa Nidhiki05 (Work) (talk) 19:30, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

This source is passing mention. This one here and [5] are not independent. Secondary independent sources helpful, that not just shows indepth coverage on the company directly but also show overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, evaluation of the product, company. RangersRus (talk) 20:00, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Declining Submission

Hi, thank you for the quick review. I looked at your comments and need some clarification.

The Draft:Penta Security is backed up by reliable, secondary, independent sources from its country, that mainly covers only the topic. Also, I cross-checked to see if they are all independent, (not sponsored) and found the sources are from journalists mainly focusing on IT companies, so yes, I assume that it is good to use. Also, I am sure it is possible to use non-English sources. (Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources)

I was wondering why the sources are declined even though (I believe) the sources are all good.

Gedww00 (talk) 02:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Request for guidance on Draft:OH!SOME

Hi RangersRus,

I’m looking for some guidance on my draft (Draft:OH!SOME).

It has been declined several times due to notability concerns. I’ve revised it by replacing some previous sources with coverage from well-known, independent media, including The Jakarta Post, Retail Asia, Kumparan, The Nation Thailand, and VNExpress, and I’ve tried to keep the draft neutral. I also added independent, in-depth coverage from Inside Retail Asia and Retail & Leisure International that discuss OH!SOME’s flagship formats and regional market entries.

From what I can tell, most of these sources use store openings, partnerships, or awards as their news hook, but they do include in-depth industry analysis and independent journalist commentary. I would really appreciate any advice on whether these sources are enough, or what kind of coverage I should be looking for to meet notability standards.

Thank you so much for your time and help!!~ I’m a bit stuck and would be very grateful for any guidance.

--BinaryEcho (talk) 07:22, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Concern is the draft looks quite promotional. It is as if the draft's purpose is to market and advertise the company and its product. Wikipedia articles about a person, company, or organization are not an extension of their website, press releases, or other social media marketing efforts. Opening a store or making a debut announcements are seen as promotional. RangersRus (talk) 12:07, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi RangersRus,

Thank you soooo much for this response real quick~!

I understand your concern that the draft still reads as promotional. That’s definitely not my intention, and I’d like to revise the draft so it focuses more on neutral, encyclopedic content.

Most of the in-depth coverages do use store openings or partnerships as the news hook, but many of them also contain industry context and independent journalist commentary.

I'd like to understand, would it be more appropriate if I minimize the event-style details and instead highlight the parts of those articles that provide broader market analysis or critical observations?

I’d be grateful for any advice on how best to reframe the draft so that it avoids promotional tone and better aligns with our standards.

Thank you again for your time and guidance!

--BinaryEcho (talk) 12:18, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi again,

I’ve revised the draft based on your feedback—trimming promotional wording, rephrasing event-style details, and putting more focus on independent coverages that discusses retail trends and market context. These sources are all from well-known, independent media outlets that include journalist analysis and commentary, nothing from the company's social media announcements, press releases or such kind of links.

Could you let me know if this version feels closer to Wikipedia’s standards?

Thanks again for your guidance!

--BinaryEcho (talk) 15:25, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Il mago di Venezia

Why is this the only Rondò Veneziano album (see Discography) that isn't encyclopedic? What's still wrong? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Il_mago_di_Venezia Driante70 (talk) 11:48, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

The sources are very poor with no indepth significant coverage on the album and if the album appeared on any country's national music chart or had been certified gold or higher in at least one country. Please find sources with significant coverage on the album. RangersRus (talk) 16:53, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Request on 17:21:36, 10 September 2025 for assistance on AfC submission by Serebit

• Serebit (talk · contribs)
  • Canon EOS C50 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Canon EOS C50 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I don't want to take too much of your time as this isn't a high importance article even in applicable WikiProjects, but this is the first article draft I've submitted for review and I'd appreciate some insight on what language in particular reads as advertisement. I'm aware of the guideline and attempted to follow it in the stub's Reception section with citations from two independent media outlets that offered reviews, one of which was extremely effusive in their praise (which I tried to water down) and the other of which noted some negatives when compared against the C50's primary competition.

I'd like to improve the article for publication, but the review didn't give me enough information to make those improvements. With the length of the article and the seeming lack of negative coverage in consideration, what should I do to resolve the advertisement issue? My only thought is adding more reviews from other outlets, but the others I've found weren't any more negative than the ones that were included, so I'm not sure that would resolve the problem.

This isn't urgent, so take your time!

Serebit (talk) 17:21, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Request for review: Draft: Moka Only discography

Hello, are you able to please give another look at the Draft: Moka Only discography. Since you last saw it, I have added proper references. Thank you. Splashmoney15 (talk) 20:38, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:P_Raman_Nair

Could you please consider the following notability aspect with respect to P Raman Nair. This is already cited in the article. He has won the Kerala State Award for Best Director (links as below). Other people who have won the same award but without any additional media coverage have made it to Wikipedia.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160303232254/http://www.prd.kerala.gov.in/stateawares.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_State_Film_Award_for_Best_Editor Christoph zacharias (talk) 06:01, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | RFC phase

Administrator Elections | RFC phase

The RFC phase of the July 2025 administrator elections has started. There are 10 RFCs for consideration. You can participate in the RFC phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/RFCs.

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:43, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation review on Gamer (soundtrack)

Hello RangersRus. This is a reminder that your Articles for Creation review on Gamer (soundtrack) is still marked as ongoing for over forty-eight hours. After seventy-two hours, Gamer (soundtrack) will be returned to the review queue so that other reviewers may review the draft.

If you wish to continue reviewing the draft but need more time before the bot returns it to the review queue, you can place {{bots|deny=TenshiBot}} on the draft so you can continue your review. Also, if you do not want to receive these notifications, you can place the same template on your talk page. TenshiBot (talk) 09:39, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback

@RangersRus

Thank you for the feedback. I have revised the draft to address the concerns.

The article now cites multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources, including The Times of India and The New Indian Express, which provide coverage of events hosted by the college.

Official government and university sources (Anna University, TNEA, DTE) have been added to confirm affiliation, recognition, and admissions.

The article has been rewritten in a neutral, non-promotional tone and unnecessary primary/self-published references were removed.

The Indian Institutional Ranking Framework (IIRF) ranking and a published book (Counselling Guru) have been added to demonstrate notability.

I believe the article now meets Wikipedia’s notability and verifiability requirements and request a re-review. Sivakumar0725 (talk) 08:08, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Lício Velloso

Hello @RangersRus, how are you? Thank you very much for generously reading Lício Velloso's draft. I am a historian, but I know that you are a leading figure in obesity studies in Brazil and are internationally recognized. How do you think I can improve the article? I saw that it has been widely covered in major Brazilian newspapers (Folha de S. Paulo, Estadão, O Globo), but what should I highlight? Thank you very much, best regards. Mtvdanilo (talk) 00:06, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Clarification request about Draft:Superbet rejection

Hi @RangersRus, Thanks for taking the time to review the Superbet draft recently. I noticed the submission was declined with the comment that it “reads more like an advertisement,” and I completely understand the importance of maintaining a neutral, encyclopedic tone.

If possible, I’d really appreciate any specific feedback you might have, particularly which parts still feel promotional or if the structure/content might be contributing to that impression. We’ve worked to base the article entirely on independent, reliable sources (Bloomberg, The Guardian, Profit.ro, Newsweek, Tech.eu, The Recursive, Forbes Romania, etc.) and made multiple rounds of edits to remove any editorial language. Since the page has now gone through 6 different reviews (some without detailed feedback), I’m hoping to understand more clearly if the current version is fixable, or if the subject simply doesn’t meet notability standards at this time. Thanks again for your time and contributions, your insight would be genuinely helpful! Contributor Marius (talk) 08:26, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Request for review

Hi,

thanks for your time taken to review draft :Laura McGhie

it says under Entertainment notability guidelines

This guideline applies to actors, voice actors, comedians, opinion makers, pornographic actors, models, and celebrities. Such a person may be considered notable if:

1. The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, notable television shows, stage performances, or other notable productions; or
2. The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

I believe this presenter to have had notable significant roles in network BBC radio for many years. Presenting their own show and presenting other high profile programmes. Does this not meet the guidelines for making contribution to multiple productions and therefore make them notable? Is the BBC not a notable source? Accuracies135 (talk) 14:58, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Susan Moran AfC

Hi. Can you expand somewhat on your decline note in the DRAFT/AFC submission for Susan Moran? The note indicates that there are insufficient references which are:

• "not just passing mentions". Many of the linked references, including the Irish Independent coverage (1998), the Irish Examiner update (2002), this RTÉ News coverage (2002), that Irish Examiner op-ed (2013), the Irish Central piece (2014), the Westmeath Independent article (2020) and others, deal with the subject as a primary topic. They are not "just passing mentions"(?)
• "in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". All of the references are published and most are in reliable/secondary/independent sources (many of which are national news outlets) and include the Irish Examiner, Irish Times, Irish Independent, RTÉ Sport, IrishCentral, etc. While, yes, some of the sources (like the Saint Joseph's Hawks and Basketball Ireland) are less-than-independent and some of the sources (like the Westmeath/Offaly Independent pieces) are local-in-scope, they are in a minority. Most of the refs (including those which deal with the subject as a primary topic) are published/reliable/secondary/independent sources(?)

I've been doing this for a while now and, per my own AfC comment, I think that notability is demonstrated. If you feel otherwise, it would be good to understand why you think these sources/refs don't materially demonstrate or contribute to SIGCOV? So those concerns can, perhaps, be addressed(?) Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 16:04, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

FWIW, I've added some additional sources. All of which are published/reliable/independent. And most of which deal with the subject as a primary topic. And re-submitted the AfC. Cheers. Guliolopez (talk) 16:53, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

You rejected worldsbk 2026 because it doesn't qualify.

But I've provided more than 10 sources, which are genuine. If I'm missing anything then you can eloborate it. BiyingTram (talk) 04:29, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

It is a case of WP:TOOSOON. Wait till the event is held to add significant coverage to pass notability. I will suggest to keep in draft till then. RangersRus (talk) 12:57, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Reverted draftification: Draft:Kathmandu University School of Engineering

Hi there, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed you recently draftified Draft:Kathmandu University School of Engineering, stating that this was a case of page move vandalism. However, MOVEVANDAL does not apply to editors moving their articles out of draft space, given that they are within their rights to move articles into the mainspace -- even if they don't pass AfC. Additionally, per WP:DRAFTOBJECT, articles should not be moved into the draftspace twice except through consensus. Because this article had already been draftified, it was not eligible for draftification. As such, I have moved it back to the main space. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns on this matter, please let me know. Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:49, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Your review: Draft:Izz al-Din al-Afram

Hello @RangersRus! I noticed that you were the editor who personally reviewed and declined the article *Izz al-Din al-Afram*. I have read your message carefully, and I must admit I was somewhat surprised by its content. You mentioned that the article does not meet the basic requirements for a Wikipedia article and that it needs sources that are *in-depth* (“not just passing mentions about the subject”), *reliable*, *secondary*, and *independent of the subject.* This is surprising, because that is exactly what I have tried to provide, in line with the criteria for qualifying for a Wikipedia article. **Secondary sources in the article:** One of the most important secondary sources used is *al-Mawsu‘ah al-Tarikhiyah* (in Arabic: الموسوعة التاريخية), one of the major publications of *al-Durar al-Sunniyah*. It was produced by a team of authors and editors under the supervision of Shaykh ʿAlawi b. ʿAbd al-Qadir al-Saqqaf. The book covers significant historical events in Islam from the Prophet’s birth up to the present, including a substantial section on the Mamluk state, from which I drew material relevant to *Izz al-Din al-Afram* (this kind of independent, in-depth secondary coverage is precisely the type of material that demonstrates subject **notability** under WP\:Notability). If you didn't hear about it before you can check it on Internet Archive here or through major Arabic digital libraries (such as “The Comprehensive Library” here It is one of the most important and largest digital libraries in the Arab world.) Or you can just get it from the official website of the Al-dorar Al-Sunniyah here.( Please note that it is one of the most important and largest groups that write about the hadiths of the Prophet and Islamic topics, so it is highly credible.) Another major secondary source is the work of **Linda Northrup**, which is widely cited in many Wikipedia articles dealing with Mamluk history, particularly the rise of Sultan al-Mansur Qalawun; I relied on it when covering the rebellion of Sunqur al-Ashqar and the role played by *Izz al-Din al-Afram*. In addition, I used several other reliable secondary sources such as **Michael S. Fulton** and **Artur Obłuski** and Paul Balog .and Ahmed Sobhi Mansour and others.(These are scholarly/peer-reviewed or widely accepted published works and therefore meet the WP\:Reliable sources standard and Notability.) **Primary sources in the article:** Yes, primary sources were also used, but strictly in the proper way as permitted by Wikipedia’s guidelines. They were employed in two ways: 1. Independently, only for straightforward factual details (such as his name and circumstances of his death), while ensuring neutrality with Wikipedia rules. 2. The majority were used As supporting evidence alongside the secondary sources, never on their own. This follows the guidance on using primary sources WP:PRIMARY: primary sources may be used to illustrate or record what those primary materials state, but **must not** be the sole basis for analysis or claims of significance ، interpretations of primary sources require reliable secondary sources. I have therefore (a) cited primary-text quotations with page numbers and (b) relied on secondary scholarship for interpretation and to establish notability. **Integration with other Wikipedia articles:** The article has also been interlinked with related Wikipedia entries that mention *Izz al-Din al-Afram*. For example, his arrest by Sultan al-Ashraf Khalil is mentioned both in his article and in *al-Ashraf Khalil’s* page. Similarly, the *Battle of al-Jisurah* article also refers to his role there. These internal links and cross-references contribute to verifiability and show that the subject appears in other articles and contexts within the encyclopedia (see WP\:Verifiability). For these reasons, I have republished the article with an additional sources and with improved information from *al-Mawsu‘ah al-Tarikhiyah*. Thank you for your time and attention. Yosf22ww (talk) 16:41, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello @RangersRus. . I would like to clathree points precisely so we can resolve this professionally and quickly. **1) What do you mean by “Tārīkh al-Barzālī … unreliable”?** Please clarify whethern: (a) that *al-Barzālī* is a **primary chronicle** and therefore **insufficient by itself** for claims of notability and interpretation , **or** (b) that the *specific edition/translation* I cited is **factually erroneous or otherwise unreliable** (in which case please identify edition/translator/publisher and the exact error or problem). (Policy note: primary chronicles are not banned on Wikipedia; they must simply be used carefully and not replace reliable secondary analysis. See guidance on using primary sources.**2) For clarity: how I used primary vs secondary sources in this draft** To avoid any misunderstanding, here is a concise map : * **Origin / name / parentage (straightforward contemporaneous claims):** these statements in the draft are supported by medieval chronicles such as *al-Barzālī* and *al-Maqrīzī* (used as primary, for the wording “It is said…”, names, and funeral accounts). Where interpretation or contested readings exist I relied on modern secondary reference(s) such as *Al-Mawsuʿah al-Tārikhiyah* (Al-Dorar al-Sunniyah). You can see these citations in the draft (refs: al-Barzālī ، al-Maqrīzī Al-Mawsuʿah . * **Biography / campaigns / role (interpretation & significance):** the narrative of campaigns, role in the Sunqur revolt, and military duties and the biography as well, are supported primarily by modern secondary scholarship: **Linda Northrup (From Slave to Sultan, pp.92–95)**, **Michael S. Fulton (Artillery ... — pages cited in refs)**, **Artur Obłuski **, **Balog **, and *Al-Mawsuʿah* entries. These are cited with pinpoint page ranges in the References section. on the draft page.) ***Arrest / confiscation / release and death:** these factual narratives are drawn from the chronicles but shown in the draft alongside secondary sources that discuss the events (e.g. *Al-Mawsuʿah*, Northrup, Maqrīzī editions where appropriate). The draft explicitly attributes statements to the primary chroniclers (e.g. “Al-Maqrīzī said…”) rather than converting primary claims into interpretive conclusions. **Short summary of method:** primary sources in the draft are used **only for contemporaneous factual statements** (names, reported acts, funeral account) while **modern secondary sources provide analysis, context, and claims of significance**. This is exactly the acceptable method described in Wikipedia policy (primary sources → factual raw material; secondary sources → interpretation). **3) Concerning WP:AGE MATTERS and “old sources are not usable”** Please note: WP:AGE MATTERS (redirected into WP:Reliable sources) does **not** categorically prohibit older primary sources. It warns that the *age* of a source matters in some fields because newer scholarship may supersede earlier conclusions — but it does **not** mean “no primary sources ever.” The proper reading is: use primary/older sources with care and confirm interpretations with modern secondary scholarship. See WP:RS (Age matters) and WP:Primary/Use_of_primary for the official guidanc. ### Requested clarifications / next steps (so we can finish this with minimal back-and-forth). If you consider *al-Barzālī* to be **factually unreliable**, please specify the edition/translator and the exact passage or error you mean (so we can correct or remove that edition). If you mean that it is a primary chronicle and therefore **not sufficient alone** for notability, please confirm that — because I have paired those passages with modern secondaries. You wrote you “still see sources as problem.” Please identify which of the **modern secondary sources** listed on the draft (Linda Northrup; Michael S. Fulton; Obłuski; Balog; *Al-Mawsuʿah* entries; Winslow Williams Clifford; etc.) you regard as mere “passing mentions,” **and give the page number** you rely on when you make that judgment. Per WP:RS, a reviewer’s claim that a source is “only a passing mention” is testable — we can resolve it quickly if you provide the page(s). If it helps, I can add **short quoted excerpts** (pinpoint quotations) from the secondary sources (Northrup, Fulton, *Al-Mawsuʿah*, Obłuski) to the draft to explicitly show where each source discusses al-Afram in detail. That will directly address the “in-depth” concern. AfC reviewers commonly request exactly this; the Articles for Creation guidance and Help Desk emphasize the need for secondary, in-depth coverage when assessing standalone notability. Procedural note (AfC expectations). I understand AfC’s instruction that submissions should show **in-depth, independent, reliable secondary coverage**. I believe the draft already provides modern secondary works and pinpoint citations that demonstrate such coverage — which I am prepared to make even more explicit by adding brief quoted passages or expanding the references in-line. If the concern remains, please specify which source(s)/page(s) you find insufficient so I can address those very points. I will update the draft immediately with any requested pinpoint quotations or with corrected editions if you identify a problematic edition. Thank you again for reviewing — I appreciate precise, actionable feedback rather than general statements; it allows me to fix issues promptly.

Yosf22ww (talk) 20:40, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Request on 12:37:28, 27 September 2025 for assistance on AfC submission by Percyvear

• Percyvear (talk · contribs)
  • Rianne Downey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Rianne Downey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I have been working on this draft for over a year with various suggestions to help improve the draft, before publication. Are you are to assist with this so this can go live, thank you

Percyvear (talk) 12:37, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

For the songs listed in top charts nationally and internationally, please add sources for each. Please also have sources for any performances that the subject did nationally or internationally or both. RangersRus (talk) 14:45, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

NBC News' Sam Brock draft article

Removed awards and recognition. Not enough citations are available. R2025kt (talk) 15:12, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Request for Help Oswald vanderVeken prize

In several places in Wikipedia pages, this price is mentioned without reference, and regularly, scientists ask where this price is given for exactly, so there is a certain public demand for explanation (and reference from other Wikipedia pages). I followed the instructions from one of your colleagues as editor, but still not sufficient, apparently. I an earlier comment, it was asked to delete more general references, which I did. So, please, can you help me out with concrete comments, as soon as the prize is open for candidates again, and then it would be most helpful if a wiki reference is available. I have asked FWO in Brussels if they have more info publicly available, and they do not have, unfortunately. Pancras Hogendoorn (talk) 15:32, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

NBC News' Sam Brock draft article

I've added a new reference and journalism under the wikiprojects I selected. R2025kt (talk) 16:20, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Movie released

Hi, Can you check this Draft:Premalo, the movie released and has full-length reviews.

Thankyou 202.153.35.242 (talk) 11:03, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Please don't message reviewers asking them to review your draft. It will be reviewed when somebody gets around to it; asking someone to review it isn't going to get it reviewed any quicker. Aydoh8^{[what have I done now?]} 11:05, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Draft: The Last Whale Singer

Hi RangersRus, about adding critical reviews: As the movie is only shown at festivals at the moment with its wide release scheduled for early 2026, there aren't any critical reviews that I could find. So far I only found a positive one here: https://the-spot-mediafilm.com/reviews/review-kino-der-letzte-walsaenger/ (in German) But I will be happy to add some reviews from reliable/professional publications as soon as they are published. LukeNorg (talk) 13:06, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Kindly requesting a fresh look at Draft:Wines on Disk

Hi RangersRus, and thank you for your earlier AfC review. I’ve substantially revised the draft to address the concerns:

• Rewrote for neutral tone.
• Added independent secondary sources (e.g., The Washington Post (1986), PC World (1988)).
• Trimmed primary/self-sourced material.

If you have a moment, I’d be grateful for a re-look at Draft:Wines on Disk. Thanks for your time and volunteer work! — Bns1743 (talk) 13:20, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Question about Draft:Melinda Looi review

Hi RangersRus,

Thank you for reviewing my draft of Draft:Melinda Looi. I’ve carefully followed the guidelines and made substantial edits to structure, sourcing, and citations to ensure it meets Wikipedia’s standards.

I understand from your comment that the main concern is with the notability of sources and whether they provide significant coverage. Could you kindly clarify which specific references you feel are insufficient, or give guidance on what types of sources would strengthen the submission?

Many of the current references are feature articles and interviews in independent, reputable publications like The Star, New Straits Times, Tatler Asia, and Harper’s Bazaar Malaysia. If these still don’t meet the threshold, I’d appreciate your advice on what additional evidence or coverage would be needed for acceptance.

I want to make sure the next revision addresses your feedback properly, so any specific direction would be really helpful.

Thank you for your time and guidance.

Best,

Kunal5651 Kunal5651 (talk) 06:05, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Request for Review "Ehrhardt Partner Group (EPG)" article

Hello @RangersRus,

I hope you’re doing well. I’ve carefully revised the article with a particular focus on improving neutrality and aligning it more closely with Wikipedia standards.

Could I kindly ask you to review the updated text and let me know if there are any areas that, in your view, still require improvement? Your feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you very much for your time and support! SCMExpert1 (talk) 13:39, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Regarding a rejected draft

@RangersRus: Draft:Anuradhapura invasion of Chola Kingdom (114-136) this specific draft was declined by you but the reasons for the decline was already solved, can you tell me the real reason for the decline.TeenX808 (talk) 08:08, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

The real reason was where I needed footnotes for verification but that was helped by Ranithraj. Further reason for decline was about the dispute about the draft where Ranithraj provided notes that the event is based on Chronicle and some historians doubt it's existence and call it exaggeration. So we need to go over this and see perhaps the draft content should be merged to another page or the title needs changed. 114-136 without AD or BC is not helpful either. RangersRus (talk) 12:01, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: first of all only one of his sources calls it a tale while the rest of them considers it as a real historical event but with some fictional elements and the user isn’t a extended user also and I had provided sources which counters his argument also I can prove them wrong TeenX808 (talk) 12:17, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: Breakdown of the sources the user has used.

1 to 5 the sources says the event should be treated with caution but none of them directly calls it fake or a myth but simply some of the event is exaggerated and fictional elements have been added. Battles recorded by ancients contains fictional elements it shouldn’t be a surprise.

6- this is the only source which comes close to declining but it is unknown if they are talking about the tale or the medieval account

7 to 12- Is simply him saying this event isn’t mentioned in certain books but he contradicts himself since in the last debate he said “The fact that certain books may have overlooked it doesn't mean they disagree with the established historical narrative”

while his reasons are just recycling and misleading info which the historians and a anthropologists has said , if you want I can break it down to.

Can his so called sources which calls the event as a myth be used to counter the article also I have provided sources where historians considers it as a real event and there’s more which are unmentioned.TeenX808 (talk) 12:21, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes the sources calling the event a "myth" can counter and you yourself have said some of the event is exaggerated and fictional elements have been added. Battles recorded by ancients contains fictional elements it shouldn’t be a surprise. A source that declines the event also can not be ignored. When writing such articles where the sources are contradicting, you have to write it with a neutral point of view. RangersRus (talk) 18:52, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: Only one of his sources directly declines the event and the source is old to begin with and majority of the sources consider it as historical event with mythical elements included in the account, also I agree some info are exaggerated but the specific user wants this entire event to be considered as a myth which does not make it fair also in the Legend or a Real event section I have clearly stated the minor opinion. TeenX808 (talk) 19:31, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @RangersRus since you have tagged me. I would like to give my thoughts. Other user has misunderstood my sources and misinterpreting it to you.

1. First source has directly said that this invasion is based on Myth .

2. Second source also suggests whole account was added later which proves this invasion is not really happened and was a later addition in later chronicles. So the second source proves this this invasion didn't happen.

3.Third source said this invasion has lack of evidence.

4. Fourth one address this invasion as legend.

5. Fifth one says Whether there is any historical truth in that legendary description is a matter of doubt. So sources from 1 to 5 proves this invasion as myth and didn't really happened.

6. Sixth one also says this invasion is legend

7-12 sources skipped it because they considered it didn't happen.

I hope you already read those sources or else you can read them as you know where are they. I hope we can the change the draft title by adding the prefix as myth or legend to the title.Ranithraj (talk) 19:45, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I would like to add some points to prove why it is Mythical or legend.

1. Chola Sources didn't mention it.

2. Dipawamsa and Mahavamsa didn't mention this. But later sources after more than 1000 years mentioned it.

3.No archaeological evidence to prove this event.

4. This invasion is based on the water cutting custom and other myth as said by Obeyasekare.

5. Majority of the Historians while talking about the history of lanka and history of South India, they skipped it. Because it is not real event.

6. The whole event was added later as said by Wijetunga.

7. There is no unanimity, even among the Sinhalese sources, as far as the career of Gajabāhu is concerned. sinhalese sources contradicts each other.

8. Sinhalese sources keep adding the myths and legends in their sources. 4th and 5th century sources didn't mention this invasion and 13 th century account mentioned this invasion but didn't mention the previous Cholas invasion but later 16 and 17th century account added the Chola invasion in the myth. It is noted by Cordington he mentioned it "According to the mediaeval account, in the time of his father, 12,000 men had been sent to work at Kaveri on the Coromandel coast ; in the late Rajavaliya this has developed into an invasion by the Chola king." So this is how this myth has been evolved and Obeyesekare also explained how this myth evolved. In his book on pg.368 "There is then remarkable evolution of Gajabahu story from the matter of fact in Mahavamsa to elaborated myth in Rajavaliya. Mythical elements are present in pujavaliya are absent in material from 5th century During this period, Gajabahu of history transformed into Gajabahu of myth. Pujavaliya commences myth making process by reference to cleaving the ocean and bring back captives." So the sources keeps on adding the myth into it. So we need to conclude this invasion as myth.

I am hoping you will take the right decision and change the draft name by adding prefix as Myth or legend Ranithraj (talk) 19:50, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Ranithraj@RangersRus: repeating the same thing when it’s proven wrong first of all Ganath obeysekara is a anthropologist not a historian even in his own book he has said he can’t clearly say if the event is mythical or historical and the points you brought is him trying to say some events could have been brought from other contexts.

also the second source neither directly declines it but brings the probability of the event being mythical .

4th source clearly has a full stop before starting with the medieval account do you want me to send the meaning of a full stop?

Again sources 1-5 as the above mention does not call the event mythical but doubts it also I have provided texts from historians also.

7-12 You are pretty much contradicting yourself as what you said in the last discussion “ The fact that certain books may have overlooked it doesn't mean they disagree with the established historical narrative”

It is pretty clear you are ignoring the historians which accept this event as a historical event while doing it you are misleading statements and points by other historians the title dosent have to be changed but I have added the mention of fictional elements in the draft that should be able to satisfy you.Thanks TeenX808 (talk) 06:21, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus@Ranithraj: This is gonna waste both of our time, please check both of our sources also I agree to put the mention of fictional elements in the account but not changing of the title since only one of his sources directly declines while the rest doubts and it is clear the sources which I have provided hasn’t been read since the points which the user has brought was mentioned but still considered as a historical event.

@Ranithraj stop repeating the same thing the discussion is simply getting longer because of the repeating, if you have something new to add please mention it also, there’s some historical and archeological proof further strengthening the account by Anton Sebastian also you are not a historian the points which you used to decline by saying the account is mentioned in later chronicles were already mentioned by historians which I added and yet they accepted it as historical.

Me and this user is waiting for you to give us a decision.ThanksTeenX808 (talk) 06:49, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Let's make this simple and quick for me to look at. TeenX808 Please cite modern era sources from the draft that has significant coverage on the event and calls it either Myth or historical. Ranithraj, I would like you to cite sources and quotes from modern era that talks about the event as myth and did not historically happen. RangersRus (talk) 07:28, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I want to add that the sources should be from academic scholars, experts in the field of study. RangersRus (talk) 07:34, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus Here are the Sources

1) Gananath Obeyesekere in The Cult of the Goddess Pattini, on page 365:

"The Gajabahu story is not a historical episode at all, but a mythic one associated with water cutting (and probably other customs) and incorporated into the two Sinhala chronicles. Thus the reason the earlier Mahavamsa account did not mention the episode is that it simply did not take place historically....

To sum up what I have said so far. The Gajabahu episode in the Rajavaliya and Rajarat nakara is probably derived from the origin myth of the water cutting ceremony or from similar myths and has nothing to do with the historical Gajabahu of the Mahavamsa, who lived in the second century.."

2) W.M.K Wijetunga Sri Lanka and Chola, 2003.

Pg. No: 55

"The Rajavaliya gives the latest account, which is also the most elaborate, with the thickest coating of fiction and legend......

Pg. No 56

Similarly the list of places where the Cola prisoners were settled reveals the late origin of the whole account...

The fact that the Dipavamsa, the Mahavamsa and the Vamsetthappa-kasini (Mahavamsa-tīka) have all remained ignorant of these events suggests that the whole account was added later..."

3) Short History Of Ceylon, Cordington 1994.

Pg. 23

"A king of little account in the older chronicle, he has attained a certain fame in popular legend. According to the mediaeval account, in the time of his father, 12,000 men had been sent to work at Kaveri on the Coromandel coast ; in the late Rajavaliya this has developed into an invasion by the Chola king. "

4) The Early History Of Ceylon by Mendis. G.C.

"One of the successors of Vasabha was his grandson Gajaba (a.d. 174-176). Later legends, without sufficient reason, represent him as one who invaded South India successfully and brought back a large number of captives to the island.1

Notes : 1.Neither the Mahavansa nor any early Tamil literary work mentions anything to support the stay. "

These four proves this invasion as myth.

I would like to give some other sources which doubts this invasion.

5) Sri Lanka : a history by De Silva, Chandra Richard, pg.34

"Pujavaliya a sinhalese work of thirteenth century does mentions Chola invasion and counter invasion. But the lack of evidence from earlier sources as well as the incredible tales connected with the counter invasions prompt us to treat the account with Caution "

6) . De Silva, Sanath; Siriweera, W. I. (2017). Warfare in Srilanka: Military History of The Island from Earliest Times upto Independence (1st ed.). Sarasavi. p. 26

" So called South Indian exploits of Gajabahu I (114-136) to avenge an invasion during the reign of previous ruler Vankanasika Tissa (111-114) are confused in detail and wrapped in hyperbole. Neither the Mahavamsa nor other ancient texts refer to Gajabahu's invasion of South India. It is mentioned only in the Rajavaliya written in the eighteenth century, sixteen centuries after the presumed event." Whether there is any historical truth in that legendary description is a matter of doubt”

I hope now we can change the name of the draft and it's content as well. Ranithraj (talk) 13:08, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I gave above the sources. Other than the sources I will give you reason why it is Mythical or legend. I suggest you to read it once, you will understand.

1. Chola Sources didn't mention it.

2. Dipawamsa and Mahavamsa didn't mention this. But later sources after more than 1000 years mentioned it.

3.No archaeological evidence to prove this event.

4. This invasion is based on the water cutting custom and other myth as said by Obeyasekare.

5. Majority of the Historians while talking about the history of lanka and history of South India, they skipped it. Because it is not real event.

6. The whole event was added later as said by Wijetunga.

7. There is no unanimity, even among the Sinhalese sources, as far as the career of Gajabāhu is concerned. sinhalese sources contradicts each other.

8. Sinhalese sources keep adding the myths and legends in their sources. 4th and 5th century sources didn't mention this invasion and 13 th century account mentioned this invasion but didn't mention the previous Cholas invasion but later 16 and 17th century account added the Chola invasion in the myth. It is noted by Cordington he mentioned it "According to the mediaeval account, in the time of his father, 12,000 men had been sent to work at Kaveri on the Coromandel coast ; in the late Rajavaliya this has developed into an invasion by the Chola king." So this is how this myth has been evolved and Obeyesekare also explained how this myth evolved. In his book on pg.368 "There is then remarkable evolution of Gajabahu story from the matter of fact in Mahavamsa to elaborated myth in Rajavaliya. Mythical elements are present in pujavaliya are absent in material from 5th century During this period, Gajabahu of history transformed into Gajabahu of myth. Pujavaliya commences myth making process by reference to cleaving the ocean and bring back captives." So the sources keeps on adding the myth into it. So we need to conclude this invasion as myth.

If we analyse those points and think logically we can conclude this invasion as myth. Ranithraj (talk) 13:45, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Please do not post wall of repeated texts explaining why it could be a myth. I just need to view sources and give opinion on it. RangersRus (talk) 16:43, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok, In the comment above of it , I gave the sources. Could you have a look at it? Ranithraj (talk) 16:47, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus:The sources you asked for, if it’s too long skim through it.

Sinhalayo 2012 pg11- “ Gajabahu is the only king of ancient Ceylon who has found a place in early Tamil literature, and it is not impossible that he undertook an expedition to South India. At any rate, his military prowess is attested by his title of Gajabahu (whose arm is of the strength of an elephant), by which he is better known than by his personal name of Gamani Abhaya”

The ancient heritage of Srilanka part I by Wijetunga, Sirisaman (2016) “During the reign of King Wankanasika Tissa, the country was invaded by South Indian rulers.It is mentioned in Rajawaliya which was written in the 13th century AD. which was written during the Dambadeniya era, also confirms it.It is said that these invaders captured 12,000 Sinhalese and took them to South India. Pujawaliya mentioned that these captives were deployed in manual work in Kaveri river, India.King Gajaba, the son of King Wanka nasika Tissa who succeeded his father was furious over this matter and he invaded the Chola kingdom in South India and brought back these Sinhala men. This could be considered as a very important factor in the history of Sri Lanka.The name, 'Gajabahu' derives the meaning, the arm of an elephant.King Gajaba is considered as a very strong king.It is said that King Gajabahu walked across the Palk Strait by pushing the water aside using a huge iron mace. He was accompanied by his giant Neela. He brought the Sinhala prisoners back. He also brought the cult of Goddess Pattini”

A Complete Illustrated History of Sri Lanka by Anton Sebastian 2018 “The royal couple, Vankanasikatissa and his wife Mahamatta, had a son by the name of Gajabähu (gaja, strong, bahu, arm) who succeeded his father to the throne in ca 108 AD. The new king Gajabähu I (Gamani) was a powerful character, and was thirsting to avenge the indignity caused to his father by the Tamils. He marched a large force under the command of his general Nila-Yodhaya to South India. The 13th century chronicle Pujavaliya describes the superhuman deeds performed by Gajabahu and his general when they reached the Chola king's capital, Thanjavur, in the valley of Kaveri River. Gajabhu threatened to raze the city unless the King of Thanjavur returned the 12,000 Sinhalese prisoners, and in addition surrendered double the number of Tamils as prisoners. The Chola king complied, and Gajabahu returned with success, bringing back with him the Buddha's bowl that was taken away by the Tamils during the time of King Valagamba”

Story of Lanka by L.E Blaze 2023 Gaja-Bahu saw that it would not do to let the Tamils go unpunished and he made preparations for war. When he was quite ready, he went over to South India with his famous general, Nila, and a large army, and so thoroughly frightened the Tamil king there, that not only were the twelve thousand Sinhalese prisoners released, but an equal number of Tamil prisoners were brought over to Lanka.These Tamils were placed in various parts of the Kandy, Colombo and Kurunegala districts--in the Alutkuru Korale, Tumpane, Harispattu, etc.The king brought back also the eating-bowl of the Buddha, which had been taken away in Valagam Bahus time, and a great quantity of jewels and other plunder.

An unusual event is believed to have taken place during the reign of King Vankanasika Tissa (110 A.D.). A Chola King Karikala is said to have invaded Lanka with an army and taken away treasure and 12,000 Sinhalese as prisoners. 25

The Sinhalese by Nandadewa Wijesekara 2016 .”If they were captives then a battle would have taken place and the spoils of victory were the captives. But if they had been taken away by force then they have to be recognized as kidnapped persons. They could have been hired to work on irrigation projects in the Kaveri Valley in Chola country. “An unusual event is believed to have taken place during the reign of King Vankanasika Tissa (110 A.D.). A Chola King Karikala is said to have invaded Lanka with an army and taken away treasure and 12,000 Sinhalese as prisoners.If they were captives then a battle would have taken place and the spoils of victory were the captives. But if they had been taken away by force then they have to be recognized as kidnapped persons. They could have been hired to work on irrigation projects in the Kaveri Valley in Chola country”

These are the most recent publications while there’s some books which are revised and published also to make it easier I have included the dates.TeenX808 (talk) 12:51, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: unfortunately I’m unable to make it smaller but all of them are historians and are very recent publications with revision. TeenX808 (talk) 12:52, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Source by Anton Sebastian, the Author is a doctor by academic and profession. L.E Blaze authored book in 1900. Who is the author of this source, "Sinhalayo 2012 pg11"? RangersRus (talk) 16:40, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: Anton Sebastian is a historian according to the description and LE blazes book was revised and published in 2023 and the author of Sinhalayo is Senarath Paranavitana,can you also check the content of the sources to determine if the point by historians aren’t mislead. TeenX808 (talk) 17:08, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

What description? RangersRus (talk) 17:26, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: sorry my mistake it says he’s an avid historian but his book can be used as a secondary source since the info which he said is mentioned by other historians in their books. TeenX808 (talk) 17:34, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

No his source can not be used. RangersRus (talk) 17:37, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: okay you can check the rest and its content. TeenX808 (talk) 17:41, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

See this. He is a doctor by profession RangersRus (talk) 17:28, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Any modern era source? RangersRus (talk) 17:32, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: I have provided some including with revisions and all of them except one dates to 2000s. TeenX808 (talk) 17:36, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Has L.E Blaze been cited by any historians you are aware of? RangersRus (talk) 17:39, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: I will have to check to let you know but can’t his source be used since the point he has pointed out tallies with other historians ? TeenX808 (talk) 17:50, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: can this be used https://www.researchgate.net/publication/396507750_King_Gajabahu_I_112_-_134_CE_and_His_Role_in_the_Anuradhapura_Kingdom_Epigraphic_Evidence_and_the_Promotion_of_Buddhism the person who wrote it is a historian. TeenX808 (talk) 18:06, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@TeenX808@RangersRus"repeating the same thing when it’s proven wrong " it's you who is repeating and misinterpreting my sources. Yes Obeyesekare is an anthropologist and his statement and findings regarding this invasion is very important as he proved this invasion is based on Myth and legend. He clearly said this event is based on Myth and legend. Anyone other than you can understand this. He clearly said entire episode of Gajabahu in later chronicles is based on Myth not some events.

Second source declining this invasion by saying whole account was added later. He also said that in 13th century account they said people were going to kaveri for service but later 16 and 17 th century account they made it as Chola invasion. If you read his entire statement, you can understand he declined this invasion.

fourth source has clearly addressed this invasion as legend. It has full stop before medieval account that shows that medieval account is legend and also proves 16 and 17 th century account developed the Chola invasion and he said there is no chola invasion mentioned in 13 century account. It shows they keep on adding myths and legends.so fourth source proves this invasion as myth or legend. If you have someone who understands English can help you how this source shows this is legend.

So 1 to 5 proves this invasion as myth.

""7-12 You are pretty much contradicting yourself as what you said in the last discussion “ The fact that certain books may have overlooked it doesn't mean they disagree with the established historical narrative”""

Nope they are different events. Timeline is different. Here this invasion is mentioned after 1000 years and chronicles which were written closely related to the period skipped the invasion. For that Parantaka 2 event , we have evidence during the king reign. So I am not contradicting and they are different events.

Now coming to the historians who said this might happened. First of all most of your sources are old. Their writings are based on later chronicles. They haven't convincingly explained why Chola and early chronicles skipped this invasion. They have not disproved the Obeyesekare points on this invasion who proved this invasion as myth.

Title and content needs to be modified. Ranithraj (talk) 07:29, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Source by Cordington is unreliable and old. Source, The Early History Of Ceylon by Mendis. G.C. was a thesis he wrote for his Ph.D. in 1931. This is ok as source but would have been better if any modern sources you could have provided. Source, De Silva, Sanath; Siriweera, W. I. (2017). Warfare in Srilanka: Military History of The Island from Earliest Times upto Independence (1st ed.), can you show if these authors are scholars in related field by profession? RangersRus (talk) 16:58, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

This source, Sri Lanka : a history by De Silva, Chandra Richard, is fine. RangersRus (talk) 17:03, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

ok Ranithraj (talk) 17:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Siriweera W.I is a historian. You can find about him through the below link.

https://www.sundaytimes.lk/130929/plus/succinct-accounts-of-a-vast-historical-canvas-63676.html

Sanath De Silva is HOD. This is his profile.

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=8k2KFdIAAAAJ&hl=en

Cordington book was revised and published in 1994.

Can I also add the sources which ignored this event but covering all other events? Ranithraj (talk) 17:16, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

W. I. Siriweera source is fine but not Cordington. RangersRus (talk) 17:53, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Can you tell me why not Cordington?,while his book is cited by others Ranithraj (talk) 17:58, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Any author who was British colonial financial administrator, is unreliable. RangersRus (talk) 18:14, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

When you say ignored the event, you mean there is no mention at all? If so, it doesn't matter. We just have to go by sources that provide significant coverage about the event and has to be by academic scholars. RangersRus (talk) 17:56, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok got it Ranithraj (talk) 17:58, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus new modern era source

Lanka, the land of kings

by Disanayaka, J. B 2007 pg 178 to 179

GAJA BAHU I,

THE MYTHICAL HERO

(114-136 AD)

The island kingdom had two kings by the name of Gaja Ba:hu, which meant literally, 'the one who had shoulders (ba:hu) like that of an elephant (gaja). The first of them, King Gaja-ba:hu I was also called Gaja-ba:huka Ga:mani. He was a king around whom many myths and legends have grown. Some of them have found their way to the chronicles like Raja:valiya.

First, he is remembered as a king who terrorized the Co:la king who had invaded this kingdom during the reign of his father. The Co:la king had taken 12,000 Sinhalese as captives to India. Gaja Bashu went to India, not with an army but with one man, a giant called Ni:la, Ranithraj (talk) 18:31, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus it is mentioned that he went alone not with army. How could be it possible? Also the author said the myth found it's way into the later chronicles Ranithraj (talk) 18:34, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

One Simple Trick - Lovejoy Draft

Hi,

I have found two reviews for the draft for Lovejoy's One Simple Trick, but I have to have feedback on whether these are okay to use or not.

Here they are: [6][7]

Please let me in on your thoughts whenever you can. Thank you in advance.

Jibblesnark86 (talk) 22:54, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Loyola Phonenix review is by a second year student and not from some professional music critic. The Totalntertainment has no editor and owner insight. This sight, anyone can pay to publish their review. Its poor source. RangersRus (talk) 07:46, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok, I found this one:https://www.sentireascoltare.com/album/lovejoy-one-simple-trick/

It’s in Italian, though I can translate it, and they review it very well, but I’m still not sure about it. Would this cover it well?

Jibblesnark86 (talk) 08:21, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Oswald vander Veekenprice

could you please have a look at my Q in this regard of september 30? Many thanks Pancras Hogendoorn (talk) 14:36, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Follow-up on Qadiri Kasnazani Sufi Order article

@RangersRus: Hello! I hope you are doing well.

I revised and resubmitted our article on the *Qadiri Kasnazani Sufi Order* on September 22. I requested your feedback at that time but have not received any response yet.

Could you please inform me about the current status of the review process of the article.

Thank you very much for your time and help.

Best regards, Sophie Researcher Sophie researcher (talk) 21:29, 25 October 2025 (UTC)