Skysun312

Welcome!

Hello, Skysun312, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Chennai MRTS

Hi Skysun312, I would like to ask you why you have removed the tags in the criticism section. Even if you had reorganised the information, the section sounds completely biased against it. If you do have a personal conflict with the service, you can use the Talk page or a forum. Wikipedia articles are not forums where you project your vehemence or disgust for something. It is a tool to share knowledge in a neutral view, that is balanced. While you have seemed to ameliorate the previous, it has a strong tone, and I suggest you change it at once. There is also a great litany of "sources" that you have used for this particular section, and I call into question the necessity of such. I am going to re-add the tags. In fact, don't even change any information, or remove the tags. I want you to talk it over on the Talk page of the article. You have some great information, and it is a great contribution. But bear in mind, that not everyone is from Chennai. Some people may have one view, some may have others. I, for example, am from New York. So essentially, I want you to really consider the tonality, talk it over with other editors, and we can rewrite your information in a more neutral tone that is acceptable to Wikipedia policy. Hmanck (talk) 02:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok fine. I understand. I think now someone has done major corrections to the article. Actually, the MRTS faces a lot of criticism, and hence I had written so much, citing multiple references for every point I had mentioned - so that it didn't look like I had just made up the content on my own. And another thing is that, since it was criticism section, I thought that this section was merely meant to criticise the topic, (as the name sounds), and hence the question of neutrality doesn't come into picture. But, regarding the other tags, I agree to some extent. Yes, the criticism section was pretty long and it didn't meet Wikipedia's standards. I hope this section of the article is better now. Thank you for identifying the errors for initiating the necessary corrections.

I have now understood the meaning of the tags in wikipedia after seeing the corrections made.

Wiki Project Chennai

--Anbu121 (talk me) 18:39, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

WP Chennai CoM

Your opinion is requested in this discussion. --Anbu121 (talk me) 19:51, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Your ability to find sources by digging up Hindu articles is really impressive. I would like to hear whether you are interested to participate in Collaboration of the Month. --Anbu121 (talk me) 11:29, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I am interested to in the project.

Please enroll yourself in the members list in the project page, accessible through the link in the banner below. And remember to vote (or nominate) before 31st August. --Anbu121 (talk me) 17:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Chennai Collaboration of the Month

Chennai Collaboration of the Month

The Chennai Collaboration of the Month begins !!! The Collaboration aims to transform an underdeveloped article into B-Class, or develop an existing B-Class article to GA/FA-Class. Nominations are now open. Voting ends on 31st August 2012. Participate and win Barnstars!!! --Anbu121 (talk me) 17:32, 20 August 2012 (UTC) Note: If you are seeing this message on someone's talk page and wish to be a part of the collaboration, add yourself in the members list.

MRTS Chennai, Central, Egmore and other edits

First of all, allow me to thank you for all the great effort you’ve put in to improve this article. I can see you, as a novice editor, working with great enthusiasm in several articles, including MRTS, Chennai Central, Chennai Egmore, etc. I would like to share with you a few nuances of editing at this point in time. First of all, we have to understand what Wikipedia is not before adding in more contents (please see What Wikipedia is not). It is not a text book, nor a guide, directory, repository of unnecessary sources, etc., etc. (the rules are plenty). It is only an encyclopedia, meaning every content should be encyclopedic. As we are working towards improving this article to a good/featured article level, we should not allow those unnecessary info to creep in, which could drastically degrade the quality of the article. For example, rather than saying “The station lacks several facilities[1][2][3]…[10]. The lifts are not working[11][12][13][14], the floors are slippery[15][16][17][18], stray dogs and cows are seen inside the premises[19][20][21][22], interiors are gloomy and intimidating[23][24][25][26], there is no safety for passengers[27][28][29][30]”, we can simply say “There are complaints about the poor maintenance of stations[valid source 1][valid source 2].” The former shows more of a complaining tone and is fit only for editorials and opinion pages, which Wikipedia is nowhere near to. The second only is encyclopedic, since it just informs readers of the situation, or put it this way, just a part of the situation. MRTS article should be more technical, that is, with project and infrastructure details, details about the service, passenger and revenue statistics, comparison with similar projects across the globe, the future plans, and stuff. Newspapers are fraught with all stuff—opinions, editorials, complains, metaphors, sarcasm, and not to mention actual facts about the project. Please note that only the final one is encyclopedic. Also any event will be reported in umpteen newspapers, but we need not list each one and make the citations look like a long trail of cues (technically, such a visually distracting trail is called a “hole” or something in publishing parlance). However, if you find new sources, please discuss them in the talk page, as you’re already doing, but do not put them in the article, especially when it is already being improved. This would create unnecessary rework on every editor’s part. I should admit here that I learnt editing Wikipedia after making these and several other mistakes. The best way to know about this is to go through similar articles of good or featured quality. This will give us an idea on how to go about the content. Hope this suggestion is useful. Please get back to any of us if you have more doubts. Thanks again for all the good work. Rasnaboy (talk) 04:35, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Will clean up all the stuff this weekend and copyedit the articles before going further. Rasnaboy (talk) 04:35, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Fine. I get it. I won't be making much editing till cleanup is over unless I feel it's very important. However, I may continue to post my opinions on the talk page, and someone else may put it up on the article if it's fine. Regarding criticism section, I have been trying to change my tone towards neutral and 3rd person's point of view, though it may not be perfect. Regarding sources, recently, I am adding the list to the talk page, so that article is not affected. I would like to point out again that some of the editors are working on secondary articles on individual MRTS stations, and these sources may be useful to them. I want to clarify, whether these articles on individual MRTS stations also affect the rating of this article - these stations articles are like branches of this main article on MRTS. If they do count, then it's mandatory that we improve these articles too, for which getting sources online may not be so easy. Even if they don't count for rating of this article, then these additional sources may be useful in building up those articles (at later stage) which are currently stubs. Skysun312 (talk) 08:03, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiLove Exceptional Newcomer Award

		The Exceptional Newcomer Award
		For all the hard work put into Chennai MRTS article Challengethelimits (talk) 05:47, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Chennai Collaboration of the Month

The articles Triplicane and Chennai MRTS improved a lot because of you. Why don't you join us at Chennai Collaboration of the Month. Your ability to find sources will hugely benefit the collaboration. --Anbu121 (talk me) 09:54, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Chennai Collaborations of the month

Hi Skysun312,
Nominations are open for Chennai Collaborations. You can nominate an article or vote for an article that others have nominated. The selected article will be taken up for development during the month of January 2013. I am personally looking forward to your participation in the voting process as well as the article development. Thanks, Anbu121 (talk me) 14:42, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Chennai COTM

Nominations Open. --Anbu121 (talk me) 12:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)