Talk: Pranay Sobusk

Please do not remove successful nominations from the GAN page if you don't know how to properly archive them. As much as you think you may be helping, you're only complicating matters. You missed several key steps in the archiving process; as such, please leave archiving to those who more or less moderate the GAN page. Thank you for your cooperation. Toprawa and Ralltiir 15:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry about that. I will not do this again in the future. Kind regards, Pranay Sobusk ~ 15:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I deleted the Wookiee Warpath articles because we don't care articles on video game levels from an OOU perspective. Toprawa and Ralltiir 16:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• In that case, those probably shouldn't be red links in that article. Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

The Battle of the Construction Facility article GA nomination hasn't been going anywhere, you voted against it but just to let you know I addressed your problems. DjMack 01:54, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I just wanted you to know I reverted your removal of the referencing on the Chreeto article. While single source referencing is not necessary, it's still ok to have it. I like to source the articles I work on regardless. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• No harm, no foul. This is how we learn. :) I find it really shouldn't be imposed one way or another. As I said, it's certainly not necessary, but I do it out of preference. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Chack Jadson 21:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I notice you fairly regularly alphabetize article categories. I just wanted to make sure you know that really is not at all necessary. There is no policy or even regular practice stipulating that categories should be in alphabetical order. Your time alphabetizing would probably be better ised on lists, in articles like Blue Shadow Virus, in the Appearances section, several of the sub-sections could do with being alphabetized, which is a regularly agreed upon way of formatting appearances lists like that. Alphabetized by number first, then by last name, if the character has both first and last name. - JMAS 00:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

• Actually, while I'm not sure if it's written in stone anywhere, alphabetization of categories IS pretty much a standard practice around here, so it's not a bad thing to do it. Also, when alphabetizing appearance lists, make sure you're only doing the ones inside articles on sources - appearance lists in in-universe articles should be in in-universe chronological order, not alphabetical order. jSarek 02:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey Pranay, I think I've addressed your objections here. Could you read it through, and if you're satisfied strike the objections? Thanks! Doluk 18:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks, I just did a significant update to the article today anyway. Doluk 19:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey there, Pranay. Just wanted to notify you that these two edits you made, where you changed {{Subcat}} to [[Category:]], were wrong. I do understand that it puts the categories on top, but that's what it's meant to be like, it's just that not many other people know about the template, and subsequently do it the wrong way. I'm merely doing what Help:Category says, even if it does mean going against the established norm. SoresuMakashi 05:04, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

• Sure, no problem! SoresuMakashi 05:03, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey Pranay. Thanks for bringing the AT-TE to our attention. I'll put it up for the next meeting. Since we only meet once a month, we can't always get to everything, and so we usually set a category that we are going to review each meeting. I believe that the plan is to review starships and vehicles in April, so if you find any more articles of that type, we should be reviewing them soon. Thanks again. 23:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I just reverted a bit of Vandalism on your page. Some anon has been kinda following you around. I recently had to revert some stuff that he did to the subrepeating blaster page.Dr.Kermit 20:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Your recent work has not gone unnoticed. :-) -- AdmirableAckbar 19:50, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

• You're welcome. You deserve it. -- AdmirableAckbar 20:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for doing it as it was supposed to be done. I couldn't have thought of that with the season I'm having. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 20:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you please tell me how to permanently get rid of the welcome new user thing in my discussion page? Vadamee 20:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert mate Joker1138 25px 20:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, I knocked out Yeeru Chivkyrie tonight. It should be ready to go. If you need anything else, just let me know. Master Jonathan 02:14, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Pranay, for your consideration and support of my RFB. It's been users like you, emerging users who don't have tons of connections but press on nonetheless, that are my inspiration and my focus on the site. I'm glad to have been able to relieve any of your reservations, and hope to prove my worthiness of the election in the coming months of my contributions to the site. If you ever need anything, or have any advice to offer me on how to better myself, let me know. Graestan 17:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I have completed my work on the Colla-Arphocc Automata versus the Galactic Alliance page and redirected the Case of Colla-Arphocc Automata verses the Galactic Alliance to that page. I wanted to thank you for the suggestion to change the name, I honestly didn't like the name of the article either. I invite you to take a look at the page and tell me what you think of the article I would like your honest opinion. My next task will be to create articles for all the red links on the page. Thanks. Apotheoses Jedi 03:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC-6)

I think just what you proposed would work perfectly. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:40, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Vizier is not of Ottoman Origin,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vizier

Vizier is a Persian Word and was a rank in Persian Empire thousands of years before Ottoman Empire.

so the entry in "Vizier head of Government" is wrong !!!

Congratulations on rollback. :) Chack Jadson 00:08, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Hi, the source that I have shows it's Malano III, not Melano III. CUSWE also states that it's Malano III. ToRsO bOy 17:08, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

• I see. Well thanks for the info. I'll get to pasting the extra info on the original article then. Slight problem though, I made a mistake in creating the capital city of Mirabel. Is it better to have an Admin delete it or do I use the same process of moving? I just logged in on IRC btw. ToRsO bOy 17:21, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

Just FYI, the there wasn't an {{inuse}} tag on CS-1004, there was a {{wip}} tag. --Xd1358 13:37, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

• Happy New Year to you too! --Xd1358 13:46, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Congrats on winning Wookieepedian of the Month for February Pranay! :D Due to the closeness of the vote I called it a draw between you and Kasra :). Grunny 00:39, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

• Congratulations for winning, Pranay! You're an excellent user.--Jedi Kasra (comlink) 16:37, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
• Hey Pranay, I also wanted to extend my congratulations for your recent achievement. It speaks volumes for your dedication to the Wookieepedia machine, and I'm glad to work alongside such benevolent users as yourself. Keep up the good work.—Tommy 928117px 17:27, February 23, 2010 (UTC)