Talk:Wangala
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Wangala. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080427012413/http://megtourism.gov.in:80/wangala.html to http://megtourism.gov.in/wangala.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080426173816/http://www.thedailystar.net:80/magazine/2004/01/02/event.htm to http://www.thedailystar.net/magazine/2004/01/02/event.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:33, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
So many mistakes and wrong information
Was this article not verified before being published? Ya0guai (talk) 17:45, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
- Ya0guai Ermmmmm no, probably not. Do you think we have a Verification Committee that sits down at a nice oak table and considers every article for, say, a couple of hours before publication? Given that publication is a bit of an odd/flexible concept around here anyway, and given the price of tea and muffins, probably not. And you might want to ask Nupedia how the whole pre-publication review thing worked out for them ... hint: not good, not good.
- No, what happens here is that someone has a go at an article to the best of their abilities and it is or isn't any good, and sooner or later someone who knows more and has better sources will come along and think blimey that's awful and get involved in fixing it, and that's you, and that's where we are right now! So, while I'm sorry your first encounter was with something you thought was terrible, the good news is the system is working, because you're fixing it, and we've acquired another editor to help us all to fix stuff! So, welcome, well done, thanks for your work on this article, and please carry on! Cheers DBaK (talk) 11:26, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)