Thank you for uploading Image:Family tree.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. J Milburn (talk) 14:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dipendra. Your family history looks interesting, but it needs references to avoid being deleted: mentions of the family in articles or books, which would establish "notability". If you have some, or want to discuss, leave a note on my (talk) page. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:57, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dipendra. I noticed you pasted back large chunks of the earlier version of this article. This introduces a lot of duplication of content, and may make the article less accessible to the general reader. I had tried to organize the content into a more standard style and structure without dropping any relevant material, but in some cases summarizing content and adding links to related topics that give more detail, and adding references to external sources.

Would you consider reverting your recent changes, then looking at the article and making changes and additions to particular sections or paragraphs where you think the text is incorrect or incomplete? Before doing so, you may want to check Wikipedia:The perfect article, and perhaps other guidelines such as Wikipedia:Lead section and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note on your recent changes to Raikut. The pictures really brighten up the article, which I think covers a very interesting subject. I may make a few edits to the article over the next few days, which you can review and change or correct if you disagree. Some basic principles that I tend to apply to all articles:

• Structure. An article is not a story. The preamble should be short, telling the reader what the article is about and why it may be interesting to them. It may include a short summary. Then there is a table of contents, then sections that cover each aspect of the subject. Some readers will skim the preamble and leave the page - this is not what they were looking for. Others will skip to one section. And others will read through from start to end.

• Language. The language should be clear, simple and direct, and should be entirely neutral.

• References. Ideally, every statement should be backed up by a footnote pointing to a source such as a book, an academic paper, an official record or an article in a respectable journal. Some editors are very picky about this, and remove all content that does give a source. I am more inclined to leave information that I have no reason to doubt. But some of the statements about the later family members could use references, if they are available. (If a section is a summary of a main article, I don't think references are so important - they will be in the main article).

So ... keep an eye on the article. Feel free to change what you disagree with. This is a collaborative effort. At some point, other editors may make other changes. Eventually the article will 'stabilize', with nobody seeing any reason for further change. I think already this entry is interesting and full of information. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:31, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Appointment for submitting a memorandum.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Raikat, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Shovon (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Appointment.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:16, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Appointment.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 23:49, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article is correctly named. A search for Google Books with preview available found 8 for "Deb Raikut" and 16 for "Deb Raikat". Examples of Raikat include

• Lethbridge, Sir Roper (2005-01-01). The Golden Book of India: A Genealogical and Biographical Dictionary of the Ruling Princes, Chiefs, Nobles, and Other Personages, Titled Or Decorated of the Indian Empire. Aakar Books. ISBN 978-81-87879-54-1. ((cite book)): Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Sarkar, Sumit; Sarkar, Tanika (2008). Women and Social Reform in Modern India: A Reader. Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-35269-9. ((cite book)): Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• "PRATIVA BOSE versus KUMAR RUPENDRA DEB RAIKAT & ORS 1965 AIR 540 1964 SCR (4) 69". ((cite web)): horizontal tab character in |title= at position 65 (help)

There are clearly two ways to spell the name, but Raikat is the more common, and Wikipedia uses the most common. I have bolded the alternative Raikut given at the start of the article. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, First Siliguri AWS (Automatic Weather Station) observatory, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onmyway22 talk 08:43, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Arjayay. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Siliguri have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 12:05, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Idoghor Melody were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:First Siliguri AWS (Automatic Weather Station) observatory and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:First Siliguri AWS (Automatic Weather Station) observatory, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "((Db-g7))" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 12:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Raikut! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 12:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Raikut. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:First Siliguri AWS (Automatic Weather Station) observatory, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:01, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]