Talk:Roshni (album)

::::{{re|AirshipJungleman29}} With all due respect, I witnessed a brief [[WP:SILENCE]] against my protest and no one told what the specific issue is in the article. Even TechnoSquirrel69, who initially pointed a potential issue to be RSNOI, called it would be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1340078558 unfair to DYKTIMEOUT]. Above, I have attached a query at the AN, which shows the history where I wrote that the DYKTIMEOUT also says, {{tq|However, if a nomination timed out while it was waiting for a review or a re-review, consider reviewing the nomination rather than rejecting it.}} And it also points to [[WP:EDITDISC]] which also says, {{tq|This doesn't exclude using these sources, but it's always prudent to remember that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.}}

::::{{re|AirshipJungleman29}} With all due respect, I witnessed a brief [[WP:SILENCE]] against my protest and no one told what the specific issue is in the article. Even TechnoSquirrel69, who initially pointed a potential issue to be RSNOI, called it would be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1340078558 unfair to DYKTIMEOUT]. Above, I have attached a query at the AN, which shows the history where I wrote that the DYKTIMEOUT also says, {{tq|However, if a nomination timed out while it was waiting for a review or a re-review, consider reviewing the nomination rather than rejecting it.}} And it also points to [[WP:EDITDISC]] which also says, {{tq|This doesn't exclude using these sources, but it's always prudent to remember that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.}}

::::{{tq|failed to get consensus}} should not mean consensus to dimsiss someone's queries. Really sorry, I found no such term as "fairness" in the policy you linked, though I think [[WP:NOCON]] sits better here, which says {{tq|to retain the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit}}. Thus, prior version was eligible for being new enough for DYK and should not be eligible for DYKTIMEOUT. Thank you! [[User talk:M.Billoo2000#top|'''M.''']] [[User:M.Billoo2000|Bill'''oo''']] 11:24, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

::::{{tq|failed to get consensus}} should not mean consensus to dimsiss someone's queries. Really sorry, I found no such term as "fairness" in the policy you linked, though I think [[WP:NOCON]] sits better here, which says {{tq|to retain the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit}}. Thus, prior version was eligible for being new enough for DYK and should not be eligible for DYKTIMEOUT. Thank you! [[User talk:M.Billoo2000#top|'''M.''']] [[User:M.Billoo2000|Bill'''oo''']] 11:24, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

:::::{{u|M.Billoo2000}} TechnoSquirrel69 said it would be unfair to invoke DYKTIMEOUT on 23 February, not two weeks later after additional opinions had been gathered. The quotes you provided from [[WP:EDITDISC]] and [[WP:NOCON]] are irrelevant; in fact the second paragraph of your comment is just incomprehensible. Please take more time to write coherently in the future. Thanks, [[User:AirshipJungleman29|~~ AirshipJungleman29]] ([[User talk:AirshipJungleman29|talk]]) 11:31, 24 April 2026 (UTC)