First of all let me congratulate your over your unending efforts @ Kayastha article.
I have been watching the fall of our community and the efforts of a few to further accelerate our journey to nowhere. WE need a common front and a strong organiztion so that our kids might proudly say that they are our kids and not feel marginalized. If need be we shall ask for reservation for the wrongs done to our brothers in Bengal and insults infilcted on us. Every group is fighting for its right and at such a time we cant stand aloof. I am not a castist/racist but yes I am a Kayastha and mighty proud of it.
I have fished out references to our high lineage from various sources, old and new, but something gives me a feeling that a few moderators are grouping against us and only allow the insults to be posted on the Kayastha article.... Now its time tp fight back, I shall support you and expect the same from you. If you are ready for it, reply back.
To check my credentials please visit my contributions page and also read about the references @ Kayastha Research Wing: http://chitraguptvanshi.wetpaint.com Kayastha Shiromani ( talk) 13:21, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Gyanvigyan1, 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:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion 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!
Aboutmovies (
talk)
06:53, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Please be very careful not to violate WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL, WP:3RR, WP:SPA. etc. This is a genuine friendly advice. Please delete it if I am being assumptive. I am saying this because the atmosphere around caste articles has been very "chop-chop" type for some months now. One needs to be very careful....Regards. MW ℳ 07:28, 12 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 08:28, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
First thing I would say is "Do not create a new account". If you do that, you will be open to accusations of sockpuppetry. And it is quite easy to find out, and difficult to hide. So, please don't do that. Saying this just as a note of caution. Not that there is anything to show that you have any intention to do so. Now, you will find all you need by studying Wikipedia:Changing username. Please read it. I will also help you get it done. But just now, real life calls. So, I must ask for leave for some time. Please pardon me until I return.- MW ℳ 11:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
I left an explanation on User Talk:MangoWong explaining how to make an easy name change request. If you have questions, let me know. Qwyrxian ( talk) 12:02, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Your views are quite impressive!!! I do not much worry about the harm caused to "subaltern, colonized, colored, and other non-dominant people", etc. due to our sourcing policies. We mean no harm to anyone certainly. We are just trying to be practical. We can't say things out of thin air. Rather than the prospect of chaos, I am coming around to the view the WP:V is necessary because we want our material to be trustworthy. That is why we need to be able to show reliable sources for whatever we say, and that is why our sources need to be verifiable. I think the future academic sourcing problem would get solved even without any publishers. We would need to find out how many universities are using which book. And that would be an indication of the reliability of academic books or authors. I hope there is also a market for reliable news. So, maybe the future would show some way of locating reliable news. And we too will follow the same way. Anyway, I think I am beginning to get into speculative territory now. So, I stop here. This was an illuminating conversation for me!!! MW ℳ 16:22, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
( Gyanvigyan1 ( talk) 05:23, 14 September 2011 (UTC))
. Almost all of the varna debate in caste articles is OR. I regard OR, misrepresentation, off topic sources, cherry picked material, passing comments, confusing material, etc. as encyclopedic poison. Such a debate does not exist in reality and it also does not exist in secondary sources. Whatever the secondary sources say on this is from their gut feeling, and is not based on any comprehensive research. It is half baked knowledge. Worthless. I am placing this here so that you can decide whether it is relevant to your point or not. And WP:OR is a core policy for WP. MW ℳ 07:11, 18 September 2011 (UTC) There will be no hard feelings if you decide that this is not relevant to your point there. You know best what you are saying there. MW ℳ 07:18, 18 September 2011 (UTC)...In general, article statements should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages, or on passing comments. Passages open to multiple interpretations should be precisely cited or avoided. A summary of extensive discussion should reflect the conclusions of the source. Drawing conclusions not evident in the reference is original research regardless of the type of source...(emphasis mine)
While making talk page comments, you may want to add footnotes in them. Doing that is easy. There is a special template for that. You can also put some parts of you comments in blockquotes. I am putting in examples of both so that you can see how it works and use them in the same way. [1]Now the blockquote example:
while using advanced formatting, it is always better to preview things before hitting the save button
. Using bulleted lists etc. is also helpful in making yourself clear. Using numbered lists will make it hard for others to ignore replying to your points :-) MW ℳ 09:38, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
References
MW ℳ 07:49, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Links for Wikipedians interested in India content |
||
Welcome kit
Register
Network
Contribute content
|
MW ℳ 05:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Just a quick note: I've seen you recent comments at Talk:Kayastha but am a little bogged down with something else at the moment. Please do not think that you are being ignored! Best. - Sitush ( talk) 18:46, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I have not yet checked subsequent events but apologise if the explanation of my revert of your refactoring (changing of existing comments) at Talk:Kayastha was either or both of rude or lacking in detail.
As a basic rule, you can change the content of your own contributions to talk pages but should not change those made by others. My own interpretation of the latter bit is something that others may not agree with: I quite regularly find myself fixing the indenting of other people (but not the actual words that they use, or their spelling/grammar etc) in order to keep the layout of the discussion orderly. I may be wrong in doing even that but there have been plenty of admins involved in the various articles & none has yet queried it.
Anyway, to the point in question. Yes, you can change your own comment. However, if you do so after someone has replied to it then it has the potential to create confusion because the visible version of your comment is not the same as that to which others had replied. There are ways round this, most usually either
Obviously, fixing minor typos, links etc after someone else has replied is not a problem. But if you even start moving your paragraphs around then it has the potential to change the entire meaning of the message and it places those who replied to it at a "disadvantage" (a poor choice of word, but it is late here).
So, I again apologise but hope that the above makes a little more sense than my blunt edit summary did. - Sitush ( talk) 00:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. JanetteDoe ( talk) 16:45, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
I like your edit on the Kayastha page. Lets form a solidarity group against those who malign the article and its subject matter. I propose the folloing name for the group.
United intellectuals' front of Kayastha ethinicty against racist or castist abuse (UIFKEARCA) Khufiya Vibhaag ( talk) 19:36, 16 July 2014 (UTC) |
First of all let me congratulate your over your unending efforts @ Kayastha article.
I have been watching the fall of our community and the efforts of a few to further accelerate our journey to nowhere. WE need a common front and a strong organiztion so that our kids might proudly say that they are our kids and not feel marginalized. If need be we shall ask for reservation for the wrongs done to our brothers in Bengal and insults infilcted on us. Every group is fighting for its right and at such a time we cant stand aloof. I am not a castist/racist but yes I am a Kayastha and mighty proud of it.
I have fished out references to our high lineage from various sources, old and new, but something gives me a feeling that a few moderators are grouping against us and only allow the insults to be posted on the Kayastha article.... Now its time tp fight back, I shall support you and expect the same from you. If you are ready for it, reply back.
To check my credentials please visit my contributions page and also read about the references @ Kayastha Research Wing: http://chitraguptvanshi.wetpaint.com Kayastha Shiromani ( talk) 13:21, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Gyanvigyan1, 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:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion 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!
Aboutmovies (
talk)
06:53, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Please be very careful not to violate WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL, WP:3RR, WP:SPA. etc. This is a genuine friendly advice. Please delete it if I am being assumptive. I am saying this because the atmosphere around caste articles has been very "chop-chop" type for some months now. One needs to be very careful....Regards. MW ℳ 07:28, 12 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 08:28, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
First thing I would say is "Do not create a new account". If you do that, you will be open to accusations of sockpuppetry. And it is quite easy to find out, and difficult to hide. So, please don't do that. Saying this just as a note of caution. Not that there is anything to show that you have any intention to do so. Now, you will find all you need by studying Wikipedia:Changing username. Please read it. I will also help you get it done. But just now, real life calls. So, I must ask for leave for some time. Please pardon me until I return.- MW ℳ 11:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
I left an explanation on User Talk:MangoWong explaining how to make an easy name change request. If you have questions, let me know. Qwyrxian ( talk) 12:02, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Your views are quite impressive!!! I do not much worry about the harm caused to "subaltern, colonized, colored, and other non-dominant people", etc. due to our sourcing policies. We mean no harm to anyone certainly. We are just trying to be practical. We can't say things out of thin air. Rather than the prospect of chaos, I am coming around to the view the WP:V is necessary because we want our material to be trustworthy. That is why we need to be able to show reliable sources for whatever we say, and that is why our sources need to be verifiable. I think the future academic sourcing problem would get solved even without any publishers. We would need to find out how many universities are using which book. And that would be an indication of the reliability of academic books or authors. I hope there is also a market for reliable news. So, maybe the future would show some way of locating reliable news. And we too will follow the same way. Anyway, I think I am beginning to get into speculative territory now. So, I stop here. This was an illuminating conversation for me!!! MW ℳ 16:22, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
( Gyanvigyan1 ( talk) 05:23, 14 September 2011 (UTC))
. Almost all of the varna debate in caste articles is OR. I regard OR, misrepresentation, off topic sources, cherry picked material, passing comments, confusing material, etc. as encyclopedic poison. Such a debate does not exist in reality and it also does not exist in secondary sources. Whatever the secondary sources say on this is from their gut feeling, and is not based on any comprehensive research. It is half baked knowledge. Worthless. I am placing this here so that you can decide whether it is relevant to your point or not. And WP:OR is a core policy for WP. MW ℳ 07:11, 18 September 2011 (UTC) There will be no hard feelings if you decide that this is not relevant to your point there. You know best what you are saying there. MW ℳ 07:18, 18 September 2011 (UTC)...In general, article statements should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages, or on passing comments. Passages open to multiple interpretations should be precisely cited or avoided. A summary of extensive discussion should reflect the conclusions of the source. Drawing conclusions not evident in the reference is original research regardless of the type of source...(emphasis mine)
While making talk page comments, you may want to add footnotes in them. Doing that is easy. There is a special template for that. You can also put some parts of you comments in blockquotes. I am putting in examples of both so that you can see how it works and use them in the same way. [1]Now the blockquote example:
while using advanced formatting, it is always better to preview things before hitting the save button
. Using bulleted lists etc. is also helpful in making yourself clear. Using numbered lists will make it hard for others to ignore replying to your points :-) MW ℳ 09:38, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
References
MW ℳ 07:49, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Links for Wikipedians interested in India content |
||
Welcome kit
Register
Network
Contribute content
|
MW ℳ 05:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Just a quick note: I've seen you recent comments at Talk:Kayastha but am a little bogged down with something else at the moment. Please do not think that you are being ignored! Best. - Sitush ( talk) 18:46, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I have not yet checked subsequent events but apologise if the explanation of my revert of your refactoring (changing of existing comments) at Talk:Kayastha was either or both of rude or lacking in detail.
As a basic rule, you can change the content of your own contributions to talk pages but should not change those made by others. My own interpretation of the latter bit is something that others may not agree with: I quite regularly find myself fixing the indenting of other people (but not the actual words that they use, or their spelling/grammar etc) in order to keep the layout of the discussion orderly. I may be wrong in doing even that but there have been plenty of admins involved in the various articles & none has yet queried it.
Anyway, to the point in question. Yes, you can change your own comment. However, if you do so after someone has replied to it then it has the potential to create confusion because the visible version of your comment is not the same as that to which others had replied. There are ways round this, most usually either
Obviously, fixing minor typos, links etc after someone else has replied is not a problem. But if you even start moving your paragraphs around then it has the potential to change the entire meaning of the message and it places those who replied to it at a "disadvantage" (a poor choice of word, but it is late here).
So, I again apologise but hope that the above makes a little more sense than my blunt edit summary did. - Sitush ( talk) 00:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. JanetteDoe ( talk) 16:45, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
I like your edit on the Kayastha page. Lets form a solidarity group against those who malign the article and its subject matter. I propose the folloing name for the group.
United intellectuals' front of Kayastha ethinicty against racist or castist abuse (UIFKEARCA) Khufiya Vibhaag ( talk) 19:36, 16 July 2014 (UTC) |