This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Welcome!
Hello, Loom91/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --
Hoary 07:55, 2005 May 31 (UTC)
I'm not as new as you think. Only that I was too lazy to register an acount. I've extensive edits in multiple featured articles, have sucessfully campaigned for renaming and have many other minor edits. Please stop editing the JF page and let's have a discussion. Loom91 08:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
Supported, looks good to me now that there are references. Phoenix 2 21:13, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I just put up a lengthy article on Mohiner Ghoraguli. Info about the band is very difficult to find. If you can help with an album cover image, would really appreciate that. Thanks. -- Peripatetic 17:07, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi, would like to know more about you.Ypu can find out me at Dwaipayanc
You are way ahead of me. I was just beginning to study gradients and parametric surfaces when in was in 10th grade. I did some independent speculation about fractional derivatives, but it was before I further examined Gamma Function.
No Probaly I do not know Aparna Gupta...Please elaborate...who she happens to be?and where are you from?
yep I know you are from Kolkata.What I asked is where r u in Calcutta?anyway,molu,or,shish(thats really an uncommon name),I am in yahoo messenger as dwai_cha@yahoo.com. hope to see you there...whats your username? bye.another thing I have to ask.How do you add the time with signature in this page?I really do not know. Dwaipayanc
Hi Loom91. Just some tips, based on this edit of yours. The link [[Sets]] should be instead [[set]]s, and the link [[Functions]] should be [[function (mathematics)|functions]]. That is to say, links should be lowercase, and for the function link, it should not point to function, rather, to function (mathematics). Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 21:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to the Novels project, answers to you questions, with question. Could I encourage you to add the userbox {{ User WikiProject Novels}} to your user page theis advertises us and also automatically puts you in our members category. Thanks for joining, there is plenty to get working on. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page) 10:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
HI Loom - Welcome to Wikipedia:WikiProject Game theory. Any help you can provide would be great, so don't worry about your qualifications ;) Feel free to jump right into any projects. If there is anything I can help you with, feel free to let me know. Again, welcome! --best, kevin kzollman][ talk 00:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Loom91. Thank you for the supportive words on my discussion page. You have prompted me to begin a petition to have this username reinstated. Would you be willing to sign your name to in the petition section of my discussion page? User talk:Jebus Christ. Thanks in advance Jimididit 02:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a million for your support in this. I appreciate it. Jimididit 00:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Just an update on my little crusade. I thought you might find it interesting to know that Secretlondon (admin and the person who requested the block) has, in some capacity, actively defended the mahomad images from vandalism. It seems that it's ok to offend other cultures but not hers. Jimididit 10:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
The deleted edits are edits made on pages which had been deleted latter. If you make an edit on a page and then this page will be deleted, then you will have a deleted edit. - nagytibi ! ? 13:38, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Loom91, I see you made some amendments to the policy page. Good luck with it. If you want to start a poll all you need to do is add a new section titled "Poll" with space for support and space for Oppose. I myself have given up on the idea and have started my own wiki instead. Gerard Foley 08:16, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Images are thumbed so that readers can choose whether or not to see the large versions, and to make pages load more quickly (especially important for people on dial-up). Increasing the size of a thumbed image defeats the object. -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 13:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
So far we've compromised on the image size and agreed on "famous". Just two to go, one of which isn't mentioned above.
It seems you are the one who let me know about the Hare School article in my talk page. The article is great. However, I stubbed it for a reason. Let it remain as a stub for some days, may be a month (unless, of course, you add a lot of information meanwhile). In stub condition, often more Wikipedians are attracted to improve the article! BTW, please feel free to improve Kolkata and also add Kolkata related articles. Thanks.-- Dwaipayanc 13:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for moving Kolkata to the Good Articles list. Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 14:05, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Glad to do it! I have now voiced my opinion. Brian1979 13:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for calling the censorship poll to my attention. Just to be absolutely sure, we are now voting on the 2nd poll, the first one has been abandoned right? I'm just asking because a lot of people seem to still be voting on the original proposal. - Serodio 14:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Stop spamming user talk pages with this censorship stuff. You get blocked for disruption.-- Commander Keane 13:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree, I seemed to have misunderstood the poll. -- OrbitOne Talk| Babel 03:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
You have been blocked for 24 hours for disruption - the spamming of user talk pages. I also left a note at WP:ANI so other admins can review the block. Sending out hundreds of unsolicited talk page messages to users is disruptive to Wikipedia, do not continue.-- Commander Keane 12:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I've already sent this to Keane and the mailing list, I'm saying it again here.
What really happened was that a poll on the proposed policy Wikipedia:Censorship is ongoing and I wanted to inform potentially interested users abut this, so I posted a short and polite message on their talk page requesting them to review the policy and make their opinions known (I did not ask them to vote for any particular side). Some users read this and voted (on both sides of the debate) and some even thanked me for bringing this matter to their attention. Not ll have the technical know-how, time or adventure necessary to keep track of such things.
In response, I was blocked by Commander Keane with only a very brief and informal warning with no mention of administrative authority that I had disregarded as routine pseudo-vandalism. Below, I detail why in my opinion the block was a mistake.
1)A user can only be blocked according to the Wikipedia:Blocking policy. In this case the section of the policy cited was Disruption, but Disruption includes no mention whatsoever of posting legitimate comments on talk pages. Loom91 18:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
2)The policy Wikipedia:Spam#Internal_spamming clearly shows that such postings are to be tolerated as long certain conditions are fulfilled, and all of these conditions were fulfilled in my case. It says
"Clean up your mess. For example, after engaging in cross-posting to promote some election, be sure to remove those cross-posts after the election is complete. Be open. Don't make cross-posts that initially appear to be individual messages. Be polite. Wikiquette issues are extra-important when a message is likely to be read by many people. Less redundancy. Rather than copying the same five page essay to twenty talk pages, write it once, in the place where it is most relevant, and then link to it. Don't use a bot. If you're not willing to spend the time personally sending the messages, don't force us to spend the time reading it (or throwing it away)."
3)I was not vote-stuffing. Disruption is "disrupting the normal functioning of Wikipedia". By involving a larger number of WIkipedia contributors in the discussion, I was facilitating better functioning of Wikipedia. You will notice that the the people I invited have voted on both sides and I also invited many who voted Oppose in the previous poll simply because they may be interested in the new poll.
Many editors have thanked me for bringing this matter to their attention as they are interested in making their opinions known and would not have found out otherwise. My message also (unlike some other instances) invited the editor to voice their opinion, not vote on a particular side. They were very polite and short requests that would annoy no one.
A high turnout at a vote is always regarded as a positive thing and makes for better consensus. Considering all, I hope you will agree that the block was not warranted and I should be unblocked and allowed to resume my work. I've worked at this project for a long time now and added a lot of content. I love the concept of an encyclopedia anyone can edit and it is a passion of mine. It grieves me to witness such misunderstandings and not be able to contribute to the project. Please set me free! Thank you. Loom91 18:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
It's a pity you're banned (HAHA! you got banned :-p). Aside from that, I thank you for correcting me on my stance. By the way, I do hope the proposal passes, but it looks shaky right now (50-50, i.e. no consensus).-- Frenchman113 19:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a great place with lots of great people. When someone gives you a warning on your talk page, it's best to assume good faith and heed that warning - or at least consider it. If you thought my warning was vandalism, a short trip to my user page or Special:Listusers would have shown you otherwise.
You need to understand that Wikipedia is not a democracy, and that consensus doesn't need to have every/lots of Wikipedians involved to be established. Also, Wikipedia isn't a society where we spend our time writing rules and rules-lawyering - I don't need a law set in stone to block you for disruption. I made a judgement and acted. Many admins reviewed the block at WP:ANI and yet the block still stands - this must tell you something: spamming is not acceptable. There are other ways to draw attention to something - try a note at the Village pump, or maybe the Community Portal.
Spamming is disruptive, and if you continue will result in blocking without further warning. Many admins agree with this.
If you agree never to spam again I am more than happy to lift the block immedietely - just mention it here (I will be watching this page).-- Commander Keane 07:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
A number of people (including me) attested to the fact that the messages weren't unwanted, and disputed the claim of disruption and the application of an editing block. I think that, at the very least, this should be discussed (perhaps at Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy before another block is imposed. -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 11:07, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Slimvirgin changed policy by unilaterally rewording two parts of NOR to fit a definition favorable to a debate she was engaged in with another user. I objected to this definition as it existed because it could be abused by editors in and endless game of catch-you which would lead to endless debates and edit wars over synthesis. I then modified her contribution to try to bring balance and asked the community there to engage in a consensus forming poll or collaboration to ferret out our two versions to: form a compromise version, keep her version, keep my version, or to keep the original. Whatever consensus said would remain. Instead of civil discourse, this user resorted to name calling, accusations of a persons edit number, an elitist attitude towards new editors etc. etc. It all can be read...this lead to a revert war, where I went overboard to try to protect the original version before any changes..until consensus could be reached as the page itself says that consensus is needed for any changes of substance. I was blocked for this, an Arbcom member unblocked me when I expressed the sentiments above to him and the desire to revert no more as it is not useful even though I was trying to uphold policy and that I gave him my word on this, which I keep my word. While I was blocked the same said editor then decided to debate my version by distorting it. I could not respond. Even though the before said Arbcom member unblocked me, I still have not responded on my word to him. Not to get to lengthy...Thats it in a nutshell. There is no consensus for change, the original version should stay until consensus is reached, and civil debate or polling should commence to ferret out differences. So far this has not happened. Best wishes - -- Northmeister 06:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello Loom91. I used a Canon 20D with a 108mm macro lens, and a 1/4s exposure to take the picture. Glad you liked it. Debivort 19:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I haven't talked to you on WP before, but I saw that you storngly supported the FAC for Stargate (device). Two days ago I nominated DNA Resequencer for FA but everyone hated the nomination so i withdrew it. Now, two days later, I have made massive imporvements to the article. I would like to ask if you think it's ready to go on FAC. Thanks. Tobyk777 00:51, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
If you're serious about finding a new arrangement for your userboxes, I suggest you look at the Boxes section on my userpage. You can steal it if you want, and fiddle with the colour parameters if red isn't quite your style. Kelisi 00:03, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
You've never heard of Goofs!? HAHAHA -- That cracks me up! Ewlyahoocom 10:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't know, I'm afraid. You could try WP:AN, or Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 18:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
You asked at the Village Pump whether there was a tool to find out what IP addresses in a range have made contributions. There isn't that I know of, but it's easy enough to do for such a small range with some local scripting. So, as I wrote there, I wrote and ran the script and here's the output:
I can't make any absolute claims about accuracy since there very well might have been a bug in the script, but it's something. Cheers! — Saxifrage ✎ 21:54, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
You may find a userfied version of the deleted box in my user space at User:Tomyumgoong/ubx/nocirc, feel free to subst or transclude it if you wish. Tomyumgoong 07:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
hello fellow wikipedian...just displaying cordial greetings...well yes, i have a little problem. How does one go about writing in Bengali in the Bengali Wikipedia. Your help would be much appreciated in this matter. Thank you.
BengalRenaissanceEccentrica 00:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
BengalRenaissanceEccentrica 03:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi! How are you doing? Kolkata is a featured article candidate now. You can visit the page and say something. Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 16:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Loom! Write an article on Chandril.It will be great. Did you read the poila boisakh article of Chandtil that appeared in Anandabazat patrika, regarding the forst vote of Apu? It was fantastic, jusr like his other articles. And do not worry much about reliable sources on Eastern wetlands. It's there. See some soutces cired in Kolkata. Also see this site for history of Saltlake. Plus you have recent newspaper articles like the one you mentioned. It won't be mush difficult to start an article, at least a stub. Go on. Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 05:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Haha, you write quite correctly no one reads talk pages for entertainment! I just bumped into your discussion. Usually people just happen to go to some unknown talk pages. Basically, talks often start some germinating ideas. (for example, your own talks on east calcutta wetlands). Who knows, some person with no knowledge of Kolkata may peovide you, by chance, with great source on those. That's why I requested. We should consider the multi-lingual audience of the English wikipedia. Talk pages are not exactly private either. Please do not mind. Bye the way, thanks for supportinf passive voice! LoL. Peculiar suggestions people have. You can follow that guy (Bob) to know that he is not exactly pro-India. In fact, he put the article India for removal from featured article status. Nichalp and others had a great time refuting his points! Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 06:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Loom, I was wondering if you've been to bn wiki. যদি গিয়ে থাকেন, তাহলে কলকাতা, পশ্চিমবঙ্গ, ইত্যাদি বিষয়ে নিবন্ধ লেখা শুরু করে দিন। আমরা বাংলাদেশের বিভিন্ন বিষয়ে অনেক নিবন্ধ লিখছি, কিন্তু ভারতের বাঙ্গালীদের সংখ্যা বাংলা উইকিপিডিয়াতে অনেক কম। তাই সেখানেও যদি আপনি অংশগ্রহন করে থাকেন, তাহলে ভাল হয়। আপনার স্কুল (হেয়ার স্কুল) এর উপর নিবন্ধ দিয়ে শুরু করে দিন .. :) -- Ragib 06:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
Before we go ahead with the idea of a new wikiproject, we need to see what we intend to cover under the new project. You may be able to bunch all Bangla related issues under Wikipedia:WikiProject Bengal which was created to cover the overlapping scenarios for Bangladesh and other Bangla-speaking territories (mainly the West Bengal of course). Also, it seems you are working on several articles involving Bangla words. Please refer to Bengali script to see the transliteration scheme that we have adopted (by months of hard work and discussion) on how to write Bangla words in English.
I am a little busy these days on non WP stuff, but time-to-time I shall be happy to contribute. In the meantime, I believe you are already in touch with User: Ragib who is now also an admin. He spends significant time on WP and I'm sure he'd love to help you out.
Cheers, -- urnonav 21:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
yeah well so i created this stupid stub. care to review it? Your valuable and constructive criticism is sought in this regard. thanks. BengalRenaissanceEccentrica 02:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
You have twice nominated an Indian school for speedy deletion. As stated for the talk page, there is no applicable grounds for speedy deletion. If you want to suggest it for deletion, you should go through articles for deletion. Capitalistroadster 07:09, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, on 3 April 2006 you "made way for disambiguation" by moving David Hare (the British playwright) to David Hare (dramatist). All links to David Hare are now redirects, and, using the search function, I couldn't find any other David Hare. Could you help me here? All the best, <KF> 17:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
There's no time limit. The only relevant factor is whether or not notability is claimed: if it is, the article can't be speedily deleted by an admin, but has to be taken to WP:AFD. There's a 48-hour limit for speedily deleting a copyright violation, but I think that that's the only case where any such limit applies.
Advice to admins includes being cautious about speedily deleting an article on grounds of non-notability when a number of editors have edited it, which might in effect create a time limit. -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 20:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Hmm! I do not know much about him. The article, as you rightly pointed out, is full of translated songs which is rather unnecessary. I shall try to improve, but am short of time now. Sorry. If you can managa some time, please go ahead. Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 09:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi! I just gave a message to BengalRenaissanceEccentrica ( talk · contribs). I am almost copy-pasting it to you too. If you write about West Bengal, many categories on West Bengal and Kolkata have been created. See Category:West Bengal. You can create more categories. However, try to make categories accotding to the ideal sections mentioned in a state article , as laid out in Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian states. So, you can make categoris like Category:Economy of West Bengal, Category:Flora and fauna of West Bengal etc. A good example is the categories under Kerala. See Category:Kerala. Portal:Kerala can be a nice example if you want to rejuvinate wikiproject Bengal. Bye!-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 15:02, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I consider this to be well intentioned but misguided. Our style guides say, that all articles should start with an accessable introduction, when an article gets long and technical, it should be considered to split off the technical parts, not the introduction. -- Pjacobi 12:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Please see my reply in Kolkata talk page i reply to your message there, regsrding the refrences. When you replace inotes with ref format, please use Template:Cite web or Template:Cite news as applicable. These have been used in the rest of the article and provide comprehensive info on the cited sources. Regards.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 15:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi! Could you please have a quick look of Darjeeling? Please give your suggestions in the article's talk page. This is for an internal review before moving to peer review. Thanks. Regards.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 17:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I just read what you wrote at the bottom of This FAC. You said that you didn't think it was even possible to write a article as detailed as that. You also said that you don't think making clear obvious assumptions that every is supposed to make counts as Orignial Reasearch. Based on that I think that you will really like this article. I was thinking of nominating it on FAC again. What do you think? Tobyk777 22:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Much as it's a nice idea, it looks too much like protologism to me, so I'm nominating it for AfD. Feel free to make your own argument for its defence. Confusing Manifestation 14:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, It has been a few days since the censorship case has been brought up there, I'm wondering what the follow-up will be. (note: if you look at my user page it will say I am on wikibreak. I am not editing on Wikipedia anymore until the conclusion of this matter and surrounding ones, but will watch out for your reply or developments on this particular case) Elizmr 17:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Welcome!
Hello, Loom91/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --
Hoary 07:55, 2005 May 31 (UTC)
I'm not as new as you think. Only that I was too lazy to register an acount. I've extensive edits in multiple featured articles, have sucessfully campaigned for renaming and have many other minor edits. Please stop editing the JF page and let's have a discussion. Loom91 08:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
Supported, looks good to me now that there are references. Phoenix 2 21:13, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I just put up a lengthy article on Mohiner Ghoraguli. Info about the band is very difficult to find. If you can help with an album cover image, would really appreciate that. Thanks. -- Peripatetic 17:07, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi, would like to know more about you.Ypu can find out me at Dwaipayanc
You are way ahead of me. I was just beginning to study gradients and parametric surfaces when in was in 10th grade. I did some independent speculation about fractional derivatives, but it was before I further examined Gamma Function.
No Probaly I do not know Aparna Gupta...Please elaborate...who she happens to be?and where are you from?
yep I know you are from Kolkata.What I asked is where r u in Calcutta?anyway,molu,or,shish(thats really an uncommon name),I am in yahoo messenger as dwai_cha@yahoo.com. hope to see you there...whats your username? bye.another thing I have to ask.How do you add the time with signature in this page?I really do not know. Dwaipayanc
Hi Loom91. Just some tips, based on this edit of yours. The link [[Sets]] should be instead [[set]]s, and the link [[Functions]] should be [[function (mathematics)|functions]]. That is to say, links should be lowercase, and for the function link, it should not point to function, rather, to function (mathematics). Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 21:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to the Novels project, answers to you questions, with question. Could I encourage you to add the userbox {{ User WikiProject Novels}} to your user page theis advertises us and also automatically puts you in our members category. Thanks for joining, there is plenty to get working on. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page) 10:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
HI Loom - Welcome to Wikipedia:WikiProject Game theory. Any help you can provide would be great, so don't worry about your qualifications ;) Feel free to jump right into any projects. If there is anything I can help you with, feel free to let me know. Again, welcome! --best, kevin kzollman][ talk 00:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Loom91. Thank you for the supportive words on my discussion page. You have prompted me to begin a petition to have this username reinstated. Would you be willing to sign your name to in the petition section of my discussion page? User talk:Jebus Christ. Thanks in advance Jimididit 02:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a million for your support in this. I appreciate it. Jimididit 00:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Just an update on my little crusade. I thought you might find it interesting to know that Secretlondon (admin and the person who requested the block) has, in some capacity, actively defended the mahomad images from vandalism. It seems that it's ok to offend other cultures but not hers. Jimididit 10:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
The deleted edits are edits made on pages which had been deleted latter. If you make an edit on a page and then this page will be deleted, then you will have a deleted edit. - nagytibi ! ? 13:38, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Loom91, I see you made some amendments to the policy page. Good luck with it. If you want to start a poll all you need to do is add a new section titled "Poll" with space for support and space for Oppose. I myself have given up on the idea and have started my own wiki instead. Gerard Foley 08:16, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Images are thumbed so that readers can choose whether or not to see the large versions, and to make pages load more quickly (especially important for people on dial-up). Increasing the size of a thumbed image defeats the object. -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 13:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
So far we've compromised on the image size and agreed on "famous". Just two to go, one of which isn't mentioned above.
It seems you are the one who let me know about the Hare School article in my talk page. The article is great. However, I stubbed it for a reason. Let it remain as a stub for some days, may be a month (unless, of course, you add a lot of information meanwhile). In stub condition, often more Wikipedians are attracted to improve the article! BTW, please feel free to improve Kolkata and also add Kolkata related articles. Thanks.-- Dwaipayanc 13:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for moving Kolkata to the Good Articles list. Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 14:05, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Glad to do it! I have now voiced my opinion. Brian1979 13:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for calling the censorship poll to my attention. Just to be absolutely sure, we are now voting on the 2nd poll, the first one has been abandoned right? I'm just asking because a lot of people seem to still be voting on the original proposal. - Serodio 14:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Stop spamming user talk pages with this censorship stuff. You get blocked for disruption.-- Commander Keane 13:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree, I seemed to have misunderstood the poll. -- OrbitOne Talk| Babel 03:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
You have been blocked for 24 hours for disruption - the spamming of user talk pages. I also left a note at WP:ANI so other admins can review the block. Sending out hundreds of unsolicited talk page messages to users is disruptive to Wikipedia, do not continue.-- Commander Keane 12:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I've already sent this to Keane and the mailing list, I'm saying it again here.
What really happened was that a poll on the proposed policy Wikipedia:Censorship is ongoing and I wanted to inform potentially interested users abut this, so I posted a short and polite message on their talk page requesting them to review the policy and make their opinions known (I did not ask them to vote for any particular side). Some users read this and voted (on both sides of the debate) and some even thanked me for bringing this matter to their attention. Not ll have the technical know-how, time or adventure necessary to keep track of such things.
In response, I was blocked by Commander Keane with only a very brief and informal warning with no mention of administrative authority that I had disregarded as routine pseudo-vandalism. Below, I detail why in my opinion the block was a mistake.
1)A user can only be blocked according to the Wikipedia:Blocking policy. In this case the section of the policy cited was Disruption, but Disruption includes no mention whatsoever of posting legitimate comments on talk pages. Loom91 18:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
2)The policy Wikipedia:Spam#Internal_spamming clearly shows that such postings are to be tolerated as long certain conditions are fulfilled, and all of these conditions were fulfilled in my case. It says
"Clean up your mess. For example, after engaging in cross-posting to promote some election, be sure to remove those cross-posts after the election is complete. Be open. Don't make cross-posts that initially appear to be individual messages. Be polite. Wikiquette issues are extra-important when a message is likely to be read by many people. Less redundancy. Rather than copying the same five page essay to twenty talk pages, write it once, in the place where it is most relevant, and then link to it. Don't use a bot. If you're not willing to spend the time personally sending the messages, don't force us to spend the time reading it (or throwing it away)."
3)I was not vote-stuffing. Disruption is "disrupting the normal functioning of Wikipedia". By involving a larger number of WIkipedia contributors in the discussion, I was facilitating better functioning of Wikipedia. You will notice that the the people I invited have voted on both sides and I also invited many who voted Oppose in the previous poll simply because they may be interested in the new poll.
Many editors have thanked me for bringing this matter to their attention as they are interested in making their opinions known and would not have found out otherwise. My message also (unlike some other instances) invited the editor to voice their opinion, not vote on a particular side. They were very polite and short requests that would annoy no one.
A high turnout at a vote is always regarded as a positive thing and makes for better consensus. Considering all, I hope you will agree that the block was not warranted and I should be unblocked and allowed to resume my work. I've worked at this project for a long time now and added a lot of content. I love the concept of an encyclopedia anyone can edit and it is a passion of mine. It grieves me to witness such misunderstandings and not be able to contribute to the project. Please set me free! Thank you. Loom91 18:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
It's a pity you're banned (HAHA! you got banned :-p). Aside from that, I thank you for correcting me on my stance. By the way, I do hope the proposal passes, but it looks shaky right now (50-50, i.e. no consensus).-- Frenchman113 19:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a great place with lots of great people. When someone gives you a warning on your talk page, it's best to assume good faith and heed that warning - or at least consider it. If you thought my warning was vandalism, a short trip to my user page or Special:Listusers would have shown you otherwise.
You need to understand that Wikipedia is not a democracy, and that consensus doesn't need to have every/lots of Wikipedians involved to be established. Also, Wikipedia isn't a society where we spend our time writing rules and rules-lawyering - I don't need a law set in stone to block you for disruption. I made a judgement and acted. Many admins reviewed the block at WP:ANI and yet the block still stands - this must tell you something: spamming is not acceptable. There are other ways to draw attention to something - try a note at the Village pump, or maybe the Community Portal.
Spamming is disruptive, and if you continue will result in blocking without further warning. Many admins agree with this.
If you agree never to spam again I am more than happy to lift the block immedietely - just mention it here (I will be watching this page).-- Commander Keane 07:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
A number of people (including me) attested to the fact that the messages weren't unwanted, and disputed the claim of disruption and the application of an editing block. I think that, at the very least, this should be discussed (perhaps at Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy before another block is imposed. -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 11:07, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Slimvirgin changed policy by unilaterally rewording two parts of NOR to fit a definition favorable to a debate she was engaged in with another user. I objected to this definition as it existed because it could be abused by editors in and endless game of catch-you which would lead to endless debates and edit wars over synthesis. I then modified her contribution to try to bring balance and asked the community there to engage in a consensus forming poll or collaboration to ferret out our two versions to: form a compromise version, keep her version, keep my version, or to keep the original. Whatever consensus said would remain. Instead of civil discourse, this user resorted to name calling, accusations of a persons edit number, an elitist attitude towards new editors etc. etc. It all can be read...this lead to a revert war, where I went overboard to try to protect the original version before any changes..until consensus could be reached as the page itself says that consensus is needed for any changes of substance. I was blocked for this, an Arbcom member unblocked me when I expressed the sentiments above to him and the desire to revert no more as it is not useful even though I was trying to uphold policy and that I gave him my word on this, which I keep my word. While I was blocked the same said editor then decided to debate my version by distorting it. I could not respond. Even though the before said Arbcom member unblocked me, I still have not responded on my word to him. Not to get to lengthy...Thats it in a nutshell. There is no consensus for change, the original version should stay until consensus is reached, and civil debate or polling should commence to ferret out differences. So far this has not happened. Best wishes - -- Northmeister 06:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello Loom91. I used a Canon 20D with a 108mm macro lens, and a 1/4s exposure to take the picture. Glad you liked it. Debivort 19:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I haven't talked to you on WP before, but I saw that you storngly supported the FAC for Stargate (device). Two days ago I nominated DNA Resequencer for FA but everyone hated the nomination so i withdrew it. Now, two days later, I have made massive imporvements to the article. I would like to ask if you think it's ready to go on FAC. Thanks. Tobyk777 00:51, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
If you're serious about finding a new arrangement for your userboxes, I suggest you look at the Boxes section on my userpage. You can steal it if you want, and fiddle with the colour parameters if red isn't quite your style. Kelisi 00:03, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
You've never heard of Goofs!? HAHAHA -- That cracks me up! Ewlyahoocom 10:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't know, I'm afraid. You could try WP:AN, or Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 18:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
You asked at the Village Pump whether there was a tool to find out what IP addresses in a range have made contributions. There isn't that I know of, but it's easy enough to do for such a small range with some local scripting. So, as I wrote there, I wrote and ran the script and here's the output:
I can't make any absolute claims about accuracy since there very well might have been a bug in the script, but it's something. Cheers! — Saxifrage ✎ 21:54, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
You may find a userfied version of the deleted box in my user space at User:Tomyumgoong/ubx/nocirc, feel free to subst or transclude it if you wish. Tomyumgoong 07:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
hello fellow wikipedian...just displaying cordial greetings...well yes, i have a little problem. How does one go about writing in Bengali in the Bengali Wikipedia. Your help would be much appreciated in this matter. Thank you.
BengalRenaissanceEccentrica 00:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
BengalRenaissanceEccentrica 03:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi! How are you doing? Kolkata is a featured article candidate now. You can visit the page and say something. Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 16:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Loom! Write an article on Chandril.It will be great. Did you read the poila boisakh article of Chandtil that appeared in Anandabazat patrika, regarding the forst vote of Apu? It was fantastic, jusr like his other articles. And do not worry much about reliable sources on Eastern wetlands. It's there. See some soutces cired in Kolkata. Also see this site for history of Saltlake. Plus you have recent newspaper articles like the one you mentioned. It won't be mush difficult to start an article, at least a stub. Go on. Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 05:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Haha, you write quite correctly no one reads talk pages for entertainment! I just bumped into your discussion. Usually people just happen to go to some unknown talk pages. Basically, talks often start some germinating ideas. (for example, your own talks on east calcutta wetlands). Who knows, some person with no knowledge of Kolkata may peovide you, by chance, with great source on those. That's why I requested. We should consider the multi-lingual audience of the English wikipedia. Talk pages are not exactly private either. Please do not mind. Bye the way, thanks for supportinf passive voice! LoL. Peculiar suggestions people have. You can follow that guy (Bob) to know that he is not exactly pro-India. In fact, he put the article India for removal from featured article status. Nichalp and others had a great time refuting his points! Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 06:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Loom, I was wondering if you've been to bn wiki. যদি গিয়ে থাকেন, তাহলে কলকাতা, পশ্চিমবঙ্গ, ইত্যাদি বিষয়ে নিবন্ধ লেখা শুরু করে দিন। আমরা বাংলাদেশের বিভিন্ন বিষয়ে অনেক নিবন্ধ লিখছি, কিন্তু ভারতের বাঙ্গালীদের সংখ্যা বাংলা উইকিপিডিয়াতে অনেক কম। তাই সেখানেও যদি আপনি অংশগ্রহন করে থাকেন, তাহলে ভাল হয়। আপনার স্কুল (হেয়ার স্কুল) এর উপর নিবন্ধ দিয়ে শুরু করে দিন .. :) -- Ragib 06:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
Before we go ahead with the idea of a new wikiproject, we need to see what we intend to cover under the new project. You may be able to bunch all Bangla related issues under Wikipedia:WikiProject Bengal which was created to cover the overlapping scenarios for Bangladesh and other Bangla-speaking territories (mainly the West Bengal of course). Also, it seems you are working on several articles involving Bangla words. Please refer to Bengali script to see the transliteration scheme that we have adopted (by months of hard work and discussion) on how to write Bangla words in English.
I am a little busy these days on non WP stuff, but time-to-time I shall be happy to contribute. In the meantime, I believe you are already in touch with User: Ragib who is now also an admin. He spends significant time on WP and I'm sure he'd love to help you out.
Cheers, -- urnonav 21:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
yeah well so i created this stupid stub. care to review it? Your valuable and constructive criticism is sought in this regard. thanks. BengalRenaissanceEccentrica 02:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
You have twice nominated an Indian school for speedy deletion. As stated for the talk page, there is no applicable grounds for speedy deletion. If you want to suggest it for deletion, you should go through articles for deletion. Capitalistroadster 07:09, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, on 3 April 2006 you "made way for disambiguation" by moving David Hare (the British playwright) to David Hare (dramatist). All links to David Hare are now redirects, and, using the search function, I couldn't find any other David Hare. Could you help me here? All the best, <KF> 17:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
There's no time limit. The only relevant factor is whether or not notability is claimed: if it is, the article can't be speedily deleted by an admin, but has to be taken to WP:AFD. There's a 48-hour limit for speedily deleting a copyright violation, but I think that that's the only case where any such limit applies.
Advice to admins includes being cautious about speedily deleting an article on grounds of non-notability when a number of editors have edited it, which might in effect create a time limit. -- Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης) 20:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Hmm! I do not know much about him. The article, as you rightly pointed out, is full of translated songs which is rather unnecessary. I shall try to improve, but am short of time now. Sorry. If you can managa some time, please go ahead. Bye.-- Dwaipayanc 09:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi! I just gave a message to BengalRenaissanceEccentrica ( talk · contribs). I am almost copy-pasting it to you too. If you write about West Bengal, many categories on West Bengal and Kolkata have been created. See Category:West Bengal. You can create more categories. However, try to make categories accotding to the ideal sections mentioned in a state article , as laid out in Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian states. So, you can make categoris like Category:Economy of West Bengal, Category:Flora and fauna of West Bengal etc. A good example is the categories under Kerala. See Category:Kerala. Portal:Kerala can be a nice example if you want to rejuvinate wikiproject Bengal. Bye!-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 15:02, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I consider this to be well intentioned but misguided. Our style guides say, that all articles should start with an accessable introduction, when an article gets long and technical, it should be considered to split off the technical parts, not the introduction. -- Pjacobi 12:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Please see my reply in Kolkata talk page i reply to your message there, regsrding the refrences. When you replace inotes with ref format, please use Template:Cite web or Template:Cite news as applicable. These have been used in the rest of the article and provide comprehensive info on the cited sources. Regards.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 15:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi! Could you please have a quick look of Darjeeling? Please give your suggestions in the article's talk page. This is for an internal review before moving to peer review. Thanks. Regards.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 17:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I just read what you wrote at the bottom of This FAC. You said that you didn't think it was even possible to write a article as detailed as that. You also said that you don't think making clear obvious assumptions that every is supposed to make counts as Orignial Reasearch. Based on that I think that you will really like this article. I was thinking of nominating it on FAC again. What do you think? Tobyk777 22:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Much as it's a nice idea, it looks too much like protologism to me, so I'm nominating it for AfD. Feel free to make your own argument for its defence. Confusing Manifestation 14:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, It has been a few days since the censorship case has been brought up there, I'm wondering what the follow-up will be. (note: if you look at my user page it will say I am on wikibreak. I am not editing on Wikipedia anymore until the conclusion of this matter and surrounding ones, but will watch out for your reply or developments on this particular case) Elizmr 17:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)