![]() | 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 15 | ← | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | → | Archive 25 |
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
For your tireless contribution you deserve this barnstar! Tito Dutta ( contact) 16:01, 22 May 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
For the article you sent me, thank you. Darkness Shines ( talk) 19:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC) |
Just in case you should not notice it. - Sitush ( talk) 15:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I guess as you are involved in the article you would not be able to use your admin powers on the article. (Thats my knowledge abt admins, could be wrong.) But for the betterment i have a proposal which i would like you to get it implemented by some or the other way. (a) Keep the article locked for indef. I dont know why it was removed the last time after 24hrs. (b) After being locked, start/continue discussion point wise; meaning propose a statementA, get majority approval and then ask another admin to edit the article. Propose B and so on... Take votes separately and strictly keep chatting to minimum. (c) Most important request would be to somehow bring some order to that talk page. But i dont see how you can do it. EVERY DAMN EDITOR IS FOLLOWING WP:BOLD AND NO OTHER POLICY. I am not gonna name the editors who are being nuisance as you know who they are. Keeping aside the content issues, this page is really getting messy because of the behavioural issues. §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 15:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
You got mail. Darkness Shines ( talk) 22:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
In case you also feel similar to what I have said there, feel free to revert those edits directly! -- Tito Dutta ( contact) 03:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Look what appeared on my watchlist today: Wikipedia:ARBIPA#Standard_discretionary_sanctions. User:Darkness Shines is up to his old tricks and is building his own private list again like he is an admin. This is the same list he put me on earlier this year. Can he do this and get away with it? Who does he think he is? Please look into this and remove any names that are not legitimately on this list. Crtew ( talk) 22:34, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
MrT just deleted all the edits we're talking about, and it is an edit I fully support! Crtew ( talk) 08:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
@Qwyrxian: I assume that actions based on these sanctions will be taken on any editor only after they are made aware of it at least once. For eg, i trust that action will be taken on RegentsPark even if he hasn't received any templated message because we know for sure that he is aware of this. So, i my personal objection is that why only our names were placed on the list? If the list has to have any real meaning, all editors who are aware of sanctions, and not just the ones who were notified, should be enlist. §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 10:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
1. If it's so innocent, then delete the word "placed" and "on notice" and create an acknowledgement list with wording that is truly more descriptive of its informative purpose! Crtew ( talk) 12:18, 27 May 2013 (UTC) 2. Then rethink the banner language, too. And don't give editors the right to use it like it's some form of punishment that they can dole out. Crtew ( talk) 12:19, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Comment: I've added myself to the list following the excellent example set by Sitush. In my opinion, there is only one editor who needs reminding of the sanctions. I'm involved so I won't do that but I think it is unfortunate that the admin corps is ignoring this mess and focusing on well meaning, if cranky, editors like Maunus instead. -- regentspark ( comment) 12:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
I know what you all three are doing by placing yourselves on the list is meant well and admirable! The skeptic in me, however, can't resist observing that all placed "not because I've done anything to warrant notification" next to their names ;-) Is that necessary? (I ask rhetorically) Crtew ( talk) 13:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark! It just occurred to me that you might not know yet that the Jerusalem RfC has now started. It's been open for almost a week, and has already generated a sizeable amount of text. If you want to follow the proceedings, it's at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jerusalem. Thank you for agreeing to close it. :) Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 11:41, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
What's the best course of action for dealing with this? This user is forcing an absolutely meaningless change in without even bothering to justify it, and with an edit summary which paraphrases to "don't revert me and I won't revert you". Thanks, CMD ( talk) 23:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Calcutta time, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page King Rat ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:44, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for unblocking me.
Mr T
(Talk?)
(New thread?)
14:01, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. As you took part in the KW topic ban. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 15:49, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
See this large-scale undiscussed removal of content. I don't have the necessary patience nor do I know the proper way to deal with this kind of edits without unilateral reversion. To me, it looks like vandalism but what do I know, as they say, I am just a surly rustic hillbilly. If I revert it, it will be framed as an edit war and then I will be blocked. Kindly take necessary steps. Warn him or block him do whatever an admin is supposed to do in these situations. Mr T (Talk?) (New thread?) 18:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
We just discussed this and I objected to unblock and you just went ahead and did it. Please reblock and seek a consensus at ANI. This is admin abuse and I am absolutely livid. Spartaz Humbug! 18:53, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
(Thanks Sitush.) Spartaz, what I've said above should be reasonably clear but I'll do the parsing.... I've apologized to you and said I should have informed you (regret). I've written a lengthy response along with an apology (I do care). I admit I've not specifically said I've no intention of doing this again but, in my view anyway, if we're talking about unblocking Darkness Shines, I would have to be suicidal to unblock him ever again. I have no suicidal tendencies. You're welcome to start an RfC/U. While, obviously, I am not eager to spend the next month or so defending every action that is bound to be dredged up, I don't believe I have done anything (other than in this case) that is indefensible. -- regentspark ( comment) 14:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Gamaliel (
talk)
18:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Dear RegentsPark, It would be very nice if you can visit Talk:Udaipur Airport and express your further view on requested move. Regards. - Jethwarp ( talk) 06:08, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Vigyani talk ਯੋਗਦਾਨ 14:03, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Reagentspark can you take a look at Minorities in Pakistan I have taken a glance at the lead paragraph of the article and it contains some major major pov sentences containing "tyranny" and "massacres" all added by a known pov pusher it has become a pov hell hole could you at least clean up the lead a bit? I also had one last question if someone creates an article and certain people do not like it due to there nationalist views should the creator be banned? Futureperf (an admin) seems to be hell bent on banning a user Darknesshines for creating a decent article which has some pov issues but not the scale of minorities in Pakistan thanks a bunch 31.54.56.16 ( talk) 08:23, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
In case Anti-Muslim pogroms in India is not on your watchlist. I just responded to your accusation of OR. Darkness Shines ( talk) 20:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
RP, I would appreciate you strikeing your comment here as the source used does say pogroms. Darkness Shines ( talk) 12:59, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
3-12 hrs
) restored / userfied? I just need a glimpse. Is that technically permitted? There are some comments which I need to collect, that's all, and then one admin can delete it perhaps? You don't have to act upon it, just tell me if it's allowed or not or if there is a policy direct me to that, thanks.
Mr T
(Talk?)
(New thread?)
08:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)I think you might need some coffee... You restored the TALK page to http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Mrt3366/Anti-Muslim_pogroms_in_India rather than the actual article! PantherLeapord ( talk) 12:16, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
You mentioned me on Sitush's page reg my vote at AN/I, we've had a long interaction including a RfC, remember "three admins" you, Spaceman and YellowMonkey? You see AN/I is on my watch-list. I saw the discussion, could have ignored it but saw Oranges' comment and for better or worse I voted the way I did, as a rule I've never voted to support sanctions against anyone, but I think adminship is a job that needs to be done carefully and it isn't being done carefully enough. I am writing here as I'm feeling bad about the vote, bad but not wrong. Yogesh Khandke ( talk) 15:56, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I don't know who else to tell this to but ask Darkness Shines to avoid commenting on my talk except for leaving formal notification templates to relevant discussions I have had it with him. I don't want to interact with him on my talk. I think that is my prerogative. I requested him multiple times politely but he seems to be ignoring those. [2] Do what an admin is supposed to do in these situations, you know better. Mr T (Talk?) (New thread?) 18:26, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello can you post in my user space the now deleted hoax article "Bicholim conflict". If you are not aware of it see Wikipedia controversies#2013. The Legend of Zorro 07:31, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
I've temporarily blanked List of Goud Saraswat Brahmin surnames because it was clearly a copy/paste from the source even though it had subsequently undergone a few (unsourced) changes. There are numerous GSB websites and I'm not even sure that relying on the one that was copied can be justified. Could you perhaps take a quick look at the pre-removal state and apply some brain cells? - Sitush ( talk) 11:58, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Sitush, Sorry for the mistake. I have edited only Kashi Math. Spedian ( talk) 19:20, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I mentioned you in an ANI thread related to WP:ARBIPA. I'm not sure if you want to comment there or not. Cheers, Mathsci ( talk) 00:08, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I have mentioned you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive828#Block review - OrangesRyellow -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 06:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
How can we permanently delete or remove the named section from the India-Pakistan page? Based on the shenanigans of placing editors on THE LIST and then letting them off lightly when they mess up, the list is even more meaningless than before. Furthermore, editors who shouldn't really be in the position of warning others, especially editors who have themselves been repeatedly ban, are using warnings to create drama and not furthering the productivity of the area. It's worse than useless-- more like trouble. What process can be used to delete the section forever from the page? Crtew ( talk) 19:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
RegentsPark, Please see the talk page discussion at 2013 Shahbag protests that I started to generate a discussion about the bias in the article. The biased article is left in mainspace intact, and my self-reverted WP:Bold is available to facilitate discussion. Crtew ( talk) 21:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I have rewritten and expanded on the pogrom article in userspace here It is now an entirly different article and I would like your feedback on it please. Darkness Shines ( talk) 20:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
I have moved the draft to User:Darkness Shines/Anti-Muslim violence in India so that the previous history will not be in the article when moved to mainspace. I suspect if any trace of the pogroms article was in the history it would cause a few arguments. Darkness Shines ( talk) 09:19, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I have requested a history merge of talk page. I am not at all interested in history merge of the actual page. The Legend of Zorro 17:42, 24 June 2013 (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 15 | ← | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | → | Archive 25 |
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
For your tireless contribution you deserve this barnstar! Tito Dutta ( contact) 16:01, 22 May 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
For the article you sent me, thank you. Darkness Shines ( talk) 19:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC) |
Just in case you should not notice it. - Sitush ( talk) 15:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I guess as you are involved in the article you would not be able to use your admin powers on the article. (Thats my knowledge abt admins, could be wrong.) But for the betterment i have a proposal which i would like you to get it implemented by some or the other way. (a) Keep the article locked for indef. I dont know why it was removed the last time after 24hrs. (b) After being locked, start/continue discussion point wise; meaning propose a statementA, get majority approval and then ask another admin to edit the article. Propose B and so on... Take votes separately and strictly keep chatting to minimum. (c) Most important request would be to somehow bring some order to that talk page. But i dont see how you can do it. EVERY DAMN EDITOR IS FOLLOWING WP:BOLD AND NO OTHER POLICY. I am not gonna name the editors who are being nuisance as you know who they are. Keeping aside the content issues, this page is really getting messy because of the behavioural issues. §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 15:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
You got mail. Darkness Shines ( talk) 22:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
In case you also feel similar to what I have said there, feel free to revert those edits directly! -- Tito Dutta ( contact) 03:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Look what appeared on my watchlist today: Wikipedia:ARBIPA#Standard_discretionary_sanctions. User:Darkness Shines is up to his old tricks and is building his own private list again like he is an admin. This is the same list he put me on earlier this year. Can he do this and get away with it? Who does he think he is? Please look into this and remove any names that are not legitimately on this list. Crtew ( talk) 22:34, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
MrT just deleted all the edits we're talking about, and it is an edit I fully support! Crtew ( talk) 08:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
@Qwyrxian: I assume that actions based on these sanctions will be taken on any editor only after they are made aware of it at least once. For eg, i trust that action will be taken on RegentsPark even if he hasn't received any templated message because we know for sure that he is aware of this. So, i my personal objection is that why only our names were placed on the list? If the list has to have any real meaning, all editors who are aware of sanctions, and not just the ones who were notified, should be enlist. §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 10:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
1. If it's so innocent, then delete the word "placed" and "on notice" and create an acknowledgement list with wording that is truly more descriptive of its informative purpose! Crtew ( talk) 12:18, 27 May 2013 (UTC) 2. Then rethink the banner language, too. And don't give editors the right to use it like it's some form of punishment that they can dole out. Crtew ( talk) 12:19, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Comment: I've added myself to the list following the excellent example set by Sitush. In my opinion, there is only one editor who needs reminding of the sanctions. I'm involved so I won't do that but I think it is unfortunate that the admin corps is ignoring this mess and focusing on well meaning, if cranky, editors like Maunus instead. -- regentspark ( comment) 12:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
I know what you all three are doing by placing yourselves on the list is meant well and admirable! The skeptic in me, however, can't resist observing that all placed "not because I've done anything to warrant notification" next to their names ;-) Is that necessary? (I ask rhetorically) Crtew ( talk) 13:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark! It just occurred to me that you might not know yet that the Jerusalem RfC has now started. It's been open for almost a week, and has already generated a sizeable amount of text. If you want to follow the proceedings, it's at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jerusalem. Thank you for agreeing to close it. :) Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 11:41, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
What's the best course of action for dealing with this? This user is forcing an absolutely meaningless change in without even bothering to justify it, and with an edit summary which paraphrases to "don't revert me and I won't revert you". Thanks, CMD ( talk) 23:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Calcutta time, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page King Rat ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:44, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for unblocking me.
Mr T
(Talk?)
(New thread?)
14:01, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. As you took part in the KW topic ban. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 15:49, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
See this large-scale undiscussed removal of content. I don't have the necessary patience nor do I know the proper way to deal with this kind of edits without unilateral reversion. To me, it looks like vandalism but what do I know, as they say, I am just a surly rustic hillbilly. If I revert it, it will be framed as an edit war and then I will be blocked. Kindly take necessary steps. Warn him or block him do whatever an admin is supposed to do in these situations. Mr T (Talk?) (New thread?) 18:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
We just discussed this and I objected to unblock and you just went ahead and did it. Please reblock and seek a consensus at ANI. This is admin abuse and I am absolutely livid. Spartaz Humbug! 18:53, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
(Thanks Sitush.) Spartaz, what I've said above should be reasonably clear but I'll do the parsing.... I've apologized to you and said I should have informed you (regret). I've written a lengthy response along with an apology (I do care). I admit I've not specifically said I've no intention of doing this again but, in my view anyway, if we're talking about unblocking Darkness Shines, I would have to be suicidal to unblock him ever again. I have no suicidal tendencies. You're welcome to start an RfC/U. While, obviously, I am not eager to spend the next month or so defending every action that is bound to be dredged up, I don't believe I have done anything (other than in this case) that is indefensible. -- regentspark ( comment) 14:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Gamaliel (
talk)
18:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Dear RegentsPark, It would be very nice if you can visit Talk:Udaipur Airport and express your further view on requested move. Regards. - Jethwarp ( talk) 06:08, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Vigyani talk ਯੋਗਦਾਨ 14:03, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Reagentspark can you take a look at Minorities in Pakistan I have taken a glance at the lead paragraph of the article and it contains some major major pov sentences containing "tyranny" and "massacres" all added by a known pov pusher it has become a pov hell hole could you at least clean up the lead a bit? I also had one last question if someone creates an article and certain people do not like it due to there nationalist views should the creator be banned? Futureperf (an admin) seems to be hell bent on banning a user Darknesshines for creating a decent article which has some pov issues but not the scale of minorities in Pakistan thanks a bunch 31.54.56.16 ( talk) 08:23, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
In case Anti-Muslim pogroms in India is not on your watchlist. I just responded to your accusation of OR. Darkness Shines ( talk) 20:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
RP, I would appreciate you strikeing your comment here as the source used does say pogroms. Darkness Shines ( talk) 12:59, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
3-12 hrs
) restored / userfied? I just need a glimpse. Is that technically permitted? There are some comments which I need to collect, that's all, and then one admin can delete it perhaps? You don't have to act upon it, just tell me if it's allowed or not or if there is a policy direct me to that, thanks.
Mr T
(Talk?)
(New thread?)
08:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)I think you might need some coffee... You restored the TALK page to http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Mrt3366/Anti-Muslim_pogroms_in_India rather than the actual article! PantherLeapord ( talk) 12:16, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
You mentioned me on Sitush's page reg my vote at AN/I, we've had a long interaction including a RfC, remember "three admins" you, Spaceman and YellowMonkey? You see AN/I is on my watch-list. I saw the discussion, could have ignored it but saw Oranges' comment and for better or worse I voted the way I did, as a rule I've never voted to support sanctions against anyone, but I think adminship is a job that needs to be done carefully and it isn't being done carefully enough. I am writing here as I'm feeling bad about the vote, bad but not wrong. Yogesh Khandke ( talk) 15:56, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I don't know who else to tell this to but ask Darkness Shines to avoid commenting on my talk except for leaving formal notification templates to relevant discussions I have had it with him. I don't want to interact with him on my talk. I think that is my prerogative. I requested him multiple times politely but he seems to be ignoring those. [2] Do what an admin is supposed to do in these situations, you know better. Mr T (Talk?) (New thread?) 18:26, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello can you post in my user space the now deleted hoax article "Bicholim conflict". If you are not aware of it see Wikipedia controversies#2013. The Legend of Zorro 07:31, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
I've temporarily blanked List of Goud Saraswat Brahmin surnames because it was clearly a copy/paste from the source even though it had subsequently undergone a few (unsourced) changes. There are numerous GSB websites and I'm not even sure that relying on the one that was copied can be justified. Could you perhaps take a quick look at the pre-removal state and apply some brain cells? - Sitush ( talk) 11:58, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Sitush, Sorry for the mistake. I have edited only Kashi Math. Spedian ( talk) 19:20, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I mentioned you in an ANI thread related to WP:ARBIPA. I'm not sure if you want to comment there or not. Cheers, Mathsci ( talk) 00:08, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I have mentioned you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive828#Block review - OrangesRyellow -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 06:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
How can we permanently delete or remove the named section from the India-Pakistan page? Based on the shenanigans of placing editors on THE LIST and then letting them off lightly when they mess up, the list is even more meaningless than before. Furthermore, editors who shouldn't really be in the position of warning others, especially editors who have themselves been repeatedly ban, are using warnings to create drama and not furthering the productivity of the area. It's worse than useless-- more like trouble. What process can be used to delete the section forever from the page? Crtew ( talk) 19:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
RegentsPark, Please see the talk page discussion at 2013 Shahbag protests that I started to generate a discussion about the bias in the article. The biased article is left in mainspace intact, and my self-reverted WP:Bold is available to facilitate discussion. Crtew ( talk) 21:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I have rewritten and expanded on the pogrom article in userspace here It is now an entirly different article and I would like your feedback on it please. Darkness Shines ( talk) 20:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
I have moved the draft to User:Darkness Shines/Anti-Muslim violence in India so that the previous history will not be in the article when moved to mainspace. I suspect if any trace of the pogroms article was in the history it would cause a few arguments. Darkness Shines ( talk) 09:19, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I have requested a history merge of talk page. I am not at all interested in history merge of the actual page. The Legend of Zorro 17:42, 24 June 2013 (UTC)