![]() | This page 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. |
I accidentally hit enter when I went to type in the reason, accidents happen so I am edit warring as much as you are - 1 revert. And I took your input on "currently", then took out any date reference at all and simply state "it is in" - yes that can change but so can anything in any article about a living person or a current subject. If it changes update the article, that's how Wikipedia works. Should all articles on living people have the "potentially dated information" tag? I mean that can change at any time too. The version currently in there is 100% correct. MPJ -US 12:03, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
If all ArbCom cases are like this and the GGTF case then someone needs to revise the standard timetable, if not the process itself. It's inhumane. - Sitush ( talk) 04:53, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I know Shakya has problems, I'm going to bed and I've had a ton of insomnia so I'm kind of trying to not do stressful things and that conversation is interesting to me as a wikignome and a linguist without being stressful. I'm sort of chatting, which I guess isn't really appropriate. Sorry if I was weirdly focused. As someone who wikignomes a lot, knowing the correct format is sort of important for when I bring the hammer down on a really messed-up article. Anyway... Ogress smash! 06:18, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
In the article Kadava dynasty the vanniyar caste editors are trying to create false history. They are misquoting authors. We have even earlier discussed this issue. Thanks for the help. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 03:52, 19 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
My sincere apologies. Please take your time and get well soon. warm regards Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 05:15, 19 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
sir please edit in bhumihar brahmin page that they called as babhan in magadh region of Bihar and also called bhuinhar brahmin in eastern uttarpradesh.
pls also remove bhumihar community origin from rajput men and brahmin women.
i also wish that get well soon and recover your health fast.
in Bhumihar article pls remove the term bhumihar brahmin origin from rajput men and brahmin women
and add proper information they called bhuinhar to bhuinhar brahmin in Eastern uttarpradesh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adding founding ( talk • contribs) 06:08, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I got a warning but the issue was that the reverting editor was not addressing the concerns or was trying to build a consensus. Would it be fair to address the concern and then revert the edit? I have not removed the claim, totally, as it still exists in body of the article. But I still think, as long the concerns raised in the talk page of the article, as well as in User VictoriyaGrayson's talk page are unresolved, lead section should not have the statement pending a consensus. -- AB Talk 15:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
You must be knowing it is not gonna be resolved any time soon.. But if you could give a hand, I would find sources and will quote it on talk page. And I see everyone crying HIndutva hinduva hoax here.. Is it such a monster...? Get well soon. AB Talk 13:02, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Just popped in and saw this removal on my watchlist. Really? We'd have no content to work with without GLAM professionals? I've not checked the cause of the kerfuffle but as a standalone comment it sounds like delusions of grandeur. Or "bollocks", as we say in these parts. - Sitush ( talk) 11:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Ok i understood that, but i can`t understand why you are reverting my edit, i gave reference too, i have quoted my many writings from book The People of India' , by Sir H.H.Risley, 1915 2nd ed., ed. by Sir W. Crooke 1969 which was provided as reference for other texts in that article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiteame ( talk • contribs) 15:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
The Dirks 2006 reference mistakenly says 2009. Please correct. In other words, the book "Scandal of Empire" is actually 2006. VictoriaGrayson Talk 15:49, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Sitush, you've been alerted already, but remember the article is under WP:ARBIPA. If more than one person has broken WP:3RR usually all parties get blocked. Holding the British responsible in some degree for the ravages of the caste system probably deserves an RfC if it hasn't happened yet. You can bring to the RfC whatever sources you think should decide the matter. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 17:44, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
British English}}
and {{
Indian English}}
. cheers. —
Spaceman
Spiff
19:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Hi Sitush -
Gorilla took action against the arbcom post at my explicit suggestion. The IP user had two edits. One was the arb post, the other was a sexist slur at SlimVirgin. What's the problem with not letting the troll post stand? It had been posted less than two days ago unless my timestamps have gone nuts. Kevin Gorman ( talk) 10:06, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I believe that other PD talk page stuff was hatted (aggressively is your POV) because they were deemed to be off-topic. They were also hatted fairly soon after the event, not five days later. The IP's comments on that page were deemed not to be. The IP may well have trolled elsewhere and it may or may not have been the same person, who knows? I'd generally be in favour of preventing IPs from editing anywhere on Wikipedia, and certainly on the drama boards, but that is not going to happen and while it doesn't happen, on-topic messages from IPs are valid.
There was absolutely no need for that particular request to be made to GW via some backchannel: some things are sensitive, yes, but that wasn't given your rationale here. Frankly, I'm appalled at your behaviour and that of GW, although perhaps I should not be because it seems to be par for the course. I'm also concerned for GW, for reasons similar to those I've outlined at EvergreenFir's talk page: she is very exposed here and while the decision is hers, given what has happened to me and to LB recently I really would urge caution. Discretion is the better part of valour. - Sitush ( talk) 10:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Sitush, I'd give up trying to argue the case for common sense on AN, you'll just go mad. Say, have you had problems getting on the British Newspaper Archives site today? I wanted to pull some stuff out for the 1926(?) renovation of Lees Cliff Hall but things kept timing out. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Would you be able to translate and tell me if the sources listed are reliable? Here is the list. Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 11:43, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your input on that talk page. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 14:00, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
@ Lightbreather: I can't post on your talk page since you banned me from it. Maybe self-revert this? I think you might technically be in breach of an IBAN, although I've rather lost track of who is banned from what. If I'm wrong then apologies for mithering you. - Sitush ( talk) 18:16, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi . Need some guidance. I would like to contribute, in future, with a different user name (my real pen name). Will it be OK to just contribute in new user name, and discontinue using the present user name (Rayabhari). Or is it necessary to inform about changing the user name officially to the admin? Can you kindly guide me? Thanks . - Rayabhari ( talk) 15:51, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Wishing you a speedy recovery and looking forward to having you back soon. Regards. Ekdalian ( talk) 08:15, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sitush, you ok?
Still catching up on my talkpage/notifications from last week, but let me know if I can be of help on/off-wiki. Easy problems preferred. :-)
Abecedare (
talk)
17:07, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
By motion, the Arbitration Committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:
You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the
AN page, the
AE page or the
Case Requests page
and are therefore restricted as specified in (2). For the Arbitration Committee,
L235 (
t /
c /
ping in reply) via
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
By motion, the committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has, per the above, accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 13, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. Apologies for the potential duplicate message. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:43, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
The list of dubious admin behaviours that have gone on this last couple of days includes the above but is not limited to it. This place has gone fucking mad. Someone email me when/if sense returns. - Sitush ( talk) 20:13, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
The article Bihari Rajputs is also to be treated in the similar manner as is the case Rajputs of Gujarat. The article stands taking support of your name See 1, 2 where the eminent editor gives reference of your concurrence which in fact is not here. Factually, a great number of kings once collectively declared themselves as a great caste so called Rajputs, but they are certainly not the descendants of Son, moon, fire or any other Indian God. How can we still believe in glorifying them at the cost of degrading the other fighters like Jat, Gurjar, Ahirs and many others, who too fought and ruled the country, but could not form a large alliance for themselves like Rajputs. Please help building neutrality. Being Rajput is certainly a subject of notability but being a Rajput from Bihar state or eastern region is simply over glorification. Otherwise, rest all major castes too are found in every state of India, like we see a lot of articles from the Potter turned mason (or other profession) caste of Gujarat like Kadia Kumbhar, Mistri (caste), Mistry (surname), Mistris of Kutch Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya, Gurjar Kshatriya Kadia, Vatalia, Shorgir etc... all groups representing the same caste and they are not names of the clans or gotra. So far I have been against all such caste glorification but now I am bound to think that if one can exist then why shall we stop the others. Rajput article is still able to delete at once all such facts which go against glorification. Are we still living in the old tradition of suppressing others and glorifying Rajputs that if a Rajput says he is son of fire god then it is history but if a Jat, Ahir or any other known ruler says he was a Kshatriya then it is Sanskritisation. A Rajput article can title a well known Maratha king Shivaji as Maratha Rajput but if a Maratha article says that they are Rajputs then it is "Sanskritisation". in which direction, actually the most popular modern source of information (wikipedia) is being led. I think this is not the place for me and I must quit, hence, I told you what I observed -- MahenSingha (Talk) 20:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
I think this is not the place for me and I must quit.Maybe take a break? I'll look at the Shivaji thing - anything on Wikipedia relating to him and to Aurangzeb is always fraught with difficulties. - Sitush ( talk) 08:54, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Mahensingha, your argument is quite confusing. You believe that making a page about Bihari Rajputs belittles Ahirs and Jats? How does it do so? Historically Rajputs and Ahirs were both recruited together during Sher Shah Suris reign so there is nothing to do with belittling one caste just by simply creating a page. Where does the page ever mention as fact that Bihari Rajputs are descended from Gods? The Rajput term has been proved to be merely a title and nothing more. Suijai ( talk) 15:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
But seriously, you were right to tell me to back down. The reason I commented is that there's be a couple dozen people that might be unfit to take admin actions against Corbett (some already voluntarily refrain). I understand your concern about the IRC comment though. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 18:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
This talk page of yours is a bit heavy, no? Brighten your day with my latest (re?) discovery, Talk:K. Banerjee Centre of Atmospheric and Ocean Studies. (I wonder: Could there be some tenuous connexion with Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Vivek Kumar Pandey (2nd nomination)?) -- Hoary ( talk) 13:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I think a redirect should be fine. I'd initially confused this centre to be like the CSIR centres, but that isn't the case. — Spaceman Spiff 09:51, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Though I'm not asked, I'll say that I think that's a good idea. ¶ Coincidentally, the article was created and in its earlier days was vigorously edited by User:Vivek Kumar Pandey. -- Hoary ( talk) 09:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case, because you have commented in the case request, or the AN or AE discussions leading to this arbitration case, or because you have specifically opted in to receiving these messages. Unless you are a party to this arbitration case, you may opt out of receiving further messages at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Notification list. The drafters of the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case have published a revised timetable for the case, which changes what you may have been told when the case was opened. The dates have been revised as follows: the Evidence phase will close 5 July 2015, one week earlier than originally scheduled; the Workshop phase will close 26 July 2015, one week later than originally scheduled; the Proposed decision is scheduled to be posted 9 August 2015, two weeks later than originally scheduled. Thank you. On behalf of the arbitration clerks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 07:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Why the heck can't we go back to Toolserver? Labs is bloody useless and has been from Day One. Repeatedly timing out, a lot of tools gone AWOL due to porting/personal issues. I can't do sod all and am increasingly pissed off, especially when sock-tracking. - Sitush ( talk) 13:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I've programmed some big stuff myself in the past but I just can't get my brain in gear nowadays for that sort of thing. The last big project was maybe 100-120k lines of VisBas using OOP/custom libraries + a couple of bought-in OCX DLLs etc for a company that manufactures polythene sheet and bags, and which had an extraordinary desire to make the UI look nice even though it was an entirely internal project. A solo job, and it drove me nuts for the usual reason, ie: the customer kept changing the requirements. I kept it running until about four years ago, at which point I handed the code over and said that enough fooling around had gone on. They also insisted that it was VB, which itself involved a bit of a learning exercise because my background was in C etc, although I'd used VB for fun/quick-n-dirty for years (as you will see if you trawl the old mailing list archives). Don't ask me about Python, Lua and the like - the entire programming thing is in my past, although maybe one day I'll dabble again.
The loss of session data is almost certainly unrelated to Labs. I just need to track down why it happens pretty much every edit. It has been going on since the switch to https but correlation is not causation and I'm normallly (but not exclusively - five PCs and a fileserver-cum-MythTV setup here) using FF 38 on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS Desktop, which has been getting a shedload of updates of late. - Sitush ( talk) 23:21, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Every tool runs it's own web server- so, effectively, every tool has its own virtual machine? I'm curious re: what the machine implementation might be. VMware etc. - Sitush ( talk) 23:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Get well soon. My sincere wishes for a speedy recovery. I generally use lavender oil rubbed in feet which is good for sleeping. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 03:56, 23 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Glad to see you active. Sitush before going to bed please have warm organic milk with a table spoon of honey added to it. Also the lavendar rubbed in feet is very effective for sleep. once again sincerely wishing for your full recovery. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 04:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Sitush how is your health. Did the lavendar oil work. It usually gives good sleep which is essential for health recovery. once again my wishes to you for a good health.. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 03:34, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Please resolve the copy issue. Myself and user Merkcid seem to be going back and forth. Please resolve once for all. My point is "lowly agricultural labouring caste" should be included in Historical status.
India's Silent Revolution: The Rise of the Lower Castes in North India
By Christophe Jaffrelot
Society In India
By David G Mandelbaum / University of california Berkeley.
The Pariah Problem: Caste, Religion, and the Social in Modern India
By Rupa Viswanath / Columbia university
Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 15:58, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Sitush hope i am not disturbing or wasting your time. When ever you have time please look at the discussion and make changes.
Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 01:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Thanks Sitush. I will follow your recommendations. Glad to hear that you are using the lavendar oil. My sincere wishes for your speedy recovery of health. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 03:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
One can't be "involved" with a sock (of this user [2] who was blocked for the same). Recently another editor's sandbox was deleted on his block which had exact same stuff. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 20:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
please do delete the speedy contest deletion message from the article and help to make the article in an elegant manner /info/en/?search=Sridhar_babu_addanki swaroop 07:10, 4 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakthi swaroop ( talk • contribs)
An IP mentioned about your comment in the last part of this discussion.-- X Swordsman Xcalibur 15:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
This message is sent at 12:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC) by Arbitration Clerk User:Penwhale via MassMessage on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. You are receiving this message because your name appears on this list and have not elected to opt-out of being notified of development in the arbitration case.
On 5 July, 2015, the following motion was passed and enacted:
FYI. Also pinging @ SpacemanSpiff and Thomas.W:, who I believe have also run into the original and/or sock accounts. Abecedare ( talk) 20:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!
With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:
Send on behalf of
The Wikipedia Library using
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
....if you have the time/inclination. Enjoy. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 04:30, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Anyone who attends this should probably thereafter be treated by default as a meatpuppet/tag-team member on en-WP in so far as matters relating to policy changes etc are concerned, and especially so in relation to policies that affect civility and the related favourite topics of the en-WP GGTF. What the heck are the WMF doing here? - Sitush ( talk) 16:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Hope you're well. I noticed the article on Babur was up for reassessment. It has been almost a month since you initiated the reassessment and the fixes haven't been made yet. Do you think it's time for it to be delisted? Cowlibob ( talk) 00:12, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
One of the enduring features of Babur's life was that he left behind the lively and well-written autobiography known as Baburnama. [1] Quoting Henry Beveridge, Stanley Lane-Poole writes:
His autobiography is one of those priceless records which are for all time, and is fit to rank with the confessions of St. Augustine and Rousseau, and the memoirs of Gibbon and Newton. In Asia it stands almost alone. [2]
References
Hi Sitush, in the open Lightbreather arbitration case, a remedy or finding of fact has been proposed which relates to you. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 21:45, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Dear user Sitush, edits in Tomara Clan wiki page with reference of Sh Jadunath Sarkar, an eminent historian has been undone by you, please look back at my edits today that you had undone, i added a very well known province of erstwhile Jaipur state. You seem to be taking all reference of British Raj out, they had their reference in oral traditions as books were not common in that era gone by (especially for very local history of smaller provinces) , with that in mind how is it possible to provide reference if its not via books or historians of an era gone by ?? also please let us know on what basis you throw out some references while allow some books as references, please provide a path for us to follow to refer something. If your criterion is that any book older than 40 years is unaccounted and can not be used as reference then it will be tough to provide reference, especially for smaller and lesser known places and its people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjtanwar ( talk • contribs) 16:04, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedy relates to you:
For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 02:56, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Integrity | |
For offering genuine advice and looking out for other editors, even those who may not see eye-to-eye 100% of the time with you. For taking steps to start discussion on a sexual harassment policy and doing so with the intent of aiding fellow editors (both individually and generally). For showing empathy and concern and for taking a more diplomatic approach to issues. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 21:02, 16 July 2015 (UTC) |
Can't quite put it all into words that make sense, but I was delighted to see your message on my talk page today. Unexpected and thoughtful. Thank you.
EvergreenFir
(talk) Please {{
re}}
21:02, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
FWIW, the RfC proposal to have a specific sexual harassment policy is making a mountain out the downward tip of a spiral molehill on a sloping iceberg. That form of harassment is just one of many, all of them inappropriate and all upsetting in equal measure to the target. Thus we'll need to introduce similar separate policies for race, religion, disability and so on ... and all of them will say the same thing, paraphrased as "don't do it". I'd guess well over 90 per cent of cases that would be reported would also be highly subjective, while the remainder would be so blatantly obvious as to be already covered by things such as CIV and NPA. The exercise smacks of tokenism and will just lead to a lot of lawyering. That Jimbo supports it is almost a rubber-stamp of its tokenistic nature. - Sitush ( talk) 10:16, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
[3]. I guess you didn't get very far with it? Bishonen | talk 17:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC).
Hi,
Sitush,
I was looking at a malformed article called
Agri language and I came across the articles
Agri people and
Agri caste. Is this the same group? What is the typical designation, "people" or "caste"? Thanks for any help you can provide.
Liz
Read!
Talk!
15:21, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Here we go again. I'm fed up of being mentioned in ArbCom proceedings, even when they do not escalate to being a case, and I'm fed up of seeing the outcomes of such proceedings being manipulated by a lynch mob of pettifogging WMF acolytes and POV-pushing warriors who do bugger all where it really matters on this project. Now everyone go figure why I haven't been editing much of late, and why I'm going to be editing even less. - Sitush ( talk) 18:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
{{subst:Arbitration CA notice|Imposition of an Arbitration Enforced Sanction against me by Bishonen}}
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Imposition_of_an_Arbitration_Enforced_Sanction_against_me_by_Bishonen Soham321 ( talk) 20:36, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Can you find out where this book is copied from? Is it just from us or does it also include your friends Tod and co? — Spaceman Spiff 15:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
The India-Pakistan arbitration amendment request, which you were listed as a party to, has been archived to [[ Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan. Thank you. For the Arbitration Committee, Jim Carter 06:27, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sitush
I did not remove any information, i just added the information 'jaat', only a single word with refrences. Can you please revert it back. Prashant 015 ( talk) 08:21, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
See diff and diff. Welcome to the show! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 03:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I wish to offer you an apology. I stand by the gravamen of what I said, but I could have, and should have, chosen my words more carefully. For that I apologize. Dumuzid ( talk) 15:45, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
wish you get well soon. kindly do not remove my edits from article Rajput as I've edited in good faith and fixed some contradictions. please discuss if anything is wrong with my editing. kind regards. Rmkop ( talk) 16:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
I added four other sources. Here's another one: https://books.google.com/books?id=WNtHAAAAMAAJ&q=Makwana+Rajputs&dq=Makwana+Rajputs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEYQ6AEwCGoVChMI9c3agq39xgIVSKceCh1RyAD2
Earlier there was no hatnote and I had no issues with this article. I think you were not paying attention to the hatnote changes that were being made recently. Let me tell you by example:-
The previous hatnote was this: This article is about the ancient Indian people. For the Kachhi community of North India who adopted "Shakya" surname, see Kachhi (caste)
Now, this misleads a general reader to think
1) Shakyas were only in ancient times and they are not alive anymore.
2) Which further implies that everyone from North India or anywhere else who uses Shakya surname is a Kachhi. Which is false because the Shakya state itself was from North India and hence most people in India/Tibet/Nepal using Shakya surname are infact Shakyas not Kachhis.
There are instances where Kachhis/Kushwahas use Shakya surname but then they use a lot of different surnames from other castes. This cannot be used as an excuse to make the entire Shakya community a Kachhi/Kushwaha.
I would request to modify this hatnote to reflect something like this: This article is about the ancient history of Shakya clan. For the Kachhi community of North India who also sometimes uses this surname, see Kachhi (caste).
And then
In Shakya article: we can later add current demographic of Shakya population in various regions, their current conditions etc
In Kushwaha/Kachhi article: we can add their various claims to Kush, Maurya, Shakya etc while specifically informing that these are seprate castes whose surname Kachhi/Kushwahas sometimes copy.
Well, thanks for giving your opinion, and sorry for all the trouble and extra work you received. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Could you please take a look at this discussion. It appears to be a content dispute, an editor asked me for input but I'm not interested in the subject (its not an area I'm expert on). I would be happy if you can take a look. Cheers, Jim Carter 03:55, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Please explain how my rationale is nonsense. I just checked the sources again, and the statements were not even there. I saw your appeal to spacemanspiff to team up against me. But please explain, I also didn't delete any of your messages from my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabt man ( talk • contribs) 14:59, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Well anyway because we are both here, would you like to discuss the issues on caste based pages? We might as well get it overwith. I would also like to talk personally right now, and I will discuss on the article page later. Please reply as soon as possible. Rabt man ( talk) 15:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Hey sitush, this is not just regarding Ezhavas, but also other castes as well. I have searched countless other "forward-caste" articles and have noticed that you were reverting many edits that showed any positive sides of any of those castes (ex. bunts, nairs, rajputs, among others). Many of the sources that you have given earlier were also that of "scientific rascists" from Europe and other Western countries who had opinions of bias. I also noticed the fact that you have been painting the castes of "other backward status" in a more positive light by removing any bad points of lower castes (as shown in the Ezhava page). These castes of forward-origin may have been arrogant or treated lower castes in a bad manner, but that does not mean that any revenge should be taken upon them, such as saying how beef is a favorite food of Rajputs and Nairs. I have also noticed in the Ezhava article among others how the article is filled with theories of "foreign origin, and saying that the Ezhavas were the same as Nairs and Muslims in ethnic origin" (which clearly shows a feeling of inferiority).
I wanted to remove the many parts of the article (which were put under sources but were not mentioned by the way), in which Nairs were said to be of same origin of the Nairs. Please remove any comparison between other castes, as the article is about Ezhavas, and stop policing me when I try to remove cited opinions.
You yourself have defended the Ezhava caste from scientific rascists (bottom), while you and many others have supported an attack on Nairs in which any major points of positivity are removed, not mentioned, or 'replaced' with worse. Such scientific rascists are also present in the attack on the Nair article in which Nairs are said to be demonic, unusual, and primitive [which some primitive things were true, and I do not deny], while the points of different ethnic origin, habits of cleanliness, countless military victories, said by Anthrpologists were not mentioned. The Kings of Travancore being of Nair Origin are also not mentioned.
With all due respect, my point is to please let others edit these articles and let others remove clear attacks as it is pretty obvious. Anyone who has attempted to bring out the fact that these articles are biased were banned by teams of editors working together to keep literally anything good about one caste in check. My Nair case in point, I do agree that the caste has been part of an arrogant community that has done many social ills, but please call off the attacks on these communities. People literally make accounts named "Nair" in order to attack with some hidden confusion. At least leave the community alone please, and stop teaming up with others (notably SpacemanSpiff), as it is unfair with moderators banning anyone they like (Spiff also broke the 3r rule, but banned me because he did not agree with my edits).
I would also like to hear your side of the story. Please respond as quickly as possible. Also, this is not just abt one particular page, but rather many. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabt man ( talk • contribs) 16:24, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Sitush I never said I did not like what you were doing, I just want to sort out a compromise or a motive in a civil manner. I would like to discuss not impose. Rabt man ( talk) 16:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
What do you mean right great wrongs? You're using Wikipedia to make personal attacks on the pages of upper castes. Seriously, if someone says at least something the least bit positive you immediately revert it. Please stop. Just look at literally any page of a 'forward caste' and you have reverted anything that you personally didn't like. What is the meaning of this? I would like to discuss this with you here right now, as this has been going for far too long. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabt man ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
What do you mean by "your ways"? I want to at least talk to you in a civil manner. My interests are not in getting people to block you like you are doing with me. You can team up with people all you want, give as many threats as you want, but your intentions are somewhat clear at this point. Please answer my question. Rabt man ( talk) 07:05, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
I do not want to talk regarding an article, but rather, regarding your edits. I asked Phil if there is any other way, but I have not yet found a response. Would you like to talk on my page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabt man ( talk • contribs) 07:24, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
I understand and agree about the sockpuppets (I really am not one of them). And I do understand if you have anything personal with them, but I have also noticed a team of editors on both sides of the conflict. I also understand how you might want to revert my edits if I write anything positive of Nairs (as you might think I am working with them etc), But the problem is, the entire article on Nairs (and other upper caste articles) feature a blatant public attack on the community centered around the demonic traditions. The military conflicts only show the brutal captivity of Nairs at north Malabar, but any of their rebellions or victories are not mentioned. But please understand (your intentions might be well), that the article has many things that are insulting to the community (such as eating beef and pork. These were not only shunned by Nairs but by all walks of Hindus). These editors may have teamed up to remove that, and from the revisions I looked at, they may have broken many Wikipedia rules to do so. I just want to add some positivity to that article, and when groups of people such as spacemanspiff, boingsaidzebedee, achayan, "Nair", and you work together to undo any of my edits, I find it unfair. Perhaps it is because you may confuse me with one of them, but please look at the article. It is clearly written to bring out negativity. Let me, and others edit Wikipedia as well. Just because someone is a Nair does not mean they want to delete the bad aspects of the community, as Nairs also deserve a say in an article about them. If the overall intention was to make the community look bad, it was successful, but keep in mind that Nairs have their sensitivities as well. Please show at least a little kindness in this, even if there is a personal motive. Thank you for letting me know, and please respond soon :). Rabt man ( talk) 07:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You may want to review some recent contributions to Karwal. I reverted them but there might be something worth to keep there. Thanks, Magioladitis ( talk) 08:47, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Is a tendency to argue from one's views rather than the rules really something that we want to see in an admin? - No, and remember that as a wider community we have written the rules. Its thorny and has come back on us - content people tend to see the results as common sence - IGAR- many of the younger admins are rule driven and see sacred script and damn the spirit. Theirin lies. Ceoil ( talk) 06:02, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
People think my AfDs are waste of community time. Thought you maybe interested in the subject. Your input is highly appreciated! Cheers, Jim Carter 11:20, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Happy friendship day -- Tito Dutta ( talk) 14:58, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand why you have rollback my edit on 'infobox template caste' on article raju. I don't see wrong in any field. Please undo - Varmapak (talk) 15:56, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Please
assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on
Raju. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia.
Varmapak
(talk)
16:32, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I have added sources in Devendra Fadnavis, you can undo your latest edit from List of Brahmins where you deleted Devendra's name. Thank you. -- Human3015 Send WikiLove 19:16, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Well I didn't had any wrong kinda intention like giving importance to nationality .But its ok :) I won't add it anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haxxorsid ( talk • contribs) 13:53, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I left a request at Talk:Perike#Request_for_links_to_WP_community_consensus_discussion_on_reliability_of_Edgar_Thurston.27s_work. if you would be kind and reply there it would be appreciated. Thank you. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 00:46, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi sitush this is Kanchipuram silk. You said that I inserted commentary, while I only moved one part of the religion section to the Military Section because I found that the Captivity of Nairs at Srirangapatnam is more so incined towards Military history, not religion. 08:18, 6 August 2015 (UTC) Kanchipuramsilk83 ( talk)
There above statement seemed to be written by a non Hindu as Panikkar is for some devious reason is trying to indicate Dravidian as an alternate other than Hinduism. Dravida means the land surrounded by the 3 seas. Pannikar is probably a Christian convert who is part of the India pseudo secularist educations planted to confuse Hindus to make them more susceptible to conversion to other religions especially Christianity.
That is pure original research. We do not allow commentary of this type in articles. - Sitush ( talk) 08:21, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
No I swear that I really did not. This was written by someone previously, not me! Look at the sources if you would like. It was already there! It was written by a previous editor, and I demand an apology. Kanchipuramsilk83 ( talk) 08:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes I promise, it may have been done on accident, but I did not write any of that! I saw it written by a previous editor, but all I did intentionally was move the srirangapatnam things to military history, and remove the sri lanka things. Feel free to remove the commentary. Kanchipuramsilk83 ( talk) 08:40, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Hope you are fine... Why you are reverting my edits??? For god sake don't create vandalism about gujjar peoples, Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikro Nekros ( talk • contribs) 13:21, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Came across this article and thought it'd be of interest to you (just in case you haven't read it already):
Abecedare ( talk) 07:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
You reverted reliable sources from article. I removed Gyan as per your opinion but all three below are not Gyan or Raj publications.
Tell me why these three are not reliable sources? Nizil ( talk) 08:46, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sitush, Namashkar, Bro , After reading History of Sindh, Jatt, Soomra dynasty, I have found that Samra who are JAtt clan might be Soomra who are also Sindhi Rajputs.-- Jogi don ( talk) 11:58, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I've come across a few more also, all of them based around WP stuff. They are gibberish to me. Am I completely thick or has the ability to communicate in plain English given way to the ghettoisation of buzzwords? Whatever, since these things all relate to WP, the people using the terms need to find another way to say whatever it is that they mean. Almost by definition, I'm not against learning stuff but, please, K.I.S.S. - Sitush ( talk) 00:07, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Is there any passing admin willing to consider events at Talk:Bhumihar#Abusive_content_WikiProject_assessment_Suggestion ? It has reached the point where neither I nor utcursch want to say more. The article has a long history of attacks/complaints from community members. - Sitush ( talk) 08:11, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Being called hybrid would be considered offensive in caste-conscious society such as India regardless of DNA research indicating affinity of different castes to each other in a given geographical area. Jonathansammy ( talk) 22:43, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
I've closed the discussion as it was going nowhere. I'd highly suggest not to respond to them anymore. I did have a good laugh when when he told me to ".Plz try to adopt a systematic approach . It would be welcome by all ." Bgwhite ( talk) 19:04, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
sir you need to read the source, I'm already done with this. please look over it carefully ( https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Kz1-mtazYqEC&pg=PA18#v=onepage&q&f=false). Rmkop ( talk) 19:25, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
I was disappointed the way you have callously gone about reducing and deleting stuff from Hoysala related articles without so much as starting a discussion. Be rest assured I will be bringing citations (even if they already exist) for the "uncited" lines you have deleted from Hoysala architecture, an article that has stood water since 2007 and has been a main page FA. You need to understand that very often, during intense copy editing, paragraphs get broken up into multiple paragraphs, thus separating a line(s) from its actual citation making it appear 'uncited', and that is what has happened in this article. Your attitude was careless, more than anything else. Hope you revert your edits on Hoysala architecture and give me time to study the content and bring in citations. You can tag it if you like, that way I don't have to struggle to reinstate the actual content. We are all busy in our personal life too and that's why I am asking you for time. Regarding the template, Template:Famous Hoysala temples, you deleted three temples which did not have underlying sub-articles, something I had planned to write about, after visiting them last April in Karnataka. In fact I visited them specifically to write about them. Wiki is not a "my way or the highway" kind of an encyclopedia. You have to learn to be patient. I have visited over 75 Hoysala-Chalukya temples in Karnataka, written numerous articles (even if some are only stubs) on them and own half a dozen books on the same topic. Writing articles in wiki is a fine balance between bringing in real content while at the same time not POVing about it. You are right, the templates can be a list and this is something I have had on my menu for a while and again I need time. Given time I will merge the two templates. There was a time when templates were the norm, or at least common in FA's and thats why I continued in that tradition. Pied Hornbill ( talk) 21:18, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
An editor left me a message regarding citation and content concerns regarding Raheja Developers. Since you appear to be the most active editor on the article and I know nothing about the subject, can I ask you to address their concerns? I'm not sure why they are bringing the issue to me versus the article talk page or making the edits themselves. -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 19:51, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
What is Raheja caste/tribe origin , does Raheja is a Sindhi tribe.?-- Jogi don ( talk) 03:44, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
You have deleted four references in this article as WP:RS. How do you determine the suitability of the book references so that I can keep a watch. It has happened for the first time. The article has now gone into a limbo as I cannot find alternate references. Can you pl suggest some alternate references so that I can retrieve the article which is posted on DYK? Thanks.-- Nvvchar. 07:24, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Can you please show me exactly where it is said in the sources the statements that were removed due to their caste-promotional purposes? Rabt man ( talk) 14:04, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
HEy! Sitush , You have reverted my edits Category History of Sindh because Jatt origin is from Sindh region. So kindly add Category:History of Sindh to Jatt-- Jogi don ( talk) 07:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
My recent updates are linked to wiki pages and why it got deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by UJcu ( talk • contribs) 20:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I have occasionally seen you refer to this, but I don't know the details. What initiative was this, and when was it launched? Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 14:19, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
You recently reverted some of my edits on the article Paswan, stating so what? The line says They are considered to be an untouchable community, but citie does not specific about the Paswan caste, is there anyone? It is requested that please avoid summery field for discussion. — CutestPenguin Hangout 08:28, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh lord the Shakya caste-warring makes me tired just hearing about it. The Newar Shakya caste are authentic descendants of Gautama Buddha? I just can't even. I can't.
I hope your health is a little better; mine is suffering rn thanks to a heatwave that has left the region with strong heat warnings. Ogress smash! 20:07, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
"Passed away peacefully last night" Rusted AutoParts 13:04, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Because the man is dead and obviously there will be a source on the deaths list. I'm not sure if you're just lazy, but you revert me, I give you the proof, and you go biting my head off. It's sourced now, just saying try not to be an asshole when someone's helping you build a new article. Rusted AutoParts 21:48, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Seems like anonymous IPs are editing the page and same old text is back that you edited out/corrected. I am sure if I revert to your revision, it will be reverted from another IP. How do you resolve such situtions? As a comparatively new user, I am more interested in the process of resolving such conflicts. Please help. ChunnuBhai ( talk) 18:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Sitush, I would be grateful for your input on the renaming of the article Dadu Konddeo. An editor changed it from Dadoji saying we do not do honorifics. Now, I could not find a single reliable source that called him "Dadu Now there are very recent news articles in Marathi calling him Dadu after publication of a controversial book on Shivaji by James Laine. Most historians including Duff and Sarkar have called him Dadaji and I believe the Ji is an integral part of his name just like other Marathi names such as Shivaji, Shahaji, Mahadji Shinde, Kanhoji Angre etc. When you have time please check the talk page of the article for more information. Thanks. Jonathansammy ( talk) 18:48, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Jonathansammy ( talk) 12:14, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Like we've done so many times, I'm letting you know that I want to add a 'not to be confused with' tag on one of the pages that you've operated on. Issue is, that a particular community has a similar sounding name to another community from another region of South Asia. But other than the somewhat similar names, the two communities are completely unrelated (in linguistics, origin, culture, gotra, surnames, etc). So is there any specific procedure that I have to follow? ShamusHarper ( talk) 00:22, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
I was referring to the Lohana and Labana communities. I've added a 'not to be confused with' tag for now, but there's this erroneous idea circulating that they're one and the same. What would you suggest? ShamusHarper ( talk) 17:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
I cannot find any source that categorizes the Labana and Lohana as the same, or states that they are related in any way. At the same time, there is no source that directly states that both communities are not related. (There are snippets on Google Books that supposedly make mention of both communities but they're inaccessible to me.) Would it be possible to inject text into the article(s) stating that the two communities speak different languages, have different Gotras, etc..? ShamusHarper ( talk) 22:19, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sitush, I'm having a problem with the same article with the same user User:JuanRiley who's deleting the some of part in a phrase in the top article that Germany and the United States had eroded some of Britain's economic lead. deleting the part to say that Britain's economic lead was fully eroded. For one I say that this doesn't give an accurate description historically and should be kept that way. I also note that user JuanRiley's edits is somewhat anti-British and trying to minimize the section of the British Empire as an example of before when I last disputed with him, my reasons were historically motivated but he refused to even give a reason to why he kept adding an then-thought unsupported content. Now he's back and trying to edit as he sees fit and justified his edit with saying that the word he deleted was redundant when actually the two word he deleted were necessary to not give a wrong concept. Another theory I have with JuanRiley is that his edit might be patriotically motivated, he tries to undermine Britain in his recent edit and user User:Calidum, who's an American like JuanRiley backs him up. Don't get me wrong, I'm an American too but I detest when edits are patriotically motivated rather than historically oriented. ( N0n3up ( talk) 02:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC))
Paraiyar is a caste group found in the state of tamilnadu,India.I modified the article with all the reliable sources.But you are depicting that caste as a slave caste.And I modified the article by researching into the past history and made edit by giving line by line proof.But one time the caste was a slave but time to time the hstory of any castes change.Our country India was also once slave to british,but because of this the wikipedia article about India cannot be started like "India a former slave of british" though the information is true.It is racial discrimination.Same for this caste also.So if you dont want to glorify this caste then its okay.But discriminating a caste is a punishable offence under Indian Penal Code(Indian law).So I hope u might have understood what I am saying.You have the right to modify the sections which has no reliable sources,but you cannot discriminate a particular group of people because of their past history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RajaRajan Tamilian ( talk • contribs) 09:46, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sitush you have redirected Jats of Sindh to Jat people is not fair , its just like hiding the facts, first read that article which you have redirected which is different in every nature from the redirected article.and why don't you tolerate the regional Jat of Sindh, these Jat are Baloch tribes. and if oyu don't restore Jats of Sindh, write about them in this article, so the facts should not be hidden from the world. hope you understand without any bias .
Dear sir, hello, I have been following some of your past edits, and trust that you are feeling much better now; my best wishes for your health. Whenever you have the time, I would be grateful for your kind assistance: as I have proposed a merger between two pages i.e. Awan (tribe) and Awans of Pakistan-- as the latter seems to be to be merely repetitious and incorporating much material that is unreliable, and that has been, previously, removed by various editors from the older original Awan (tribe) page. Could you perhaps take a look at both at your kind leisure and find out some way to resolve this matter. I shall be very grateful, thanks. Yours sincerely, 39.54.241.61 ( talk) 04:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC) Col (retd) Malik Mumtaz Khan, Pakistan
Welcome to Wikipedia. Wikipedia invites everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, but one or more redirects you created have been considered
disruptive and/or malicious, and have been reverted. Take a look at the
welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you.
Hi Sitush. Please read Proposed Merger to create a discussion first. I advise you to make a proposed merger and state your reasons for a redirect or merger as the articles have been separate for a long time and especially it is on a controversial topic. Do not hesitate to discuss any issue.
Pixarh ( talk) 15:03, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello sir..when did the Rajbhar community has been added to scheduled caste and on which basis u have edited the Wikipedia page.. Thank u.. Piyush7500 ( talk) 15:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
I have seen you citing her book quite a few times so
a gift for you.
Solomon
7968
16:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Sitush please watch your words and think twice before accusing other editors. Acquaint yourself with Wikipedia Etiquettes first.
Your statement is still confusing. Define "fake references'. At wikipedia, either references exist or they do not. There is no and should be no midway for that.
On the other hand, the entire content of the article Awans of Pakistan is referenced under the section heading of 'references' and 'further reading'. There is nothing duplicate in both the articles both in terms of content and context. Awans of Pakistan is one long article which deals with the full history of Awans who belong to Pakistan and is nothing like article Awan (tribe) which is too brief, politicized and contains only "2 sentences" (one is lead section and second in history) apart from two statements by 2 different people.
On a soft note, the article Awan (tribe) is very short and had anything been copy/pasted or duplicated for that matter, it would have been clearly visible. You may state your particular concerns if you have any and I might be able to help you there. As you have asked me to insert content in Awan (tribe), I can do that and help you after all what are editors for but to improve articles and I am a helper but please make things clear first and understand that both articles are separate.
I am watching this page, so you may wish to reply here.
Pixarh ( talk) 14:49, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Please do not create
malicious redirects, as you did with
Awans of Pakistan. They are disruptive and are considered
vandalism, and have been
reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Thank you. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Pixarh (
talk •
contribs)
15:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Tito Dutta ( talk) 15:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey, sorry to disturb. But can you please elaborate on Raj sources. THanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo ( talk · contribs · count) 13:09, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Please see this sanctions section and the contributions of Righteous.12 ( talk · contribs) over the last few months, more or less all of which have been disruptive at Arain. - Sitush ( talk) 09:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Why you are constantly changing our page 's information if we found it changed again then we will take this topic to cyber security....so kindly please revERT the changes that you had done on our page.. Bannaakkisa ( talk) 12:11, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your concern and for marking the edit as a good will edit. Let me explain the grammar of what I wrote: "Neither was Singh born there nor did he live there." In English, since "neither...nor..." is a parallel structure, the "..." must be filled by the same type of grammatical structure in both places. In this case "Singh was born there" and "he did live there" are both independent clauses with a simple past tense verb, so this requirement is fulfilled. If I say, "Singh was neither born there nor lived there," there are two problems. First, the "was" is applied to both "..." groups, which in this case are "born there" and "lived there." So the phrase essentially becomes "was born there" and "was lived there," and "was lived" is obviously an invalid use of the verb "to live." Second, since "was born" is the technical simple past tense form of the verb "to be born," you need to have the equivalent for "to live," which can be accomplished by "did live" or "lived" in this case.
So, my restatement solves these grammatical errors, so I am going to fix it. Otherwise, you could say "Singh neither was born there nor did live there," or "Singh neither was born nor did live there," or "Singh neither was born nor lived there," and so on. All of these statements are fine, because they preserve the parallel structure, but what you wrote doesn't. So I'm going to fix it to what I originally had, but please feel free to fix it to any of what I just wrote or anything else that preserves the parallel structure later on if you would like to.
Also, I hope you are doing ok, based on the notice on the top of your talk page. :( Get well soon!
EDIT: In fact, "lived" doesn't work at all, because "was born" is passive voice, and "lived" is simple past, so "did live" is the correct form since that is also passive voice. See English verbs.
Subbupedia95 ( talk) 18:20, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Pixarh ( talk) 16:11, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
I am adding accurate info...plzz don't revert it . to ensure credibility I want you to know that I am a panicker myself,
thanks, p.s.(reply on my talk page) Mathew102 ( talk) 11:49, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Sir please take a look on others mughal related articles.-- శ్రీధర్ బబు ( talk) 13:44, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
If you continue to remove my contributions to other editors and administrators talk pages such as Dennis Brown, then I will report you for vandalism. It is not for you, or a clique to arbitrarily decide what is 'relevant' to be included for discussion in a talk page and you have broke the rules of Wikipedia by doing so. 77.97.24.152 ( talk) 13:33, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Sitush, What are Reliable Sources i want to submit to believe the article. 1.Inscription 2.Ancient Poem's and etc. Because The ancient things only have the true matters. Now a days news papers and books are written only for money making purpose. So I can explain you if you understand the Tamil authorized poems. They written the poem about the "Why gounder title is given to the particular community". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobugounder ( talk • contribs) 10:24, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Sitush, Thankyou. I have updated gounder title with Vettuva gounder as per Wikipedia proposal. shall I remove the vettuvar from gounder page and Kongu vellalar does not have gounder title in Indian government caste gazatte. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobugounder ( talk • contribs) 18:01, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Sitush, Why you did not accept the vettuva gounder in gounder title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobugounder ( talk • contribs) 18:49, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Pixarh (
talk)
16:07, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
I've reverted myself pending further review. It looked OK at first blush, but I take your point. Sorry for the trouble. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 09:12, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Register here. Your contributions would be welcomed. Forum not intended to compete with Wikiopediocracy, which is for criticism only, but rather focuses on getting like-minded people together who want to see improvement. Peter Damian ( talk) 12:33, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Could you weigh in on the synthesis question under discussion there, if convenient? Charles Matthews ( talk) 15:23, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
I accidentally hit enter when I went to type in the reason, accidents happen so I am edit warring as much as you are - 1 revert. And I took your input on "currently", then took out any date reference at all and simply state "it is in" - yes that can change but so can anything in any article about a living person or a current subject. If it changes update the article, that's how Wikipedia works. Should all articles on living people have the "potentially dated information" tag? I mean that can change at any time too. The version currently in there is 100% correct. MPJ -US 12:03, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
If all ArbCom cases are like this and the GGTF case then someone needs to revise the standard timetable, if not the process itself. It's inhumane. - Sitush ( talk) 04:53, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I know Shakya has problems, I'm going to bed and I've had a ton of insomnia so I'm kind of trying to not do stressful things and that conversation is interesting to me as a wikignome and a linguist without being stressful. I'm sort of chatting, which I guess isn't really appropriate. Sorry if I was weirdly focused. As someone who wikignomes a lot, knowing the correct format is sort of important for when I bring the hammer down on a really messed-up article. Anyway... Ogress smash! 06:18, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
In the article Kadava dynasty the vanniyar caste editors are trying to create false history. They are misquoting authors. We have even earlier discussed this issue. Thanks for the help. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 03:52, 19 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
My sincere apologies. Please take your time and get well soon. warm regards Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 05:15, 19 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
sir please edit in bhumihar brahmin page that they called as babhan in magadh region of Bihar and also called bhuinhar brahmin in eastern uttarpradesh.
pls also remove bhumihar community origin from rajput men and brahmin women.
i also wish that get well soon and recover your health fast.
in Bhumihar article pls remove the term bhumihar brahmin origin from rajput men and brahmin women
and add proper information they called bhuinhar to bhuinhar brahmin in Eastern uttarpradesh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adding founding ( talk • contribs) 06:08, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I got a warning but the issue was that the reverting editor was not addressing the concerns or was trying to build a consensus. Would it be fair to address the concern and then revert the edit? I have not removed the claim, totally, as it still exists in body of the article. But I still think, as long the concerns raised in the talk page of the article, as well as in User VictoriyaGrayson's talk page are unresolved, lead section should not have the statement pending a consensus. -- AB Talk 15:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
You must be knowing it is not gonna be resolved any time soon.. But if you could give a hand, I would find sources and will quote it on talk page. And I see everyone crying HIndutva hinduva hoax here.. Is it such a monster...? Get well soon. AB Talk 13:02, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Just popped in and saw this removal on my watchlist. Really? We'd have no content to work with without GLAM professionals? I've not checked the cause of the kerfuffle but as a standalone comment it sounds like delusions of grandeur. Or "bollocks", as we say in these parts. - Sitush ( talk) 11:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Ok i understood that, but i can`t understand why you are reverting my edit, i gave reference too, i have quoted my many writings from book The People of India' , by Sir H.H.Risley, 1915 2nd ed., ed. by Sir W. Crooke 1969 which was provided as reference for other texts in that article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiteame ( talk • contribs) 15:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
The Dirks 2006 reference mistakenly says 2009. Please correct. In other words, the book "Scandal of Empire" is actually 2006. VictoriaGrayson Talk 15:49, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Sitush, you've been alerted already, but remember the article is under WP:ARBIPA. If more than one person has broken WP:3RR usually all parties get blocked. Holding the British responsible in some degree for the ravages of the caste system probably deserves an RfC if it hasn't happened yet. You can bring to the RfC whatever sources you think should decide the matter. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 17:44, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
British English}}
and {{
Indian English}}
. cheers. —
Spaceman
Spiff
19:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Hi Sitush -
Gorilla took action against the arbcom post at my explicit suggestion. The IP user had two edits. One was the arb post, the other was a sexist slur at SlimVirgin. What's the problem with not letting the troll post stand? It had been posted less than two days ago unless my timestamps have gone nuts. Kevin Gorman ( talk) 10:06, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I believe that other PD talk page stuff was hatted (aggressively is your POV) because they were deemed to be off-topic. They were also hatted fairly soon after the event, not five days later. The IP's comments on that page were deemed not to be. The IP may well have trolled elsewhere and it may or may not have been the same person, who knows? I'd generally be in favour of preventing IPs from editing anywhere on Wikipedia, and certainly on the drama boards, but that is not going to happen and while it doesn't happen, on-topic messages from IPs are valid.
There was absolutely no need for that particular request to be made to GW via some backchannel: some things are sensitive, yes, but that wasn't given your rationale here. Frankly, I'm appalled at your behaviour and that of GW, although perhaps I should not be because it seems to be par for the course. I'm also concerned for GW, for reasons similar to those I've outlined at EvergreenFir's talk page: she is very exposed here and while the decision is hers, given what has happened to me and to LB recently I really would urge caution. Discretion is the better part of valour. - Sitush ( talk) 10:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Sitush, I'd give up trying to argue the case for common sense on AN, you'll just go mad. Say, have you had problems getting on the British Newspaper Archives site today? I wanted to pull some stuff out for the 1926(?) renovation of Lees Cliff Hall but things kept timing out. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Would you be able to translate and tell me if the sources listed are reliable? Here is the list. Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 11:43, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your input on that talk page. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 14:00, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
@ Lightbreather: I can't post on your talk page since you banned me from it. Maybe self-revert this? I think you might technically be in breach of an IBAN, although I've rather lost track of who is banned from what. If I'm wrong then apologies for mithering you. - Sitush ( talk) 18:16, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi . Need some guidance. I would like to contribute, in future, with a different user name (my real pen name). Will it be OK to just contribute in new user name, and discontinue using the present user name (Rayabhari). Or is it necessary to inform about changing the user name officially to the admin? Can you kindly guide me? Thanks . - Rayabhari ( talk) 15:51, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Wishing you a speedy recovery and looking forward to having you back soon. Regards. Ekdalian ( talk) 08:15, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sitush, you ok?
Still catching up on my talkpage/notifications from last week, but let me know if I can be of help on/off-wiki. Easy problems preferred. :-)
Abecedare (
talk)
17:07, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
By motion, the Arbitration Committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:
You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the
AN page, the
AE page or the
Case Requests page
and are therefore restricted as specified in (2). For the Arbitration Committee,
L235 (
t /
c /
ping in reply) via
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
By motion, the committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has, per the above, accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 13, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. Apologies for the potential duplicate message. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:43, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
The list of dubious admin behaviours that have gone on this last couple of days includes the above but is not limited to it. This place has gone fucking mad. Someone email me when/if sense returns. - Sitush ( talk) 20:13, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
The article Bihari Rajputs is also to be treated in the similar manner as is the case Rajputs of Gujarat. The article stands taking support of your name See 1, 2 where the eminent editor gives reference of your concurrence which in fact is not here. Factually, a great number of kings once collectively declared themselves as a great caste so called Rajputs, but they are certainly not the descendants of Son, moon, fire or any other Indian God. How can we still believe in glorifying them at the cost of degrading the other fighters like Jat, Gurjar, Ahirs and many others, who too fought and ruled the country, but could not form a large alliance for themselves like Rajputs. Please help building neutrality. Being Rajput is certainly a subject of notability but being a Rajput from Bihar state or eastern region is simply over glorification. Otherwise, rest all major castes too are found in every state of India, like we see a lot of articles from the Potter turned mason (or other profession) caste of Gujarat like Kadia Kumbhar, Mistri (caste), Mistry (surname), Mistris of Kutch Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya, Gurjar Kshatriya Kadia, Vatalia, Shorgir etc... all groups representing the same caste and they are not names of the clans or gotra. So far I have been against all such caste glorification but now I am bound to think that if one can exist then why shall we stop the others. Rajput article is still able to delete at once all such facts which go against glorification. Are we still living in the old tradition of suppressing others and glorifying Rajputs that if a Rajput says he is son of fire god then it is history but if a Jat, Ahir or any other known ruler says he was a Kshatriya then it is Sanskritisation. A Rajput article can title a well known Maratha king Shivaji as Maratha Rajput but if a Maratha article says that they are Rajputs then it is "Sanskritisation". in which direction, actually the most popular modern source of information (wikipedia) is being led. I think this is not the place for me and I must quit, hence, I told you what I observed -- MahenSingha (Talk) 20:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
I think this is not the place for me and I must quit.Maybe take a break? I'll look at the Shivaji thing - anything on Wikipedia relating to him and to Aurangzeb is always fraught with difficulties. - Sitush ( talk) 08:54, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Mahensingha, your argument is quite confusing. You believe that making a page about Bihari Rajputs belittles Ahirs and Jats? How does it do so? Historically Rajputs and Ahirs were both recruited together during Sher Shah Suris reign so there is nothing to do with belittling one caste just by simply creating a page. Where does the page ever mention as fact that Bihari Rajputs are descended from Gods? The Rajput term has been proved to be merely a title and nothing more. Suijai ( talk) 15:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
But seriously, you were right to tell me to back down. The reason I commented is that there's be a couple dozen people that might be unfit to take admin actions against Corbett (some already voluntarily refrain). I understand your concern about the IRC comment though. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 18:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
This talk page of yours is a bit heavy, no? Brighten your day with my latest (re?) discovery, Talk:K. Banerjee Centre of Atmospheric and Ocean Studies. (I wonder: Could there be some tenuous connexion with Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Vivek Kumar Pandey (2nd nomination)?) -- Hoary ( talk) 13:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I think a redirect should be fine. I'd initially confused this centre to be like the CSIR centres, but that isn't the case. — Spaceman Spiff 09:51, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Though I'm not asked, I'll say that I think that's a good idea. ¶ Coincidentally, the article was created and in its earlier days was vigorously edited by User:Vivek Kumar Pandey. -- Hoary ( talk) 09:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case, because you have commented in the case request, or the AN or AE discussions leading to this arbitration case, or because you have specifically opted in to receiving these messages. Unless you are a party to this arbitration case, you may opt out of receiving further messages at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Notification list. The drafters of the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case have published a revised timetable for the case, which changes what you may have been told when the case was opened. The dates have been revised as follows: the Evidence phase will close 5 July 2015, one week earlier than originally scheduled; the Workshop phase will close 26 July 2015, one week later than originally scheduled; the Proposed decision is scheduled to be posted 9 August 2015, two weeks later than originally scheduled. Thank you. On behalf of the arbitration clerks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 07:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Why the heck can't we go back to Toolserver? Labs is bloody useless and has been from Day One. Repeatedly timing out, a lot of tools gone AWOL due to porting/personal issues. I can't do sod all and am increasingly pissed off, especially when sock-tracking. - Sitush ( talk) 13:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I've programmed some big stuff myself in the past but I just can't get my brain in gear nowadays for that sort of thing. The last big project was maybe 100-120k lines of VisBas using OOP/custom libraries + a couple of bought-in OCX DLLs etc for a company that manufactures polythene sheet and bags, and which had an extraordinary desire to make the UI look nice even though it was an entirely internal project. A solo job, and it drove me nuts for the usual reason, ie: the customer kept changing the requirements. I kept it running until about four years ago, at which point I handed the code over and said that enough fooling around had gone on. They also insisted that it was VB, which itself involved a bit of a learning exercise because my background was in C etc, although I'd used VB for fun/quick-n-dirty for years (as you will see if you trawl the old mailing list archives). Don't ask me about Python, Lua and the like - the entire programming thing is in my past, although maybe one day I'll dabble again.
The loss of session data is almost certainly unrelated to Labs. I just need to track down why it happens pretty much every edit. It has been going on since the switch to https but correlation is not causation and I'm normallly (but not exclusively - five PCs and a fileserver-cum-MythTV setup here) using FF 38 on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS Desktop, which has been getting a shedload of updates of late. - Sitush ( talk) 23:21, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Every tool runs it's own web server- so, effectively, every tool has its own virtual machine? I'm curious re: what the machine implementation might be. VMware etc. - Sitush ( talk) 23:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Get well soon. My sincere wishes for a speedy recovery. I generally use lavender oil rubbed in feet which is good for sleeping. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 03:56, 23 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Glad to see you active. Sitush before going to bed please have warm organic milk with a table spoon of honey added to it. Also the lavendar rubbed in feet is very effective for sleep. once again sincerely wishing for your full recovery. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 04:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Sitush how is your health. Did the lavendar oil work. It usually gives good sleep which is essential for health recovery. once again my wishes to you for a good health.. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 03:34, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Please resolve the copy issue. Myself and user Merkcid seem to be going back and forth. Please resolve once for all. My point is "lowly agricultural labouring caste" should be included in Historical status.
India's Silent Revolution: The Rise of the Lower Castes in North India
By Christophe Jaffrelot
Society In India
By David G Mandelbaum / University of california Berkeley.
The Pariah Problem: Caste, Religion, and the Social in Modern India
By Rupa Viswanath / Columbia university
Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 15:58, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Sitush hope i am not disturbing or wasting your time. When ever you have time please look at the discussion and make changes.
Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 01:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
Thanks Sitush. I will follow your recommendations. Glad to hear that you are using the lavendar oil. My sincere wishes for your speedy recovery of health. Sangitha rani111 ( talk) 03:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111
One can't be "involved" with a sock (of this user [2] who was blocked for the same). Recently another editor's sandbox was deleted on his block which had exact same stuff. -- lTopGunl ( talk) 20:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
please do delete the speedy contest deletion message from the article and help to make the article in an elegant manner /info/en/?search=Sridhar_babu_addanki swaroop 07:10, 4 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakthi swaroop ( talk • contribs)
An IP mentioned about your comment in the last part of this discussion.-- X Swordsman Xcalibur 15:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
This message is sent at 12:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC) by Arbitration Clerk User:Penwhale via MassMessage on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. You are receiving this message because your name appears on this list and have not elected to opt-out of being notified of development in the arbitration case.
On 5 July, 2015, the following motion was passed and enacted:
FYI. Also pinging @ SpacemanSpiff and Thomas.W:, who I believe have also run into the original and/or sock accounts. Abecedare ( talk) 20:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!
With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:
Send on behalf of
The Wikipedia Library using
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
....if you have the time/inclination. Enjoy. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 04:30, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Anyone who attends this should probably thereafter be treated by default as a meatpuppet/tag-team member on en-WP in so far as matters relating to policy changes etc are concerned, and especially so in relation to policies that affect civility and the related favourite topics of the en-WP GGTF. What the heck are the WMF doing here? - Sitush ( talk) 16:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Hope you're well. I noticed the article on Babur was up for reassessment. It has been almost a month since you initiated the reassessment and the fixes haven't been made yet. Do you think it's time for it to be delisted? Cowlibob ( talk) 00:12, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
One of the enduring features of Babur's life was that he left behind the lively and well-written autobiography known as Baburnama. [1] Quoting Henry Beveridge, Stanley Lane-Poole writes:
His autobiography is one of those priceless records which are for all time, and is fit to rank with the confessions of St. Augustine and Rousseau, and the memoirs of Gibbon and Newton. In Asia it stands almost alone. [2]
References
Hi Sitush, in the open Lightbreather arbitration case, a remedy or finding of fact has been proposed which relates to you. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 21:45, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Dear user Sitush, edits in Tomara Clan wiki page with reference of Sh Jadunath Sarkar, an eminent historian has been undone by you, please look back at my edits today that you had undone, i added a very well known province of erstwhile Jaipur state. You seem to be taking all reference of British Raj out, they had their reference in oral traditions as books were not common in that era gone by (especially for very local history of smaller provinces) , with that in mind how is it possible to provide reference if its not via books or historians of an era gone by ?? also please let us know on what basis you throw out some references while allow some books as references, please provide a path for us to follow to refer something. If your criterion is that any book older than 40 years is unaccounted and can not be used as reference then it will be tough to provide reference, especially for smaller and lesser known places and its people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjtanwar ( talk • contribs) 16:04, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedy relates to you:
For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 02:56, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Integrity | |
For offering genuine advice and looking out for other editors, even those who may not see eye-to-eye 100% of the time with you. For taking steps to start discussion on a sexual harassment policy and doing so with the intent of aiding fellow editors (both individually and generally). For showing empathy and concern and for taking a more diplomatic approach to issues. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 21:02, 16 July 2015 (UTC) |
Can't quite put it all into words that make sense, but I was delighted to see your message on my talk page today. Unexpected and thoughtful. Thank you.
EvergreenFir
(talk) Please {{
re}}
21:02, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
FWIW, the RfC proposal to have a specific sexual harassment policy is making a mountain out the downward tip of a spiral molehill on a sloping iceberg. That form of harassment is just one of many, all of them inappropriate and all upsetting in equal measure to the target. Thus we'll need to introduce similar separate policies for race, religion, disability and so on ... and all of them will say the same thing, paraphrased as "don't do it". I'd guess well over 90 per cent of cases that would be reported would also be highly subjective, while the remainder would be so blatantly obvious as to be already covered by things such as CIV and NPA. The exercise smacks of tokenism and will just lead to a lot of lawyering. That Jimbo supports it is almost a rubber-stamp of its tokenistic nature. - Sitush ( talk) 10:16, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
[3]. I guess you didn't get very far with it? Bishonen | talk 17:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC).
Hi,
Sitush,
I was looking at a malformed article called
Agri language and I came across the articles
Agri people and
Agri caste. Is this the same group? What is the typical designation, "people" or "caste"? Thanks for any help you can provide.
Liz
Read!
Talk!
15:21, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Here we go again. I'm fed up of being mentioned in ArbCom proceedings, even when they do not escalate to being a case, and I'm fed up of seeing the outcomes of such proceedings being manipulated by a lynch mob of pettifogging WMF acolytes and POV-pushing warriors who do bugger all where it really matters on this project. Now everyone go figure why I haven't been editing much of late, and why I'm going to be editing even less. - Sitush ( talk) 18:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
{{subst:Arbitration CA notice|Imposition of an Arbitration Enforced Sanction against me by Bishonen}}
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Imposition_of_an_Arbitration_Enforced_Sanction_against_me_by_Bishonen Soham321 ( talk) 20:36, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Can you find out where this book is copied from? Is it just from us or does it also include your friends Tod and co? — Spaceman Spiff 15:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
The India-Pakistan arbitration amendment request, which you were listed as a party to, has been archived to [[ Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan. Thank you. For the Arbitration Committee, Jim Carter 06:27, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sitush
I did not remove any information, i just added the information 'jaat', only a single word with refrences. Can you please revert it back. Prashant 015 ( talk) 08:21, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
See diff and diff. Welcome to the show! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 03:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I wish to offer you an apology. I stand by the gravamen of what I said, but I could have, and should have, chosen my words more carefully. For that I apologize. Dumuzid ( talk) 15:45, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
wish you get well soon. kindly do not remove my edits from article Rajput as I've edited in good faith and fixed some contradictions. please discuss if anything is wrong with my editing. kind regards. Rmkop ( talk) 16:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
I added four other sources. Here's another one: https://books.google.com/books?id=WNtHAAAAMAAJ&q=Makwana+Rajputs&dq=Makwana+Rajputs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEYQ6AEwCGoVChMI9c3agq39xgIVSKceCh1RyAD2
Earlier there was no hatnote and I had no issues with this article. I think you were not paying attention to the hatnote changes that were being made recently. Let me tell you by example:-
The previous hatnote was this: This article is about the ancient Indian people. For the Kachhi community of North India who adopted "Shakya" surname, see Kachhi (caste)
Now, this misleads a general reader to think
1) Shakyas were only in ancient times and they are not alive anymore.
2) Which further implies that everyone from North India or anywhere else who uses Shakya surname is a Kachhi. Which is false because the Shakya state itself was from North India and hence most people in India/Tibet/Nepal using Shakya surname are infact Shakyas not Kachhis.
There are instances where Kachhis/Kushwahas use Shakya surname but then they use a lot of different surnames from other castes. This cannot be used as an excuse to make the entire Shakya community a Kachhi/Kushwaha.
I would request to modify this hatnote to reflect something like this: This article is about the ancient history of Shakya clan. For the Kachhi community of North India who also sometimes uses this surname, see Kachhi (caste).
And then
In Shakya article: we can later add current demographic of Shakya population in various regions, their current conditions etc
In Kushwaha/Kachhi article: we can add their various claims to Kush, Maurya, Shakya etc while specifically informing that these are seprate castes whose surname Kachhi/Kushwahas sometimes copy.
Well, thanks for giving your opinion, and sorry for all the trouble and extra work you received. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Could you please take a look at this discussion. It appears to be a content dispute, an editor asked me for input but I'm not interested in the subject (its not an area I'm expert on). I would be happy if you can take a look. Cheers, Jim Carter 03:55, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Please explain how my rationale is nonsense. I just checked the sources again, and the statements were not even there. I saw your appeal to spacemanspiff to team up against me. But please explain, I also didn't delete any of your messages from my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabt man ( talk • contribs) 14:59, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Well anyway because we are both here, would you like to discuss the issues on caste based pages? We might as well get it overwith. I would also like to talk personally right now, and I will discuss on the article page later. Please reply as soon as possible. Rabt man ( talk) 15:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Hey sitush, this is not just regarding Ezhavas, but also other castes as well. I have searched countless other "forward-caste" articles and have noticed that you were reverting many edits that showed any positive sides of any of those castes (ex. bunts, nairs, rajputs, among others). Many of the sources that you have given earlier were also that of "scientific rascists" from Europe and other Western countries who had opinions of bias. I also noticed the fact that you have been painting the castes of "other backward status" in a more positive light by removing any bad points of lower castes (as shown in the Ezhava page). These castes of forward-origin may have been arrogant or treated lower castes in a bad manner, but that does not mean that any revenge should be taken upon them, such as saying how beef is a favorite food of Rajputs and Nairs. I have also noticed in the Ezhava article among others how the article is filled with theories of "foreign origin, and saying that the Ezhavas were the same as Nairs and Muslims in ethnic origin" (which clearly shows a feeling of inferiority).
I wanted to remove the many parts of the article (which were put under sources but were not mentioned by the way), in which Nairs were said to be of same origin of the Nairs. Please remove any comparison between other castes, as the article is about Ezhavas, and stop policing me when I try to remove cited opinions.
You yourself have defended the Ezhava caste from scientific rascists (bottom), while you and many others have supported an attack on Nairs in which any major points of positivity are removed, not mentioned, or 'replaced' with worse. Such scientific rascists are also present in the attack on the Nair article in which Nairs are said to be demonic, unusual, and primitive [which some primitive things were true, and I do not deny], while the points of different ethnic origin, habits of cleanliness, countless military victories, said by Anthrpologists were not mentioned. The Kings of Travancore being of Nair Origin are also not mentioned.
With all due respect, my point is to please let others edit these articles and let others remove clear attacks as it is pretty obvious. Anyone who has attempted to bring out the fact that these articles are biased were banned by teams of editors working together to keep literally anything good about one caste in check. My Nair case in point, I do agree that the caste has been part of an arrogant community that has done many social ills, but please call off the attacks on these communities. People literally make accounts named "Nair" in order to attack with some hidden confusion. At least leave the community alone please, and stop teaming up with others (notably SpacemanSpiff), as it is unfair with moderators banning anyone they like (Spiff also broke the 3r rule, but banned me because he did not agree with my edits).
I would also like to hear your side of the story. Please respond as quickly as possible. Also, this is not just abt one particular page, but rather many. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabt man ( talk • contribs) 16:24, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Sitush I never said I did not like what you were doing, I just want to sort out a compromise or a motive in a civil manner. I would like to discuss not impose. Rabt man ( talk) 16:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
What do you mean right great wrongs? You're using Wikipedia to make personal attacks on the pages of upper castes. Seriously, if someone says at least something the least bit positive you immediately revert it. Please stop. Just look at literally any page of a 'forward caste' and you have reverted anything that you personally didn't like. What is the meaning of this? I would like to discuss this with you here right now, as this has been going for far too long. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabt man ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
What do you mean by "your ways"? I want to at least talk to you in a civil manner. My interests are not in getting people to block you like you are doing with me. You can team up with people all you want, give as many threats as you want, but your intentions are somewhat clear at this point. Please answer my question. Rabt man ( talk) 07:05, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
I do not want to talk regarding an article, but rather, regarding your edits. I asked Phil if there is any other way, but I have not yet found a response. Would you like to talk on my page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabt man ( talk • contribs) 07:24, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
I understand and agree about the sockpuppets (I really am not one of them). And I do understand if you have anything personal with them, but I have also noticed a team of editors on both sides of the conflict. I also understand how you might want to revert my edits if I write anything positive of Nairs (as you might think I am working with them etc), But the problem is, the entire article on Nairs (and other upper caste articles) feature a blatant public attack on the community centered around the demonic traditions. The military conflicts only show the brutal captivity of Nairs at north Malabar, but any of their rebellions or victories are not mentioned. But please understand (your intentions might be well), that the article has many things that are insulting to the community (such as eating beef and pork. These were not only shunned by Nairs but by all walks of Hindus). These editors may have teamed up to remove that, and from the revisions I looked at, they may have broken many Wikipedia rules to do so. I just want to add some positivity to that article, and when groups of people such as spacemanspiff, boingsaidzebedee, achayan, "Nair", and you work together to undo any of my edits, I find it unfair. Perhaps it is because you may confuse me with one of them, but please look at the article. It is clearly written to bring out negativity. Let me, and others edit Wikipedia as well. Just because someone is a Nair does not mean they want to delete the bad aspects of the community, as Nairs also deserve a say in an article about them. If the overall intention was to make the community look bad, it was successful, but keep in mind that Nairs have their sensitivities as well. Please show at least a little kindness in this, even if there is a personal motive. Thank you for letting me know, and please respond soon :). Rabt man ( talk) 07:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You may want to review some recent contributions to Karwal. I reverted them but there might be something worth to keep there. Thanks, Magioladitis ( talk) 08:47, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Is a tendency to argue from one's views rather than the rules really something that we want to see in an admin? - No, and remember that as a wider community we have written the rules. Its thorny and has come back on us - content people tend to see the results as common sence - IGAR- many of the younger admins are rule driven and see sacred script and damn the spirit. Theirin lies. Ceoil ( talk) 06:02, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
People think my AfDs are waste of community time. Thought you maybe interested in the subject. Your input is highly appreciated! Cheers, Jim Carter 11:20, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Happy friendship day -- Tito Dutta ( talk) 14:58, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand why you have rollback my edit on 'infobox template caste' on article raju. I don't see wrong in any field. Please undo - Varmapak (talk) 15:56, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Please
assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on
Raju. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia.
Varmapak
(talk)
16:32, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I have added sources in Devendra Fadnavis, you can undo your latest edit from List of Brahmins where you deleted Devendra's name. Thank you. -- Human3015 Send WikiLove 19:16, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Well I didn't had any wrong kinda intention like giving importance to nationality .But its ok :) I won't add it anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haxxorsid ( talk • contribs) 13:53, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I left a request at Talk:Perike#Request_for_links_to_WP_community_consensus_discussion_on_reliability_of_Edgar_Thurston.27s_work. if you would be kind and reply there it would be appreciated. Thank you. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 00:46, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi sitush this is Kanchipuram silk. You said that I inserted commentary, while I only moved one part of the religion section to the Military Section because I found that the Captivity of Nairs at Srirangapatnam is more so incined towards Military history, not religion. 08:18, 6 August 2015 (UTC) Kanchipuramsilk83 ( talk)
There above statement seemed to be written by a non Hindu as Panikkar is for some devious reason is trying to indicate Dravidian as an alternate other than Hinduism. Dravida means the land surrounded by the 3 seas. Pannikar is probably a Christian convert who is part of the India pseudo secularist educations planted to confuse Hindus to make them more susceptible to conversion to other religions especially Christianity.
That is pure original research. We do not allow commentary of this type in articles. - Sitush ( talk) 08:21, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
No I swear that I really did not. This was written by someone previously, not me! Look at the sources if you would like. It was already there! It was written by a previous editor, and I demand an apology. Kanchipuramsilk83 ( talk) 08:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes I promise, it may have been done on accident, but I did not write any of that! I saw it written by a previous editor, but all I did intentionally was move the srirangapatnam things to military history, and remove the sri lanka things. Feel free to remove the commentary. Kanchipuramsilk83 ( talk) 08:40, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Hope you are fine... Why you are reverting my edits??? For god sake don't create vandalism about gujjar peoples, Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikro Nekros ( talk • contribs) 13:21, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Came across this article and thought it'd be of interest to you (just in case you haven't read it already):
Abecedare ( talk) 07:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
You reverted reliable sources from article. I removed Gyan as per your opinion but all three below are not Gyan or Raj publications.
Tell me why these three are not reliable sources? Nizil ( talk) 08:46, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sitush, Namashkar, Bro , After reading History of Sindh, Jatt, Soomra dynasty, I have found that Samra who are JAtt clan might be Soomra who are also Sindhi Rajputs.-- Jogi don ( talk) 11:58, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I've come across a few more also, all of them based around WP stuff. They are gibberish to me. Am I completely thick or has the ability to communicate in plain English given way to the ghettoisation of buzzwords? Whatever, since these things all relate to WP, the people using the terms need to find another way to say whatever it is that they mean. Almost by definition, I'm not against learning stuff but, please, K.I.S.S. - Sitush ( talk) 00:07, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Is there any passing admin willing to consider events at Talk:Bhumihar#Abusive_content_WikiProject_assessment_Suggestion ? It has reached the point where neither I nor utcursch want to say more. The article has a long history of attacks/complaints from community members. - Sitush ( talk) 08:11, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Being called hybrid would be considered offensive in caste-conscious society such as India regardless of DNA research indicating affinity of different castes to each other in a given geographical area. Jonathansammy ( talk) 22:43, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
I've closed the discussion as it was going nowhere. I'd highly suggest not to respond to them anymore. I did have a good laugh when when he told me to ".Plz try to adopt a systematic approach . It would be welcome by all ." Bgwhite ( talk) 19:04, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
sir you need to read the source, I'm already done with this. please look over it carefully ( https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Kz1-mtazYqEC&pg=PA18#v=onepage&q&f=false). Rmkop ( talk) 19:25, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
I was disappointed the way you have callously gone about reducing and deleting stuff from Hoysala related articles without so much as starting a discussion. Be rest assured I will be bringing citations (even if they already exist) for the "uncited" lines you have deleted from Hoysala architecture, an article that has stood water since 2007 and has been a main page FA. You need to understand that very often, during intense copy editing, paragraphs get broken up into multiple paragraphs, thus separating a line(s) from its actual citation making it appear 'uncited', and that is what has happened in this article. Your attitude was careless, more than anything else. Hope you revert your edits on Hoysala architecture and give me time to study the content and bring in citations. You can tag it if you like, that way I don't have to struggle to reinstate the actual content. We are all busy in our personal life too and that's why I am asking you for time. Regarding the template, Template:Famous Hoysala temples, you deleted three temples which did not have underlying sub-articles, something I had planned to write about, after visiting them last April in Karnataka. In fact I visited them specifically to write about them. Wiki is not a "my way or the highway" kind of an encyclopedia. You have to learn to be patient. I have visited over 75 Hoysala-Chalukya temples in Karnataka, written numerous articles (even if some are only stubs) on them and own half a dozen books on the same topic. Writing articles in wiki is a fine balance between bringing in real content while at the same time not POVing about it. You are right, the templates can be a list and this is something I have had on my menu for a while and again I need time. Given time I will merge the two templates. There was a time when templates were the norm, or at least common in FA's and thats why I continued in that tradition. Pied Hornbill ( talk) 21:18, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
An editor left me a message regarding citation and content concerns regarding Raheja Developers. Since you appear to be the most active editor on the article and I know nothing about the subject, can I ask you to address their concerns? I'm not sure why they are bringing the issue to me versus the article talk page or making the edits themselves. -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 19:51, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
What is Raheja caste/tribe origin , does Raheja is a Sindhi tribe.?-- Jogi don ( talk) 03:44, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
You have deleted four references in this article as WP:RS. How do you determine the suitability of the book references so that I can keep a watch. It has happened for the first time. The article has now gone into a limbo as I cannot find alternate references. Can you pl suggest some alternate references so that I can retrieve the article which is posted on DYK? Thanks.-- Nvvchar. 07:24, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Can you please show me exactly where it is said in the sources the statements that were removed due to their caste-promotional purposes? Rabt man ( talk) 14:04, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
HEy! Sitush , You have reverted my edits Category History of Sindh because Jatt origin is from Sindh region. So kindly add Category:History of Sindh to Jatt-- Jogi don ( talk) 07:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
My recent updates are linked to wiki pages and why it got deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by UJcu ( talk • contribs) 20:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I have occasionally seen you refer to this, but I don't know the details. What initiative was this, and when was it launched? Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 14:19, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
You recently reverted some of my edits on the article Paswan, stating so what? The line says They are considered to be an untouchable community, but citie does not specific about the Paswan caste, is there anyone? It is requested that please avoid summery field for discussion. — CutestPenguin Hangout 08:28, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh lord the Shakya caste-warring makes me tired just hearing about it. The Newar Shakya caste are authentic descendants of Gautama Buddha? I just can't even. I can't.
I hope your health is a little better; mine is suffering rn thanks to a heatwave that has left the region with strong heat warnings. Ogress smash! 20:07, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
"Passed away peacefully last night" Rusted AutoParts 13:04, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Because the man is dead and obviously there will be a source on the deaths list. I'm not sure if you're just lazy, but you revert me, I give you the proof, and you go biting my head off. It's sourced now, just saying try not to be an asshole when someone's helping you build a new article. Rusted AutoParts 21:48, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Seems like anonymous IPs are editing the page and same old text is back that you edited out/corrected. I am sure if I revert to your revision, it will be reverted from another IP. How do you resolve such situtions? As a comparatively new user, I am more interested in the process of resolving such conflicts. Please help. ChunnuBhai ( talk) 18:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Sitush, I would be grateful for your input on the renaming of the article Dadu Konddeo. An editor changed it from Dadoji saying we do not do honorifics. Now, I could not find a single reliable source that called him "Dadu Now there are very recent news articles in Marathi calling him Dadu after publication of a controversial book on Shivaji by James Laine. Most historians including Duff and Sarkar have called him Dadaji and I believe the Ji is an integral part of his name just like other Marathi names such as Shivaji, Shahaji, Mahadji Shinde, Kanhoji Angre etc. When you have time please check the talk page of the article for more information. Thanks. Jonathansammy ( talk) 18:48, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Jonathansammy ( talk) 12:14, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Like we've done so many times, I'm letting you know that I want to add a 'not to be confused with' tag on one of the pages that you've operated on. Issue is, that a particular community has a similar sounding name to another community from another region of South Asia. But other than the somewhat similar names, the two communities are completely unrelated (in linguistics, origin, culture, gotra, surnames, etc). So is there any specific procedure that I have to follow? ShamusHarper ( talk) 00:22, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
I was referring to the Lohana and Labana communities. I've added a 'not to be confused with' tag for now, but there's this erroneous idea circulating that they're one and the same. What would you suggest? ShamusHarper ( talk) 17:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
I cannot find any source that categorizes the Labana and Lohana as the same, or states that they are related in any way. At the same time, there is no source that directly states that both communities are not related. (There are snippets on Google Books that supposedly make mention of both communities but they're inaccessible to me.) Would it be possible to inject text into the article(s) stating that the two communities speak different languages, have different Gotras, etc..? ShamusHarper ( talk) 22:19, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sitush, I'm having a problem with the same article with the same user User:JuanRiley who's deleting the some of part in a phrase in the top article that Germany and the United States had eroded some of Britain's economic lead. deleting the part to say that Britain's economic lead was fully eroded. For one I say that this doesn't give an accurate description historically and should be kept that way. I also note that user JuanRiley's edits is somewhat anti-British and trying to minimize the section of the British Empire as an example of before when I last disputed with him, my reasons were historically motivated but he refused to even give a reason to why he kept adding an then-thought unsupported content. Now he's back and trying to edit as he sees fit and justified his edit with saying that the word he deleted was redundant when actually the two word he deleted were necessary to not give a wrong concept. Another theory I have with JuanRiley is that his edit might be patriotically motivated, he tries to undermine Britain in his recent edit and user User:Calidum, who's an American like JuanRiley backs him up. Don't get me wrong, I'm an American too but I detest when edits are patriotically motivated rather than historically oriented. ( N0n3up ( talk) 02:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC))
Paraiyar is a caste group found in the state of tamilnadu,India.I modified the article with all the reliable sources.But you are depicting that caste as a slave caste.And I modified the article by researching into the past history and made edit by giving line by line proof.But one time the caste was a slave but time to time the hstory of any castes change.Our country India was also once slave to british,but because of this the wikipedia article about India cannot be started like "India a former slave of british" though the information is true.It is racial discrimination.Same for this caste also.So if you dont want to glorify this caste then its okay.But discriminating a caste is a punishable offence under Indian Penal Code(Indian law).So I hope u might have understood what I am saying.You have the right to modify the sections which has no reliable sources,but you cannot discriminate a particular group of people because of their past history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RajaRajan Tamilian ( talk • contribs) 09:46, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sitush you have redirected Jats of Sindh to Jat people is not fair , its just like hiding the facts, first read that article which you have redirected which is different in every nature from the redirected article.and why don't you tolerate the regional Jat of Sindh, these Jat are Baloch tribes. and if oyu don't restore Jats of Sindh, write about them in this article, so the facts should not be hidden from the world. hope you understand without any bias .
Dear sir, hello, I have been following some of your past edits, and trust that you are feeling much better now; my best wishes for your health. Whenever you have the time, I would be grateful for your kind assistance: as I have proposed a merger between two pages i.e. Awan (tribe) and Awans of Pakistan-- as the latter seems to be to be merely repetitious and incorporating much material that is unreliable, and that has been, previously, removed by various editors from the older original Awan (tribe) page. Could you perhaps take a look at both at your kind leisure and find out some way to resolve this matter. I shall be very grateful, thanks. Yours sincerely, 39.54.241.61 ( talk) 04:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC) Col (retd) Malik Mumtaz Khan, Pakistan
Welcome to Wikipedia. Wikipedia invites everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, but one or more redirects you created have been considered
disruptive and/or malicious, and have been reverted. Take a look at the
welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you.
Hi Sitush. Please read Proposed Merger to create a discussion first. I advise you to make a proposed merger and state your reasons for a redirect or merger as the articles have been separate for a long time and especially it is on a controversial topic. Do not hesitate to discuss any issue.
Pixarh ( talk) 15:03, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello sir..when did the Rajbhar community has been added to scheduled caste and on which basis u have edited the Wikipedia page.. Thank u.. Piyush7500 ( talk) 15:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
I have seen you citing her book quite a few times so
a gift for you.
Solomon
7968
16:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Sitush please watch your words and think twice before accusing other editors. Acquaint yourself with Wikipedia Etiquettes first.
Your statement is still confusing. Define "fake references'. At wikipedia, either references exist or they do not. There is no and should be no midway for that.
On the other hand, the entire content of the article Awans of Pakistan is referenced under the section heading of 'references' and 'further reading'. There is nothing duplicate in both the articles both in terms of content and context. Awans of Pakistan is one long article which deals with the full history of Awans who belong to Pakistan and is nothing like article Awan (tribe) which is too brief, politicized and contains only "2 sentences" (one is lead section and second in history) apart from two statements by 2 different people.
On a soft note, the article Awan (tribe) is very short and had anything been copy/pasted or duplicated for that matter, it would have been clearly visible. You may state your particular concerns if you have any and I might be able to help you there. As you have asked me to insert content in Awan (tribe), I can do that and help you after all what are editors for but to improve articles and I am a helper but please make things clear first and understand that both articles are separate.
I am watching this page, so you may wish to reply here.
Pixarh ( talk) 14:49, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Please do not create
malicious redirects, as you did with
Awans of Pakistan. They are disruptive and are considered
vandalism, and have been
reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Thank you. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Pixarh (
talk •
contribs)
15:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Tito Dutta ( talk) 15:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey, sorry to disturb. But can you please elaborate on Raj sources. THanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo ( talk · contribs · count) 13:09, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Please see this sanctions section and the contributions of Righteous.12 ( talk · contribs) over the last few months, more or less all of which have been disruptive at Arain. - Sitush ( talk) 09:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Why you are constantly changing our page 's information if we found it changed again then we will take this topic to cyber security....so kindly please revERT the changes that you had done on our page.. Bannaakkisa ( talk) 12:11, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your concern and for marking the edit as a good will edit. Let me explain the grammar of what I wrote: "Neither was Singh born there nor did he live there." In English, since "neither...nor..." is a parallel structure, the "..." must be filled by the same type of grammatical structure in both places. In this case "Singh was born there" and "he did live there" are both independent clauses with a simple past tense verb, so this requirement is fulfilled. If I say, "Singh was neither born there nor lived there," there are two problems. First, the "was" is applied to both "..." groups, which in this case are "born there" and "lived there." So the phrase essentially becomes "was born there" and "was lived there," and "was lived" is obviously an invalid use of the verb "to live." Second, since "was born" is the technical simple past tense form of the verb "to be born," you need to have the equivalent for "to live," which can be accomplished by "did live" or "lived" in this case.
So, my restatement solves these grammatical errors, so I am going to fix it. Otherwise, you could say "Singh neither was born there nor did live there," or "Singh neither was born nor did live there," or "Singh neither was born nor lived there," and so on. All of these statements are fine, because they preserve the parallel structure, but what you wrote doesn't. So I'm going to fix it to what I originally had, but please feel free to fix it to any of what I just wrote or anything else that preserves the parallel structure later on if you would like to.
Also, I hope you are doing ok, based on the notice on the top of your talk page. :( Get well soon!
EDIT: In fact, "lived" doesn't work at all, because "was born" is passive voice, and "lived" is simple past, so "did live" is the correct form since that is also passive voice. See English verbs.
Subbupedia95 ( talk) 18:20, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Pixarh ( talk) 16:11, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
I am adding accurate info...plzz don't revert it . to ensure credibility I want you to know that I am a panicker myself,
thanks, p.s.(reply on my talk page) Mathew102 ( talk) 11:49, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Sir please take a look on others mughal related articles.-- శ్రీధర్ బబు ( talk) 13:44, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
If you continue to remove my contributions to other editors and administrators talk pages such as Dennis Brown, then I will report you for vandalism. It is not for you, or a clique to arbitrarily decide what is 'relevant' to be included for discussion in a talk page and you have broke the rules of Wikipedia by doing so. 77.97.24.152 ( talk) 13:33, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Sitush, What are Reliable Sources i want to submit to believe the article. 1.Inscription 2.Ancient Poem's and etc. Because The ancient things only have the true matters. Now a days news papers and books are written only for money making purpose. So I can explain you if you understand the Tamil authorized poems. They written the poem about the "Why gounder title is given to the particular community". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobugounder ( talk • contribs) 10:24, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Sitush, Thankyou. I have updated gounder title with Vettuva gounder as per Wikipedia proposal. shall I remove the vettuvar from gounder page and Kongu vellalar does not have gounder title in Indian government caste gazatte. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobugounder ( talk • contribs) 18:01, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Sitush, Why you did not accept the vettuva gounder in gounder title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobugounder ( talk • contribs) 18:49, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Pixarh (
talk)
16:07, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
I've reverted myself pending further review. It looked OK at first blush, but I take your point. Sorry for the trouble. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 09:12, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Register here. Your contributions would be welcomed. Forum not intended to compete with Wikiopediocracy, which is for criticism only, but rather focuses on getting like-minded people together who want to see improvement. Peter Damian ( talk) 12:33, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Could you weigh in on the synthesis question under discussion there, if convenient? Charles Matthews ( talk) 15:23, 13 September 2015 (UTC)