User talk:Hkelkar/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


Things to do

The Wikipedia Neo-Buddhists

Get diffs of their inflammatory comments and submit them to Blnguyen on his talk page.Hkelkar 06:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ambedkaritebuddhist:

  1. Summary [1].
  2. [2]
  3. Massive disruption : [3] (he's done this once before)
  4. [4]
  5. [5]
  6. [6]
  7. [7]

Srilankanbuddhist:

  1. Using wikipedia for propaganda [8]
  2. Bogus claims of vandalism [9]
  3. Repeated misrepresentations and other forms of vandalism [10]

Dhammafriend:

  1. Tendentious edits: [11]
  2. Invicil edit summaries [12]
  3. [13]
  4. [14]
  5. meatpuppetry [15]


Nothing wrong here, but it's just plain hilarious (Babasaheb Ambedkar "taught us", apparently Ambedkaritebuddhist must be really really old to have been literally taught anything by Babasaheb :-))[16].

  1. Racist PA from Ambedkaritebuddhist [17]

Dear Kelker, You are making fun of others You wrote: "Babasaheb Ambedkar "taught us", apparently Ambedkaritebuddhist must be really really old to have been literally taught anything by Babasaheb :-)". In my country we have Buddhist population as 0.8%. People who have migrated to America don't have much knowledge about my country. Hkelkar have mentioned once on your talk page regarding discussions 'Indian Jews' that your Father is Hindu and Mother is Jew. At least I accept the story and I really dont have any objections about your origin. I said if your school certificate shows you are a Jew then you are Jew otherwise Hindu. As always you reverted all the comments and discussions. Why do you hide discussions? I have also given the Vandalism Links but you are reverting them again and again. Will find more links wherever you have done vandalism. Now I am learning to work on Wikipedia. Have enough time to work. I am also happy to inform you that my grandchildren are helping me a lot. Take Care and carry your work dear.Ambedkaritebuddhist 11:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Dhammafriend:

  1. Summary:[18]
  2. [19]
  3. [20]
  4. [21]
  5. [22]
  6. [23]
  7. [24]

Bodhidhamma: TBC

Revisit old RFCU

Report Mujeerkhan's sock army to an admin.Hkelkar 06:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • > Please abstain from editing other's comments.Secondly, DO NOT call the serious issue of incivilty as "Ho Hum".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ikonoblast (talk • contribs) .
He will once someone learns not to litter talk pages with bogus warnings.Bakaman Bakatalk 17:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This should be my comment and not Ikonoblast - Pls. recheck "*> Please abstain from editing other's comments.Secondly, DO NOT call the serious issue of incivilty as "Ho Hum".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ikonoblast (talk • contribs) ." MerryJ-Ho 13:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your arbitration case

You should place your evidence on the Evidence subpage in the case. That is where you would place arguments in your defense, any explanation of your actions, diffs showing the bad behavior of others, and so on. Thatcher131 11:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

anon

ok, i'll see if he strikes again in those articles and revert his unsourced edits. tx Idleguy 14:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your case

I provided some evidence. Will put in more as I find it. Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 04:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hkelkar arbitration case

May I suggest that you provide evidence on the evidence page? Descriptions of disruptive editing practices, supported by diffs, will be much more persuasive than unsupporteed accusations. You might want to look over the evidence pages in some prior cases to get an idea of how the process works. Thatcher131 14:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like this is the calm before the storm. Good luck on the arbitration case. Mujhe lagtahai keh tumhay zuroorat hogey. BhaiSaab talk 04:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tit for tat eh? I guess that's a useful strategy, but your arguments aren't holding up. BhaiSaab talk 06:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to me to number my points so you don't have to requote them? BhaiSaab talk 06:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Hi

Ay dude,

I'm sorry i'll not be able to come back before May. I'll be taking A Levels this year you see... So you r a Mumbaikar ha? My mum is from across the Bay, Alibag. Though my dad is a Sindhi-Rajput i identify with Marathis more coz i've grown up with my mother. Still my Marathi is far from perfect! Anyways do you know Alibag had highest percentage of Jews amongst its population until 1960's... One of my cousins is married to a Bene-Israeli. She stays in Ashdod. Neeways take care.

File:England flag large.png अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 14:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheema

I agree, it's a bizarre article. Firstly all that discredited "Martial Race" stuff of which the author appears to approve, and then a very strange narrative based on a single source called the Chach-nama. Articles on castes and sub-castes are always a fruitful source of contention as there are many users who see them as a sort of private online genealogy and repository of cherished myths of origin. However, I find an article which goes on at so much length about how an early Muslim conqueror was a better ruler to the non-Muslims of Sindh and Punjab than the Hindu Rajas who "oppressed" them highly suspicious. If the Chach-nama is a valid source then it is clearly a hagiography which needs to be used with caution. It is also unlikely that the majority of the population of Punjab would have been Buddhist at that date. We should beware of using modern religious terms too freely when talking about such a distant period, but the heyday of Indian Buddhism was under the Mauryas five hundred years previously. It is much more likely that the people of Punjab (a large proportion of whom would have been nomadic then) followed various local deities which have subsequently been subsumed into Hinduism. I also have my doubts as to whether all Cheemas are now Muslims - most of the major Jat clans have representatives on both sides of the border, and are divided between Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs. I can't claim to be an expert on this period as it's really far too early, but I'll see what I can do. Sikandarji 18:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only history of the Jats the Bodleian has is by Kalikan Raja Qanungo and was published in Calcutta in 1925. I suppose I could have a look at that. Sikandarji 19:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

adab

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:India-Israel_relations#Islamic_Terrorism_.2F_Islamic_Militancy Mustaqbal 02:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tipu sultan

dont vandalise!you said "India did not even exist at the time of Tipu", then how come india was called during 18th century other than hindustan or bharath. If you cant digest it then please dont blow it out! Mujeerkhan 04:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dalit Voice

Sorry, I am pretty clueless in that area. I'd love to learn though. ←Humus sapiens ну? 12:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim Guild POV-pushers trying to get original article deleted to protect their POV Fork

Striver's POV-pushing cohort User:Burgas00 has, in a fit of his POV-pushing zeal, nominated Beit_Hanoun_November_2006_incident for deletion here. The cowardly bad faith POV-pusher wouldn't even sign his own name to the deletion request either. I thought you should be warned of this. RunedChozo 22:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is very incivil for you to remove my message from your page, especially without bothering to give a reply. RunedChozo 22:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry that was a mistake. I was reverting vandalism by another user. Thanks for informing me.Hkelkar 22:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Quite all right, not a problem :) Striking out my earlier bit, since it was an honest mistake. RunedChozo 22:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed your talk page

You might want to see this diff], my guess is it's related to your issues with the Neo-Buddhists. They vandalized your talk page with it from an anonymous IP address. RunedChozo 22:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch :). Hkelkar 22:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dear all, where do you find neo-Buddhists? What is their population? Please also let me know. I want to write about them also. It will be a help from you people contribute to wikipedia. Please help. Ambedkaritebuddhist 11:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suspect images

Hi!

A lot of images uploaded to the Mumbai page to you have suspect licenses.

  1. An image which is licensed under a cc-by-sa-2.5 licence must explicitly state the author's name, the source location and the page where the author has released it under the license.
  2. Although legally valid, it is best that you release a PD license under the same one rather than a cc-by-sa-2.5
  3. Please do not hotlink an image to the source. Always link to a webpage that contains the image.

Please rectify this by next week to prevent your images from being deleted. Thanks and regards, --Anon

Mum

Thank you for moving my userbox. While I write, can I point out that on your user page you describe some Wikipedians as "racists". Also on the page "Countering Systemic Bias in Religion" you referred to some users as "Islamofascists". You know, we should assume good faith of all our fellow editors, so these comments aren't appropriate. It isn't easy to get on with those who have an opposite point of view to our own, but it is essential to do so if the encyclopedia is to be improved. There is a page somewhere, can't find it right now, with "most pointless POV disputes". It is very funny and I would recommend it. Itsmejudith 00:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Assumptions of Bad Faith

Regarding my assumptions of bad faith, you should read #9. BhaiSaab talk 04:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can check all you want, Roy. BhaiSaab talk 04:49, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have to add your edits to the comments section; don't try to make it appear as if Fred put them there. BhaiSaab talk 05:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think BhaiSaab is correct...I think the assertion is supposed to be that of the asserter. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
you can make your own stronger version of the assertion. In many arbcom cases, there are series like : 1 month ban, 2 month ban, 1 year ban....etc, and you sign all the small ones up to the maximum that you want. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:42, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You also said that you "ran out of usernames to choose from." That doesn't mean people necessarily believe you. BhaiSaab talk 05:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hi, Kelkar why did u reverted the sourced contents on Indian Buddhist Movement? I put the link from our beloved and valuable Buddhist Channel. [HKelkar Vandalism]. Be a positive contributor. Shrilankabuddhist 15:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hkelkar, why did you erase the reference I gave from countercurrent.org about Rastriya swyamsevak sangh? You then name it dubivious? You are not even allowing a critical view of sangh pariwar as exisits from different sources. An attempt to saffronise the wikiepedia too? User:Thiru_kk (thiru_kk)17 November 2006

Please don;t waste my time. If you have any issues, raise it in the talk page of the article.Hkelkar 21:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gujarat Death Toll

Thanks a lot for the offer Hkelkar. I'd love to help, and be of any service possible. Being new to wikipedia, i'm just starting to find my feet, and hence, i'm not that experienced. But, i'd be happy to offer you any help needed.

prasad88 22:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Caste

I really know very little about this subject, but historically for all elite Muslim groups nasab or claims to descent from one of the early companions of the Prophet is of great importance. In Central Asia, for instance, such a lineage (normally Yemeni in this instance) is often necessary to establish the spiritual authority of a Khoja or saint and his subsequent descendants and disciples, alongside his own miracles and holy deeds. The practices of Sayyids and other groups claiming arab descent often resemble those of castes when it comes to endogamy, ritual purity etc. In all cases there will be some sort of narrative explaining how the ancestors of the family or descent group came to the region as part of the invading army of whichever Muslim commander it might be, in Central Asia Caliph Umar, in Sindh and Punjab Muhammad bin Qasim. In the Subcontinent this is further complicated by the fact that converted groups tend to maintain their previous caste identities for generations, and will sometimes even continue to intermarry across the religious divide but within caste. This is particularly true of Punjab and the various Jat clans now divided by the border, but one thinks of other groups such as the Rangurs (Muslim Rajputs) in UP. Even though they appear impossible to reconcile these local clan narratives sit quite happily alongside the narratives about descent from the Prophet's companions and early Arab invaders. We have a garbled version of some such myth of origin on the Cheema page at the moment.Sikandarji 22:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Email

For personal reasons I do not wish to engage in emails. Please press me no further on this issue.Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 05:47, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images to be deleted

Please check your upload log for suspect images. I will be deleting them shortly for copyvio. Images posted as a cc-by-sa-2.5 MUST have

  1. A link to the source page where the image resides (not hotlinking to the image)
  2. A link to/transcript of the page where the author has given explicit permission releasing it under a cc-by-sa licence.
  3. The name of the author.

Please comply and let me know which have to be deleted. Thanks! =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrights

Creative commons

All cc versions are not OK for wikipedia. Only the following are valid:

  1. CC-BY-[version]
  2. CC-BY-SA-[version]

Both licences require the author to be credited (BY). The SA licence means that derivatives can only be released under the exact (BY-SA-) licence. You can include a specific version (1.0, 2.0, or 2.5) or all three.

See the above section as to what to do when you upload using a cc licence.

GFDL

This licence is not suited for images if you are the author. Prefer CC-BY-* or dual licence instead. Again, author must be credited, source page be stated, and link to the page where the licence is mentioned should be present on the page.

Dual Licence

The CC licences and GFDL are used together. A person seeking to make a derivative can use either one.

Public Domain

These are free images. The author may not be credited. The source though must be stated for authentication & verification.

Note: All images published in India before 1-1-46 are public domain.

Fair Use

DO NOT UPLOAD. Admins are cracking down on fair use images.

=Licences info

If an image is PD, use PD. Avoid changing the licence. Similarly do not change the licence for others.

=Nichalp «Talk»= 07:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William D

Hi, this is the best that I could do in a hurry. Do check for spelling mistakes and such. Hope it helps.

Freedom skies Send a message to Freedom skies 11:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you needed it for the article ? I thought there was an argument or something (judging by elaborate a criticism). It should'nt be too difficult to make it enclyclopedic enough to add to the article soon. I'll get to it soon enough. Freedom skies Send a message to Freedom skies 11:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

take a look now. [25] Freedom skies Send a message to Freedom skies 11:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I already put a version in the article before your last message. Let me know what you think of it. Freedom skies Send a message to Freedom skies 12:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible POV in article

Hi Hkelkar, I came across an article - Decline of Buddhism in India. It seems to me a very biased and POV-article. There hardly seem to any references at all. And what's that about this views and that views. Do all Indian Buddhists pertain to the view provided in the article ? I seriously doubt it. And the so-called Hindutva view is shared by many other neutral scholars as well. There do not seem to any citations as well. Actually, I have read many neutral articles on this topic and almost everywhere, it agrees with the "Hindutva" view. And that's why I am a little concerned that this article may not be NPOV. You may take a look at it. Bye, keep rockin' --NRS | T/M\B 13:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that SrilankanBuddhist did a real number on it.I suggest you change it back to before he edited it.Hkelkar 14:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

24 hr block for revertwarring on Indian caste system

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

Rama's arrow 13:53, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|The last so-called "revert" of mine was meant to re-insert tags removed by the other user without discussion, an act of vandalism and 3RR should not apply for that.See diff below.}} Hkelkar 14:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See diff [26]

{{unblock reviewed|The last so-called "revert" of mine was meant to re-insert tags removed by the other user without discussion, an act of vandalism and 3RR should not apply for that.See diff below.|decline=The other guy's tag removal wasn't "blatant vandalism", therefore, no exemption from 3RR applies. -- [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] ☼ 18:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)}}[reply]

Image violations

A high majority of your image uploads were copy violations. I have spent a major part of today just deleting these image. Wikipedia is has tightened its policies concerning the uploads of copyrighted media. Please DO NOT upload any more images unless you are WELL AWARE of the copyright licences. Thanks! =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. Goahead and delete the ones that are innappropriately liscensed.Hkelkar 12:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See the reply here. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 11:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ikonoblast

  1. [27]
  2. [28][29][30][31]
  3. [32]

Hkelkar 12:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[33]

Infact I am very busy these days but could not resist to wish you Good day. Before accusing others look at your own contribution on Kancha Ilaiah.All diffs above are my genuine edits. Since I am going off for another 1 week I wd like you to present diffs in which you changed Votebank to votebanal (I don't know what it means) and CPI(marxist) to CPI(Maoist) any rationale for that too? Hope to meet you after 1wk . Ikon |no-blast 12:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hope the arbcom result would be out by next week. Wish you good luck. BYE. Ikon |no-blast 13:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block expired

{{unblock-auto|1=70.113.118.27|2=Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Hkelkar". The reason given for Hkelkar's block is: "3RR and revert warring on Indian caste system".|3=Rama's Arrow}}

My block expired but ip is autoblocked. Hkelkar 13:10, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Medieval sources are considered primary sources, so please avoid using them. Also, BhaiSaab is using the most respected academic sources, so if all of them say something it should be true. --Aminz 00:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comic relief.BhaiSaab and "respected academic sources". I needed the laugh.Hkelkar 00:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Oh, my mistake. I thought this book "Mohammad Habib & Afsar 'Umar Salim Khan, The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate (Including a translation of Ziauddin Barani's Fatawa-i Jahandari Circa 1358-9 A.D.), p.97-98" was written in 1358-9. Please specify the date of publication, the publisher, ISBN, etc etc. Also, one needs to show that the book is peer-reviewed (that is it is published through a university press or a press that particularly publishes academic sources). --Aminz 00:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The paper you've linked seems reliable but I don't have access to it. I wanted to check how this book is quoted in the article. It really matters. And I would like to see what exactly that book says. But that's my job to check :) --Aminz 00:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great if you can. Thanks --Aminz 00:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should know that Hkelkar only probably considers Hinduunity.org a reliable source - not much else, even if it's the Encyclopedia of Islam or Brittanica. BhaiSaab talk 01:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Muslim Caste system is an influence of Indian Caste system. No such thing has ever been observed in any other land. Please correct me if I am wrong. Some, as one expects, might have tried to reconcile it with Islam. But that's not the influence of Islam but influence of Hindu culture. Still we need to check the sources and see how they express it. --Aminz 01:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hkelkar contends that there is a Yemeni caste system, but that still doesn't negate the possibility of Muslims being influenced elsewhere. You can read what sources express here. BhaiSaab talk 01:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not just yemen, but also Central Asia and Nigeria.Hkelkar 01:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
He hasn't provided any sources for Central Asia or Nigeria. BhaiSaab talk 01:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I will soon.Hkelkar 01:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You might or might not do that, but the sources will have to provide an explicit counter-statement about Indian Muslims to the sources I've provided on the talk page. If you take the sources to say "well this sources states that there are castes in so-and-so country so I conclude the Muslims in India have castes that are independent of Hinduism", that would be original research that directly contradicts reliable sources. BhaiSaab talk 01:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to make it precise that what we mean by *influence*. Does the influence means that the caste system started with Islam? Does it mean that some Muslims, or converts from Hinduism, invented theories in an attempt to reconcile Islam with Caste system and then those theories influenced some later Muslims? That's the point. If those theories influenced people, then it is not Islam, it is those theories. --Aminz 01:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please add the page number for the source you added. --Aminz 02:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I saw it. --Aminz 02:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that the book isn't written by "Muhammad Baqir Najm-i Sani, Sajida Sultana Alvi" and published by SUNY press. In any case, it seems to be a reliable source. I however want to read that page (p.116 BTW) more carefully. --Aminz 02:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re urgent

I've replied on my talk page. =Nichalp «Talk»= 23:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

;

You don;t seem to get it either. [34] BhaiSaab talk 08:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I sent you an email. BhaiSaab talk 16:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a facebook account? BhaiSaab talk 17:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand you don't want to communicate offline - actually I see now that you do have a facebook account. I have sent you a message. Just tell me here on Wikipedia what it states, even if you don't want to respond. Surely, your messages on facebook aren't "sent to dev/null." BhaiSaab talk 17:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's proof enough that you got my message but it's hardly harassment. I will stop contacting you. BhaiSaab talk 18:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind answering my questions about cold atoms? BhaiSaab talk 18:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A book does not tell me a student's personal experience with this type of research and I know of no one in my area that does the same. I would appreciate it. Thanks. BhaiSaab talk 18:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bhaisaab plz see WP:STALK, its amazing how your pov-pushing has gone from wikipedia to Yahoo and now Facebook. You seriously gotta be kidding me with this bakwaas. Hkelkar you never should have given out ur real name, amazingly dumb mistake on ur part. Bakaman Bakatalk 18:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:STALK states nothing about this. And Hkelkar, thanks for the intro. BhaiSaab talk 18:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[35]. BhaiSaab talk 18:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Buddhist Movement

The edits are about present Buddhist situation in India. Don't revert sourced edits. Shrilankabuddhist 17:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

I sincerely apologize to Wikipedia and to you for making a provacative statement. The use of the phrase "I double dog dare you" in my edit summary to the Indian Buddhist Revival Talk page was in poor judgement. I assure you and Wikipedia that I won't make such comments again.

Sincerely, NinaEliza 19:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vedas

Kindly keep an eye on Vedas, Vedic Sanskrit and Rigveda. There are editors who will substitute text from authorities like Max Muller with those whom they prefer, irrespective of the Wikipedia standards. Thank You. Freedom skies 19:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: ArbComm

Not at all, you're welcome! I've been waiting in the wings to offer assistance when the case was taken be somebody else. Thanks - Martinp23 20:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility warning

Stay WP:CIVIL. [36]. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 12:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw some of your earlier comments here. I suggest you calm down; mocking Arbitrators will not help you out one bit. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 12:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The same applies to TerryJ-Ho as well. His provocative comments need to stop.Hkelkar 13:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
TerryJ-Ho has been civil throughout the proceedings on that page. If he hasn't, you are welcome to present the diffs. Comments like this are seen as disruption. Please take this as your last warning. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 13:09, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This (summary)[37]
Comments like this, discussing political motivations, are irrelevant and disruptive to boot.[38]
There's more if you look carefully Hkelkar 13:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have notified Terry regarding this, and I believe that he will take it in good light. As far as I see, you have been provocating him to get this response. So be careful. Further such edits will not be entertained and will result in preventive blocks being handed out. Regards, — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 13:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

{{unblock reviewed|I do not think your indefblock of me is justified as the user in question (BhaiSaab) was harrassing me off wikipedia by calling my lab and my supervisor.Nonetheless, I promise to discontinue such remarks if you unblock me. See the diff posted below|decline=declined for now, as pending appreciation here. -- Húsönd 00:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)}}[reply]

diff.Hkelkar 00:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note to admins - Hkelkar was being stalked by BhaiSaab.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
information Note: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar/Workshop#Unblock - all four ArbCommers have been notified as to this proposed temp. injunction. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 00:24, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I ask that my statement be taken into consideration. Whether or not this affects the validity of the block, I'm not sure. Thanks. BhaiSaab talk 00:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, BhaiSaab. At the very least, there was room for misunderstanding here, and I have asked Nakontari to unblock. I strongly urge you to stop trying to contact Hkelkar in real life, as that is obviously being negatively perceived. Thatcher131 00:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, I have legitimate reasons to be afraid of his attempts. Reasons that I should not discuss on wikipedia. Hkelkar 00:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would urge Hkelkar to provide more evidence of BhaiSaab's wikistalking and to take preventative measures before he is stalked again. Wikipedia should be a place to build an encyclopedia, not a site of perpetual fear of stalking by POV-pushers.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:53, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, BhsiSaab basically admitted to it all [39] Hkelkar 00:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William Dalrymple

The last time I saw it, it was edited by someone very bizzarely, someone who did not even care to attach the paranthesis ([]) to the links properly. I was preoccupied with many projects at the time so I did not edit it then. In any event, I'll take a look into the article now. Freedom skies (send a message to Freedom skies)


Hclintontx

Right now, this looks like a content dispute. I'm happy to block him if he remains disruptive, but now it's too early. His messages on your userpage could simply be a newbie take on where his message belonged and it looks like he doesn't know how things work here. Please point him to relevant policies first. - Mgm|(talk) 21:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so glad were finally working together!

I'm really glad you've buried the hatchet with me and decided to work positively on this article. I would love to hear what you have to say about the books I posted on Talk:Indian Buddhist Revival. I understand that you're busy with school right now from your post on the talk page - no worries! I'm just glad you're willing to look into them and not pan them outright.

In truth, I agree with you - Dhammafriend probably has socks in the other two users you mention here [[40]]. I noticed you've already done the leg work in exposing them. If you like, I would be happy to support in an RFCU to put your (our?) troubles to end. If you don't want to do it yourself (considering your case), I would be happy to do it for you. Just say the word.

It looks from the above post that Hclintonx might also be giving you a hard time. In all liklihood, he's a sock as well. I'll go check him/her out and see what I can find.

I was actually going to leave Wikipedia for good until you posted[[41]]. I'm thankful that I posted a response on talk page before I did. I was really discouraged.

Sincerely, NinaEliza 06:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! User:Hclintonx is a suspected sock

I checked out Hclintonx for you, and he IS a suspected sock, but the template isn't going to the right place somehow. Check it out for yourself. I was going to get you the list of suspected socks, or the puppetmaster, but when I click on the links they lead to almost empty pages. I've never been to the RFCU page, but I would think there would be a long list of suspected sockpuppets because all the other noticboards have TONS in them. Let me know what you think. NinaEliza 07:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC) Dang it, the link doesn't work. I'm afraid I need to sit down and have a good read at the tutorial on this. This is the only way I can do it:[[42]]. Sorry about that - maybe you can help me with links in the future...NinaEliza 07:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't get a chance to look at the link you provided, but good job anyhow! I still think we should do an RFCU on Dhammafriend though. Anyway...

Sorry it took me so long to respond - I had to make myself something to eat. Just so you know, I went ahead and posted to someone on WikiProject India about Indian Buddhist Movement to ask them if WikiProject India might want to participate. I hope you don't mind :). I don't know what they'll say - perhaps nothing.

Anyway, great job on the Kerlanji Massacre article! I hope a lot more people read it besides me soon and appreciate your initial efforts and hard work. I added some sources to the talk page - check them out!

It looks like you're off to bed. I'm off too! NinaEliza 11:09, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Vandalism'

Sorry, didnt mean to delete your post. Must have happened in error. (It was a single word.) Do try not to use the word 'vandalism' when you're already under attack? Hornplease 12:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh WP isnt, but it looks to me like your RfArb is, a little. Hornplease 12:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian caste system

There's a caste sytem project if you're interested.--D-Boy 18:26, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William Dalrymple

I have removed material from William Dalrymple that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.

In regard to the 'Controversies' section, this was highly critical material presented as fact in a non-neutral manner - dependent on only one source.--Docg 19:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can't put in negative commentary on the guy as factual, based on one sources' report of what he said. Discuss this on the talk page and don't insert it again. We take WP:BLP very seriously. --Docg 23:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(moved from Doc's talk page)Please have a look at Narendra Modi hwere the same thing is being done by multiple editors for months (I have removed some of the more egregious BLP violations).Hkelkar 23:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So, what you are saying is that you were aware of WP:BLP, that you've objected to violations on other articles, and yet you violate it here. Behave, before you are blocked from this site.--Docg 00:01, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(moved again)I see. So one standard for Indians, other standard for Europeans. I'll remember this.Hkelkar 00:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No. You don't knowingly breach WP:BLP, period. I'd care whether you are black, white, male or female; I don't care what your ethnicity, sexuality, or favourite Spice Girl is; and most of all I'm not interested in what the other guy did. You don't knowingly break it, or you'll be blocked 'till hell freezes over. Now, remember that.--Docg 00:12, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(replied on Doc glasgow's talk page). Hkelkar 00:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hkelkar/Archive_7&oldid=1146564364"