User talk:Rama's Arrow
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Poll finds people think Wikipedia "somewhat reliable"
- Wikipedia biographical errors attract more attention
- Association of Members' Advocates nominated for deletion
- Reference desk work leads to New York Times correction
- WikiWorld comic: "Charles Lane"
- News and notes: Alexa, Version 0.5, attribution poll
- Wikipedia in the news
- Features and admins
- Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- The Report on Lengthy Litigation
| WikiDefcon |
 WikiDefcon 3: Significantly elevated levels of vandalism from shared IPs and experimenting users. |
| [] |
|
Watchlist has been fixed! Still lots of vandalism showing up on recent changes so be vigilant. -- Hdt83 Chat 00:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
| Can You Feel The Heat Rama's Arrow |
||
| A Few Drops of Rain · CHEAT2WIN | ||
| Work | ||
|---|---|---|
| 21,000 Edits | ||
| My Pictures · Nirav's Edits | ||
| Communicator | ||
| Post a Message · 2006-A · 2006-B · 2007-A (Open) | ||
| Research | ||
| Dholavira · Nanotechnology | ||
| Hinduism · MEMS | ||
| Dinosaurs · Economics | ||
| Toolbox | ||
| CSD · ANI · FAC | ||
| Cleanup · Reference Desk | ||
| Commendations | ||
| Dogtags | ||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume II, Issue 1 - January 2007
|
|
|
accusations
What are you accusing me of? A troll(or more correctly a sock/meatpuppet) starts destoying the work of 3 descent editors and you accuse me.If you dont like my edits then we should get a neutral admin to deal with this.I was enraged by the comments you made on the Pakistan discussion page.If you don't like my style of editing then,let's ask a neutral party to intervine.
Blocking every single user you disagree with will only bring more attention to this issue in my opinion.Nadirali نادرالی
It is incivil of you to accuse me so randomly and without basing your accusations on any evidence.Please see wikipedia no personal attacks policy.Comment on my edits not on my ethnicity or personality.Nadirali نادرالی
Re:Arbcom
We are ready to deal with this.I must ask Fowler and Islescape as witnesses to this.I have evidence not just against you,but the others as well.I feel you made the right decision as this is the only way to resolve this. I am leaving now.I must go for lunch.--Nadirali نادرالی
I have posted my statement.Let's see what you have to throw at us.--Nadirali نادرالی
my alleged attack on Muhajirs
How can you accuse me of attacking Muhajirs when I AM a Muhajir from my father's side.My father is a Muhajir of Azerbaijani ancestry from his mother's side.Therefor he is of Azerbaijani descent born in what is today india. I still stand by my claims that I dislike their mentality of being too conservitive.I once had a Greek tutor who would repeatidly attack his people because he felt they were too arrogant.Does that make him an "anti-Greek".
If you think my comments were attacking Muhajirs,then atleast you can call me a "self-hating Muhajir" rather than an "anti-Muhajir" which is quite ridiculous and somewhat quite laughable :-)--Nadirali نادرالی
Who said I cared about DaGizza's background? If you're reffering to the comment I made on the history of India talkpage,he asked me to post if I regarded him as Pakistani or not and even posted on my talkpage to make sure I'd see his question on the talkpage.
As for my comments regarding the Muhajirs,I commented on the typical Muhajir mentality and the recent terrorism commited by the MQM.And I still stand on my claim the aticle is biased which is why I put the NPOV check on it. It's called commenting on content,not contributers
The reason why we're at arbcom is not because we're disrupting you're agenda.I really don't think we'd be there at this moment if you had not seen Unre4L and I pointing out your abuse of wikipedia as an admin.
Also stop telling me about "giving around my background".I did that for a reason to rebuff your silly accusions about "attacking Muhajirs".--Nadirali نادرالی
Really? Then is it a coincidence that the case was opened roughly 16 minitues after my complaint of your conduct and that 3 users (Unre4L,Fowler and I) agree on that factor.
Tell me does criticising people for being too religious attacking anyone's religion? The only "evidence" you seem to have is words by us twisted to suit your alligations.
I've seen many of the comments you've made to Unre4L and Szhaider as well as Fowler and I find them nowhere close to civility.I really think you should apologise to them.You've apologised to Fowler,but not Unre4L or Szhaider.Now if you'll excuse me there's some articles I'd like to work on.--Nadirali نادرالی
Pakistani civilization
I wrote the article.Don't chase Unre4L,I wrote it.
I don't see who it's hurting as it's an important part of our history.--Nadirali نادرالی
Regarding reverting edits of Kazi Nazrul Islam Page
Dear Rama Arrow,
Peace and greetings.
This is Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq. I am a Nazrul researcher and I maintain the only comprehensive website dedicated to the life and works of Nazrul. Indeed, the resources at the site were extensively used and referred to in putting together the Wikipedia article on Nazrul. My own writings on Nazrul have also been included in the reference section of the essay.
Recently, while going through the Wikipedia article, I came across a particular information that is uncorroborated. Indeed, the particular reference given is not even accessible. Based on three leading biographies of Nazrul and additional research (that does not contradict the information provided in these biographies), I edited the part related to Nazrul's illness and treatment and added specific, corroborated information (including about the physicians who examined Nazrul and their diagnosis). It seems all my edits have been reverted by you.
Since you have contributed so much to this page, obviously you have interest in this article. I am wondering if you can help me understand your reason to revert it. After all, if you care about Nazrul, I am sure you will like to have accurate information about him. Furthermore, as a Wikipedia contributor, we all must have interest in improving the pedia through better research and works.
I would greatly appreciate if you can help me understand your decision to revert my edits.
I can also be directly contacted at farooqm@globalwebpost.com.
Best regards.
======================
Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq Associate Professor of Economics and Finance Director, Institute of Entrepreneurial Studies Upper Iowa University, USA Owner/Webmaster: Kazi Nazrul Islam Page [2]
Intervol
Hi there, I was wondering under what grounds the article 'Intervol' was deleted by you? It may not have had references as yet but it is a constitution certified member of one of the largest and most well-respected universities in England. The page is useful as it gives readers of the main university of birmingham page more information if they want it. Please could I have a copy of the page so that I can correctly reference it and then re-include it. I would have much preferred some constructive criticism and help rather than a quiet removal. Is your role to simply remove the unreferenced material again and again or to teach people how to correctly assemble pages?
Thank you for your time.
CaiHeath 20:59 GMT March 10th
152.216.11.5 block
This is a shared IP address of thousands of users. Next time, do a soft-block. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 152.216.11.5 (talk) 14:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC).
WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume II, Issue 2 - March 2007
|
|
|
Admin action requested
I need an uninvolved admin to look into this : [5].
Thanks. --Ragib 22:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Nirav, I have gone through your talks with Dab regarding his creation of Hindutva pseudoscience. Dab has created this article and it clearly gives false impression about Hinduism ( even for scholar like Vivekananda ). Dab is asking you to write Oppostion to Marxists etc. regarding Hinduism from `peer reviewed articles'. But, he writes anything which may not be `peer reviwed' & just his denigrating nature. And, what's peer reviewed as him ? It means belonging to his gang. Dab is trying to redirect N.Kazanas to OIT because he is not worthy to have an article. His motives are clear to me. Oppose strongly to Dab. He is rude and behaves in Dictator like mode. I have seen his many contributions to WP regarding India, and he is found to push typical colonial era type of his views ( denigrate India in what so ever way - is his motto ). Oppose him strongly.
I am getting similar opposition ( or threat to ban me ) for Sarasvati river, Indo Aryan Migration and Indus Valley civilization. I think that Indians should oppose deletions of well ref. points which gives India centric understanding and not western eyed one. You are an admin. and you can oppose this in a better way. WIN 06:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- I have been threatened as well, and dab's definition of trolling seems to be like Szhaider (talk • contribs) talking. See this where he claims I troll on Hindutva related articles. I had no idea removing anti-Hindu polemic and demanding reliable sources (dab sourced a couple of blogs) was trolling.Bakaman 16:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
The reason why I am strongly against Dab , is because of his dictator like behaviour. That's all. He is not understanding that throwing a stone from his glass house will naturally have consequences.So, he should stop blaming other editors & or even scholars with his denigrating style. I am against this. WIN 06:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Yahya01
No trouble at all, if he's been causing more disruption, let's make sure the point gets across. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I adviced him to avoid this kind of behaviour, but alas he didn't listen.Anyway for how long he has been blocked for.User talk:Yousaf465 03:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the information.I will follow your advice.User talk:Yousaf465 03:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello, some help please
Hello Rama's Arrow,
I placed some requests in WP:ANI and WP:Requested Moves. But nothing has been done. Since you frequently edit in India-related articles, I thought I'd ask you to take a look at it. Basically a vandal moved around a bunch of articles; I moved them back (what I could) but one of them is un-movable and requires an admin's help. Also his account seems to be mainly used just for vandalism. My request as WP:ANI is here and the one at WP:RM is here. This is the first time I am making a request like this on WP:ANI and WP:RM so I have no idea of the timeline. But requests posted after mine seemed to have been acted on, so that's why I am asking. Thanks! --vi5in[talk] 23:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your quick reply! I will go ahead and request some help on [[WT:INB] regarding the content disputes. --vi5in[talk] 23:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- My userpage seems to be alright, but going through his contribs reveals that he's made a terrible mess of things. For example, the Talk:Nair page has been moved to Nair:Talk and I can't move it. back. I'll go through and compile a list of stuff that's messed up and see if I can fix stuff. If not, I'll put it on WP:RM. Thanks for your help! --vi5in[talk] 17:02, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Haha! Alright, I'll go and do that. What I'm able to fix, I am fixing. --vi5in[talk] 17:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Your edit to Vali vidungo
Your recent edit to Vali vidungo (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 04:40, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Help from admin!
I am fairly green when it comes to Wiki help. This person http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Drbluff, continues to vandalize the Tyler Hansbrough article with unsubstantiated rumors. Could you please help? Thanks Ebtunc2006 04:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey
Hey it seems this user has made a huge mess they have moved pages not sure if its vandalism, [6] Lakers 04:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Ah that was really fast, thank you. Lakers 04:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
My RfA
Thank you for your support in my recent successful RfA.--Anthony.bradbury 10:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Peer review/Shahbag
I have just put the article to peer review. Would you care to take a look? Aditya Kabir 20:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Your message
No, putting a notice on the User page, at which most people don't look, is not the same as putting a notice on the Talk page (as required by the Blocking Instructions), where everybody looks when they're thinking of warning or blocking someone. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- You disagree that a notice on the User page isn't the same as a notice on the Talk page? Peculiar. You disagree thata notice on the Talk page is required by the Blocking Instructions? It's there in black and white (black and pale blue). You disagree that people who go to warn someone go to the Talk page rather than the User page? Ask around; I think that you'll find that you're on your own. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- It's worrying that you either can't or won't understand the point I'm making. The notice isn't just there for the user — it's a courtesy to other editors. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
This has been discussed at length at WP:AN. It's not just for the User; it lets editors, and especially other admins, know what's happening, so that they don't leave pointless warnings to a blocked user, or go through half the blocking process (as I did here) before discovering that the vandal has already been blocked. Courtesy, that's the watchword. If you choose not to be courteous, that's up to you — but don't complain if others mention the fact. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Podcast summary
Hey there, now that a new edition of the podcast has been published, I thought I'd check how many times our edition had been downloaded... According to the statistics there have been 546 individual downloads in various formats! That's pretty impressive I think. I recomend you check out some of the comments there (I've you havn't already, they're all very supportive of what you guys are up to. Thanks for coming on the show, and I hope to see you 'round the wiki. Witty lama 14:40, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Hindutva Propaganda AfD
Hi. Is it fair to assume that you would have no comment on this timeline? rudra 18:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- (replying to your response, for which thanks): Your warnings need not be friendly. I didn't ask whether you had a comment. I asked whether you would have one. I assumed that, as an experienced admin, you had noticed that the version being discussed in the debate following Sarvagnya (talk • contribs)'s vote was the version established, after the AfD had started, by people who had voted to delete. It followed that the spectacle of discussing a version not prefered by those voting to keep did not strike you as in any way incongruous or worthy of comment. Pardon me for being surprised -- I had high hopes for Wikipedia at one time -- but I just wanted to make sure. I shouldn't have bothered, and I apologise. rudra 20:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Just for the record, my view which I have stated on the AfD doesnt stem merely from the lines I quoted. It has to do with the article in its totality and infact, host of other related articles. Infact, on taking a closer look at the history, the lead in this version by dab reads just as bad if not worse. Infact, I hardly see any difference between this and the one I quoted on AfD. The article is more comentary and less facts. Kak and Frawley dont become flagbearers of anything or anybody simply because Witzel and Sokal accuse them of being so. Sarvagnya 07:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- I was wondering if a PhD in biotech [7] who is not a tenured academic professor in any field is quotable on Hindutva propaganda. RAther it seems Meera Nanda is quite similar therefore to User:Hkelkar in that regard, both have Ph.D.'s and nothing else.Bakaman 23:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- As I just said elsewhere, a possible difference is if one has published peer-reviewed work, and/or by reliable academic publishers with editorial oversight, and the other hasnt. In which case one meets RS and isnt FRINGE, and the other is. Not saying this is the case, haven't checked. Hornplease 09:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- I was wondering if a PhD in biotech [7] who is not a tenured academic professor in any field is quotable on Hindutva propaganda. RAther it seems Meera Nanda is quite similar therefore to User:Hkelkar in that regard, both have Ph.D.'s and nothing else.Bakaman 23:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Just for the record, my view which I have stated on the AfD doesnt stem merely from the lines I quoted. It has to do with the article in its totality and infact, host of other related articles. Infact, on taking a closer look at the history, the lead in this version by dab reads just as bad if not worse. Infact, I hardly see any difference between this and the one I quoted on AfD. The article is more comentary and less facts. Kak and Frawley dont become flagbearers of anything or anybody simply because Witzel and Sokal accuse them of being so. Sarvagnya 07:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Interesting
Yur fan club keeps increasing! Amey Aryan DaBrood© 20:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, I see that I'm not the only who's noticed this. I suggest that, first, you read properly what I said on someone else's Talk page (which you were astonishingly quick to spot; is it on your Watchlist? Why? You appear to have had no interaction with him). Secondly, calm down, or you might well find yourself blocked for incivility.
- I'm taking this to WP:AN/I to see what others think of it. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Zia2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Zia2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Signature
I just noticed and got a good laugh out of your signature but I was wondering if you have a source for that claim as it might violate WP:BLP. Just kidding. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC) It appears that User:Teke deleted Mamacita so I will have to take your word for that, WP:AFG. Kind of interested in "pretty sisters and best friends of former mamacitas". CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Re: Your comments at my talk page
I've replied to Duck's allegations at: WP:ANI#Disruptive_comments. I suggest you take a closer look at the background of an issue before dropping CIV warnings to long-term Wikipedians.--LeflymanTalk 03:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- There was no "retaliation" or "tit for tat" -- I've been civil, if increasingly annoyed, in the face of Duck's continued intransigence to following Wikipedia policy. Asking, "Could you perhaps explain what your purpose in editing here is, as apart from an early interest in pseudoscience, nearly all the contributions you have made since last month are connected to the topic of how Wikipedia sucks" is hardly a personal attack. It's entirely appropriate to question whether someone's intentions in editing are to pursue a purpose outside of making Wikipedia better -- which Duck's disruptive edits are not doing. The worst that may be said is that I have violated WP:AGF, by hinting that his behaviour may be intentionally malicious; however as pointed out there, "This guideline does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of evidence to the contrary..."
- I'm also familiar with DR, and will pursue the appropriate course, if needed. Thanks, --LeflymanTalk 03:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Majorly's RfB
Hi Rama's arrow, thanks for your kind support in my RfB. Sadly, it didn't pass, but I appreciate the support, and I do intend to run again eventually. See you around! Majorly (o rly?) 03:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Jinnah
Dear Rama,
I do appreciate the work you've put in on Jinnah article.
I have a few questions:
1. On the Jinnah article, it is well known that Jinnah was called the best ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity and was called this by many Indian nationalist leaders... and a book "Ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity: Jinnah's early Politics" by Ian Bryant Wells was quoted as a reference... why then have you called it a "POV" edit? I would request that you please restore it.
2. You've removed the dubious tag. I have given a reason for it on the talk page. Please see it. Kindly quote a source to show that Jinnah supported the war effort in WW1 .... indeed the irony of history is that Jinnah supported the British in WW2 while Gandhi supported them in WW1 thus travelling diametrically opposite between the wars.
3. The book by Sarojini Naidu is "Advocate of Hindu-Muslim Unity". I know because I actually found a copy in a university's library on the West Coast of the US.
In response to your comments on my page: My response: Dear Rama... I am not going to push this issue... but I'll say this I am not aware of a book on Maulana Azad but it must have been later on as a response to the fact that Jinnah had been repeatedly described as such... in any event, as far as I am aware, Jinnah was the only politician who was known by this name... and if it was used in a book on Azad, it definitely did not catch the popular imagination as all biographies on Azad fail to mention this. The book I quoted "Ian Bryant Wells' Ambassador of Hindu Muslim unity: Jinnah's early politics" is a good resource to have. PS: As an analogy - one may say that to call Gandhi "Mahatma" is POV because many others have been called Mahatma (Great Soul). Whereas we know that this term is often used as a stand alone for Gandhiji. Similarly mentioning that Jinnah is called "Quaid-e-Azam" (Great leader) because the term is said to have been used for Ch. Rahmat Ali as well by his followers in the rival Pakistan National Movement, even though the term Quaid-e-Azam is used as a stand alone for Jinnah sahab just like Mahatma for Gandhiji.Teabing-Leigh 14:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Also please note that the body of the article makes no reference to Jinnah being called "Ambassador" of Hindu Muslim unity... which you said was what you were reverting to. Secondly you removed the All India Reports citation for Tilak Sedition case... now how was that on? Teabing-Leigh 14:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
