User talk:Ghanadar galpa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Dear user Ghanadar galpa, I have asked you to answer to the points I have mentioned there in the human rights in India talk page. Please see that and answer there. Otolemur crassicaudatus 06:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I have. Ghanadar galpa 06:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I have already recieved a warning about personal attack on you, see this [1] and I have also replied to that, see this [2]. You also don't attck me personally as you did here[3]. Here you commented on me "Repeating the same flawed arguments to the point of tedium seem to be the user's forte". Comment on the edit, not on the editor. If I have commented on you, that was my mistake. I will be very careful about this. You also attacked me personally here[4]. You commented about me "it is YOU whose trying to blackwash India with all your bogus articles". Again telling don't comment on the editor. I will not comment on you, and you also stop making comment on me and attacking me personally. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks warning[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Nishkid64 (talk) 18:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Please do not retaliate to personal attacks by making your own personal attacks. Nishkid64 (talk) 18:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

IP vandal[edit]

Unfortunately, this person seems to have a frequently changing IP address, and there is nothing we can do about that except block them.   jj137 23:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I protected the first three articles you said and the last one for vandalism; the fourth one I don't think had enough recent vandalism to justify protection. If vandalism keeps up on any of those articles, let me know and I'll take care of it.   jj137 23:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pakistanphobia[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, Pakistanphobia, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistanphobia. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 20:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Indophobia[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, Indophobia, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indophobia. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits[edit]

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button Button sig2.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 22:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:IP vandal is back[edit]

I gave the user a warning, and I'll block him if it continues; since he is the only one causing trouble, I can't protect the article.   jj137 23:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I will.   jj137 02:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Libel warning[edit]

Libelling living people as anti-semites, neo-Nazis as you did here [5] is against WP:LIVING, which applies to talk pages. Editors are entitled to remove such material when it violates these rules. Please engage in a discussion that is productive and within Wikipedia rules.--Conjoiner (talk) 18:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

3RR rule[edit]

Dear Ghanadar galpa, please be advised about WP:3RR rule. You violated it today in article Red Terror, and you can be blocked if anyone reports you to administrators. Please be more careful in the future.Biophys (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry my understanding is that 3Rr does not apply while reverting vandalism. Mass blanking of well-sourced content is clearly vandalistic, as was being done by CPI(M) members in the Red Terror article. Please elaborate.Ghanadar galpa (talk) 01:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
If you report this to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, an administrator will not consider this to be a vandalism. He will consider this a "content dispute". Vandalism is very narrowly defined. With regard to 3RR violations, an administrator would likely block you both, and you do not need this. I understand you have certain POV. That is fine. Many people here have strong opinions. Then try to create new article(s) on the subject. I think that your struggle in Red Terror is simply unproductive. Sorry. Biophys (talk) 04:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Please also follow this good advise[6]. It is fine if you want to promote your POV (everyone has POVs) as long as your contributions are sourced. But if you have to make a comment, then discuss only the subject (content, contributions), but not WP contributors. Making any personal comments with regard to WP contributors will only harm you and your cause, as this will be used in any blocks, RfC or arbitrations against you. Just tell nothing about WP contributors (no matter if this is a person or a group), unless you comment in an RfC about a person or in arbitration.Biophys (talk) 16:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
You think that reporting an IP vandal will justify your 3RR violation? Yes, I can see that you restored sourced text and deleted highly POV and unsourced text. But WP "justice" is not perfect. Last time I have made such report, a vandal repeatedly blanked the entire page. Still, he was not blocked. My advice: try to minimize the number of reverts you are doing. Instead, make some modifications in the text to improve it.Biophys (talk) 18:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


You have violated 3RR again. Please revert yourself or you will almost certainly be blocked from editing WP. Relata refero (talk) 14:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

That's not how it works. If you don't revert immediately, you'll be reported. Relata refero (talk) 15:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


How about an article titled Massacres committed by CPI(M). Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 04:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Nanoor massacre, 1982 Bijon Setu massacre, Chhoto Angaria massacre all will be within its scope. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 09:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


Nuvola apps important.svg You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Indophobia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

hello. Regarding your allegation in my talk page that I am "edit-warring", I should like you to look at WP:TROLL a little more closely and evaluate the actions of the ip(s) in question on that basis. The ip in question has been evading blocks and engaging in trolling on talk pages. I have made numerous complaints to WP:AIV regarding this (and would be happy to supply you with diffs if you wish). A simple glance at the talk page of Indophobia will demonstrate that a number of well established editors are developing a consensus as to the article, and the ip in question is reverting against said consensus. If you have doubts about the trollish nature of the ip and wish to look into the matter further, I can supply you with a diffs showing the ips history of vandalism, POV-pushing, misrepresentation of sources and prejudices disruption. Thank you.Ghanadar galpa (talk) 19:08, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
The IP has been likewise warned. However, I have looked over the contributions, and this is not a case of clear-cut vandalism. This is a content dispute, plain and simple. You, as well as the IP, are in clear violation of the 3 revert rule. Disruptive users do not create a 3RR exception. Please seek other methods of resolution besides edit warring. - Revolving Bugbear 19:13, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
After re-reviewing the dispute, this is clearly not vandalism, but a content dispute. I have raised the level of protection to full protection. I STRONGLY advise you seek out alternate means of dispute resolution, as described at WP:DR. A few good places to start include WP:RFC and WP:3O. Please avoid bandying about accusations of vandalism where they clearly do not exist. 19:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Please see this page as it evolves over the next few days regarding the block evading ip User:Ghanadar_galpa/ip-vandal Ghanadar galpa (talk) 20:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Your concern is duly noted. I suggest you pursue dispute resolution. - Revolving Bugbear 20:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
How can I pursue any reasonable discourse with a block-evading sock who declares me "intrinsically biased" because of my nationality? Ghanadar galpa (talk) 20:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
With all due respect, that's why it's called "dispute resolution" and not "we already agree resolution". I've seen -- and resolved -- much more extreme cases before. In any case, edit warring is not tolerated no matter what the circumstances. It would be in your best interest to either find a peaceable solution or to walk away. Keeping a dirty deed list is not likely to help. - Revolving Bugbear 20:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I would like to reiterate what Bugbear has said... Please seek a way to achieve consensus. Building a case to "punish" another user for edits you do not like is surely to go poorly for you. Seek consensus first; if your "version" of the article is favored by a preponderance of neutral, uninvolved editors, you may have something; however unless and until that happens, this is still an open dispute, and by the edits you have cited, neither you not the anonymous editor(s) you are in dispute with has established any moral high ground. Admins are not interested in solving content disputes; however we will stop edit-warring and open disruption regardless of where it comes from. I still take no stand over which side of this debate is in the right, however you can be right and still be disruptive. Please be aware of that. 21:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Im giving sources with valid data why am i being blocked the biased against pakistanis need to stop while indians are running a mock on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Comment on my talk page[edit]

"Could you get involved as a mediator in Talk:Indophobia if you can spare the time? Actually. Most of the regularly involved editors (incl myself) are slowly reaching consensus and agreement. It's only the anon who drops by every now and then and disrupts the process..."

I would love to help, but I am not very well versed in the art of mediation, and as I have been involved already, I feel uncomfortable taking that particular role. Two places you can ask for help in finding a mediator (and both are VERY helpful) are: the Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal, which is an informal group of editors who will volunteer to help mediate disputes, and the Wikipedia:Mediation Committee, which is a formal, official group of mediators and much more rigourous. I have used both, and they are both great. Read their pages I have provided, and contact them directly. They are very helpful. If you need any more help, please feel free to drop me a note on my talk page. 02:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

SSP case[edit]

Re [[Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets#User:Blodhol], there are likely more, please file an WP:RFCU code G. RlevseTalk 02:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

2001-2002 India Pakistan Conflict[edit]

Hi Ghanadar, in re your recent rv of the user's post, please note that we can't blanket revert people's posts based on WP:BLP, which applies primarily to Wikipedia articles and not so much the corresponding talk pages. I have however, added a warning on the user's talk page telling him/her to refrain and except to get blocked if these sort of racial attacks continue. Thanks AreJay (talk) 17:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


We will take to Mediation if you want .It needs to be written in a neutral point of view.For example EVR was the President of the Madras(Tamil Nadu)Presidency Congress .He left the party due to differences within the Congress leadership over caste reforms after they refused to support his reforms for caste based reforms .Nowhere it is mentioned that he left the party to the aryan Invasaion checked all the references

Simply no Good references All others seem to support Periyar's viewpoint .Please go through them Baka before speaking All the references against Periyar are not online and clearly debatable

Sara Dickey,"The politics of adulation in South India", Journal of Asian Studies Vol 52 No 2 (1993) pages 340-372 ^ a b Lloyd I. Rudolph Urban Life and Populist Radicalism: Dravidian Politics in Madras The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 20, No. 3 (May, 1961), pp. 283-297 ^ Lloyd I. Rudolph and Suzanne Hoeber Rudolph, The Modernity of Tradition: political development in India P78,University of Chicago Press 1969, ISBN:0226731375 ^ Singh, Yogendra,Modernization of Indian Tradition: (A Systemic Study of Social Change),Oriental Press 1974 page 167 ^ C. J. Fuller,The Renewal of the Priesthood: Modernity and Traditionalism in a South Indian Temple P117, Princeton University Press 2003 ISBN:0691116571 ^ a b c d e f Bergunder M, Contested Past: Anti-Brahmanical and Hindu nationalist reconstructions of Indian prehistory,Historiographia Linguistica, Volume 31, Number 1, 2004, pp. 59-104(46 The other is blog against Periyar by Rajeev.Adyarboy 18:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I have some concerns after going through some of the peer reviewed papers quoted. FYI I have access to most of the journals through Athens login. Starting with Sara Dickey’s 1993 paper. To start with the right title of the article is The Politics of Adulation: Cinema and the Production of Politicians in South India which is quoted wrong. It is a 32 pages long article which talks about votes mind set and quotes various examples including NTR, MGR and even touches a bit of North Indian politicians of Sunil Dutt and co. The word ELITE is referred to the previous sentence in which it denotes socioeconomic class and not elite caste as it would mean from the phrase used in the article, since the preceding sentence talks about Aryan race. Now coming to Rudolph’s paper, I wasn’t able to find where he talks about mass-migration of Brahmins. I may have missed it. Can someone point where it is mentioned please? Now the book Modernization of Indian Tradition, is of concern too since the page quoted (although not online) is obvious from the table of contents (which is online) talks about Gandhi. I do not want to comment on this for now. Will go find it in the library before I say further. But a clarification would be appreciated. Its kind of intriguing to find that the pages quoted once again are part of pages missing in the online version in the reference from the book The Renewal of the Priesthood: Modernity and Traditionalism in a South Indian Temple. Let me make my stance clear that am not throwing allegations of dubious citation, but requesting a clarification. Thanks ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε †αLҝ 20:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

As raised by other users .i also checked the references not finding the the concerned piece except in rajeev's blog .If you we can take it to mediation.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


Stop x nuvola with clock.svg
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 day in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for edit war on Indophobia. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Ghanadar galpa (talk) 06:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Poverty in India Image[edit]

Beggar in Bodhgaya

There is a discussion going on regarding whether or not the following image should be a part of the Poverty in India page. Most Poverty in *Country* pages do not have any images, at most 1. User:Otolemur crassicaudatus has brought many images showing extreme poverty in India and has tried to mislead people into thinking this is the way a majority of poor Indians live. There is a vote in which your input would be appreciated. You can find this discussion here

I feel that the the Bodhgaya Beggar image does not represent poverty in India correctly because:

  • The beggar in Bodhgaya image does not accurately depict poor people in India because they do not look like this. This man is an exception. To say that this man represents all poor people in India is very wrong. A small minority of Indias poor are disabled. Most living under the poverty line work long hours fishing, farming or as construction workers. This picture shows a man whose legs have been broken. Unless a majority of India's or even a fraction of the poor have legs like this, the image is irrelevant and undue to the poverty in india page.
  • Poverty and Disability are not connected in any way. There are thousands of super rich people who are disabled.
  • There are 11 country articles on poverty
  • This user is being uncivil and unyielding. This user has tried to have my user page deleted because it said America is priceless!
  • This image is being used by User:Otolemur crassicaudatus to display his dislike of India and to mislead people into thinking that this is the plight of millions of poor Indians. This user has often added images showing extreme poverty to many India relating articles.[7] Even though this user knows that poverty is present in every country and that extreme poverty is not a fair representation of the Indian economy, this user has previously tried to add an image of children washing their clothes in a mud puddle to the economy section of the India page. This user has added this image to the poverty section of the Economy of India page, when a graph showing poverty would make more sense.
  • WP:Undue says:
We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by a small minority deserved as much attention as a majority view. Views that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in articles devoted to those views. To give undue weight to a significant-minority view, or to include a tiny-minority view, might be misleading as to the shape of the dispute.

This can be applied to this because a very tiny fraction of poor people in India are disabled. Most work very hard trying to make a living for themselves. This image is misleading. Nikkul (talk) 03:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User talk:Ghanadar galpa/Indophobia[edit]

User talk:Ghanadar galpa/Indophobia, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Ghanadar galpa/Indophobia and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:Ghanadar galpa/Indophobia during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 19:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)