User talk:Hornplease/Archive3

199.64.0.252

I've looked a bit at this user's contribution history, and there does seem to be some long-term trouble -- however, there are also a few constructive edits, which suggests perhaps multiple people are using the IP address. There haven't been any edits for the past 1/2h, but I'll keep an eye on it. You can also report issues directly to admins on this page: WP:AIV, and they'll be able to look at it right away. Cheers, Marysunshine 23:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Problems

Give me a good reason for why you follow me around on Wikipedia and try to undo every edit I makeBakaman%% 15:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Ethnic Cleansing of kashmiri Pandits

If you are serious about accurate representation of Kashmiri Pandits then assist me in improving the s--tty article on the topic, as well as on Terrorism in Kashmir.Netaji 20:15, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Savarkar

Hi - I appreciate your advice. Do review the article and give your comments - I haven't finished adding refs. You don't have to fight trolls/POV warriors by yourself at all times - they'll be defeated at one time or the other. Don't make it personal. Rama's arrow 16:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

There will always be trolls, but our main purpose is to build an encyclopedia. Rama's arrow 16:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't vandalize Calif Textbook article

Don't spam links to irrelevant garbage sites or dead links or I'll report you.Netaji 18:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Holywarrior has not edited the page in recent history. He has only ranted in the talk page. You have added a bunch of links that lead to dead web pages. Plz check them. I will assume good faith on your part that thiswas unintentional and am removing the blatantvandal tag. ok? Check your links for dead pages.Netaji 01:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll have a look. Probably the result of a revert or re-inserting references following the tabbed browsing bug deleting the end of an edit. I havent inserted any new references in that article for ages. Hornplease 02:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Please discuss chowk.com article edits

Please discuss your recent revert/edit in the talk page:

here Thanks. Netaji 00:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Basic Structure

I am afraid your understanding of the Minerva Mills case is in error.

1. Article 368(4) of the Constitution was itself inserted into the Constitution by s.55 of the Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, which states 55. Amendment of article 368.- In article 368 of the Constitution, after clause (3), the following clauses shall be inserted, namely:-

"(4) No amendment of this Constitution (including the provisions of Part III) made or purporting to have been made under this article whether before or after the commencement of section 55 of the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976] shall be called in question in any court on any ground.

(5) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that there shall be no limitation whatever on the constituent power of Parliament to amend by way of addition, variation or repeal the provisions of this Constitution under this article.".

2. Therefore, although you have said that a part of the Constitution itself can violate the Basic Structure of the Constitution, this is incorrect. 3. It is the Amendment Act which violated the Basic Structure doctrine. 4. Secondly, Minerva Mills has nothing to do with President's Rule. It is do with nationalisation of Mills without compensation (hence Article 31-C of the Constitution).

I have changed it back and made it clearer. If you have a problem with this please state it on the Talk Page for the Basic Structure Article.

If you wish to read the Minerva Mills case, you can do so on judis.nic.in

In relation to the Basic Structure, it is best not to trust Seervai as he was always opposed to it although it is now recognised as the Law in India.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.176.79.94 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 31 Jul 2006 (UTC)

2002 Gujarat violence

Please see my proposal at Talk:2002 Gujarat violence#Proposal for informal mediation from Bcorr. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 20:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Wendy Doniger

I would like to help you, but I'm not sure that I can. There seems to be a limited number of Wikipedia editors with academic training or standards, and a large number of folks from various pressure groups who insist on enshrining their POV in Wikipedia. To a disproportionate degree. We seem to have more than our share of Hindutva.

Unfortunately, my academic training is in Polynesia and I've devoted most of my self-teaching time, of late, to early Islamic history and ancient Persia. I'm not up to date on Wendy Doniger; I haven't read any of her books.

Plus, I'm having a hard time finding a balance on Wikipedia, between caring so much that I lose my temper and exhaust myself, and not doing anything at all. It's hard to believe that the sane editors will eventually wear down the idjits. It seems that the project amounts to educating the whole of net-connected humanity. As a Buddhist, I swear to save all beings. It's possible that this is one way of keeping the Boddhisatva's vows, but it's a hard hard path. Zora 07:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

Several users have expressed concern over my block nomination of several college a cappella groups. I would like to apologize for causing a medium-sized ruckus on the AFD page and thereby wasting the time of several excellent contributors. I see now that this was an ill choice for a block nomination. I'll be relisting most of the articles individually as soon as I can double check the list.

In addition, I would like to apologize to you personally for my unecessarily crass and apparently pointless reply to your comment. Again, please accept my apologies. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 17:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your note of apology, its rare to encounter that sort of politeness on WP. For what its worth, I think I can understand your motivation here a little. I looked at your userpage; I too for my sins have to spend a great deal of time on the sort of campus where at certain times of year a million a capella groups spring out of the ancient woodwork to sing last year's hits at unwary passers-by. Fall is coming, and every gracious colonnade and awe-inspiring staircase will be crowded with a bunch of kids in tuxedos harmonising happily at me. I dread it. Hornplease 05:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with my alleged personal distaste for a cappella and more to do with musical groups using Wikipedia for self-promotion. Perhaps I should propose a new notability guideline: "If no one who isn't a member of your organization would be motivated to (or able to) create an article about it, it's not notable." I think I'll just focus on deleting in-line links to where you can buy their albums for now. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 05:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

A useful mental guideline, but I think a little too subjective to be actual policy. Still, I'll keep it in mind. Hornplease 05:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Mahesh Pathak

Well since he is now not the collector of the city, the article can be deleted. But a collector's role is important, and not a minor one. The office of the collector does appear in the papers many a time, so they are notable while in office. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Mani Shankar Aiyar

Hi just noticed you edit on Aiyar.Firstly his own Lok Sabha entry shows his address as Sainik Farm.The ntry is there in the article.The reference to Sheila Dixit came from SUNDAY magazine and Press Council adjudication against him.The willing slave bit was in Rajat Sharma's TV programme Aap Ki adalat. and the bit about Chidambaram was his utterance in Karan Thap[ar's progrmme.Amar Singh episode appeared as headline in too many papers to mention.I am afraid I do not have any ready reference available and shall try but the Sainik Farm bit is authenticated in the Lok sabha entry referred to in the article.Regards(Vr 07:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

Here is another link http://www.tribuneindia.com/2000/20001123/nation.htm#4

Regards(Vr 07:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

Kirit Shelat

Only persons of Indian Administrative service can become Secretary, Energy Department. He may not have been a direct IAS recruit. He would have been conferred IAS Doctor Bruno 15:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I am fairly sure secretary of the Gujarat energy dept has to be IAS. Certainly the secy of the Bengal energy dept is not. Hornplease 07:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you explain it a bit _Doctor Bruno_^_Talk_/_{E Mail} 12:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

vandalism

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. On the Witzel page, my comments were not even aimed at Witzel [1], [2], I was attacking the theory. I will report you unless you reinstate my comments.Bakaman _Bakatalk 16:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I think its quite clear what its aimed at. Please read WP:BLP. If you wish to 'report' me, feel free. I think a discussion of the applicability of this new policy is in order anyway.

Also, please refrain from misusing vandalism templates.

Hornplease 07:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Its aimed at "western scholarship". If you wish to misrepresent my comments and then lie, thats your problem.Bakaman _Bakatalk 16:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It is fairly clear from the context that you are referring to a particular western scholar, namely the one you are discussing. Please realise that I do not need to 'lie' about this, as the records of the page are publicly available, and linked above. If you do not learn not to be unduly aggressive nobody on this project will take you seriously. Hornplease 23:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

No actually I never aimed it that way. FundyWatching will also make nobody on this project take you seriously.Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you not read what I said after you used that term on the page you link to above? I have no idea what it means, and neither, I'm sure, does anyone else. Do try and modify your words based on the feedback you receive, if you do indeed read that feedback and understand it.

Further, if you never meant it that way, I am glad, and since I continue to assume good faith about your actions, I believe you. However, it sounds like you did, and certainly most people proficient in the language reading that will believe that you did. Hence I think it's still covered by WP:BLP. Do take it elsewhere for an opinion if you disagree. Frankly, I just want talk pages to be a bit more WP:CIVIL and if WP:BLP will help enforce that, I'll enforce BLP, however little I agree with it.

Hornplease 05:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Mani Shankar Aiyar

Thanks for your note.I was going to do as you suggesyed but am confronted with a familiar problem:Ashprakash who is either Aiyar's relative or a Tamil diehard(I speak as an Aiyar Tamil myself) is upto his tricks again.I very nearly got into an edit war with him as he believed that Aiyar was one of the best things to happen to Tamils despite his conduct which goes against every grain of Tamil decency I know and kept on vandlising by including terms like Brilliant and well eductaed and deleting even the referenced negative bits.You can see the exchenges I had with him.He has deleted the entire controversies section.As you are an administrator I should like you to look into this please.Thanks(Vr 06:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC))

I'm not an admin, but I'll see what I can do. Hornplease 07:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Indian nationalism

you might want to check the indian nationalism page...Kennethtennyson 02:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I strongly suggest that you double-check any source cited by Shiva's Trident/Subhash bose/Netaji or whatever name he's going by these days.

He has a history of citing sources that don't actually verify his statements.

In fact, I would recommend that you demand page numbers so that you don't waste your time reading the whole book.

Remember, "the obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it."

In other words, you have one of Wikipedia's three official content-guiding policies on your side, so feel free to ignore whatever bullshit accusations of vandalism Shiva's Trident and his meatpuppets may throw at you.

Regards,

CiteCop 13:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Church of South India

The source is somewhat shady, but it does deal with the church of south India [3]. The COSI also has bishops. I'm reinstating the info. Bakaman _Bakatalk 15:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Hornplease/monobook.js

Please fix your monobook.js file. It's currently showing up in Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion. I suspect it may have something to do with the string "db-" in it. --  Netsnipe  ►  17:31, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I concur, I came here to say that myself --- Deville (Talk) 23:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually I think one of your codes are the soure of the problem. Please see this diff, many thanks. --WinHunter ^(talk) 06:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

re User:Hornplease/monobook.js

This page is appearing in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion, although there's no speedy tag or category on the page. Do you want it deleted, or what? You can just blank it if you want. Herostratus 05:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Fixing this now. Thanks, and apologies. Hornplease 08:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism in Robert Vadra

Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Robert Vadra. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Enjoy the Boston Tea Party and not the Vandals' Revelry. I assume you are not a sock puppet of the Indian National Congress. ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 17:02, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Do the policies say that people like Osama Bin Laden should not be exposed (you read it SLANDERED)? ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 18:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I dont believe I have ever edited the Osama bin Laden article. You'd have to take it up with the editors. I merely suggest you follow policy as laid down following much discussion. Hornplease 18:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I have struck out the bogus vandal warning. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Will you pl. see the India Today article?

Will you pl. see the copy-pasted article of India Today on talk pages of Swadhyay Parivar along with my comments?

Swadhyayee 12:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Mani Shanker Iyer

The contents below 'Controversies' are of hatred nature and it is not suitable for the biography of a living person in Wiki.

incivility

Please regard WP:Civil and WP:NPA regading your last post to my talk page. Thanks.Hkelkar 22:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't Nehru a Kashmiri Pandit? That makes him Hindu by default. I did not see any coherent arguments to suggest his athiesm (just one section in the talk page that said "search google"; I did and found no credible evidence to suggest a declaration of athiesm).I did not see any argunemts in the talk page archive either.Care to point me in the direction of any talk page argument or debate to that effect?Hkelkar 02:27, 17 September 2006 (U

Rajendra Prasad

Actually it was nor me who inserted it-it had been there long before I visited teh article.But I restored it after Atticus had deleted it as 1.it is stated in teh Govt of India release on him'2.there are instances of other personalities whose offspring if they merit an article have been alluded to in the text eg.Vijay laxme pandit whose daughter Nayantara merits an article,my fellow tamil(and Iyer)Dr.Radhakrishnan whose son Gopal merits an article.I am restoring it but should you still feel it does not have to bet there please let me know.Regards(Vr 06:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC))

Read this

After fighting any sort of Nehruvian/Gandhian/PSecular thinking on wiki, check this funny comment. Reply on my tlak page with your responseBakaman _Bakatalk 00:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Pratap and Akbar

Akbar and the Second Islamic Empire were perceived as colonialist foreigners.Akbar was a liberal foreign emperor. What's the problem here?Hkelkar

Just because some Rajput mercenaries served under Akbar is no sign of general perception. Bear in mind that many Scots served as mercenaries under the English during the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314.However, the Scotts still perceived the English as foreigners (some still do).Hkelkar 02:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Responded to your latest post in my talk page

Look at it.Hkelkar 03:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Rollback

Please do not use the rollback button for content disputes, as you did on Francois Gautier. Thanks, Mak (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Is that policy? I havent been able to find a specific reference for that. I've often wished or two buttons on that thing, one which makes you ask for an edit summary, and one that doesnt.Hornplease 22:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if there's a specific policy, but I've seen it suggested a number of places including here. It can also contribute to revert-wars (you know about the WP:3RR right?), and is generally not conducive to collegial editing. You might be interested in looking at WP:1RR, which I try to keep myself to, except in cases of blatant vandalism, and I find that it lowers stress in various editing situations. Thanks, Mak (talk) 22:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your promptness. I have read it with great care, and it's a policy I tend to follow. I used the rollback feature after leaving a message for the last editor on his talk page that wasnt responded to. I usually leave messages on talk pages instead of reverting immediately. If there's no response, I revert, sometimes using rollback, on the assumption that anything that encourages people to check the talk page is a good thing. You probably do good work ensuring that people dont get out of hand, but I've been around for a couple of years now, and I think I heard someone mention WP:3RR at some point. Always good to be reminded, though, in case one forgets. Hornplease 22:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I didn't check, I assumed you had heard of 3RR, but just wanted to make sure. Thanks for using talk pages, I've just decided to "crack down" on such roll-back use, since I think it's a small thing that people can easily fix that doesn't help the community. Clearly, I need to check the situation a little better in the future. Cheers, Mak (talk) 22:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, I saw that the article's talk page was a redlink, so I made wrong assumptions that no contact had been attempted. Sorry. Mak (talk) 22:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Backward Castes

I see that you recently edited Backward Castes. I previously stumbled across this article while on NPOV patrol. After doing a little research, I concluded that Backward Castes was the same topic as Other Backward Class. However, I don't know enough about India to be certain. You seem to be pretty knowledgable in this area; can you confirm whether these two articles are on the same subject? If so, I think the articles ought to be merged. Thanks -Kubigula (ave) 02:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Category:Jewish mathematicians

Hi. You may wish to check the diffs before posting accusations No rollback; rather a correction to an edit based on a careful reading of Wikipedia:Categorization of people. Thank you. -- Avi 02:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I am giving you some time to explain yourself again , wow, where did you learn to talk like that ??? from the deadline man ???

Since you like doing the deadline routine I could'nt think of a better title. Anyways what's to explain ?? ?? ?? ?? Got a few citations, removed sentences that the article could have done without (and which had a citations needed tag to 'em) that's about it.

Best Regards I'm sure. Freedom skies 10:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

And about removing the citations needed from the Durant thing, just try [4], you should come across a mess of Indian sites that echo the nationonalist sentiment, guess Indians just loved what the guy had to say after all, huh ??

Freedom skies 10:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary

I'm afraid that you have misunderstood the situation. The editor was seeking to change the character of the category. It is my considered opinion, and that of others whom I have consulted, that his proposed change violates WP:V and WP:NPOV. If someone is verifiably Jewish, editors have a right to say so and it would violate WP:NPOV to deny editors that right. No guidelines can override WP:V and WP:NPOV. Some have argued that WP:BLP restricts the use of Jewish categories for living people, though this is a misconception (Judaism is an ethnic category), but of course this does not apply to non-living people. Of course, I fully accept his and your good faith, and I hope that you will accept mine.--Brownlee 14:10, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

F.Gautier

Its changed so as to not reflect OR or motive assignment, but taking into account why the French guy has written so much on India.Bakaman _Bakatalk 00:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Forced conversion

Hi. You removed two small sections from the above article, and I'd like to discuss that with you. Will you please join me at talk:Forced conversion? --Uncle Ed 20:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Rahul Gandhi

You are deleting my edits continuously. I want to ask you 2 questions 1)How do you attribute scuh a his=gh rise in politics to a man who has no great education,no oratory skills and above all\he has not stayed in india during the formative years of ones personality. IS IT NOT OUR duty to make the children who read this article know that it is only due to GANDHI surname. 2)Look it from a perspective of person in india.(I dont know where you are from) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nithyanandkota (talk • contribs) 19:34, 2 Oct 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary continued

Judaism is an ethnic category as well as a religious one. No discussion on AfD or CfD can override WP:V, WP:NOR or WP:NPOV, which are fundamental policies of Wikipedia. You needn't worry about repeat nominations for deletion by people who object to the maintenance of these fundamental principles; anybody who tries that would be guilty of violating WP:POINT.--Brownlee 11:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Santosh

You had prodded the Santosh article. I have made it a dab article now. Could you please take a look and check if it is okay to stay? Please feel to prod it back if you feel otherwise. - Ganeshk (talk) 04:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Gujral.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gujral.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)