User talk:King Zebu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Nosedown)
Jump to: navigation, search

Ukrainian Crisis[edit]

How is removing a statement which is not universally supported and putting there a more truthful one vandalism? It' easy to revert, and use template messages. Please stop prommoting the point of view. And please, do sign on talk pages as well.Psubrat2000 (talk) 06:40, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Please check my reverts again. You removed my edits in another section and I reverted back. Besides, in the edit I reverted, you didn't remove a statement but added controversial terms such as "fascists" - your edit made it seem as if that term was used by Russian government, but in fact, it was used by some sections of the Russian media (as per the Guardian source you provided). --King Zebu (talk) 07:05, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Automotive industry in India[edit]

Dear King Zebu,

I have noticed that you have done some great work on a number of articles related to India and commonwealth games recently.

I first came across your work when you removed an update from me ("11 million figure") on the article "Automotive industry in India" on 11th October. As advised on that update, I have read the guidelines from "Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources".

The source that was used on that article was a self-published source. As a result, I now understand that I am unable to update Wikipedia articles from the reports that we publish.

However, I would like to bring to your attention that, all the reports that we publish are researched from highly reliable sources such as government databases, industry publications and popular newspapers. That "11 million figure" was also taken from a very reliable industry publications "Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM)". Our reports are also used by top universities in Australia. Refer to the link to Swinburne University quoting Automobile Industry India link on their website: (

We would like to contribute to Wikipedia and its users but, we are restricted to do so. We encourage you to use our content and quote us wherever possible. If you have any questions please feel free to ask me.

We appreciate all your help and support.

Thanking you, Warm Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarun mor50002 (talkcontribs) 03:57, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I understand your viewpoint but you must read Wikipedia:No original research. If you can provide details for the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers publication which has supported the 11 million figure, then that source should be more than credible. However, until then, the 11 million figure cannot go in. --King Zebu (talk) 20:06, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
I have read Wikipedia:No original research -- Two points on that 1) We have cited Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM) in our publication 2) As per Wikipedia:No original research our publication may be used as a Secondary source.
Most of the content we consulted from Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers is from their periodicals. Kindly, refer to the the link for more details on Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers. Thanks.--Tarun mor50002 (talk) 10:25, 20 October 2010

Dear King Zebu, I am still awaiting your reply on my previous response to your request. Tarun mor50002 (talk) 10:25, 27 October 2010

I have no objections to the proposed text. Thanks --King Zebu (talk) 15:20, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

India images[edit]

Also add List of most populous metropolitan areas in India to your image clean up list please. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 16:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Ganga move[edit]

Please contribute to discussion on Ganga talk page. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


I've undone your change at Upanishads. The comment by the European writer shows that not all Europeans were reacted like Kant, Max Muller, Schopenhauer, etc. If you still feel strongly about the content, feel free to undo again but please initiate a discussion on the talk page so we can get opinions of others to form consensus. Zuggernaut (talk) 05:44, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I had two problems with the concerned text — it gives little insight apart from making superficial derogatory remarks against the writers of the Upanishads and the person who made these remarks was some "unnamed early European writer". The latter is no longer an issue since this writer is Dr. A.E. Gough (as per Essays on Indian Culture by Sir John Woodroffe). However, the first point is still an issue and as a compromise, I have removed the quotation template and moved the text to the second para. --King Zebu (talk) 19:25, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 Works for me. BTW, good work at India with the copy-editing. We need to add content related to famines to that article. Feel free to take a look at Famine in India which also appears in the current issue of the India newsletter. Zuggernaut (talk) 05:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Muslim districts in India[edit]

Sir, please keep this category. Some of the discussion is favouring list instead of category. But lists contain numbers only. I will improvise the articles about these 20 districts over time with information about culture, economy, et al.Katheeja (talk) 09:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:KandaharHijacking.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:KandaharHijacking.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

it is unacceptable per Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images 2. The rationale given is inadequate. The Taliban walking in the front were not involved in the hijacking. The plane does not show "Flight 814", this same plane may still be around and so obviously an image of it can be created. The plane being in Kandahar is also irrelevant, the hijackers were Pakistani nationals who hijacked the plane inside India.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Zakirnaikfan (talk) 14:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

See File talk:KandaharHijacking.jpg --King Zebu (talk) 16:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Famines and India[edit]

King Zebu, I owe you an apology for being dragged in to the mess of famines at the India article. Feel free to undo the famine edit (I will take it up myself until it reaches a fair conclusion) if you think it tarnishes your reputation on Wikipedia. However there is a serious POV problem with several India related Wikipedia articles as documented in the NPOV policy and the WP:Countering systemic bias essay. I am willing to setup a separate project to overcome this bias if there is enough support. Also, Fowler is accusing us of edit warring, something I find strange.Zuggernaut (talk) 03:01, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Zuggernaut, I can easily defend most of the changes I've made to the concerned article. Going through some of Fowler's arguments, I realize that this person comes with a heavy baggage of bias. Also, I'm amused by Fowler's suggestion that I should have discussed these issues before making edits to the History section. Maybe he/she is not aware of the BRD cycle. To be frank, those list of points put forward by Chipmunk and Fowler actually made me chuckle. I do realize that Wikipedia attracts a lot of strange minds and therefore, neither do I have the time nor the motivation to indulge myself in an argument with them. --King Zebu (talk) 08:16, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid BRD doesn't apply to Featured Articles. Please read: Wikipedia:Ownership_of_articles#Featured_articles. Besides, editing etiquette for the India page has been discussed many times before on the talk page. Many RfCs have been held on the Talk:India page in which experienced Wikpedians—including ArbCom members, bureaucrats, and administrators—have all come down on the same side. Please read the archives. Please also read the FAQs on the Talk:India page. The answer to Question 3 says: "If you wish to expand the content, consider editing daughter articles (Such as History of India) instead. ... Please read Wikipedia:Main article fixation." Have either you or Zuggernaut ever edited History of India? I note that none of the introduced edits on the India page were first added to the History of India page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC) Updated. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 08:07, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
All that policy says is that editors need to exercise care while editing FAs which King Zebu has done. WP:BRD says noting about featured articles. Have I edited History of India? I am only going to say this - I detect a pattern of AGF failure on your part Fowler. Zuggernaut (talk) 04:45, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid it says more than that. It says:

While Featured articles (identified by a bronze star in the upper-right corner LinkFA-star.png) are open for editing like any other, they have gone through a community review process as Featured article candidates, where they are checked for high quality sources, a thorough survey of the relevant literature, and compliance with image policy and with Wikipedia's Manual of style. Editors are asked to take particular care when editing a Featured article; it is considerate to discuss significant changes of text or images on the talk page first.

Fowler&fowler«Talk» 08:07, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
King Zebu's edits were compliant with WP:BRD. The above detail is highly subjective and I feel he exercised particular care in making them. Several other editors did not object to his edits over several months in the way you are doing now. Please read WP:Bully, WP:OWNERSHIP and try to work in a constructive way rather than thinking of the Wikipedia world in bullfighting terms. Zuggernaut (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
OK, just add the talk page of WP:IN to your watchlist as any announcements are likely to be made there. Editors working on India articles are under-represented and minor participation in discussions doesn't hurt. Zuggernaut (talk) 04:45, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Il-76 vs IL-78[edit]


There are two kinds of IL-78s. The early models were basically an IL-76MD in which removable fuel tanks were installed in the hold, fuel pods under the wings and in the tail (along with appropriate plumbing), a refueller station installed in the tail gunner's station. They retained the rear ramp, the rear door. In those aircraft, one could easily remove the pods, the large tanks in the hold, and you had what basically became an IL-76 transport. With the IL-78M this was no longer possible. The rear cargo doors were removed and the larger tanks in the holds were permanently installed. These were permanent tanker aircraft (and had a higher gross weight of 210 tonnes)

It was common for a military IL-76MD to be sold to an airline which then called its aircraft an IL-76TD, although it still had the military gear like the gunner turret. In the same vein, in some countries (Ukraine did this a lot), the tanks and pods were removed from IL-78s and they were converted into apparent IL-76s. It is very possible and likely that the picture aircraft was a real IL-78 with pods and tanks removed. It would still have all the pluming installed, as well as the refueller station located in the tail gunner's position.Hudicourt (talk) 22:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Point taken. However, even if the Libyan aircraft is an Il-78, it is still inappropriate to have it as the lead image of the article. The lead image of the article should give the best possible visual description/depiction of the subject. A modified aerial refueling tanker without its refueling pods and being used as a cargo aircraft does not depict the concerned subject very well. --King Zebu (talk) 10:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Vir Chakra[edit]

Ashoka Chakra.svg For defending India
Vir Chakra for your work on the India article. Zuggernaut (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks :) --King Zebu (talk) 11:41, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your correction on ...[edit]

... the India page. As you will see in this link to an edit of August 2011, the sentence has now come a full circle! (Don't know who changed it.) It seems more than half our work involves restoring text to a previous version. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:43, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

List of Agrawals[edit]

Before you go reverting me again and making snide comments in edit summaries, please take a look at User:Sitush/Common#Castelists. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 18:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

"Snide" Really? You are ordering others to follow a policy on your userpage... and when someone points out that you are making up your own rules, you label it as derogatory?
Please direct me to a specific clause in Wikipedia:BLP which explicitly specifies that "living people need to self-identify, not be classified by someone else". As far as Wikipedia:Verifiability, "it must be possible to attribute all information in Wikipedia to reliable, published sources that are appropriate for the content in question", and I believe that my edits are in line with Wikipedia's policy as the sources provided are reliable and relevant.
Lastly, it is quite possible that I may have missed the relevant Wikipedia policy. If that's the case, then I will not have any objection to your reverts. But, do point out that Wikipedia policy, and do not direct me to your userpage. And please, don't edit war. It serves no good. Let us resolve this issue amicably. --King Zebu (talk) 13:56, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
You took this to User_talk:Sitush#Verifiability, so we will finish it there. - Sitush (talk) 14:07, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pepsi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sprite (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 5 November 2012 (UTC)