User talk:Sitush

Posco India

Hi Sitush - I read wiki pages on original research and synthesis. I then went back to my edits, and reflected on what I wrote. I can sense what might have confused you, but I am not sure because your comments were broad and generic. If you have specific comments, please share them with me. I will incorporate them and then attempt to rewrite the section. I can see from your discussion page you are a busy person. So, if you prefer, I can rewrite the sections paying attention to NOR/NS issues, post them on your discussion page or on the Posco India page, and then you can take another look. Let me know your preference. Thanks. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 18:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Excellent news. My comments were indeed broad-based but that was because the problems were also - just one of those things. Sorry if it confused you.

Just do what you want to do on the article and drop me a line afterwards. I can't promise an immediate response but I will review the edits for you. - Sitush (talk) 18:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at ApostleVonColorado's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi Sitush - Left a reply in the talk page of 2011 Land acquisition protests in Uttar Pradesh. On Posco India, a quick update: it has taken me time to find more reliable literature and verifiable citations. Now I have 100s of pages, from NGOs in Orissa, government of Orissa, interviews of the villagers affected, as well as the office of Indian Ministry of Finance. I am reading through them to get a balanced, NPOV view of all sides. Posco India issue is very complicated, one side within India criticizing or partially supporting the other side within India. Before I summarize I want to read all of these reports. I would rather wait, read and do this right, than rush and do this wrong. Allow me some more time. Your understanding is appreciated. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 20:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks & ...

Indeed when I reported the IP user's disruptive edits the first time at Sudhamoy Pramanick I had avoided the V word at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection on 12th July and also at User talk:220.225.6.45. Appreciating that the V word is strong , the User:220.225.6.45 seems to be repeating such activity at a regular frequency - his/her edits are not productive. Plz suggest whether it's worth semi-protecting the page. Anyway if someone is so interested in editing, it does not take a long time registering oneself. Tinkswiki (talk) Tinkswiki (talk) 10:38, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Since the IP has already exceeded the point where semi-protection functions, it is a pointless move. I will add the page to my watchlist & see what develops. - Sitush (talk) 13:24, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, see WP:SILVERLOCK--IPs never reach a point beyond which they can edit semi-protected articles; even those few static IPs we have that have thousands of edits and are clearly a single person still can't edit semis. Only registered users with the 4 days and 10 edits can edit silverlocked articles. Note that I haven't looked at this article and have no opinion on whether or not a semi would be appropriate--just clarifying how it works. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:04, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

You are right, of course. I was getting registered users mixed up with IPs. If anything, this appears to be a very slow edit war, so I am inclined to let it run and just see what develops for now. It is easy to keep on top of the thing. - Sitush (talk) 15:10, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I guess by Silverlock you mean Semi-protection - that's what I'd asked for initially - such that unregd users can't tamper with. Tinkswiki (talk) 12:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Moved comment

This picture of Jayalalithaa which you have put back from the commons site is consisting of people along with her which does not serve the purpose of depicting herKumarrajendran 22:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I dont know why you are interested in putting the picture of Jayalalithaa to which i had a valid objection. she is shown with other people, which does not depict her office nor are they important people worth mentioning. I am sorry to say that you are being adamant and you have something personal against jayalalithaa, If you have a picture of Jayalalithaa you are welcome to put it but it should be an induvidual photograph. If you cannot do anything about it just remove all pictures depicting her, till we find an appropriate pic. I accuse you abt being biased and instead of helping build wikipedia site which is depicting Jayalalithaa. I am condeming your actions. I wish that action should be taken against you. Kumarrajendran 12:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

It was removed due to various concerns: copyright, licensing and non-free use. This has been explained to you by various people in connection with other images which you have uploaded over quite a period of time. In this particular instance, you muddied the waters by changing the image attached to the filename on four occasions over roughly three days, ending up with one which can be found on a website but which you claim is "from my collection" and "I hold the copyright". It is true that you may indeed own the copyright of that one etc, although it seems unlikely. There were three others "behind" it which you definitely did not own the copyright for and which failed the non-free use criteria.

I can assure you that I have no interest at all in Indian politics; I do have an interest in ensuring that the Wikipedia policies etc are followed. I can also assure you that I queried the situation with other contributors. - Sitush (talk) 16:53, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

article: Jat people <about the removal of content>

Hello Sitush,

Sikh-History has reverted some of My contributions to the article: Jat people. I have some reasonable doubts and believes that the information should be on the page. I have also shared My views for this. The explaination for the reverts, does not seems to be fair enough. You are quite an experienced One. Could You please put some light on the issue under discussion there. So, I respectfully ask You to please join the discussion at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jat_people#Experts.27_Assistance_deeply_Requested.2C_about_the_Guidelines_of_Wikipedia. Section: Experts' Assistance deeply Requested, about the Guidelines of Wikipedia. at Talk:Jat people. For whichI would be grateful to You!

Thanks! Sincerely: Abstruce (talk) 17:35, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Agnieszka Fijol

...is a 'herself' so far as I'm aware. Agnieszka is a Polish girl's name. (This is in connection with your remark to User:Bampublore.) Peridon (talk) 16:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Bugger! I am afraid that I fall into the category of people who continually get confused about the gender of others. It has been worse: I recently called Woohookitty a bot. - Sitush (talk) 17:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. No indication other than the -kitty whether m or f (or other...). This is one reason (apart from the mickey-take on userboxes) why I describe myself in the third person on my userpage. Peridon (talk) 17:38, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I try to use them, their etc but fail far too often. It is of course a big deal if in article space; outside it, well, there is an ideal world of gender neutrality and there is the real world. Just chip away at it where I can and when I remember. I make no claim to be perfect and am not going to lose any sleep over it, although I do understand why some people might. Nonetheless, the Agnieszka error was daft: Agnes, Agnetha and umpteen others follow the same root (although that itself is dodgy ground, eg: Hilary can be male or female; Simon and Simone share the same root but are different gender). Minefield. - Sitush (talk) 17:45, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Another plate...

Well, although I will make changes to my talk page soon, please do accept my apologies for the earlier incident at my talk page (now archived). Your reward is below...

CHAK 001 ^{(Improvements? Please let me know!)} 09:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Not having a great day, so this is a pleasant surprise. Thank you! - Sitush (talk) 09:08, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thank you for helping to clear up Akrura. Its very much appreciated Skamecrazy123 (talk) 10:14, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

No probs. There is a bit to add around the Kamsa and gem/jewel issues. You might want to have a go yourself. this has probably got some info to keep things moving but there are still gaps because it seems to assume some prior knowledge. - Sitush (talk) 10:19, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I will copy edit whats left of it and then see what I can add from the source you gave me. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 10:24, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

what to do

Hello, Yadur was once a place in India with an article, then it was moved to Yadur, Shimoga leaving Yadur as a redirect page. Unnecessary, but links can be fixed or it can be moved back. Then it becomes a WP:SIA page, so the links from the redirect, which are the responsibility (by courtesy) of the page-mover are a shambles. I suspect the mover of the page has no great interest in sorting out these little things as he appears to have greater ambitions so what do we do?? Multiply this for the others and we have a mess. I would go for WP:Afd on all the set index pages created as I fail to understand any need for them, be abused a bit, and sort this out quickly. Comments? Regards (Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)).

PS The pages that link to Yadur, a set index page, just about destroy my browser! (Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:11, 21 July 2011 (UTC)).

I sort of understand why it has been done this way, although I notice that the template for ambiguous populated places which is inserted on the page doesn't in fact mention Yadur.

Populated places are inherently notable, and I assume that the two redlinks at the SIA do in fact exist in the real world. If they do exist then Yadur should definitely be in the template; if they do not then life becomes a lot easier. SO, let's break it down into small chunks. Firstly, is there any chance at all of creating even stubs for the two redlinked places?

As for your PS - I think that is because of the huge templates listing all placenames in a district etc. We may have to take that issue to the India project talk page, which I am trying to avoid at the moment because I will just get told off for being a colonial throwback again ! - Sitush (talk) 11:20, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Small chunks, if more than one have articles we have dab pages; if only one we do not; Next chunk- move an article, leaving a redirect page behind, with links to be fixed in due course, OK. Next chunk- convert that redirect page into an article with a nav. template, creating a bunch of new links to a wp:sia article then the links are stuffed. So once when you clicked on a link to Yadur in an article you were directed to the article (or via a redirect after a move, which can be fixed); now you are directed to a set index page and there is no way it can be fixed because none of us know which of the links were to the original page or to the new set index article via its template. Creating permanent stubs is seldom a solution (if it was a dab page it should go straight to speedy delete, as a set index page it is a monumental stuffup). I feel the perpetrator of this shambles will not be quick to help, even though he/she started with a reasonable argument,Cheers (Crusoe8181 (talk) 12:05, 21 July 2011 (UTC)).

Yes, I understand the principle and the problems. I am not sure of some of the specifics, though. Eg: Doncram has in the past somehow swayed the community that it is legitimate to have redlinks in dabs etc. More pointedly, I am not sure if an SIA can be taken to AfD - it may have to go to MfD. Can this mess be reverted by restoring the status quo ante on the various pages? I will appeal to the stalkers. - Sitush (talk) 12:14, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback at LoS

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at LadyofShalott's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Huge revert at Dhangar, but I'm back on it

I went to go work on Dhangar, though I was vaguely under the impression that there were things wrong I'd fixed before, but there was nothing on Talk. I did a huge chop, and only after that thought to look at History: turns out you did a lot of chop on it in June, but then some 2009 account that has barely touched Wiki in 2 years swooped in and reverted it all with a simple "undid vandalism". I'd already added some refs and made some tweaks in mine (yours was mostly chop, yes, not adding too much?), so rather than undo mine and go back to yours I left it at mine, and I'll keep an extra-close eye on it, and send a note to the reverter about tossing around "vandalism" and not communicating over huge changes.

The article is still pretty bad, though in pretty standard caste-cruft ways, but since Deccan is unfortunately kind of my thing I'll take charge and keep chipping on it. It was 4.4k hits last month, so not as heavy-traffic as Nair or Rajput, but still worth cleaning. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:06, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

It should have appeared in my watchlist. I must have clicked the mouse twice or something. All articles are worth cleaning, whether they get a few hits or gazillions. Right now I am pretty much at a loss with how to deal with the current goings-on and would be happier if there was any light to be seen at the end of this tunnel. Thanks for taking Dhangar on. - Sitush (talk) 15:12, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

For Kurmi, and to a lesser degree Ahir, probably best bet is to just hold the fort and prevent any significant changes made in haste. That should free us both up to work on less contentious articles for a bit, which (should it come to a conflict) helps to keep clear that we're serious editors doing major cleanups, not SPAs or POV pushers. It is unfortunate, but I have had plenty of caste articles that didn't stir up major contention, or resolved faster. Though Kurmi was awfully quiet for months, and then just suddenly exploded. I do agree with you that something a little untoward is going on, but I can't pin it down, and don't want to tar a whole group of disagreeing editors with the same brush. For Dhangar I think we'll be okay for a bit, as the main interferer who reverted you barely uses Wiki. I did, however, add Shudra cites, and that's pretty much the red flag before the bull. I have momentarily considered whether I should just do caste cleanups and just avoid varna issues since that brings in simply scads of protest, but the ornery side of me doesn't want to self-censor just to save time. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, if an article says X when in reality it is Y, the least you should do is remove the incorrect statement. - Sitush (talk) 15:40, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Sudheendra Kulkarni

Hi - you left a message on my talk page regarding my tagging this article for deletion. Ouch - you are right - it was a very bad tag on my part. Thank you for taking the time to point it out to me. Mark^Dask 15:32, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry too much about it. I did it in part for reasons which do not really matter from your perspective, and I'm pretty sure that you do not make a habit of this. Plus, I have messed things up at least ten times today already, although I always blame it on my computer :) - Sitush (talk) 15:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Yogesh Khandke's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Yogesh Khandke (talk) 16:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

An Invite to join the WikiProject Education in India

- - - - - - - - - - - - WikiProject Education in India - - - - - - - - - - - -
Hi, Sitush, you are graciously extended an invitation to join the Indian Education ! The WikiProject Indian Education is an evolving and expanding WikiProject. We are a group of editors who are dedicated to creating, revising, and expanding articles, lists, categories and Wikiprojects, to do with anything related to Indian Education System(Schools,Colleges and Universities).
As you have shown an interest in article related to Education in India we thought you might like to take an interest in this growing WikiProject.Thank you for your contributions.
We look forward to welcoming you to the project!

naveenpf (talk) 02:23, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Rajput claims

Working further on Dhangar, and it reminds me that, though far secondary to Kshatriya claims, Rajput claims are also quite popular, particularly in the Deccan area where I do cleanup. They have cites, but they sound awfully patchy (and one "cite" was just a comment that "Rajputs and Dhangars have the same gotras"), so I need to dig into those. Also having the same SYTH problem where Krishna's stepfather was (per the source) a Bharawad, but since the Bharawads are linked to the Dhangar somehow the lede claimed "Krishna's stepfather was of this caste." Pretty usual stuff.

If I do an article on gotra-cruft, someone a serious tool, somewhat a pressure-relieving unofficial essay on the practice, would you be interested in following the progress of that? Not asking you to write, just asking whether you'd like to be kept abreast, or kept separated from it so as not to be associated with my blunt critique of caste-warrior silliness? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it, certainly. Start it in your userspace, let me know the details and I'll add to my watchlist. - Sitush (talk) 18:03, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Reported for 3RR

Please note that you have been reported for a violation of 3RR at the Kurmi article by me. Thanks.-MangoWong (talk) 17:08, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

No probs. Where have you reported me? Not that I am too fussed because it will fail. - Sitush (talk) 17:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I think I should have mentioned that the report is at WP:ANI. Thanks for the morale boost.-MangoWong (talk) 17:15, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Odd place to put it when there is a noticeboard for the purpose. Not sure what you mean by a morale boost? It certainly seems that you are taking things personally. Anyway, I'll take a look but might not bother responding because it should fail without my involvement. Be wary of WP:BOOMERANG when you report things to ANI, by the way. - Sitush (talk) 17:21, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Diving into Kodava

Not at all to drag you in with me, but just for FYI I'm tackling Kodava. For starters, the lede says "Kshatriya" with three cites. One mentions them in absolute passing, another specifically says "other groups say they're jungle people and deride their Kshatriya pretensions" and the last (which I left) says it explicitly, but it's an Encylclopedia of Stateless Peoples, so not at all an authoritative work on varna. I'll dig more into it. Maybe it's just that fixing Dhangar has been too easy? ;) I did dig into Menoky (a Nair sub-caste) just a little too; their K. claim had zero gBooks backing, but did find some good data saying they were historically temple accountants (seems kind of danced around in the prior version). I would put Category:Kshatriya up for CFD, except it happens to be a great place to find articles full of un/poorly-cited K. claims. Fascinating place, India. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Yogesh Khandke (talk) 17:36, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

See diffs [1] and [2], your reverts happened so fast that I didnot understand that you are reverting, if you don't want explanations from me you are welcome to have your way, was providing diff for what I said on AN/I. Don't want to bug you on your talk page. Bye. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 22:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I reverted because that diff is already at ANI in connection with your comment, and you should know this because you have responded. Furthermore, the poster was warned by BsZ and then the content was deleted because it is clear trolling/attack content. It is meaningless and you know that. Feel free to keep winding me up with your inane, repetitive rubbish and feel free to recruit people off-wiki to step in here on your behalf. You have argued ridiculously with LadyofShallot, Boing! said Zebedee, Salvio and several others recently. Sooner or later, patience will run out. In fact, I rather think that it has in one instance.

Furthermore, since you now claim on your talk page that you need to learn (and it is regarding a trivial point where you won't accept the advice given even when it is in response to your own question & comes from an admin), it may be best if you do not advise other new contributors as I believe you have been doing. You have been extremely misguided in your recent interpretations of policy and it would be a shame if you pass that poor guidance on. Yes, we all make mistakes and we are all learning but the sheer scale of it is staggering. - Sitush (talk) 23:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Kongu vellala Gounder Related article

you removeing base lessly everythink related to kongu vellala gounder article,i can't understand your intention, you does not allow any one edit,banning every one,even with citation

every one in tamil nadu knows the person was belongs to kongu vellala gounder but you say not belongs to kongu vellala gounder,and also allowing article with citations also

i can't understand what is goal of wikipedia by not any editors , or citations every think else

say to us what is u r intention?

every one knows kongu vellala gounder clan oriented people even journal of tamil studyies say ,partically we following u does allow put clan names over there

u deleting every thing , say to us what is your intention? in the earth no people like kongu vellala gounder present

115.241.3.134 (talk) 08:58, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Wikipedia requires that content is verifiable using reliable sources. I think that I know which person you are referring to. If I am correct then the issue is that in lists of people such as this it is necessary to "prove" that they are indeed relevant and worthy of inclusion. This is usually done by linking to an article about them that already exists (a biographical article, almost always), but in this instance there is no such article. The alternative is to provide a source as a citation.

I am happy to help you with either of these options if you can come up with some information based on reliable sources, or to generally advise you regarding what makes for a reliable source etc. However, until one of those options is available then the name should not be in the list. Unfortunately, it does not matter to Wikipedia whether someone is well-known locally etc: they need to be notable and this needs to be established as I have indicated. Those are the rules, I am afraid. - Sitush (talk) 09:06, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Please don't...

Please don't walk away from India-related work - there are so few people working on them, and we need as many skilled researchers and competent writers as we can get. I understand the frustration, but these things do take time to get addressed, and it is a slow and painful process - but awareness of the problems is slowly being raised, and we do have the most egregious abuse averted (at least for now). Maybe take a break for a few days (as I do), and ignore the people making accusations? It's only when they actually affect article content that it really matters, and that seems to be reasonably well under control at the moment -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

They are affecting article content, if only because I am spending most of my time unable to develop content. I have managed to fettle Didda & Kalhana this week, plus do a massive overnight rewrite of what was hopelessly incorrect (and potentially libellous) content at Cash-for-votes scandal, plus have created Lohara dynasty over the last couple of weeks. I should be doing a lot more of that sort of stuff but am getting bogged down defending stuff that really should not need defending. My plans for further updates to the Malabar Marriage Act and to assist LadyofShallot + AN Other with the Madras Public Library Act are simply not happening, nor is the polishing that is needed at Nair. If I go there, I am sure these people will follow.

I appreciate all that you do but this feels often like me + MV vs the world. If I do not participate then MV is likely to be in big trouble on the basis of consensus and articles will be changed in a manner detrimental to the project's aims. Sure, consensus has to be supported by V and RS etc but it would be difficult for him to do all that alone, especially since admins cannot evaluate sources and remain uninvolved. Right now, that is the only reason why I am hanging on & getting involved with all the vexatious crassness, which I am convinced is being co-ordinated off-wiki. Myself and MV do not always agree and I have less interest in many of those areas he is involved in, but I do know when something is blatantly right or wrong and I do appreciate the huge effort he has been putting into these areas. - Sitush (talk) 11:19, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Yep, it's holding you back from other work you want to do, that's true - and it's doing the same to me. But these ethnic disputes crop up all the time, and they are amongst the hardest to solve and they do take time. I'm thinking about how to progress this, and will probably seek some advice -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I also would hate to see you leave the field, but, at the same time, if doing this is making Wikipedia unpleasant, then you shouldn't feel obligated. As I think I suggested elsewhere, how about we try a simpler approach: the first time someone expresses a concern (e.g., "They're not Shudra!!!!") we cite policy/guidelines. The first time someone brings in a bad source, we tell them it doesn't meet RS. When the person repeats the problem, we simply explain to them calmly how to pursue DR--point them to WP:RSN, WP:NPOVN, whatever. We respond to their concerns there, of course, but we just stop explaining the same things over and over again. We place the burden where it should be: on those who want to argue that a given source is valid, that their analysis is not original research, etc. If they want to declare that they're being abused, we direct them to ANI or wherever. Meanwhile, we keep evaluating sources, keep figuring out ideal article content. When someone is edit warring, we report them. When someone adds OR and gets a gang to try to keep it in, we take it to WP:NORN ourselves, and when NORN nearly inevitably backs up our position, we take it out again. If that ends up with the article fully protected; so be it; a that point, we should be able to legitimately run an {{edit request}} and say "See this discussion over at that noticeboard--every uninvolved editor said that X is the right way to write the article, not Y." In other words, we use the DR process just like we should. Sometimes, of course, DR will decide that a source we think is unreliable is, in fact, reliable; great, that's evidence of the process working. But every time we raise this, or get POV pushers to raise this, at a noticeboard, more and more people see it. Some of them watchlist the article in question. Others start to see a pattern build up. Eventually, enough people see the problem for what it is, and the community as a whole says, "Hey, we're sick of hearing this, time for some sanctions" (or time for ArbCom). Plus, over time, we will find good, helpful editors. I just found one today; the Shudra issue came up at Kamma (caste), where basically only one source was supporting Shudra status, while the rest of the article supported Warrior status (not with great sources mind you, but the Shudra was only in the lead). So I removed it. Then User:Foodie 377 came in with 3 sources, at least one of which appeared to be very high quality, which all agreed that Kanma count as Upper Shudra. Take a look at Talk: Kamma (caste)#Shudra, and see that xe even seems interested in improving the overall quality of varna issues on this and other articles. I know at this point I'm rambling (it's late here), but I do think that head way will eventually be made, and I also think that it can be done without completely overwhelming you or MV. Of course, please reach out when you have specific problems; to Boing as an admin and me as an editor, and anyone else you think can help. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:48, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Foodie is a great (albeit rare) example of a caste editor who can do good things when handled cordially. We started butting heads at some point (Reddy?), but we talked through it, and he basically came to the conclusion "I'm not upset about telling both sides of the Reddy story, I'm upset that Reddies look bad in comparison to the still-biased articles", so he's been really great sourcing Reddy (while telling both sides) and also smacking some neighboring castes who've been getting away with cruft. Not saying he's attacking other castes, just trying to even the playing field amongst quarelling factions. I dunno, I'm just going to keep doing what I'm doing. Some days I'll have more time, some days less, and some slow days I might just bail from India for a few days to catch up on my massive to-do list. I just really, really, really don't want to help establish a precedent of "you can always fix Wiki by calling your boys on Orkut, closing your eyes to every reply, and screaming racism when all else fails." MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:41, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit-warring notice

Please see Talk:Kurmi#Fully protected -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

KURMIS, AHIRS/YADAV

Here are some refs which may interest you: [3], [4], [5]... Your opponents are right when they say that the word Shudra is not commenly used (i will give you more explanations later if I find time) but this is not at all a reason to add the word Kshatriya instead of Shudra... You were right to remove the classification eventhough I think it should be kept but instead of mentionning Kshatriya/Shudra stuffs, it should mention their traditionnal occupations that is: cultivators, cowherds... Varna classification should be explained in the article itself...Rajkris (talk) 12:16, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, those refs have already been examined and (I think) are all among the batch of 15 quotes I have listed. I've got another 100+ lined up. I am sure that it is correct that the term is not commonly used now in India but that alters nothing: the article already says that it is a deprecated term in that country. The issue of the classification line in the box is part of a wider issue that I have raised in several places: the infoboxes for these articles are more trouble than they are worth. Using your alternate suggestion, some people would say (extreme example) "but my father is an accountant" and start warring over that instead of varna or OBC/ST/SC/FC etc. Since the population size fields are also hopeless, the associated groups are frequently warred over, the areas of significant population cannot usually be cited, and so on ... it makes sense simply not to use the boxes at all. 97% of WP articles do not have an infobox. - Sitush (talk) 13:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Is http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/t/tripura.html an RS?

I see this chap pop up a fair bit, any thoughts on his credibility: http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/t/tripura.html  ?

BTW, have you seen the "$400/hr" kerfuffle on Jimbo's Talk page? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I've seen that website, yes. I doubt very much that it qualifies as a reliable source. We have no idea of his expertise and his footnotes tend to be on the thin side. Of course, those footnotes that he does provide might be of use independent from a cite of the site (!) Take it to WP:RSN if you fancy a run out with it, although I suspect the problem there will be lack of in-depth knowledge of the subject area. There is an equivalent for the UK that is quite widely used - Leigh Radiment's guide to the peerage, or something like that. However, that one has more sourcing & the compiler(s) have a track record.

Saw Jimbo's page yesterday and then again today just Jimbo replied to Yogesh's reinstated query. It will go nowhere, although I have now said my piece & it may get one or two other editors interested (mostly likely not ones that would suit the POV agenda, so it could be a huge own goal for Yogesh). - Sitush (talk) 22:07, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

List of Ezhavas

I am trying to keep an eye on the page. Sorry I can't be more helpful with edits like this. I can't tell who's who. If it's simple, I'll fix it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that you had stepped in, and thanks for that. Basic rule: ignore the names and just work using WP:V & WP:NLIST - if an item is redlinked and unsourced then bin it because it fails to meet V and NLIST. - Sitush (talk) 11:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Will do, my friend. Will do. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:16, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you kindly

Thank you for your support

Thank you very much for your support at my RfA. More importantly, thank you for your support across a range of articles, and ultimately, for your crazy hard work in the face of ridiculous accusations and sometimes very problematic opponents. I hope to continue working with you indefinitely, and hope that, one day, we can wrestle at least some of those articles into control. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:12, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Texture King?

It seems like you and I have had to deal with the Govind Kumar Singh more than anyone, so I thought I'd ask for your input before acting on this. Vermapriya1986 seems to be resuming his edits at Govind Kumar Singh, which made me take a look at what redirected to that article. Among the pages is a redirect, Texture King, which redirects to Govind Kumar Singh. I can't figure out why, because the Govind Kumar Singh article doesn't address this in any way. However, you can't prod redirects, and I'm honestly not sure if G11 applies to it (although I think it does, I'm not sure). Thought I'd ask for a second opinion and see if G11 applies, or if I should take it to RFD, or just leave it alone. - SudoGhost 10:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

C.Fred turned it into a redirect way back when s/he was using the Wnfck sock. It had a little content because Texture King was alleged to be Kumar's nickname. Best bet is to have a word with C.Fred but my gut feeling is to leave it alone because it does no harm & I don't think we actually need to comply with WP:V etc for a redirect. - Sitush (talk) 11:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Kshatriya

Sir,i have explained about exclusion of jats with sources on disscussion page but inspite this you reverted my correction.Bill clinton history (talk) 13:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I did. You gave no explanation in the edit summary and you have not given people enough time to respond on the talk page. You removed a substantial amount of cited information and need to allow more than the two days that you did. Give it a couple of weeks at least, especially since I for one did respond and need more time. - Sitush (talk) 13:35, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

OK sir,i have already provided the other side of topic with sources.Bill clinton history (talk) 13:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your careful and helpful work on Fanny Crosby. Ockham would be proud of you, and I think Ms. Crosby herself looks on your work and approves. Drmies (talk) 14:54, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks indeedy, although of course there are three involved in this exercise. It is great that we're at the point now where an edit doesn't throw an error on the servers, which is what was happening on every occasion a couple of days back & made things b. awkward. The edits went through ok then, but the error was consistent and did not happen on other articles I was working on, so I presume it was a size issue.

BTW, I am not sure that Ms. Crosby is capable of "looking" down, but I know what you mean ;) - Sitush (talk) 15:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

An error due to a size issue...hmmm...nudge nudge? Drmies (talk) 15:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Construction date

I am curious where you got the info about all those possible construction dates to Green Leaves. Atterion Talk•Contribs 17:55, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

From the cited sources that you removed. - Sitush (talk) 18:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

No no no. I mean before I removed them. Atterion Talk•Contribs 18:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Eh? Look in those sources - the info is there. I was the person who found them. If you cannot see the sources then, sure, I'll provide quotes for you. - Sitush (talk) 18:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, as far as I can recall, they were all interviews with various members of your family. Unless your family has a history of misinforming the wider community, their views should be noted. Even NRHP say that something was there at an earlier time. - Sitush (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Reported for edit warring

--QuickEditor (talk) 18:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Good. Watch out for the boomerang. You are being ridiculously bumptious and it would assist if you slowed down a little & read the comments on the talk page. That's the article talk page, where you tried to close down discussion with a template. - Sitush (talk) 19:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Thoughts?

User:Smjwalsh has raised a complaint regarding the speedy deletion(s) of Early Life of Fanny Crosby and Rescue Mission Ministry of Fanny Crosby at User_talk:Fastily#Early_Life_of_Fanny_Crosby. Since you tagged the pages for speedy deletion, your input would be welcome. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 18:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For your good humor at Talk:Kim Kardashian. Your recent contributions to Wikipedia on Talk:Kim Kardashian had me rolling on the floor laughing so hard that I almost died. I really appreciate how you lightened the mood at Talk:Kim Kardashian. I am giving you this Barnstar to show you my appreciation for your good humor at Talk:Kim Kardashian. Thank you. QuickEditor (talk) 19:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Invite to WikiConference India 2011

- - - - - - - - - - - - WikiConference India 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Hi, Sitush, The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011. Official website Facebook event 100 day long WikiOutreach Scholarship form
As you are part of WP:IND community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience.Thank you for your contributions.
We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011

naveenpf (talk) 07:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Once more out of YK and I'm taking him to ANI

Stellar day: YK yet again brings up that blog, and implies that Jimbo is doing an investigation that will take you and me out in a month or two: Such an attitude was the reason for my bringing the blog to the notice of the founder. Every one should remember that he has promised to look at the issue, it is only a matter of months. Also, class act, compares me to the Oslo bomber. I wrote him back, told him one more comment like any of that and I'm taking him to ANI, as this is just freakin' ridiculous. If you catch him dragging that silly blog again (again, not that I care about the blog, I care about him PAing), or throwing around more ridiculous insults, please let me know, and if you want in the ANI too that'd be great. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have just been reading his comment on your page, after seeing your on his. The guy is extremely bad news, IMO. He'll be chewing my leg again before too long, I guarantee it. - Sitush (talk) 18:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I must say, however, that he doesn't say Jimbo will sort it all out in 2 months. YK has that peculiar way of numbering his points and the (2) is his second point in the message. - Sitush (talk) 18:18, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't mean the (2) was the months, I was just referring to his "matter of months" as a silly "you'll get yours, MV and Sitush, it's all just coming down the pike in good time." He keeps jabbing at this on my Talk page, showing zero signs of "okay, I phrased that poorly, but I'm still concerned". Any reason I shouldn't just take it to ANI now? MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:37, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

No reason not to if you have the diffs etc. The problem is, he is slippery with his language and may fall back on the "I didn't it that way but, you know, Indian English is different". I keep meaning to dig up the diffs for his general rabble-rousing but for some reason seem never to have sufficient time. I wonder why that is? Have you mentioned the latest reference to BsZ? - Sitush (talk) 18:42, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Didn't want to pull BsZ in again, because I guaran-dang-tee the reaction will be "wellity well! Look who dragged in his pet POV attack editor to prevent me from telling the truth... (and exposing your $400/hr scheme...)" I'll pull it up at ANI when I get a moment. He keeps falling back on "not saying the blog is actually true, just saying it's a WP credibility issue", but then in the same breath he'll talk about "actions needed against certain editors", imply I'm trying to cover up the blog, etc. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen his wording etc. It is an example of his slipperiness. He knows full well that he is getting his POV across and then backing out of it after the target has been reached (ie: another mention). Note that he never backs out of it at the venue where he posts the comment, thus not affecting the impression he has given to a new bunch of viewers. He has also just bolded the "I'm only saying, not believing" comment in a msg he posted on his talk page a few days ago - a peculiar bit of refactoring to do at this stage, but clearly done for a reason. - Sitush (talk) 18:51, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't know much at all about the badlinks thing, but maybe you can get that URL added so that it can not be added again. LadyofShalott 00:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind that; WP:BADSITES is what I had in mind, but it's a failed proposal. Wikipedia:No personal attacks#External links is the relevant policy, but y'all probably knew that already. LadyofShalott 02:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

No, you may have hit on something there, LoS: edit filters. It has been agreed at ANI to be an attack site, I might have a word with Reaper Eternal and see if filtering is possible. Although, of course, there is more than one simple way round a filter. - Sitush (talk) 11:32, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, an edit filter might just be the thing. LadyofShalott 22:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

The will

Figured I'd reply here since I didn't know if you'd see the reply in the middle of my page. On the Tod will, the solution is "easy"--write your own, solid research paper on the will, get it published, and then let us know and we can consider it for citation in the article. That should only take a few years, right? Qwyrxian (talk) 00:19, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I have been thinking about it! Seriously, there is a way round this that would still provide info for the dedicated. At Isaac Perrins I added available archive information to the External links section, just so people would know that it existed. The same could be done at Tod (or in this case it could also go under Further reading). There are a few things scattered among the archives. It all goes to show that where there's a will, there's a way <g> Thoughts? - Sitush (talk) 11:37, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Varna infoboxes

So...there's a variety of ways to proceed on those. If you think you can get consensus, probably the "easiest" is to propose Template:Infobox caste for deletion at TfD. The main problem is, I'd say you stand no more than a 50% chance of succeeding, given that we're talking about a Template that is transcluded on over 50 pages, and the argument you're making is one based in logic more than any specific policy. One could argue that WP:BLPCAT applies, and that these infoboxes, by definition, will always violate BLPCAT, but that requires stretching the definition of BLP to cover a group of people, which is sometimes done but always questionable.

An alternative would be to simply start a discussion on the talk page of the template itself about removing the parameters which will always be disputed and thus impossible to cover in a single line in an infobox (even sourced). Publicize that discussion on the Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Then, if there's consensus, we can just remove it from all of them as a deprecated parameter (allegedly easy to do with AWB, I just never got the hang of the tool). Qwyrxian (talk) 00:47, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I am going to try to do something about it but am unsure of the best method. Your suggestions above are welcomed. - Sitush (talk) 11:39, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

It looks like the users at Talk:Kamma (caste) seem pretty willing to pursue it; I've just directed them to the template talk and the noticeboard to get a discussion going...it looks like...looks like something good and positive and collaborative is happening! Qwyrxian (talk) 12:27, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Based strictly on the conversation above (I have not looked at the infobox in question) - if it's a BLP-related issue, you could also publish the link to discussion at WP:BLP/N and ask for input there. LadyofShalott 13:32, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

A point to note

Please avoid making casual remarks about freedom movements just to make colonial rules appear as civilized as today's laws, regardless of your personal indifference, as you mentioned in this edit; while making point against "Rebellion against british aint an offense" as mentioned by IP.

Such casual attitude against freedom movements, according to me, is a thing of the past in all countries officially. No need to flog a dead horse for anything. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 18:23, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I was not aware that I have made any remark about freedom movements recently, anywhere. I recall that you did but I did not respond to that part of your point because it was irrelevant and tangential to the matter at hand, as so much of that which you write seems to be at present. - Sitush (talk) 18:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

May be this edit could clarify it further. Anyway, all I am pointing out is that colonial period is over long time back. No one has to keep dragging anything if he doesn't like it, world has moved on. Though one should not insist that the colonial times were as civilized as post-colonial times, and differ with anyone on these lines, etc. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 18:49, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I am not getting involved in another long, pointless thread with you about some imagined wrong. Do not puts words into my mouth by use of your overly vivid imagination and heightened sense of post-colonialism. Thank you. - Sitush (talk) 18:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I guess there is no point to ask for any clarification about 'Rebellion against any governing power is, technically, an offence. But if the rebels succeed then obviously they will not punish themselves :)', as it may be termed as no more than out of heightened sense of post-colonialism. Thank you. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 19:07, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

It means what is says. If you choose to read something into it that is not said, then that is your vivid imagination etc. Believe me, when I write something I write what I intend to say and I expect people to read it with that in mind. I could not do subtlety to save my life, as you should well know by now. So, drop the bone please. - Sitush (talk) 19:09, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at CycloneGU's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WP:WQA concerning User:QuickEditor

Hello, Sitush. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I mentioned your talk page in a diff, so I thought I'd bring it to your attention, just to cover all my bases.. - SudoGhost 06:44, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Evidence: The above is a perfect display of the friendship between User:Sitush and User:SudoGhost, a perfect explanation as to why I am being personally attacked by both users. --QUICK EDITOR 14:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Although I'm not seeing how the above comment (which is a pretty standard notice template) is evidence of anything, kindness and collaboration between editors is a good thing at Wikipedia, not evidence of some dark conspiracy. - SudoGhost 15:15, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011 (a recent edit that you made on User_Talk:QuickEditor)

A recent edit that you made on User_Talk:QuickEditor was removed or reverted because it was a misuse of a Wikipedia template. Thank you. --QUICK EDITOR 14:58, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it appeared to be a very valid use of a Wikipedia template. - SudoGhost 15:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Columbia University

Hi Sitush. As a Columbia alumnus, I can access certain electronic databases (such as JSTOR). When I tried to access the dissertation through the link you provided using my ID and password, I got the message "File missing: docs/logup.htm". I guess that means I can't get it. Sorry.

You might want to contact one of the other members of WikiProject Columbia University; maybe one of them is on campus and has better access than I do. Good luck. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:55, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Bill

After reading the Tamil Kshtriya topic i have presented my views on discussion page of Kshtriya in support of merger many days ago.Bill clinton history (talk) 09:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I was aware of that. My point was that the discussion on the merger has been ongoing for two months or so now - there is no rush, there or anywhere else, unless the article is a WP:BLP with problems, or there are copyright violations etc. For basic content issues, Wikipedia is timeless. - Sitush (talk) 14:42, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Please put message on proper discussion page

Hi, Why have you put remark "Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - Sitush (talk) 16:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)" on my user page and not my talk page.

Please do the needful. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 17:10, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I am obliged to inform you. You have been informed. Period.- Sitush (talk) 17:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Thisthat, the AN/I page says at the top that "You must notify any user who is the subject of a discussion. You may use {{subst:AN-notice}} to do so." Any message on your page with that notification is simply a user following the rules required at AN/I. - SudoGhost 17:16, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I understand that I have been notified, though incorrectly. Notifying User can be considered as straightforward action of posting message on User's talk page instead of otherwise. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 17:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

... or it can be done as suggested by WP:AN. Look, you are tendentious enough elsewhere - please do not bring it here as you have already once this week. - Sitush (talk) 17:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The message was placed on his user page, not his talk page, which is presumably what Thisthat is complaining about. Christopher Connor (talk) 17:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah. That's my mistake - trying to get the message out to everyone before I get accused of not getting the message out to everyone. Sorry. I couldn't understand "Please do the needful". Still do not, for that matter. - Sitush (talk) 17:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

It only means that it leaves unwanted lines on my user page, which are already reverted without wait. Never mind about anything else too. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 17:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I do not fully understand that ^ either. I notice that MangoWong has also had some difficulty understanding you today, although usually you are fairly clear. - Sitush (talk) 17:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Dude it means those lines on my userpage took me by surprise. It could be put on talk page that is all. Nevermind. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 17:58, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I have apologised for that. It was a mistake, caused by the reasons given. But, seriously, you are pretty hard to understand today & usually it isn't difficult. Hope you are ok. - Sitush (talk) 18:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Sitush, You should still post a {{subst:ANI-notice}} message on the talk pages of all users who might be involved. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Don't need to apologies. I am ok with anything really, the Undo tool is great. ..ईती ईती नॆति नॆति.. Humour Thisthat2011 06:47, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for letting me know. I will excuse myself from the ANI. I took your advice and I do feel that it's best to keep out of such places. I wanted to add a photo of Indian PM with President Obama on the India page, but it seems there is a strong opposition to that from a few editors who seem to 'own' that Page.

I have been to UK several times, and I love it. Reading, Southall, Wimbley, London , etc. were my favorite places. Let's stay in touch. I may not come to WP as there are more pressing things that have filled my space. Take care. Nameisnotimportant (talk) 05:11, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

India-related articles tend to be one of the somewhat contentious areas here, But there is much to be done on Wikipedia that does not involve India and in which your input would be appreciated, I am sure. It is often actually easier to concentrate on areas where you do not have a possible conflict of interest because you can view the subjects dispassionately. You appear to be keen on finding sources and so perhaps that might be something that would interest you? I know that you have doubts about the usefulness of Google's various search options but there are also resources such as www.archive.org and www.hathitrust.org that contain large libraries of texts ... and there are tens of thousands (maybe hundreds of thousands!) of articles here that are in need of citations. I could point you in the right direction for that if you would like me to, since there at lists of these things and you can pick at them either randomly or sequentially as you prefer. - Sitush (talk) 06:55, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

FUCK YOU!

I have had enough. Shutup and pull the stick out of your ass! You are so fucking stupid and annoying. If you have a problem with my editing call 1-800-KISS-MY-ASS. I bet your parents don't love you. That is why you come on here and attack other people for no reason. This site sucks and is ran and edited by a bunch of nerds living in there parents basements. There is no point in even editing on this site if every edit you make is ridiculed by a pathetic nerd loser. No wonder a lot of people don't like to edit on Wikipedia anymore. I am done with Wikipedia. (I don't care if I am blocked for this.) --QUICK EDITOR 08:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)