Jump to content

User talk:Fowler&fowler: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
thanks!
→‎Thanks!: very welcome
Line 268: Line 268:
== Thanks! ==
== Thanks! ==
I don't know if this is the done thing at all (and please let me know if I'm breaking a guideline/etiquette. I am pretty new to WP, out of my depth, and absolutely didn't intend to start that whole process). I just wanted to say thanks for your lovely comment this morning. I'm finding the discussion about language really hard going because much of it is so personal, and it cheered me up no end. [[User:Persicifolia|Persicifolia]] ([[User talk:Persicifolia|talk]]) 00:41, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
I don't know if this is the done thing at all (and please let me know if I'm breaking a guideline/etiquette. I am pretty new to WP, out of my depth, and absolutely didn't intend to start that whole process). I just wanted to say thanks for your lovely comment this morning. I'm finding the discussion about language really hard going because much of it is so personal, and it cheered me up no end. [[User:Persicifolia|Persicifolia]] ([[User talk:Persicifolia|talk]]) 00:41, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
:There is no guideline on Wikipedia that prohibits thanking someone for admiring sensitive writing. So, you are welcome. I have to say I hadn't anticipated the young Libertarians making their last stand at a "wheelchair-bound" discussion. I was unaware they read fiction. I was especially unaware they frequented the plays of [[Aimé Césaire]]. What strange bedfellows an internet search engine will throw up. [[User:Fowler&amp;fowler|<span style="color:#B8860B">Fowler&amp;fowler</span>]][[User talk:Fowler&amp;fowler|<span style="color:#708090">«Talk»</span>]] 02:46, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:47, 4 November 2021

Archive 22 Archive 23


Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

October 2021

October 2021

Information icon Hello, I'm Omer123hussain. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your aggressive reverts to India have been restored because they are reliable cited and you do not discussed on talk page before revert. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Please note: You cannot be selective in reverting particular cited work. All editors are equal on WP; so you cannot assume to take liberty to revert others constructive work without discussion and consensus on talkpage.

If it is 17 years old FA, it doesn’t mean that the article should have 2 decades old content, dynamics have changed and that is what i am trying to update, otherwise the articles FA status will be stripped down. So please cooperate and let us constructively contribute to maintain/replace statistics and dynamics. Hope you will collaborate. :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 09:43, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Points to note:

  1. Please use talk page before reverting reliably cited content;
  2. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  3. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you keep engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.  :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 09:43, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Taking the matter to admins.

I disagree with your views and your conduct. You aren't giving me any other reason other than consensus. I don't know why you are adamant about the wordy lead. I am taking this matter to admins.Akshaypatill (talk) 17:47, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fowler&fowler:I have opened a content dispute resolution - [[1]]Akshaypatill (talk) 18:29, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Subhas Chandra Bose. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. As you stated on the talk page of the article, you are reverting my edits in the leads of the page because, you want to rewrite and shorten the lead. Please don't assume the role of maintainer of the page. We all are here to make Wiki a better and reliable source. Please note edit-warring is not the solution. Akshaypatill (talk) 19:23, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts on Shivaji

You recently reverted my edits on the page questioning the reliability of the sources. Have a search on Google, Sir Jadunath Sarkar CIE was a prominent Indian historian and a specialist on the Mughal dynasty. You are insulting the works of these legends. I ain't glorifying Shivaji. You could have changed the content you have a problem with, rather than reverting all the edits. Akshaypatill (talk) 21:08, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also take a look at WP:Reliable_sources#Age_matters.Akshaypatill (talk) 21:28, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Third edit warning notice of the month

Stop icon

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Subhas Chandra Bose. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Please note edit-warring is not the solution. Per WP:BRD you need to discuss your edits on the article's talk page, i.e. Talk:Subhas Chandra Bose and establish a consensus for them there. This is your third edit warring notice of the month.Akshaypatill (talk) 03:25, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Subhas Chandra Bose

I wish to move an RFC like this one?

Should the introduction be updated from the current (a) to (b)? If not (b), then should it be left as it is?

(a) Subhas Chandra Bose was an Indian nationalist whose defiant patriotism made him a hero in India, but whose attempt during World War II to rid India of British rule with the help of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan left a troubled legacy.

(b) Subhas Chandra Bose was an Indian nationalist who sought to free India of the British Raj with the help of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan during the Second World War. —

I actually did one. But then I realised that there have been two RFCs before. So I rolled back. Since you have been an habitual editor of the page, I wished to consult you. The problem with the current lead is it is a copy paste wording from https://www.amazon.in/dp/1636699650/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apan_glt_fabc_JGYWW5MN3JG1WXRSGW2D which doesn't look like an actual scholarship since the author is a nobody. I've never seen extravagant adjectives like "defiant patriotism" "hero" "troubled legacy" in any long-standing article. In this proposed (b) I've not restructured information back and forth, instead I've just neutralised the word usage. I hope you find this constructive. Appu (talk) 15:38, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@APPU:, that source is copied from this article. I suggest with respect that you not embark on this RfC. You do not know enough about the topic. I have repeatedly urged you in the discussion threads above to work on short overlooked articles and develop your writing and sourcing skills, but you take no heed. You made brave promises that you would work on the climate articles for the different states of India but have done nothing as far as I can tell. You are skirting with eventually getting penalized. Don't say I did not warn you. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:45, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@APPU: Just as an FYI, our text predates the book. Clearly, and sadly, the book is plagiarizing Wikipedia rather than Wikipedia copy pasting from the book!--RegentsPark (comment) 15:57, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Fowler&fowler:You're correct. I know not much about the subject. I think I better leave Bose here. As far climate articles is considered, I conceded that I realised a little letter that they are too heavy for me. So I've been refraining from editing lead of important biographies except for too minor an edit. Also I'm seeing to create articles of some important books I know. User:APPU#To be created. Meanwhile I want to know if Heart disease in India, Jnanpith Award and Kannada and Death of Lal Bahadur Shastri would be some good additions to the platform? Appu (talk) 15:58, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @APPU: On the other hand, in the lead sentence itself:

"whose defiant patriotism made him a hero in India" has been cited to:

  • "His romantic saga, coupled with his defiant nationalism, has made Bose a near-mythic figure, not only in his native Bengal, but across India." (Barbara D. Metcalf and Thomas R. Metcalf's A Concise History of Modern India, Cambridge University Press, 2012.
  • "Bose's heroic endeavor still fires the imagination of many of his countrymen. But like a meteor which enters the earth's atmosphere, he burned brightly on the horizon for a brief moment only." (From Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund's History of India 6th edition, Routledge, 2016.
  • "Subhas Bose might have been a renegade leader who had challenged the authority of the Congress leadership and their principles. But in death he was a martyred patriot whose memory could be an ideal tool for political mobilization." (From Sekhara Bandyopādhyāẏa's From Plassey to Partition: A History of Modern India, Orient Longmans, 2004.

"but whose attempt during World War II to rid India of British rule with the help of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan left a troubled legacy." has been cited to:

  • "The most troubling aspect of Bose's presence in Nazi Germany is not military or political but rather ethical. His alliance with the most genocidal regime in history poses serious dilemmas precisely because of his popularity and his having made a lifelong career of fighting the 'good cause'. How did a man who started his political career at the feet of Gandhi end up with Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo? Even in the case of Mussolini and Tojo, the gravity of the dilemma pales in comparison to that posed by his association with Hitler and the Nazi leadership. The most disturbing issue, all too often ignored, is that in the many articles, minutes, memorandums, telegrams, letters, plans, and broadcasts Bose left behind in Germany, he did not express the slightest concern or sympathy for the millions who died in the concentration camps. Not one of his Berlin wartime associates or colleagues ever quotes him expressing any indignation. Not even when the horrors of Auschwitz and its satellite camps were exposed to the world upon being liberated by Soviet troops in early 1945, revealing publicly for the first time the genocidal nature of the Nazi regime, did Bose react." (From Rudolph Hayes's, Subhas Chandra Bose in Nazi Germany, Springer, 2011.
  • "To many (Congress leaders), Bose's programme resembled that of the Japanese fascists, who were in the process of losing their gamble to achieve Asian ascendancy through war. Nevertheless, the success of his soldiers in Burma had stirred as much patriotic sentiment among Indians as the sacrifices of imprisoned Congress leaders. (From Burton Stein's History of India, Wiley, 2011
  • "Marginalized within Congress and a target for British surveillance, Bose chose to embrace the fascist powers as allies against the British and fled India, first to Hitler's Germany, then, on a German submarine, to a Japanese-occupied Singapore. The force that he put together ... known as the Indian National Army (INA) and thus claiming to represent free India, saw action against the British in Burma but accomplished little toward the goal of a march on Delhi. ... Bose himself died in an aeroplane crash trying to reach Japanese-occupied territory in the last months of the war. ... It is this heroic, martial myth that is today remembered, rather than Bose's wartime vision of a free India under the authoritarian rule of someone like himself." (From Metcalf and Metcalf above).

Elsewhere the late Christopher Bayly is much cited. These are among the foremost historians of modern India, especially of the British period. Will reply to your questions a little later. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:07, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

I don't know if this is the done thing at all (and please let me know if I'm breaking a guideline/etiquette. I am pretty new to WP, out of my depth, and absolutely didn't intend to start that whole process). I just wanted to say thanks for your lovely comment this morning. I'm finding the discussion about language really hard going because much of it is so personal, and it cheered me up no end. Persicifolia (talk) 00:41, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no guideline on Wikipedia that prohibits thanking someone for admiring sensitive writing. So, you are welcome. I have to say I hadn't anticipated the young Libertarians making their last stand at a "wheelchair-bound" discussion. I was unaware they read fiction. I was especially unaware they frequented the plays of Aimé Césaire. What strange bedfellows an internet search engine will throw up. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:46, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]