User talk:Sitush

... or panic madly and freak out?

Have you come here to rant at me? It is water off a duck's back.

Per your RX request

As requested [1], time limited.

A few toxic comments on Beach Thomas

A couple for starters:

Early Career

• "Athletic prowess and the time spent in achieving it may have contributed to Beach Thomas's poor academic performance, but it probably also assisted him in getting his first job at a public school." The subject of that sentence is "Athletic prowess and the time spent in achieving it", which is obviously plural and therefore doesn't match the "it assisted him ..." bit.

Death

• "He had married Helen Dorothea Harcourt, a daughter of Augustus George Vernon Harcourt, in April 1900, and she survived him." This first mention of his wife and later his family in what seems like a rather inappropriate place says to me that there's a missing Personal life section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric Corbett (talk • contribs)

Woah! Your vitriol is upsetting me ;) I noticed that you had been copyediting and I've just learned of {{nowrap}}, which I've not seen before despite it being used on over 300,000 pages. Good stuff, thanks.

Regarding the "atheletic prowess", yes, it is a howler. Can we just drop the second "it" in that sentence? Regarding the personal life thing, well, I've seen people do it in so many different ways. In my ideal world, I would probably add marriages etc chronologically rather than in a separate section but more often than not it is awkward to do so. So, a "personal life" section would be less jarring than the current layout? I'm just going to do what you think is best here, Eric, so where do you think it would be best placed?

Yours, without honor of course. - Sitush (talk) 20:37, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Ooh, there is a female contributor here who has actually appreciated my attempts to help her in the past. I know that I have a few lady talkpage stalkers and get on great with the likes of Bish but, well, that sort of note somewhat puts the kibosh on Jimbo. Like you, I'll help those who want to progress the important things here but not those whose primary intent seems to be an extension of their real life protest efforts through such bizarre things as accusations of misogyny for use of the word "drama". I think I will go celebrate with a pint at the Eagle. - Sitush (talk) 20:51, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

It's always very tempting to try and write biographies chronologically, but in my experience that hardly ever works for anything other than start-class articles. I now always try to write them thematically, as in the case of Enid Blyton let's say, or Margaret Thatcher. Enjoy your pint. Eric Corbett 21:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Which I've just noticed are both females! I'll get thrown out of that WP misogyny club soon if I'm not careful. Eric Corbett 22:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I know you lady stalkers are ok with me, by the way. It's just that the diff is a particularly good, point-y one. "In yer face", as I believe those in the rougher end of town would say it. - Sitush (talk) 20:53, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I get on just fine with female editors too, despite what my enemies may claim. Eric Corbett 21:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

yes, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

@Eric Corbett: Enemies? I mean, yes, but "detractors" might be better in this new, sunlit politically-correct "Friendly Space". It's a "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" situation. Anyway, I'm off to bed and will hopefully not dream of zeugmas and "Personal Life" sections. Thanks very much for your help, as always.

And, adding @Gerda Arendt:, it is always nice to see you popping in here. Maybe we should opt for "Sensible Space" or something similar, as opposed to "Friendly Space"? We as a community of contributors are here for a purpose and that purpose is not about being friends with everyone (although any well-formed friendship is, obviously, a bonus). BTW, I'm not sure where Erik Möller/Eloquence would fit into either of these marketing bullshit phrases but most likely neither. - Sitush (talk) 00:13, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation, very flattering for Fräulein Kriminelle. You will see on the Main page today that I go for the Inkpot Madonna. She returns to her Cathedral today, after that was closed for restoration for four years, but I see also a woman, working on early education, DYK? - This user learned that the flowers of kindness etc. do not grow on a soil of people thinking of people as toxic personalities, and recommends her stroll. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:52, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

You're not off the hook yet Sitush, I'll be back with more toxic comments tomorrow. Eric Corbett 00:22, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

@Eric Corbett: do you have any more toxicity to dispense, Eric? Or advice regarding my queries to your comments above? It looks likely that you did, given your last comment but perhaps, ahem, you have suddenly, become a loved-up signatory to the cult? Would it make any difference to you if I claimed to be a female half-Indian/half-Inuit widow with one eye, fifteen children and a fairly severe ranking on the Asperger's scale? Or if I claimed to be the avatar of certain WMF employees? - Sitush (talk) 01:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Childhood and education

• "The countryside location inspired an affection in Beach Thomas and this greatly influenced his later observational writings about natural history and rural subjects." An affection for the countryside presumably, but I just can't see the causal link between affection and its influence over his observational writings.
• "Beach Thomas was a keen sportsman during his time at Shrewsbury School". This seems to come a bit out of the blue. When did he go to Shrewsbury School?

• According to this, he started in the Lent Term of 1882. Will get back to you about all the other stuff and whatever else you turn up. It really is much appreciated. - Sitush (talk) 20:32, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Early career

• "Noting that the Olympics were by then being seen as a measure of "national vitality", he wrote that ..." Some reviewers insist that every quotation is cited immediately at the end of the sentence in which it occurs.

War correspondent

• "Beach Thomas was one who managed to reach the front lines in Belgium". I'm not at all sure what's being implied by "was one". The only one? One of many?
• "Beach Thomas was able to resume his role in December of the same year". We've not been told that he gave up his role. Is this something to do with his incercaration by the British Army? How long was he imprisoned for? In Belgium presumably?
• "... as such it ran somewhat against the grain, which had officially tried to emphasise that this was a British war rather than an English one but had arguably shifted the balance too much." The grain had shifted the balance too much?

Later years

• "In 1931 Beach Thomas had lamented the inability of the National Farmers Union of England and Wales to arrest what he saw as the decline of the farming industry." Why the past tense ("had lamented")?

Citations

• There's a full stop at the end of ref #41.

I think I'm just about done now, no more toxicity from me. Eric Corbett 20:59, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Please Help me

On the page Kashmir.

Your opinion'd be appreciated

Greetings. You opinion would be appreciated here. Don't worry, no Hindutva related nonsense, just a caste related question. And no tendentious editors around either. Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:52, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

You are well used to Indian matters

On that basis I believe that your opinion at Wikipedia:ANI#Assistance_requested_at_Fringe_Theories_Noticeboard and the subsequent proposal would prove useful. There is background reading required, and consideration of a topic that some state to be fringe and others assert to be mainstream, together with the behaviour of a relatively inexpert editor. I have worded my request carefully so as to seek not to influence your contribution in any manner. Fiddle Faddle 16:25, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Tim, I'm not great on the deeper aspects of Hinduism and astrology (nor, indeed, any other religion) and I'm really not in a great place at the moment generally anyway. I'm trying to keep out of convoluted discussions where possible. @Redtigerxyz: might be able to offer something - they're certainly my first port of call when it comes to matters relating to Hinduism. - Sitush (talk) 00:43, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

That works for me. I was really calling on your experience with editors from India rather than the topic per se, but if Redtigerxyz woudl like to take a look I think it would be beneficial. Fiddle Faddle 08:21, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Fiddle , Commented. However, I do not wish to continue discussing on the threads about these articles. The user has some good articles, but many have problems. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:29, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Concur. Fiddle Faddle 12:22, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

St John's Church, Manchester

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of St John's Church, Manchester, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: St John's Gardens, Manchester. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 09:45, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I came to say great stuff but it seems I was beaten by a bot. J3Mrs (talk) 10:40, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

@J3Mrs: the bot turned up within seconds! I think that the only church article I've ever had much involvement with was the one for Besses o' th' Barn Congs. I've attempted a restructuring but have no idea if it either follows our conventions and/or is the best way to treat it. I've got some more stuff to add but would appreciate some help/comments etc, especially if I've messed something up. - Sitush (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

My first attempt at a church was St George's Church, Tyldesley. I copied the structure from the numerous church articles by Peter I. Vardy who is great at these things. My suggestion would be to combine the origins and demise into a history section, maybe with those subheaders, and retitle the office holders to Clergy. For a church that isn't there anymore I think it's a great start. J3Mrs (talk) 11:12, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Good ideas, thanks. I've done those and some other stuff. - Sitush (talk) 13:36, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

So I see! You seem to be on a roll, I'm keeping from under your feet for now but you might like this. I've bookmarked some stuff on the Byroms at BNA so I might start to put together an article after the Bank Holiday. I'm having a teabreak from gardening, just dropping by to see what you've done. Keep up the good work. J3Mrs (talk) 14:20, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. We definitely need some extra biographical stuff about the Byroms. I know we have a bio for John but the rest of the family pop up a lot at BNA and elsewhere. If nothing else, we could create Byrom family of Manchester or whatever. I'll leave that to you because I've got to create articles for various putative links in the John's Church thing. - Sitush (talk) 14:25, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Started Edward Byrom, agreed on a family article and name as suggested.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:22, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Highly impressed with the quality of your research and speed in which you've created St John's Church, Manchester which with minor work should be approaching GA. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:54, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I've got some more stuff to add to it but need to be in the mood. - Sitush (talk) 20:10, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Nailed

I am working on editing articles versus editing talk pages[2] but sometimes, oh the sirens call so sweetly. NebY (talk) 08:53, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Your Edit on the WP article "Bene Israel"

Hi, Sitush. I noticed where you were taken aback by a source book that I cited dating back to 1937. Actually, the chronicler, Mr. Haeem Kehimkar, was closer in time to the event in question and should, therefore, be considered a trustworthy secondary source about events that happened close to his time. If you haven't yet seen his book, I would highly recommend it. A pdf copy of his momentous work written by Haeem Samuel Kehimkar, The History of the Bene-Israel of India (ed. Immanuel Olsvanger), can be viewed online. Type the title of book on Google Search and you should be able to see it. Be well. Davidbena (talk) 07:50, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

@Davidbena: my apologies for the delay - I'm not having a great time of things at the moment. I think the best course would probably be to raise this at the article talk page. You may well be correct but there is always a potential problem when a source is "close to the action", in either or both of time and cultural space. As a general rule, we try to avoid pre-1945 sources for Indian anthropology etc but there are some occasional exceptions. - Sitush (talk) 00:37, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

@Sitush:, do you think that there's any scholarly place or room for inserting what Mr. Kehimkar wrote about David Rahabi in the current WP article on Bene Israel? Since there are several opinions regarding the identification of "David Rahabi," perhaps there is a place to mention his view as well. After all, we do find outlined in WP policy what is called WP:UNDUE, according to which: "Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the main space fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources.[3] Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means that articles should not give minority views as much of, or as detailed, a description as more widely held views, etc." Based on this, there is still a place here for the representation of Mr. Kehimkar's view as to who was the real "David Rahabi."Davidbena (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

As I've already explained, you have to ascertain the reliability of Kehimkar. I'm not sure what other views are expressed but if a source is not reliable then that scuppers it anyway. - Sitush (talk) 13:23, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Religion of Jawaharlal Nehru

I have heard a lot about you. We are having a problem with the Religion section of the article Jawaharlal Nehru. An editor is trying to use fake refs to include unwanted lines. Jawaharlal Nehru is an important topic in the history of India. We would be obliged if you can join us in this discussion [3]. Thank you.Indian4747 (talk) 08:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Namas(Rishi)

I do not know who declares the mythology reliable or unreliable. Is Bible reliable ? Was there any Jesus ever except that people believe? Do you think it documented history? Is there not an Article on Bible and Genesis ? Is not there a dispute regarding wherefrom Genesis came ? Do you judge its athentication? I think you have missed the point. The question you raise is not applicable of a mythology. H.H.Resely has mentioned the myhtology , the community has told to him. It is not that he has fabricated it. I do not find any meaning arguing with you. You are beyond any reasonableness. Thanks.It is not a good faith or bad faith editing. Bible is also , and all mythologies are good faith writing. Do you have the honesty to suggest deleting those for that? No you have not . I don't find any meaning arguing. 14.96.35.129 (talk) 13:13, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Mr Sitush you have not replied here . You have not replied anything. Risely has written community faith, the mythology. I am Not editing anymore. Let the non-sense remain there. 14.96.35.129 (talk) 13:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) H. H. Risley is a really poor source and your edit at Namas (rishi) was full of pov-pushing, even down to your choice of article link, which should have been Namasudra even though you claim that to be an offensive term. The Namasudra community has been pushing for a preferred recognition by officialdom for well over a century and this is something that needs to be discussed in a rounded manner at Namasudra, not stated in a pov-y way at a tangentially related article. At best, you could perhaps add Namasudra as an article in a "See also" section of Namas (rishi).

A fair amount of discussion about naming etc has gone on over a prolonged period but there have been so many pov forks created by the Namasudra community that a lot may well have been deleted and/or be visible only on the talk pages of articles that have now been redirected to Namasudra. I'll see if there is anything I can do about that. - Sitush (talk) 13:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

This is probably one of the key books about the community but it is several years since I read it. I'll have to dig out my copy. - Sitush (talk) 13:35, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Invisible marks?

I can't see how to comment on someone's edit summary directly. Only way seems to make a small incidental edit, like the "." that you reverted, then write my own edit summary. DoctorTerrella (talk) 00:06, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Some people seem to manage to make something called a "null edit" but I've never bothered working out how they do it - probabyl add a pointless space or something. In any event, if you want to pursue a conversation then the place to do it is on the talk page of an article and not in edit summaries. (I'm not having a go at you here, merely explaining how things are supposed to be done: many a block has happened because people try to converse through the summaries and, indeed, it is probably one reason why the WP:AN3 noticeboard specifically asks whether or not the complainer has attempted to discuss properly beforehand). - Sitush (talk) 00:12, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. A null edit of a pointless space seems to not to be digested as an edit, shows up as nothing and the edit summary is not even saved. I understand about talk pages, and I've already done my fair share of talking. Just curious, and thanks for your responsiveness. Sincerely, DoctorTerrella (talk) 00:25, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I did realise that you meant well. But out of interest, I'm going to ping @Bishonen and Drmies: - clever, experienced people who can probably put me out of my null edit misery also. How do people do this, you two? I've seen very occasional situations when it might be useful, eg: if I forget to add an edit summary. - Sitush (talk) 00:29, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Too clever by half, Drmies. I still can't see what you did. Am I now blind as well as deaf? - Sitush (talk) 00:56, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I think DoctorTerrella must have missed actually making the space. If you do add a pointless space somewhere (double an existing space, that way nothing will show up on the page), the edit and the edit summary will save. Always did for me, at least. (And no, you won't be able to see what Drmies did, but it was a space.) Bishonen | talk 01:11, 27 August 2014 (UTC).

In that first one I removed what I considered a redundant comma. Just because I could. In the other one, yes--a double space, which doesn't render as anything on the screen. Drmies (talk) 01:23, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

A little confusion going on.

• A null edit is when you click edit and then click save. The reason to do this is because the job queue is running behind. Job queue processes things like updating categories. A null edit will run all the jobs in the job queue for that particular article. For example, the article may register as being part of a hidden category, but the problem was actually fixed. Doing a null edit will remove that hidden category.
• A dummy edit is changing one small thing to record an edit summary. Adding or removing a space will often not register as a dummy edit. Drmies edit was a dummy edit and not a null edit as he said in the edit summary. Of course, saying a "Drmies" edit is another name for a "dummy" edit. Bgwhite (talk) 01:39, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, experimental results on this (admittedly) trivial subject: My adding a space within a pre-existing block of text is saved as an edit (along with my edit summary). Adding a space at the end of the block of text is not saved. At least, not for me. Okay, enough. Thanks, DoctorTerrella (talk) 19:27, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

The PROD

When I searched for chahar jat, got, gotra and so forth, I did not enclose those expressions in speech marks. That will produce fewer results. The books published by Zed and Sage were among the sources I had in mind. I'm sorry if I misunderstood them.

I would have thought that "chahar clan" would be a plausible redirect to the article on the Jats or the Jat clan system, which originally had a list and presumably should have one. (If the clan system satisfies GNG, a list of clans must satisfy LISTN). When I was doing PROD patrol, I was looking for sources that would satisfy WP:R#CRD as well as WP:N. James500 (talk) 19:18, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

@James500: thanks, and I understand. The problem with redirecting non-notable clans to article about the caste as a whole is that often those clan names are used by more than one caste, so we would potentially end up with a lot of redirects that would be pretty much unsourceable, eg: Chahar (Jat clan) (ok, we have some passing mentions for that), Chahar (Rajput clan), Chahar (Yadav clan) etc. Since these things really are little more than Western surnames, and we do not usually have articles for non-notable Western surnames, there isn't much point in retaining them. That's why the consensus has tended to be to delete, I guess.

Please note also that there is also often no certainty that a name used in one region relates to the same parent caste as a name used in another region: they are by no means always synonymous and the confusion is evident even in official government publications, notably those relating to the affirmative action/positive discrimination system used in India.

The other problem with creating a load of redirects is that these caste-related articles tend to be repeatedly hijacked by POV pushers and we simply do not have sufficient people with the ability or inclination to monitor them. We've had a bit of a push to clean them up over the last two or three years but the amount of puffery remains excruciatingly high and those that were doing the pushing have, with the exception of myself, burned out with the stress etc of it all. That includes at least three well-respected admins who have actually now given up Wikipedia completely. We've even had to salt or indefinitely full-protect many redirects to prevent further disruption, eg: for articles relating to the Ezhavas and Bhumihars. - Sitush (talk) 19:35, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

I do apologise. If that is the case, you might want to look at Lali clan as well. James500 (talk) 19:49, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Apologies are not necessary! You were doing a WP:BEFORE, as I had done, but these caste-related things are a nightmare even when people have put in several thousand hours of dealing with them. - Sitush (talk) 19:52, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Reminder of AFD

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nain (surname), creator of this article was a single purpose account. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Addition of images

Hi Sitush, I have a query, is it right and encyclopedic according to Wikipedia guidelines to add images like of a local hotel, school, mall or any place of worship. For example in Jhansi article there are lot of images which are just local with no historical or cultural significance. I had managed to move images in gallery section. Please help me what should be done in any article. Work2win (talk) 05:48, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

talk page stalker comment - Good work Work2win in gathering the images in one place; articles tend to become clogged up with all sorts of un-notable images. Galleries are more appropriate to Commons, so I have transferred the entire section there (c:Jhansi). I've also trimmed the external links because the idea is to have pertinent links and not a large directory of links for every conceivable need. Please feel free to trim any major external links sections in accorance with WP:EL. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 08:41, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Very much thanks Sitush and Green. Work2win (talk) 19:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Namas Rishi/Namassej

The Namas Myhtology

Namas was an ancient sage (rishi), who was a descendant of the Kashyapa lineage (Sanskrit कश्यप kaśyapa), one of the Saptarshis in the present Manvantara; with others being Atri, Vashishtha, Vishvamitra, Gautama, Jamadagni, Bharadwaja.

The founder clan of Bengali-speaking community Namasudra(Namassej) are originated from this mythological sage.Herbert Risley, writing in 1891, 'Namasa' Muni or Rishi 'whom the Namsudras regard as their mythical ancestor'.[1] Though later they were made out of castes, since their origin is Namas Rishi they were accepted as Namasudra meaning Namasya(ben=respectable) sudra or as they preached, Namas Sreej(> ssej) { ben= (from)Namas originated } > Namassej OR Namshya Sreejan >Namasya Sreej>Namassej.They believe in a clan relation like Marichi >Kashyap > Namas > Kirtiban& Uruban or Ariban.

  Risley, Herbert Hope (1891). The Tribes and Castes of Bengal II. pp. 183–184.

MR SITUSH why you have changed I do not know. Mythology and hearsay of the Brahmins are the naming system in Indian Hindu Apartheid.And it was difficult for a community to write or documentation of their mythology who were the highest target of this APARTHEID in Bengal. And only Halton and Risely agreed to document these. The anthropological studies also initially done by these two Britihsers .The others did not agree . Now you are thinking the only gateway of the community to be non-reliable and siding with the Apartheid believers who want the community to be tagged as "SUDRA" Or "BORN-SLAVE". Unfortunately the WP: policy is not followed equally for every article. Priviledged and non-priviledg 14.99.186.159 (talk) 08:45, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Copied fromm Talk Page of Namas08:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.99.186.159 (talk)

Needs attention

Hi. In my opinion, article Mogaveera needs your attention!! Please visit the page when you are free. Thanks. - Rayabhari (talk) 13:03, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Arbitrary heading

Hi Sitush. Arains are 100% Muslim and a landlord tribe. I have detailed history of Arains in Urdu text which proves that the Arains are the Arabs. Arain people maintain there pedigrees and they are the desandants of sevral Arab tribes like Banu Umayya [Umayyad]], Banu Sama, the tribe who ruled the Multan Punjab Pakistan. So don't post wrong information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John.v.v111 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Why have you opened another user account? You were Johv.v111 (talk · contribs), I think. As for your sources, they are almost certainly Tarikhs/Tareeks and are generally not considered to be reliable because they are written by the tribe for the tribe. - Sitush (talk) 18:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Monday strike?

Have I missed something or is this general dissatisfaction? As usual I'm MIA when the excitement happens. --regentspark (comment) 23:36, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

(watching) It was discussed on Eric's talk. (Only: I didn't edit for 4 days - for pleasant reasons - and don't think anybody noticed.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I tried, but the discussion on Jimbo's page is way too long. I guess the comment about finding another hobby is what triggered the strike. As it should. Me, I prefer to take the position that I'm on Wikipedia for myself and don't really give a hoot what Jimbo or anyone else has to say about anything. If I don't like it here, I'll just go away. The harsh reality is that enough "indispensable" editors have walked away and - in the end - hardly anyone notices or cares. Didn't get your Carmen comment though. The happy ending? --regentspark (comment) 11:58, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Will explain later, RP. Got to go out. - Sitush (talk) 09:15, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

There has been a lot of general dis-satisfaction regarding the various recent significant software changes and, more specifically, the way in which they have been implemented. This came to a head with the shenanigans on the German Wikipedia at the tail end of the recent London Wikimania, when a less than diplomatic announcement of the new "superprotect" user right was followed by it being almost immediately deployed to prevent a javascript hack. That hack attempted to limitg the effects of MediaViewer and was broadly in accordance with consensus of a RfC held on that project. Roughly, this situation was similar to what happened here a few months ago with Visual Editor, when Erik Möller stepped in and we were teetering on a wheel-war situation. Erik's high-handedness - even if well-intentioned - seems to be a big part of the problem, to be honest, but ultimately this is a stand-off between the communities and the WMF regarding spheres of influence.

In addition to this, Jimbo has been increasingly causing problems all by himself. He has enunciated a campaign for "moral ambitiousness", declaring that certain people are "toxic" and commenting widely about content creators, who engage in something of which he has practically zero experience. He seems adamant that WP will continue to thrive without such people even though the evidence is to the contrary and he is developing a cult-ish fanclub of various hobbyhorse riders. Then, when he gets named in an ArbCom case, he suggests that ArbCom deal with it by speaking to him privately rather than through a public examination. He attempted a similar thing some months ago when Dennis Brown was unhappy and he has also suggested it as a remedy to me, as he backtracked slightly on his statement that I needed to act with "more honor".

One day a week will achieve little but it does limit withdrawal symptoms for those who are addicted, thus potentially increasing numbers. If that one day rises to two days and then three or whatever, the WMF is going to find itself in big trouble because there is only a small core group of people here who are protecting it against numerous legal challenges re: BLPs, copyright etc and they're not all going to be able to catch up on the crap that gets inserted during the "off" days. The first and best thing that WMF could do is simple: don't introduce half-cocked software that is "opt out" by default or not opt out-able at all. The first and best thing that Jimbo could do is shut up commenting about people. - Sitush (talk) 11:21, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I also did not 'work' yesterday and have a sort of quasi-template on my talk page. I know Eric mentioned working in concert. Should we have a 'wikipedians' category (who are not wikipedians on Monday? ツ ) or a protest project page to sign? My talk page is not all that active, so my template may not be noticed by itself... All the best, Fylbecatulous talk 14:39, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I think that I first mentioned "co-ordinated days off" at Village Pump on the day that the superprotect was used; someone else said something similar and then repeated it on Jimbo's talk page. That strategy would have more eye impact than people taking different days off but, either way, the result would be the same in the long run if the support was there. I know from experience that catching up on big watchlists etc takes time and there is only so much that bots can do.

Any category would be deleted as WP:POINT, as happened to the "Wikipedians who are not a Wikipedian" category (that itself originated with some crazy remark from Jimbo, IIRC: he really does need zip it because, like it or not, he is treated differently here.)

That "crazy remark" came from former arbitrator JClemens, who was commenting on an arbitration case at the time, incredibly. Eric Corbett 16:41, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct. I owe Jimbo an apology for that. - Sitush (talk) 16:46, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

That would be the "honorable" thing to do. ;-) Eric Corbett 16:51, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I should clarify for RP that the specific instance of superprotection was removed at de-WP a couple of days ago but with the proviso that WMF "preferred version" stayed. The user right itself remains. - Sitush (talk) 15:27, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Sitush. Yes, I am still in that redlinked category, (not a Wikipedian); that even the very existence of the members being allowed to stay in a deleted category hung by the skin of its teeth. Fylbecatulous talk 18:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

On your user page

FYI. [4] --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:24, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 09:15, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Case Opened: Banning Policy

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 16, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon ^talk 12:28, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Your edit summary at Cybernetics

Could you please expand a little on your edit comments at Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine: "I'm not even sure that this section should exist, and I'm even more unsure whether this article asserts notability for its subject"?

As regards whether the Synopsis section should exist, it seems to me to fully accord with the suggested structure at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Books#Article_structure.

And is there any serious doubt about the notability of the subject - possibly the most influential technical book of the 20th century?

It would be more helpful if you were to make a slightly fuller statement on improving the article on its talk page, rather than just throwaway remarks in the edit summary. Thanks. DaveApter (talk) 10:45, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Someone has asserted notability now and I thanked them for doing so. They clearly saw what I meant; that you did not is unfortunate but perhaps unsurprising. - Sitush (talk) 10:53, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

And your doubts about whether the Synopsis section should exist? DaveApter (talk) 10:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Can't be arsed, sorry. Some of it was pov-y (I fixed a bit) and I'd rather see a source rather than an editorial but I'm well aware that the Books project has some odd ideas. - Sitush (talk) 11:01, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thanks for the guidance. 8XM (talk) 13:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Firozpur District

Revisiting this after seeing various edits, isn't it actually Firozepur?[5] And the rest?[6] I see GBooks gives more hits for "Firozepur city" than "Firozpur city" so I'm thinking I was wrong, although I thought I'd checked! Dougweller (talk) 08:16, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I've removed the scripts there and at Firozpur pending some sort of consensus on the talk page - the recent warring and the inability of the likes of us to comprehend what is going on is precisely why WP:INDICSCRIPT came about. Although that guidance allows scripts for places, it does require reasoned explanation for the selection.

I've no idea regarding even the English spelling. A quick Google does seem to suggest Firozepur and I've also seen Ferozpur in the past. I think we're going to have to start a COMMONNAME discussion and since it will affect at least two articles, some centralised venue would seem to be better than having people put forward the same arguments in multiple places. Could this be done at WT:INB, with a note placed on the talk pages of both articles? - Sitush (talk) 09:57, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I can't see why not. There's also Firozpur Cantonment‎. Dougweller (talk) 11:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Shiva

You might want to take a look at the editor who just moved this article, which I've reverted. Dougweller (talk) 16:15, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Ramachandra Guha

The Indian edition of the e-book no longer contains the source text. Its also been removed online from Google-books in response to various DMCA complaints. Lindashiers (talk) 08:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Background reading

I came across the sunspot theory of social unrest back in 1986- I told a lecturer about it, as at the time there was a high point in the sunspot cycle- shortly after there was the Tiananmen Square massacre, and the lecturer jokingly praised me for "predicting" it. Anyone who takes it seriously and claims to predict significant social events through studying it is just a modern-day version of a priest studying entrails, and is not to be taken seriously on any subject whatsoever- they are (as Vonnegut says) a cuckoo clock with some of the gear teeth willfully broken off- perfect time most of the time, "cuckoo" at random times. I presume if you're banned from posting on someone's talk page, that means the someone don't read your page? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 09:06, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't presume that. CMDC is obsessed with an anti-male agenda, here and off-wiki. What I do not understand is how she gets away with it, especially the repeated canvassing and point-y asides. The sooner she is site-banned, the better for everyone (including those who really do have gender gap as their concern). She only gets involved in "right-on" topics, such as guns, Palestine and gender gap, and has little interest in improving this place. She is far from being a new user but is adept at pretending that she is or else incredibly stupid (which I doubt). - Sitush (talk) 10:55, 5 September 2014 (UTC)