Jump to content

User talk:SpacemanSpiff: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2015/September) (bot
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 126: Line 126:
</div></div>
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=681519218 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=681519218 -->

==Ban Query==
Hello! All the admins had problems with my History editing relating to Indian kings, dynasties and empires. But none has ever expressed any issue regarding [[Jainism]] or [[Digambara]]. The ban as you've informed has been imposed for Indian religions. I did not do anything wrong with the same, did I? I think the ban, if you feel is necessary, should be on Indian Royalty or History or something. Please reconsider. Thanks -- Pankaj Jain ''[[User:Capankajsmilyo|Capankajsmilyo]] <span class="plainlinks">([[User talk:Capankajsmilyo|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contribs/Capankajsmilyo|contribs]] '''·''' [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Capankajsmilyo&project=en.wikipedia.org count])</span>'' 07:48, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:50, 26 September 2015




Deletion of page G. Satheesh Reddy

Dear SpacemanSpiff,

The page which I created was about a globally renowned Distinguished Aerospace Scientist Dr G. Satheesh Reddy. The contents mentioned in the article which I last revised did not have any duplication of data except for his awards. May I request you to restore the article please. Regards. Santosh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeroind (talkcontribs) 12:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroind, I don't know what it is with this bio and copyright violations but you are not the first account filling it with copyvios. I will not restore it as all revisions so far from the two deletions have been copyvios. Please read WP:C to get an understanding of our copyright policies. If you wish to create an article please follow WP:MFA. —SpacemanSpiff 12:29, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moving Ramjas College

Hey! There change the name of Ramjas College to Ramjas College, Delhi. And delete if any Redirected page is created with name Ramjas College. As we are on a mission of changing name of all the DU colleges as College name, Delhi. Same as in the case of Oxbridge ( University of Oxford & University of Cambridge). Hope you'll understand & corporate. Thanks. ISahilBhaskar (talk) 14:58, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ISahilBhaskar, who is this "we"? Please follow the process listed at WP:RM and open a move discussion if you wish to move any page. Also, I don't think you should be on such missions on Wikipedia. —SpacemanSpiff 15:01, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
SpacemanSpiff, "we" are Delhites University of Delhi students. And how could you say it useless. It'll even improve the articles signalling that Colleges location & affiliation to University of Delhi. I'll still request you to make changes. ISahilBhaskar (talk) 15:07, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please understand our policies. I have left you a welcome note, please go through the linked policies and guidelines. I see that Thomas.W has already alerted you to a few issues with your edits. The "missions" etc of you and your friends can work when they coincide with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, not otherwise. —SpacemanSpiff 15:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Religious data for Indian states

Hello. I noticed your revert on Delhi so I thought I'd tell you that the editor you reverted had added correct numbers, not fake data. I don't know if their other edits are correct since I don't have that material at hand, but according to this file from the official Census 2011 site the data for "NCT of Delhi" were correct. Cheers Thomas.W talk 15:26, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The source that's within the article now supports the current number, that's the one I checked. This from the article has the population figures that are currently in the article. As for the religious data they changed the 2001 sourced data to something that was unsourced, and this page on the census site didn't have any proper info on it. Sigh, it's all so confusing. I'll self revert and change the source. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 15:35, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It would have been a lot better if there wasn't any data at all for religion in those articles. Everyone is fighting over it and trying to change the numbers to suit their views... Thomas.W talk 15:42, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just wait until the caste data is made public, this was the first time that was recorded! —SpacemanSpiff 15:48, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
<sigh> Thomas.W talk 15:51, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) See this related INB discussion. I had updated the dempgraphics sections of some 10-15 states, but got waylaid with other stuff before getting to the rest. Fwiw, Abusaid's numbers are correct, although he should have of course updated the reference too while updating the stats. Abecedare (talk) 15:52, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I seemed to have missed that, but we probably have to go through with a round of "source cleaning" on all these articles as we've got far too many disparate census pages being linked within the same article (I just saw that at Chandigarh which had a similar problem as the Delhi article). —SpacemanSpiff 15:57, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I had covered the states upto J&K in this list + Maharashtra and Telangana. The others need to be updated (or, checked to see if someone else already did the work). If anyone is interested, I can email them a modified version of the census excel sheet with the percentages calculated. Abecedare (talk) 16:09, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A, but we have something like another 4-5 refs with conflicting data included within articles. I just randomly went to Jharkhand which is something you didn't tackle and see that there's 2001 data, a 2008 table with 2011 data, conflicting population numbers, data from 2001 mixed with a ToI report from 2015 and so on. A major overhaul would be needed of this entire mess. —SpacemanSpiff 17:06, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
True. Even in articles I did tackle, you'll find similar problems with other demographic data (see my edit summaries here, here, here etc). Basically, we need more (cluefull and neutral) editors working on and watching these articles... and I want a pony. :) Abecedare (talk) 17:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 September 2015

pre emptive protection?

Is there sufficient cause to preemptively protect Death of Subhas Chandra Bose in light of the recent nonsense? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:29, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I wasn't aware of the existence of this article, and I expect that it will have to be tackled sooner or later. This might merit an exception as it is exclusively the disputed content in the other article, so I'll protect now. —SpacemanSpiff 19:33, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your last edit on article Ravi Tripathi. Now it really looks great. Smiles --Jeeteshvaishya (talk) 16:05, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you keep an eye over this user's contributions? His edits are clearly problematic – in Bipasha Basu filmography and Kareena Kapoor filmography. Thanks, Vensatry (ping) 06:04, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple editors active on these pages so I suggest taking to WP:AN3 for edit warring. I'm going to be a bit sporadic
It's not just about edit-warring. If you look a his edits they are quite problematic. Vensatry (ping) 18:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see a tp discussion and it seems to go in a direction, if there's further disruption after that it would have to be handled as such. In this case I can't really take a stance on whether it's right or not as it can be a difference of opinion. The edit warring is what's problematic. I'm going to page Cyphoidbomb as he seems to like adminning the Indian films area and I'm not going to be on only very intermittently over the next few days, perhaps he can keep a watch, else, best bet is to take to WP:AN3 if an when a problem comes up after the talk page discussions. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 04:59, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On what citations you reverted back my changes on Hosur page?

You had reverted my changes on Hosur page . On what basis you did it? i have attached proper citations but still you reverted and added wrong content without any citations? Justify your content added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FriendRahul (talkcontribs)

I have not added any content, I have reverted your change of adding that the population is 80% Telugu because it is solely based on the claim of a politician who has got other facts wrong within the same sentence (note: this portion is not verifiable through any WP:RS data, just that the other claims have been verified to be untrue). —SpacemanSpiff 17:26, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You had reverted back again my content with the data that doesnt have any citations. alos you removed my attached wikitravel data cite reference. I am a obidient user of wiki and i have been donating for it only bcz i need it to be a good source of data with proper facts. If you gain revert back my changes i will complain to wiki and it is a serious concern related to our hosur telugu community.

reverting back my appropriate content on Hosur with that of inaccurate data

I will take this seriously to the notice of wiki if at all it is reverted back with false data. you are promoting Wikipedia:Vandalism. Its a serious concern and it will not be entertained. If your data reverted is appropriate then why there is no proper reference to cite?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FriendRahul (talkcontribs)

Sigh, once again, I don't have any interest in the content but you adding stuff that is unsourced or poorly sourced is the problem here. You are likely to be blocked if you continue this behavior of adding opinion as fact and not providing reliable sources. —SpacemanSpiff 03:12, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DRN notice

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Hey Spaceman, this is in relation to a content dispute on Hosur. I am not the filing party, nor currently involved in the dispute. Hope to see you soon, Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 10:53, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring article on Dr G. Satheesh Reddy

Dear SpacemanSpiff, I feel that though there might be some repetitions of information pertaining to the article G. Satheesh Reddy, if we remove that, then the article is absolutely neutral and needs to again released in wiki. You have vast expertise and I am sure you will be able to remove the required contents and restore the article. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.99.157.14 (talk) 12:15, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The problem isn't repetition but copyright violation. I'm assuming you are the editor in question, but there's been repeated copyright violations on that article despite multiple notifications to the editor and the sockpuppets. This is clearly in violation of our policies and until that is cleaned up the contents will not be made visible. —SpacemanSpiff 14:24, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 September 2015

Ban Query

Hello! All the admins had problems with my History editing relating to Indian kings, dynasties and empires. But none has ever expressed any issue regarding Jainism or Digambara. The ban as you've informed has been imposed for Indian religions. I did not do anything wrong with the same, did I? I think the ban, if you feel is necessary, should be on Indian Royalty or History or something. Please reconsider. Thanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 07:48, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]