User talk:Kashmiri

I'm interested in how you found these pages

I am also interested in what brought the pages discussed here to your attention. Your editing history doesn't generally show that you're involved in patrolling Wikipedia space, or anywhere really, for technical CSDs. It certainly does leave the impression that you were following their contributions. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish I'm terribly sorry but that's not the kind of discussion I'd like to spend my time on, as it's not helping to build an encyclopaedia, which is what I'm here for. So I'll keep focusing on the latter task if you allow.

By the way, you've gone through my contributions, correct? — kashmīrī ^TALK 19:59, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, at it certainly appears that you were watching their edits and hopped in to csd those pages, I was hoping to address this with an informal warning to not do that with someone you're already at loggerheads with. I'm also hoping to avoid a real sanction like an interaction ban.

Going through their contributions is fine. Everyone does that to everyone else. What isn't fine is opening a gotcha csd with someone you disagree with on content. The battleground in ARBPIA is bad enough without spreading it around.

I haven't reviewed your own contributions in too much detail, but I did review your csd log, which is why I said it doesn't seem like you're normally patrolling for technical csds. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish On seeing a highly problematic edit, I routinely check that editor's other contributions, and I've been doing this for many years. This was especially useful when dealing with vandals and socks, but also GF edits and administrative mistakes (e.g., recently had to go through edit history of an otherwise prolific editor Onel5969 and undo tens or hundreds of their edits). Yes, given that BM's edits have been quite of a problem on Israel-Palestine web pages, I do keep an eye on their contributions across the project, too. Much like they do with my contributions, popping in after weeks of absence just to undo or report my edits.[1][2] Sorry but I have to put up with it and unlike BM have little patience for noticeboard drama. — kashmīrī ^TALK 13:08, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

That's about what I expected. Please try to avoid immediately CSDing pages created by someone you're in conflict with since it's obviously going to raise the temperature. If there are obvious red-line violations you can still address that, but short term test pages to test a user script on-wiki could probably sit for a bit to see if the editor requests deletion on their own. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, it's not whether you or me think it's fine or not – and we never know beforehand how many test pages the user or their script will create next, so we need to react. Scripts that rename pages cannot run wild, untested, in a key namespace. It's also about using namespaces for their intended roles. Talk is not forum, and WP is not test. We have a dedicated WP version for testing – test.wikipedia.org. I'm glad to see that BM at least started to use the Draft namespace for testing, just as I advised them, since that's the most permissive of our namespaces. — kashmīrī ^TALK 13:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft was being used as it’s the intermediate round Robin step. I’m not able to use it for testing as I need to confirm it switches namespaces correctly. BilledMammal (talk) 00:39, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh and I won't "immediately CSDing pages". BM are most welcome to create pages in appropriate namespaces: an article page in mainspace, a template in Template namespace, etc. I promise I won't CSD any article they create in mainspace – assuming of course it's an actual article! — kashmīrī ^TALK 13:28, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

FYI, I didn’t find either of those by watching your contributions - I’d been participating at those articles for a while. BilledMammal (talk) 00:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

May 2024

Your recent editing history at Tamil genocide 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; read about 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. Goldenarrow9 (talk) 20:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Kashmiri reported by User:Pharaoh of the Wizards (Result: ). Thank you. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Administrator's noticeboard/incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Goldenarrow9 (talk) 21:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Outing

Hi Kashmiri, please delete the link to the other editor's instagram page. It's very bad for the user and but mostly for yourself. BoldGnome (talk) 08:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

@BoldGnome It's not that user I believe. It's a coincidence, and the Instagram page is for a business, it does not identify anyone!!! — kashmīrī ^TALK 08:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

In that case it's just bad for you! There is a person's full name in the Instagram blurb/description. BoldGnome (talk) 08:29, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Let me check. — kashmīrī ^TALK 08:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

OK, removed. Thanks for the heads up. I didn't notice a person's name there at first. Still, I believe it's only a funny coincidence, the actual business name doesn't contain digits, it's just Instagram forcing a unique URL, and we never had a Wikipedian by that or similar name per Special:ListUsers. — kashmīrī ^TALK 08:37, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024 warning for Outing

Kashmiri: Truthfully your explanation makes no sense to me. I think some oversighters might conclude given what happened here and with the Nihonjoe AfD that you should be OS blocked until you can make a credible assurance that you will not out editors in the future. Given your quick removal when asked I'm prepared (along with the further reason below) to just issue you this warning: any further OUTING could lead to you being blocked. If this were to happen given the number of chances you've had recently I expect you might find it difficult to gain a quick unblock, where as I think you could plausibly compose an appeal similar to Fram's at this moment and have it accepted. This thinking is part of why I am prepared to just leave it at a warning. However, if another OS were to come along and feel a block was more appropriate I would not argue with them. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Barkeep49 That wasn't outing. That was a tongue-in-cheek response to that other editor complaining about my username. The link was a random link from Google that contained their username, a link to a business anyway. It's more than obvious that this wasn't a match (timezone, business name etc.). If someone still argued that this was a match, then businesses are not allowed to edit Wikipedia under their businessnames. So please don't make it outing when it clearly wasn't. — kashmīrī ^TALK 08:58, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

So that there aren't any issues further down the line, I think that I should clarify that incorrect outing is still outing. Regarding your reply above about Instagram forcing a unique URL, the word(s) in the URL are the username of the account: to pick an example from here, LeBron James' username is "kingjames". In the future, please do not pull a random link from Google to make a point. Sdrqaz (talk) 03:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

@Sdrqaz Correct or incorrect, there must at least be an intent of outing. Wheras my only intent was to mock the absurdity of that editor's comment about my username: your username itself is a contentious topic, hope admins are aware of that. I accept that irony might not have been immediately obvious to everyone. Yet indeed it was a random link intended as mockery. — kashmīrī ^TALK 15:48, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Barkeep49: You can't block over something that happened last year. ——Serial Number 54129 13:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129 I didn't block. I warned for a recent edit and for the pattern it shows based on a second edit that happened earlier this year. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC) It's been pointed out to me that it relates to the subject heading I did which I have now fixed. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

To be fair, the context of the warning was extremely obvious despite your typo/mistyping. BoldGnome (talk) 21:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It probably isn't. I for one have thought there was already a similar outing in May 2023 and that Barkeep was referring to that along side the current one. — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 08:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

To be fair, this is correct. When those in authority warn someone backed by that very authority, it should be considered an exercise in precision. Not a sideshow in pinning the tale on a barrel full of donkeys in wild hope as others here may suggest. Cheers! ——Serial Number 54129 15:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

You should be expressing how you won't do the same thing again, not doubling down. Arkon (talk) 21:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Punctuation for "Shiva Tandava Sotra"

Thank you for correcting my error when I edited the article "Shiva Tandava Stotra" to change the first occurrence in that article. My change was incorrect. However "Shiva Tandava Stotra"' is the proper display for the first phrase in the lede. The display under the image should read "Shiva Tandava Stotra" according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles of works#Quotation marks. Titles of shorter works should be enclosed in double quotation marks ("text like this"). It particularly applies to works that exist as a smaller part of a larger work. Examples of titles which are quoted but not italicized: Articles, essays, papers, or conference presentation notes; short work should not be in italics but instead, be enclosed -by quote marks.

I've looked at several articles concerning short works; the same rule applies to all songs, short stories, and short religious works. Please compare with Paranas. The "Shiva Tandava Sotra" is sixteen quatrains while the Paranas are a huge collection.

If you have a different interpretation, please let me know.

I know very little of Shaivism or Hinduism, though I live within two miles of two temples (in a small town in the U.S. Perhaps I should visit. — Neonorange (talk to Phil) (he, they) 10:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC) —

Move

Assalamuallaikum

Move of Chitral is protect please move it to Chitral (city) like Dir (city) and fix area size is 35.9km and whole district size 14850kms. thankyou. 103.19.48.98 (talk) 15:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Unlike Dir, Chitral does not need parenthetical disambiguation. Regarding area, you are welcome to start a discussion on Talk:Chitral. — kashmīrī ^TALK 16:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

look at simple English Wikipedia chitral page and fix area size of town is 35.9 and now it is city please move it to Chitral (city).103.19.48.98 (talk) 10:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@103.19.46.98: No. Read my response above. — kashmīrī ^TALK 12:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

"Indigenous"

curprev 14:31, June 1, 2024‎ Kashmiri talk contribs‎ m 980 bytes 0‎ Kashmiri moved page Lists of Indigenous peoples of Russia to Lists of indigenous peoples of Russia over redirect: Revert undiscussed move (WP:RMUM): See also the discussion at Talk:Genocide of Indigenous

Please do the same for Unified list of Indigenous minority peoples of the North, Siberia, and the Far East of Russia - Altenmann >talk 21:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Altenmann Done. Cheers, — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Notice

You have recently made edits related to Sri Lanka. This is a standard message to inform you that Sri Lanka is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

"Shiva Tandava Stotra"

I believe this part of the Manual of Style applies to the article "Shiva Tandava Stotra":

MOS:NOITALIC states: The convention of italicizing non-English words and phrases does not apply to proper names; thus, a title of a short non-English work simply receives quotation marks.

— Neonorange (talk to Phil) (he, they) 21:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC) —

Well, that may be the tradition within the so-called Western world (e.g., song titles are not italicised; album title is). In Indian studies, all titles are italicised. This has perhaps to do with the fact that larger Sanskrit works are not copomsed of smaller works, (like album of songs, or poem book of poems), but instead, certain passages of larger works are considered works on their own.

Things get more complicated when we consider the traditional classification, when poems can be part of a work which itself is part of a larger work, which again can form part of an even larger work. The common "Western" italicisation rules are not really applicable!

Cheers, — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:05, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Julian Assange

FYI, since I see you closing a lot of discussions at that page, ARBAA2 is not under extended confirmed restrictions - IP editors may participate without restrictions.BilledMammal (talk) 00:35, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Indeed, I didn't spot the difference on the cursory glance at the TP notice. Thanks. — kashmīrī ^TALK 00:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Discussions however may be closed for other reasons, particularly where they are edit requests which have been denied or just plain trolling as the gender one appears to be. TarnishedPath^talk 01:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

:) — kashmīrī ^TALK 01:16, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Kashmiri, you (still) have a notice you've posted at Talk:Julian Assange#Kevin Rudd's Involvement saying that certain types of editor can't participate in discussions. I followed the link you gave and didn't see anything about that on the arbitration page. Are you sure? I thought in certain cases certain categories of editor couldn't edit the article, but I'd be surprised if they can't participate in discussion. Where exactly on the arbitration page does it say that? E.g. what words to search for on the page? Thanks for clarifying. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 02:11, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

@Coppertwig: Thx, done. — kashmīrī ^TALK 06:57, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Silly joke I didn't want to inconvenience the eventual RM closer with

You're not the first person to make this assumption. First I made a notice for my user talk page, next I guess I'll have to make my signature something like Kinsio is XC, I promise (talk ★ contribs) 😭 Kinsio (talk ★ contribs) 15:15, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

@Kinsio: That! Or have the team behind Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups add EC status to the popup :) — kashmīrī ^TALK 00:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

It happened again so I decided to make my signature what it is now lol Kinsio (talk ★ contribs ★ rights) 00:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Looks great! The stars give it a feel of a Western movie :D — kashmīrī ^TALK 05:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Noor Muhammad Maharvi page

Hi, i Believe you reverted some revisions done on Noor Muhammad Maharvi page as his complete name is Khawaja Noor Muhammad Maharvi as cited on that article and it is totally common in this part of area and moreover noone has even objected once in that matter because many sufi saint has that prefix used. Can you elaborate why you did that? Alragon1 (talk) 16:44, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Khawaja is not a name. Nobody names a child, "Khawaja". — kashmīrī ^TALK 16:50, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

What about Khawaja Ghulam Fareed? Alragon1 (talk) 17:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I think you are right but i did write more commonly as because he is commonly known by that name. Alragon1 (talk) 17:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

True, but we include titles and honorifics only if the person is almost never known without them (e.g., Saint Peter, King Arthur, etc.). See MOS:HON. For Maharvi, however, there are many sources that call him simply "Noor Muhammad Maharvi": [3][4][5][6]. — kashmīrī ^TALK 20:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

ok then i want to tell you Maharvi is also not a name its a suffix mostly used to show locality of a person in his case because he was from mahar sharif many other people who are not related to him call themselves maharvi too for not confusing please use Noor Muhammad instead of Maharvi alone in article atleast that's his proper name. Chill Alragon1 (talk) 20:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Regarding your recent WP:ARBECR revert on Talk:Gaza genocide

Just wanted to make sure you know that when you're doing a revert related to WP:CTOP, you should also leave a message on the user's talk page. For reverts to enforce WP:ARBPIA4's WP:ARBECR, {{subst:welcome-arbpia}} is also often appropriate. I happened to notice your revert so I notified that user, but ideally the one reverting should do it so no one gets forgotten about. Thanks :) Kinsio (talk ★ contribs ★ rights) 04:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Kinsio, indeed it's often a good practice to notify users, but this is mostly done when users may be unaware of the sanctions in place. However, in this instance there's a huge banner that warns editors about sanctions, and it's really okay to simply revert editors who violate them with a brief explanation in edit summary. This is how it has been done in Israel-Palestine articles for months and years, especially during periods of hightened disruption from non-EC editors. — kashmīrī ^TALK 12:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll defer to your longer experience than me on that then, good to know. Kinsio (talk ★ contribs ★ rights) 12:25, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

It's perhaps more about observations during the last months than wiki experience (yours is also impressive under all accounts!). At the height of times, there were dozens of non-EC editors a day trying to add their POV to ongoing discussions on every page dedicated to the Gaza war... Editors just kept reverting. — kashmīrī ^TALK 14:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Let's Encrypt.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Let's Encrypt.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the Zurich RM

Thank you for getting it done. I sadly missed the vote itself, but I am delighted to see the vote swing the right way this time. It still boggles my mind that there are people arguing for the umlaut - I suspect they don’t actually live in Zurich and don’t realize the real-world usage. (Nor that English didn’t simplify the German name, but actually directly adopted the French name, as it originally did for a great many Swiss cities.) Anyhow, thanks again! Cheers! — tooki (talk) 22:57, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

No probs :) That wasn't too difficult. I wish we had fewer editors who'd make such nonsense arguments as there, beceuase next they'd perhaps argue that Pakistan is a "lazy spelling" of Pākistān, Mumbai of Muṁbaī, and Tokyo of Tōkyō. We're lucky that they had limited themselves to the age-old anglicised name Zurich, and glad it's resolved. — kashmīrī ^TALK 20:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Twitter: Requested Move 20 June 2024

Hello! I totally agree with your assessment regarding the speedy close of this RM. That said, I was interested in what a reasonable period of time would be before the next RM, since it seems inevitable unless some de-rebranding happens. Which is funny, because a parody Musk post was submitting a poll to revert to Twitter or stay with X, and the overwhelming majority wanted Twitter back... I guess we'll see! Cheers, Matthieu Houriet (talk) 20:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Assuming good faith is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia

Please review this tutorial.

WP:GF Tobyw87 (talk) 05:14, 20 July 2024 (UTC)