Revision as of 12:52, 25 August 2012

In support of the Karen National Union and their ongoing struggle against genocide.

= Badaun Edits

Thanks for response and feedback! I edit Badaun to make it more informative. The link to rathore on wikipedia is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budaun_district. As for Sot river, I was looking to create a page on it, as its quite a impt river for people living in the region. Please suggest.

Two more points:

The assam page, seemed to really not an academic account please check

Also like to point out... the article on Mahendra Singh Tikait has been cut down a lot, even after references, please have a look ... found out when i accidently reached his page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahendra_Singh_Tikait

PC Software, etc

Hi Blade, just directing your attention to this section of the current discussion of PC. It seems likely that the devs cannot have PC ready to go on the schedule we originally set, and I'd like to see what you, THO, DQ, and James Forrester think about possible ways to work with that restriction. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That RFA

I was going to support til I saw he's a Dallas fan, UGH! Do I still have to? PumpkinSky talk 22:29, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not loving America's Team is, well, unAmerican. I was raised in Texas so it is natural, but don't understand how someone could not love the best franchise in the league. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- BARF-O-RAMA! PumpkinSky talk 22:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I voted/!voted as you did PumpkinSky talk 23:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- On a more serious note, you have to admit, you never know what kind of question I'm going to ask. At least one of my previous RFA questions was a bit controversial, although I thought it was spot on and challenging. I was expecting a longer reply here, but what impressed me most was his ability to break away from the mold I created and be independent enough to choose his own choice favorite. It would have been easy to just agree with one of the choices I gave him. Independence is a big deal in an admin and the most important trait in my opinion, as that means they are less likely to fall victim to group think. Everything else can be learned. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:24, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - What ? was controversial and why? PumpkinSky talk 23:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hahc21, Q7. Some thought it was a trick question, but in reality it was a very good question to test how "knee jerk" the candidate was, which was my (well founded) concern. A few used it as a basis to oppose and the RfA failed. I actually asked a harder question at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/De728631 and he handled it like a freaking pro, as well as the whole RfA, proving he was ready. I have seen that question copied in a couple of other RfAs, using different BLP subjects, which I take as flattery :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      I generally like your questions, as they're very insightful. The one at Hahc21's was great. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Excellent questions. I saw the trademark one when the RFA was running and also thought his answer was great. I don't have to worry about your tricky questions because I'd get creamed at an RFA. PumpkinSky talk 23:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        Thank you, Blade. What I liked about De728631's question and answer was that it was in reality quite complicated and he was wise enough to say "I don't know", meaning he was willing to ask someone more experienced. Knowing our limits is an important part of being an admin. I like questions that aren't simple, cut and dry, and force them to think "shit, I've never thought of that before" and go read up and figure out how to apply policy. As you know, we 'mins are always having to go and read policies to make sure we are getting the nuances in a given situation. The real test is never the black and white issues, but is always a question of "how do you react in the grey areas?". That tells me how they think, not just what they think. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        I'm waiting for the right admin (probably someone who's interested in contentious topics, like Rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid when he ran) to ask a question about how they'd handle something at AE; I'd be interested to see how that turns out. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Reaction and thinking are certainly key factors. AE questions? That's cruel and unusual punishment ;-) PumpkinSky talk 23:55, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Believe me, there's no way I'd begrudge someone who didn't want to answer it. Not sure if I would have if someone asked me at my RfA, but now I feel like I'm waging a one-man war over there to keep things under control; one never knows where they'll end up. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:56, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kayastha

I submit Kayastha to your tender mercies ;) - Sitush (talk) 18:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My eyes almost bled... ouch! I'll get it when my connection clears up. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:29, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Again. - Sitush (talk) 04:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012_Assam_violence edits!

Hi I want to notify that even after warning and displenary action notice some editors without talking in talk page have been editing out texts changing the meaning and content and bringing imbalance to the post eg. link by editor Zencv, thanks againShrikanthv (talk) 09:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My ban

Hi there, you invited me to request clarification on the extent of my ban on Prem Rawat related articles. I am not reapplying for topic editing rights, but am I prohibited from discussing the situation here? Rumiton (talk) 09:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As of now, you are; if you'd like to appeal that, I'd be fine with it. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 20:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The situation that I could see no way of dealing with is still going on, and unless I can find an effective way of dealing with it there is no point in my reapplying for editing rights. How about I appeal now for permission to discuss the situation here or on my Talkpage(and nowhere else)? Rumiton (talk) 01:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's fine. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks. One of the underlying problems I see is that the editors are unbendingly opposed to each other. You did say you would look out for "further outbursts" from user:PatW but his contributions are more of a chronic, indignant and self-pitying rejection of all other points of view. Here is one: What YOU think is 'right' is to remove any negative tone (implied from the original sources) and to replace it with you and your Rawat supporter friends preferred re-write. This is all ugly, inexorable revisionism in my opinion. The repeated mentioning of Rawat's divinity claims is TOTALLY justified by contemporary sources , as are probably all the other 'imbalances' you seek to 'correct'. I don't care if this sounds like I don't have faith in your intentions. I think your mission here is contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia. And your self-confidence that you are 'making things right' is thinly disguised mocking of people who have frankly tired of resisting your highly biased editing spree. Do as you like. I'm just hoping someone, somewhere will take a look at your dodgy history here and put a stop to this retrograde behaviour.PatW (talk) 22:00, 18 August 2012 (UTC) I don't know how to deal with this stuff, which I find wrong and personally offensive. When I replied to the points he raised, I was accused of "escalating" the problem. When I ignored them, I was banned for "not listening." What do you think? Are these posts collegial? Do they assume good faith? Are they likely to create an atmosphere that will allow negotiation and lead to an improvement in the article? Rumiton (talk) 10:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban

Do you feel that Talknic has violated his topic ban again by this? It looks to me like it's showing a mentality that he's not giving up from the topic itself, but maybe it doesn't violate it.

Thanks. --Activism1234 14:34, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to block over it this time, but yes it's a violation. I'll leave him a warning. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 20:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks. --Activism1234 20:35, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Blade of the Northern Lights - Uh? The current topic ban mentions nothing about "all namespaces". The topic ban from "all namespaces" expired 6 June 2012. In full here talknic (talk) 05:06, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Briefly

what do you want to tell me ? . פארוק (talk) 20:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) He means that you cannot write anything about Israel, Palestine, the political dispute between them, or anything even vaguely related to that, anywhere on Wikipedia, including both articles, talk pages, etc. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Yes, you have. - Sitush (talk) 23:47, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I want to create an article

Hey Mate,

Hope you are in good health, I want to create an article, but I guess it was deleted before, page showed "please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below." So I got your link below.

This is the page I want to create & you deleted it before "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AdEngage&action=edit&redlink=1" I want to create this article again with unique content along with the strong references. Please help me, & let me know what should I do?

Looking forward to hear you soonest,

Best Regards, Carrol82 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carrol82 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

اردیبهشت

Hi. You had recently blocked User:اردیبهشت for editwarring and removing scholarly sources. Well, he is back at it once again, removing a reference to the Encyclopaedia Iranica and technically violating 3RR. I have reported him on WP:ANI. --Lysozym (talk) 21:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This individual did not notify me about her report, nor does she have any grounds for such a complaint when her edit history at Hazara people is indicitive of her disruptive editing. I had initially made a complaint about that, and he/she is evidently seeking to retaliate out of emotion and for no other reason. Quite Sad. اردیبهشت (talk) 21:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This edit is a violation of WP:STALK and WP:POINT. Maybe he can explain to us why he reverts back to a version that is a direct violation of copy rights and draws heavily on obviously falsified content. Maybe he should have read the talkpage first. --Lysozym (talk) 21:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, please stick to your own issue at hand. Also, im afraid that stalking is characteristic of your attidue and has been initiated long before by you, so please do not play a victim here.[1][2] اردیبهشت (talk) 22:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker). Now that an AN/I has been opened, continuing the feud here won't help and it's not the place for it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:43, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]