Jump to content

User talk:Nishkid64

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Singh6 (talk | contribs) at 08:31, 4 December 2008 (→‎You have received what I promised: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This user wrote Abram Lincoln Harris, which is a good article. This user wrote Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, which is a good article. This user wrote Flag of Tunisia, which is a good article. This user wrote Félix Houphouët-Boigny, which is a good article. This user contributes to the Did you know? section on the Main Page. This user is an Indian-American. This user is an Indian-American.
This user wrote Samuel Adams, a featured article. This user wrote Joshua A. Norton, a featured article. This user wrote 1880 Republican National Convention, a featured article. This user wrote Arrest and assassination of Thomas C. Hindman, a featured article. This user wrote Lee Smith (baseball player), which is a featured article. This user wrote Stede Bonnet, which is a featured article. This user wrote T206 Honus Wagner, a featured article. This user wrote Louis Slotin, which is a featured article. This user wrote Barthélemy Boganda, a featured article. This user wrote D. B. Cooper, a featured article. This user helped write Ima Hogg, a featured article. This user wrote J. R. Richard, which is a featured article. This user wrote 2007 Samjhauta Express bombings, a featured article. This user wrote Saint-Sylvestre coup d’état, a featured article. This user wrote 1926 World Series, which is a featured article. This user wrote Alexandre Banza, which is a featured article. This user wrote List of heads of government of the Central African Republic and Central African Empire, a featured list. This user wrote List of Buffalo Bills head coaches, a featured list. This user wrote List of Sultans of Zanzibar, a featured list. This user wrote List of San Francisco 49ers head coaches, a featured list. This user wrote List of heads of state of the Central African Republic and Central African Empire, a featured list. This user wrote List of New York Jets head coaches, a featured list. This user wrote List of Baltimore Ravens first-round draft picks, a featured list. This user wrote List of Jacksonville Jaguars first-round draft picks, a featured list. This user wrote List of New York Jets first-round draft picks, a featured list. This user wrote List of Minnesota Vikings first-round draft picks, a featured list. This user worked on Portal:Business and economics, a featured portal. This user created Portal:Disasters, a featured portal.

I am currently:
Leave me a new message.

Please SIGN your comments using ~~~~. That way it'll be easier for me to identify who is trying to get a hold of me.
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 4 days are automatically archived to User_talk:Nishkid64/Archive 51. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
Wikipedia ad for Wikipedia:WikiProject Malaysia
Wikipedia adsfile info – show another – #204
Archive
Archives
  1. July 1, 2006 - August 20, 2006
  2. August 21, 2006 - August 30, 2006
  3. August 31, 2006 - September 29, 2006
  4. September 30, 2006 - October 6, 2006
  5. October 7, 2006 - October 12, 2006
  6. October 13, 2006 - October 19, 2006
  7. October 19, 2006 - October 27, 2006
  8. October 27, 2006 - November 6, 2006
  9. November 7, 2006 - November 14, 2006
  10. November 14, 2006 - November 23, 2006
  11. November 23, 2006 - December 3, 2006
  12. December 3, 2006 - December 9, 2006
  13. December 10, 2006 - December 16, 2006
  14. December 17, 2006 - December 26, 2006
  15. December 26, 2006 - December 31, 2006
  16. December 31, 2006 - January 5, 2007
  17. January 6, 2007 - January 16, 2007
  18. January 16, 2007 - January, 22, 2007
  19. January 23, 2007 - January 29, 2007
  20. January 29, 2007 - February 7, 2007
  21. February 7, 2007 - February 16, 2007
  22. February 16, 2007 - February 22, 2007
  23. February 22, 2007 - March 2, 2007
  24. March 2, 2007 - March 10, 2007
  25. March 10, 2007 - March 23, 2007
  26. March 25, 2007 - April 19, 2007
  27. April 20, 2007 - April 30, 2007
  28. April 30, 2007 - May 14, 2007
  29. May 14, 2007 - June 3, 2007
  30. June 3, 2007 - June 19, 2007
  31. June 19, 2007 - July 10, 2007
  32. July 11, 2007 - September 15, 2007
  33. September 17, 2007 - October 3, 2007
  34. October 4, 2007 - October 15, 2007
  35. October 15, 2007 - November 1, 2007
  36. November 1, 2007 - November 19, 2007
  37. November 20, 2007 - December 14, 2007
  38. December 14, 2007 - January 3, 2008
  39. January 3, 2008 - January 17, 2008
  40. January 18, 2008 - February 6, 2008
  41. February 7, 2008 - March 3, 2008
  42. March 3, 2008 - March 24, 2008
  43. March 24, 2008 - April 23, 2008
  44. April 23, 2008 - May 15, 2008
  45. May 15, 2008 - June 11, 2008
  46. June 11, 2008 - July 9, 2008
  47. July 9, 2008 - July 29, 2008
  48. July 29, 2008 - August 20, 2008
  49. August 20, 2008 - September 12, 2008
  50. September 12, 2008 - October 21, 2008
  51. October 21, 2008 - Present

Ponty Pirate CU

You can send them to me via email and I will contact the local police. - NeutralHomer • Talk • November 20, 2008 @ 02:09

Edit Warrior

Kansas Bear has been relentlessly stalking me on these pages and vandalzing or removing most of my edits, without explanation, without reason and without any discussion. A good example is his repeated removal of a paragraph I have added in "Armenia–Turkey relations". The paragraph itself links to numerous rebellions detailed in Wikipedia articles, and obviously belongs in an article with that title. None of the facts are disputed. Supposedly a well researched academic book titled "Armenian Rebellion at Van" does not qualify as reference under a heading "Armenian Rebellions" and not in an article named "Armenia–Turkey relations"! Due to my inexperience in fending these attacks intially, and the coordinated nature of these pro-Armenian pov edits, I have been put in a disadvantage already. I am aware of his obsession with these topics, willing to accomodate him and others who are determined to turn these pages into blatant Armenian ethnic propaganda and alternate reality tools, but there has to be a limit somewhere. I would like these attacks, this stalking and this destructive editing to come to an end. Can you help me?--Murat (talk) 04:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fact 1,[1] -continued attempt to edit POV after discussion[2], and after shown a primary source which corroborates the article[3].
Fact 2, Removal of referenced material[4], after posting a contentious statement unsupported by factual evidence.
Fact 3, Continued removal of heavily referenced statement[5], without using talk page.
Fact 4, More edits to remove heavily referenced statement[6], while categorically denying that references exist!
Fact 5, Upon a cursory check of said individual's contributions[7], it is clear this person has an obsession to manipulate the POV of selected articles by removing referenced material that is unpalatable to this person's puerile mentality. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Murat is not in a strong position here. Almost all his edits are contentious ones, inserting marginal opinions as if they were accepted mainstream facts. Also, he repeatedly tries to insert the same material again and again, even though that material has been discussed and rejected in talk pages. That is why those repeat edits tend to be reverted without a detailed explanation. And when he makes useful additions (which I admit he does sometimes), those additions are often buried within more POV material, making it difficult to salvage the good stuff from the unacceptable. If Kansas Bear has been watching the articles he has been trying to edit, or watching his editing history, it is because there is a legitimate reason to do it. However, it would be better if Kansas Bear were to give a proper edit summary when reverting or removing material. Meowy 20:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above editor has removed the POV tag I had attached to three articles (Turkey-Armenian Relations, Bitlis, Justin McCarthy) where there is serious dispute about the objectivity as can be clearly seen in the discussion pages. I have since also added seperate sections for this purpose, though it seems redundant. The tags were not to be removed until a conflict was resolved. That is the Wikipedia rule if I am not mistaken, and it is stated so clearly on the tag. If that is the case, please have these tags re-inserted, as I do not want to be found violating any revert rules imposed on me. I also hope a warning may be issued, as this exmaplifies the cyber stalking I had complained about earlier which still goes unabated as you can see from the edit history of Kansas Bear. --Murat (talk) 02:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Murat has been spamming POV tags. He added them to at least three articles without adding the required talk page subsection giving his reasoning for the insertion of the tag. He has just reinserted the same tags to the same articles after they were removed by me for the above non-compliance, and he has spammed the talk pages of those articles with identical "Disputed Objectivity" subsections containing identical text - text that is clearly off-topic (for example, Justin McCarthy is not a "Turkish city, with a thousand year Seljuk-Ottoman-Turkish history" [8] ). Would it be correct to class these edits as vandalism and get them removed? Meowy 20:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help

I don't know if you can, but could you at least try to help with Nevado del Ruiz? Thanks, —Ceran ♦ ♦ (speak) 22:44, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anything in general. Mostly copyediting. —Ceran ♦ ♦ (speak) 13:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AA

Hey Nish, I saw your vote for Jayvdb and wanted to ask what "AA issues" are. I was planning to support, but as you're one of the editors I most respect, I wanted to be familiar with the substance of your concern. --JayHenry (talk) 04:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick note, I have clearly stated that I will recuse from any AA arbitration at Questions from PhilKnight. My involvement in any arbitration would not be helpful.
I know I have been getting increasingly "involved" in that, culminating with my involvement in the Ehud case. One side of that dispute showed overwhelming displeasure so I have tried to stay away from it since then. If it would help, I'd be happy to review all my admin actions and provide a list of tool use since that case.
John Vandenberg (chat) 05:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note. As I see it, all the Arbs inevitably have some entanglements, but it looks like Jayvdb has been as upfront about it as any of them, pledging to recuse. As a thought to Jayvdb, I would say to remember that Arbitrators wield both formal Arbitrator power, secondary powers such as oversight and checkuser, and the informal (but perhaps as important) power of being on that inner circle, having the ear of the fellow arbs and the community, even when you're not on the formal podium. Sometimes recusing from a case is sufficient and sometimes further steps are needed. As an aside, Nish. I was surprised not to see your name on the candidate list. You'd be good at it. In the future perhaps? --JayHenry (talk) 06:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the way you have handled the case is a very legitimate concern which goes beyond AA. You have not tried to stay away from it, you continued with your very questionable actions. A recent example is this report by Grandmaster against Vacio, regarding Sisak. Three days later you suspiciously created the page about Sisak (eponym). The arbitration enforcement page had become a soapbox because of the report, in which Grandmaster attempted to have a much lesser experienced user restricted by inviting him to revert war. Given the ‘eponym’ use, you knew what the result would be, a confrontation between both users when the eponym was at the center of the conflict (the timing and the exact subject choosing was very suspicious), which you could not have ignored and would have gotten Vacio restricted. This sort of actions which result is to perpetuate conflicts which resulted with unnecessary restrictions unwelcomed. There are legitimate concerns to oppose you. We have seen you deal with cases and witnessed how you handle things. Your beautiful speech has no value when actions speak a lot louder than words.
It does not stop there, the AA case without doubt shows a potential from your side to support your friends (not only those involved in AA). And this underground communications, including trying to have another user restricted from English Wikipedia by asking a checkusers to run a Wikipedia-wide checkusers, to then have your friend use that to have the person with whom he is disagreeing with restricted. Evidence of proxing for others this way, and systematically taking one side is the last thing which is needed. You can for all we know provide sensitive arbitration mailing list materials to your friends since we are at it. Or better, once you have checkusers access run those requests of your friends yourself.
Like another who said it, it's just politics. Recuse does not satisfy me, we've had three arbitration cases, and very questionable at that, but John's statements, opinions and analysis by far were worse than what the most inept arbitrator could have come with. VartanM (talk) 06:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I created Sisak_(eponym) because it "Sisak" was mentioned over on Rlevse's user page around that time in regards to some dispute, and Sisak was obviously not the topic you were all talking about. The way it was mentioned it seemed like it was a pretty vital piece of information for Rlevse to understand, so I wrote the article. John Vandenberg (chat) 09:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the checkuser request that I believe VartanM is referring to. John Vandenberg (chat) 10:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This was a year ago now, so my memory may be imperfect but this is what I remember... Jayvdb requested a crosswiki check at Meta, and presented quite a bit of corroborating material to justify running it. In my considered judgement, as well as that of several other CUs, there was reason to run the check. I worked jointly with Jayvdb, checkuers from fr:wp and other wikis, and we carried out an extensive crosswiki check. It was a complex investigation and it was in some ways inconclusive and in other ways it found things that were concerning about some of the users that were found. I don't think there was anything wrong in any way about asking for this check, the justification presented was compelling. I don't think there was anything wrong in any way about how the check was performed, as multiple checkusers were involved and we checked each others work and findings. So I'm not really clear what the issue regarding this check is, as this was a shining example of how crosswiki checks ought to work. I would suggest that VartanM may not be presenting a completely unbiased view of this matter, for whatever reason. Further, these allegations made about Jayvdb seem completely unwarranted. DarkFalls has it just right. ++Lar: t/c 15:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I sincerely hope that these comments towards John does not stems from your dislike of Grandmaster, or on John's past administrative actions which you seem to have taken a particular dislike in. You are hardly an uninvolved party in this debate, and these accusations are unfounded. Material such as "You can for all we know provide sensitive arbitration mailing list materials to your friends since we are at it. Or better, once you have checkusers access run those requests of your friends yourself" hold no weight whatsoever. Let me note the fact that every checkuser action is logged and monitored by everyone with checkuser access... As for John's "supposed" use as a proxy for others, I would like to see some evidence of this. To put it bluntly, we do not wish to see your hypothesis... rather we'll like the evidence. —Dark talk 10:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the requested meta cu[9] and here is the user creation log for Grandmaster on meta[10]. What are the chances that a user who was trying to get his opponent banned registered at the site an hour after a cu was filled against his opponent? I think John is the one who should answer that question. VartanM (talk) 20:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While this isnt conclusive, this does show that you will leap to accusations without checking your facts. Your own links above are wrong; a few minutes of browsing the history would have shown you that the Grandmaster account was created a day after the initial checkuser request.
Initial CU request: 20 December 2007 07:19
Grandmaster registering at meta 21 December 2007 09:16
There was some other factor in this; I think Grandmaster had some problem with his preferred account name being already taken on meta. John Vandenberg (chat) 00:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK a day, but is it really of your interest when you know that several other cases can be provided, like here when you voted 14 minutes after him. I wonder what kind of account problem he had then :-) - Fedayee (talk) 02:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like JayHenry read this one well; the "further steps" he mentioned are definitely important, and my clear statement about recusal is evidently not clear enough. I should have made it clear that I would not use the checkuser or oversight tools in those circumstances either; I have updated my answer to that question in order to clarify this.
As an example that JayHenry might remember, the Academic Journals project was trying to set up its own delsorting list. I have also been quite active on the delsorting project, and could quite easily have pushed it through, but because I am one of the principle members of the AJ project, it still doesnt have its own delsorting list. (relevant discussion here). --John Vandenberg (chat) 10:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some simple questions John. Were you, or were you not assisted by Grandmaster in the Andranikpasha case? Was Andranikpasha vandalizing or personally attacking any users in en.wiki at the time you started the hunt? Did he behave any differently than any other AA involved user? Just for the record, Andranikpasha started aggressively and was indef blocked by Moreschi as a SPA, then unblocked by El_C and placed under my supervision and since then he authored 100+ new articles. VartanM (talk) 20:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
VartanM, I have repeatedly been asked to disclose unnecessary details about Grandmasters involvement, and each time I have done so every time.[11][12] I have absolutely nothing to hide so I am now writing up an even more details account of my AA involvement. Please bear with me as I also have to seek permission from the relevant people to quote them. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have provided more information in regards to this question at User:Jayvdb/AA involvement. I will continue to expand it over the next few days. John Vandenberg (chat) 17:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lar, Vartan is perhaps biased, but Jayvdb's involvement in the AA issues is of serious concern. No administrators involved in Armenian-Azerbaijani conflicts have ever taken sides to the extent that John has. Let's not confuse the fact that simply because these two arbitration cases have not had much coverage, that there is no evidence of misconduct. He was almost always absent when Azerbaijani sockpuppets were edit warring or being disruptive, yet strangely present when Armenian sockpuppets were being a nuisance. He only reacted slightly whenever users on the pro-Azeri side started to become disruptive.

Much worse, however, he has gone as far to suggest bad-faith conspiracy to influence sanctions against users who have, rightly so, felt that the ArbCom has never adequately taken the matter seriously. True changes are needed in the system, not just great promises which are contradicted by actions. Khoikhoi 04:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Khoikhoi, nobody in good standing has yet suggested that the CU request that I filed was not warranted or appropriate; in fact, other admins agreed that the concerns raised in my CU request warranted the user being put under editing restrictions. I didnt make that call; I put together the case for others to make the decisions. Are you saying the meta CU request was improper? John Vandenberg (chat) 07:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nish, please take the time to review my meta CU request that has brought down this sudden hailstorm on me and go on record as to whether you think it was well founded or not. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Supreeme

Yo, whats good Nishkid64?

I am new to wikipedia and am interested in editing hip hop related articles. One of the things I want to accomplish here on wikipedia is to write an article about Atlanta based hip hop group Supreeme. I noticed that in 2006 you posted an article about them that got deleted. what can you tell me about them and how this article got deleted?

thanks PhillipRube (talk) 20:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sock case

Hi, thanks for dealing with the Cukiger sock case so quickly. Could you do me a favour and keep the checkuser info saved somewhere? Something tells me we will be dealing with this guy for longer than the checkuser logs are kept. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject San Francisco 49ers

Candlestick Park Hello fellow Wikipedian! I just wanted to let you know that WikiProject San Francisco 49ers is looking for participants who are interested in improving the quality of the articles on the San Francisco 49ers! If you want to help, you can add your name to our list of participants, check out our to-do list, and most importantly, improve the articles!
--pbroks13talk? 02:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian Cystic Fibrosis Foundation

I see that you deleted my quote from the Canadian Cystic Fibrosis Foundation since the paper in which they were quoted is regarded by you as "right wing". I'm not sure what the medium has to do with the message, but you appear to be in charge of a lot of topics. Can you tell me if you prefer a source that is "left wing"? The CCFF was quoted in many papers and on TV, so I could recapture the quote from another source if you like. Or have you condemned the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation because they made the mistake of being quoted in a right-leaning journal?

It might be useful to tell us, too, if you are a medical researcher with special knowledge of CF like the staff of the Foundation, or do you simply consider yourself to be "in charge" of this topic, thereby positioning yourself as a gate-keeper entitled to label properly sourced contributions as "vandalism"? Bushcutter (talk) 22:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nishkid64

What's up! It has been a long time seeing you. I just thought of something Wikipedia-worthy. If you have the chance to go to Barack Obama's inauguration (which is the day after Martin Luther King's Birthday), could you please take some camera pics and upload them to Wikipedia?! Also, don't let checkuser burn you out. :-) Take care. miranda 22:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Indian Barnstar of National Merit

The Indian Barnstar of National Merit
Awarded to Nishkid64, one of the most prolific editors and admin/CU from India. We are proud of you ! -- Tinu Cherian - 06:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked account User:Rolgn

Hi, today at 5:44 you blocked User:Rolgn with the comment "(account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite (Abusing multiple accounts: Koov)". Does this mean that User:Rolgn is also blocked from editing? I am asking because I was having some very unpleasant confrontations with User:Rolgn these last few days and I am kind of hoping that your block will put an end to this. Look forward to your reply. --Zlerman (talk) 07:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 66

Hey! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 66: Searching High and Low has been released. You can listen and comment at the episode's page and, as always, listen to all of the past episodes at wikipediaweekly.org. WODUPbot 07:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.

You have received what I promised

Hi Nishikid64,

As promised, I have sent an email to you, please spare some time to read it, thanks --Singh6 (talk) 08:31, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nishkid64&oldid=255806739"