Jump to content

User talk:Sitush

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rjpsingh (talk | contribs) at 22:19, 4 March 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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

Citation Note

Since you are a Wiki expert. Why don't you cite my piece the way it should be. I have provided references. Things like WWI and WWII are historical facts. Go through it and help me cite it yourself. I think it will make you happy. Go for it, please please !!!

Revert Note

Okay Sitush - let's talk about what "History" is. Would you like to have a "philisophical" discourse or modern version of definition discourse.

For example "Battle of Loos" was a historical fact. For example "King Commission Officers" was a historical fact. For example "Military Dispatches" were indeed printed in London Times. For example "World War I" is event that really really happened. You don't believe it happened, Sitush? For example "World War II" is event that really really happened. You don't believe it happened, Sitush?

And tell me Mr. Sitush...what kind of sane man asks for WWI and WWII citation? Its like asking citation for a statement when I say "we live in planet earth". I mean these are basic facts everyone knows....Comon On !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjpsingh (talk • contribs) 22:17, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced Citation

Dude - I am not here to argue with you since I can't win as you are Wiki police. But I must ask you to leave history alone. Help me understand of "why, what, how and where" when you say cite references. I have given enough references about World War I, World War II, Battle of Loos in France against the German Nazi Forces, King Commissioned Oficers and Military Dispatches that were daily published in London Times during WWI and WWII. What references do you need besides these? In addition, I have provided various links to other Wiki pages on these topic for validation and cross references !! Please leave my recent addition about people who are related to House of Tulsipur who fought in World War 1 and World War II alone. These people, unlike you and I who take freedom for granted, gave the ultimate sacrifice with their lives to free the world from the Nazis !!!!!!!!!

Please don't delte my comments. I am user rjpsingh on Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.49.14 (talk) 22:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction in your addition and deletions of cited content

Since you are repeatedly deleting my contributions over various articles without discussion (see my contributions page) and talk page strewn with your messages . I find your selective actions contradictory .

We need to discuss the serious contradictions in your appropriating the privilege to add or remove content with citations by other editors .There are instances galore but I am going to discuss here only two such instances .

Lets take instance no 1 first regarding a dodgy book Kshatriyas_and_would-be_Kshatriyas - which is currently citation no 18 on article Khatri .
An article which you ostensibly started editing on 23rd September (and subsequently deleted various valid content and citations) and on which you have done considerable work deleting and adding citations as well as conflicting with other editors trying to contribute content .

Is this book a valid citation for a Wikipedia article or not ? Because you have been instrumental in both creating this citation as well as condemning it . Since you have have stated yourself that you are not happy with this citation .

Whereas you state you are not happy with the citation , and yet it stays on the article inspite of your minute involvement with the article regarding edit contributions by others .

Is this book a valid citation for a Wikipedia article or not ?

Next lets discuss the article Baid and the citations you have provided there that contradict your own statements to others regarding quality of sources and content.

Intothefire (talk) 13:59, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The book is a reliable source for itself, ie: for use in the article concerning that book. - Sitush (talk) 14:04, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • But you have not responded to my specific question , which pertained to asking you if this book fits wikipedia 's standards for a valid citation on Khatri article or any other article . Your answer is obfuscating ....you say its a reliable source for itself . Earlier you yourself state nor am I brilliantly happy with it as such .

Intothefire (talk) 19:04, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have had this discussion before, and it involved people other than myself. Unless you have anything to add to that discussion then this is a pointless repetition. And if you do have something to add then I rather think that the best place for it is at Talk:Kshatriyas_and_would-be_Kshatriyas or Talk:Khatri. However, please do note that repeating yourself is unlikely to achieve much as both Janette Doe and utcursch adequately explained the situation. - Sitush (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And he's copied the Jogendra comments here as well. JanetteDoe (talk) 17:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is what ITF and RIK do, time after time. It is tendentious, imo, but we'll just have to live with it for now. I do not expect to have to live with it for too much longer, however. - Sitush (talk) 17:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions

Hi Sitush, the proposal to impose discretionary sanctions was enacted; if you need a template to inform editors about them, I have created this one, basically coping Template:Uw-sanctions. Feel free to use it, if you wish. Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 23:46, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. My worry now is that I will inadvertently overstep the mark! Nonetheless, it is a positive move and I thank you for proposing something that has been suggested but not followed through on far too many occasions (I am one of those who can be tagged with that failure). - Sitush (talk) 01:08, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the template, and at the link to the sanctions page, and even after searching around on various policy pages was not sure that I clearly understood what specific behavioral guideline was imposed, nor what specific penalties were established. Scientology and Free Republic editing sanctions, for example, are pretty clear. Caste is very vague. What is your understanding, and can you point me to a link that explicitly defines expectations? Thanks. JanetteDoe (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think that we all have to feel our way forward on this one. "Discretionary" appears to mean "discretionary". It is not an entirely satisfactory state of affairs but the reasoning behind it seems to be that any admin can take any form of appropriate action to combat, for example, obvious disruptive editing without the need to jump through quite so many hoops as are sometimes required. I expect that this will eventually turn into a 1RR rule but right now it does not. The key point to note is that contributor must be warned beforehand and the warning needs to address the specific actions that are deemed to be problematic. If those actions persist thereafter then the admin's discretion will come to the for. I rather suspect that the example of the 2.x contributor at Rajus does or would fall into that category in future. So perhaps would repeated insulting etc comments even though they might not usually meet the bar of WP:NPA. But, really, it is all very muddy waters at the moment. One thing seems sure to me: there will be a few complaints about alleged arbitrary/excessive admin actions at ANI before it all settles down. - Sitush (talk) 21:51, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)Basically, it's these sanctions. The only difference is that admins have been permitted to impose them by the community and not by ArbCom. Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:54, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but I read that a few days ago and it still seems as clear as mud <g> I rather suspect that JD has read that page also because that's what conscientious people do. I bet that if I watched sufficient articles re: Ireland etc (currently watched: 0) then I'd soon get the hang of it. It does, however, explain why some people see this move as favouring the regulars: if the likes of myself do not understand the proscriptions particularly well then what hope is there for a newbie. Nonetheless, I do think it is a good thing to do: there will just be some teething problems, IMO. - Sitush (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but I read that a few days ago and it still seems as clear as mud Oh...

The basic point is that, usually, it is very difficult to block for low-level disruption: tendentious editing, I-didn't-hear-that type of behaviour, general incivility that does not rise to the level of personal attack, filibustering. In all these cases, it takes time and patience and blocks are issued only after considerable disruption has been caused. With these sanctions, hopefully, we'd be better equipped to handle them: first a warning, then, if the user doesn't mend his ways, we can start imposing sanctions (increasing blocks or topic/article bans). Discretionary sanctions basically lower the bar for the imposition of sanctions. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I take it to essentially mean that an admin can act unilaterally in cases where community consensus would otherwise be needed. For example, an individual admin cannot usually impose a ban, but with this in place they can - the community has in effect pre-approved such actions -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Questionable citations about Baids and Hindus

I am seeking to make sense of contradictory stances and standards you adopt in different articles concerning validity of sources . Since the matter concerns several articles the best place to discuss is your talk page where a convergence is possible for a discussion spanning several different articles .

Sitush you have incessantly deleted my contributions without discussion , nay even deleted my discussion on various talk pages . Then posted messages on my page calling me incompetent because of sources I have used .

But the contradiction of your own usage of questionable sources and vilifying citations is self evident . Lets take one more example :of article Baid .

7 December 2011 -On this article which was about a community Sitush adds the following content  :

  • Since you quote William Crooke you do believe him to be a valid source for a Wikipedia citation , better than Tod who you often delete ? ........ (You have off course completely rewritten a non neutral article on Tod) .
  • By which yardstick is Tod not a valid source if according to you William Crooke is ?
  • By what measure is this quote by a William Crooke a sound contribution about the Baid people ?
  • How is the furtherance of encyclopaedic information about the Baid community of ayurvedic doctors achieved by quoting William Crooke statement which you added viz :such people, who were Hindu, to be "incompetent" in their medical practices ?


Now whats wrong with Tod if you keep deleting him as a source even as you give yourself the prerogative to yourself use William Crooke ?
Intothefire (talk) 18:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All dealt with previously. I have no desire to go through all of this with you again. Your hounding of me is ridiculous. - Sitush (talk) 18:54, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But Sitush thats not true see Talk baid Page its not discussed here ? perhaps you would like to tell me where it was discussed . Intothefire (talk) 19:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree with you Intothefire that how can one use William Crooke and slam Tod at the same time. Ror Is King (talk) 06:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pannu

I just took a hatchet to it. Considering the way it looked before the chop, I gather it's not on your watchlist. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:13, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, not seen that one before. Some of those sources for the "notables" were, erm, bizarre. Nice job. Since it is also allegedly a common name in Finland, it adds to the general idea that associating people with a caste merely by dint of their last name simply does not work. I am sure that there are Indian people in Finland but scarcely sufficient in number to make it a common name! - Sitush (talk) 04:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the Finland thing is sort of off topic too. Anyway, there was a ref or two for a couple of the people, but I zapped the lot until verified. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:17, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Your recent editing history shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. You have reverted edits on James Tod twice already 1 [1]  ; 2 [2]. Please don't indulge in edit warring. Ror Is King (talk) 06:29, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nowhere near 3RR, nor will I be the first to reach it if you continue in this vein. You really need to spend a little time trying to understand how the policies work. - Sitush (talk) 06:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well your first revert [3] called my edits "utter nonsense" and the second one became a good faith [4]! I must have done something awesome to deserve this :) Ror Is King (talk) 06:53, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can count & I opened a discussion. At the time of my original revert you had omitted sources and added a completely unnecessary cite request.. Let's keep the discussion on the article talk page. You are just pursuing some sort of vendetta here, methinks, and I would rather that it happened in full view. - Sitush (talk) 06:56, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Skip the persecution complex. I still do not know what unsourced matter I added to Tod that you are chiming about. You are too trigger happy. We have seen that your assertion that I deleted Frietag was obviously a lie. Ror Is King (talk) 07:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/U

I have decided an RFC/U is on order for TG's shoddy sourcing and edit warring of uncited content into articles. As you expressed alarm over one aspect of his behaviour I am informing you in case you would like to endorse it.[5] Darkness Shines (talk) 13:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have not had sufficient involvement with the contributor, sorry. What I have seen is a mixed experience for me. & mostly weighed on the downside, but the scope is incredibly narrow. I think that you need to find people who have had a greater interaction. - Sitush (talk) 13:45, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non free image

The image the IP user placed on Talk:Rajus and that actually has been placed on Saptarishi appears to be from this page: [6]. This means that not only is it not a WP:RS, it is probably a copyright violation. I tried looking at both the relevant policy pages and Moonriddengirl's policy pages and was very confused as to where to start. If you would get out your wikimachete and cut through the confusion and tell me what needs to be done about this image and what steps I should take first, I'd really appreciate it. Alternately, I am fine if you just decided to do it yourself. JanetteDoe (talk) 06:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It does look dubious but it also looks messy. When I first saw it a few days ago I could also not make my mind up whether the stains etc were real or added for historical effect, with the colouring-in intended to emphasise the suggestoin that this is a derivative of an out-of-copyright work! I was as lost as you. I think that Magog the Ogre might be the best person to ask, with the expectation that it will likely end up at WP:PUF or its Commons equivalent. Do you want to ask them? I'll keep an eye on events. - Sitush (talk) 06:37, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to list it at WP:PUF, but am having difficulty with labeling the image and notifying the uploader. Either I've done things incorrectly (possible) or the templates are misbehaving. In any case, I left a "Help me!" message both on the WP:PUF noticeboard, and also on Moonriddengirl's talk page, as I've heard she is a guru of copyright. Hopefully I can get it straightened out shortly. In any case, it seems pretty clear that it is not RS, and will have to be removed from the several pages it is used on. Weather forecast this week: very windy due to caste related wrangles, and intermittent sunny skies. JanetteDoe (talk) 17:53, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've just left a reply to you on MRG's page. I forecast a lot of hot air and dense overnight cloud cover that results in a dark night (of the soul). I am a bit dis-spirited by the current shenanigans, probably because I am feeling a bit too old at the mo! It happens occasionally, and I have come very close to jacking it all in before now. - Sitush (talk) 17:57, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Templeman

did u get the templeman booki sent u...Mayan302 (talk) 07:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't think so. Maybe it is in my spam folder - will check later. I am getting a bit swamped with contentious stuff again at the moment. - Sitush (talk) 07:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ok.no im not talkin abt the entire book.the pages frm templeman relevant to the crrent discussion on the talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mayan302 (talk • contribs) 07:38, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

minor correction

a line in the northern nadars section says that the vellalars n maravars were just above the nadars.thats not right the maravars were just above the nadars.not the vellalars.u might want to change that.Mayan302 (talk) 05:21, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Awareness of changes in community sanctions policy

The community has recently added some pretty liberal sanction powers regarding Indian politics and caste articles. This may be of interest to you as they cover disruption, including evidenceable "I don't hear that" conduct. I thought you may like to know about this given that I believe you may have been experiencing IDHT behaviour from other editors that amounts to disruption in areas that you edit. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks. If you look above on this talk page then you should see the discussion that lead to the emergence of the sanctions that were proposed and enacted at WP:AN. IDHT is certainly an issue that affects me in the India-related sphere etc but it has been so for roughly a year now. I sometimes feel drowned by the tendentiousness of it all and wander off to do other things, such as John Horsefield! Thankfully, there appear to be a few more admins who have taken an interest in the issues during that time, and I am grateful to them. It remains a very frustrating area but hopefully the sanctions will smooth things out a little. And, obviously, I am not always correct in what I say. BTW, I keep seeing a red reference problem when you post a message but I cannot for the life of me see anything wrong with your sig. Any ideas? - Sitush (talk) 00:35, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The red ref issue has gone away now that I have replied. I've seen this happen at RSN also - very odd. - Sitush (talk) 00:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding references, there are a couple of quotes above where people have <ref> wrapped citations... In relation to IDHT behaviour, including denial of obvious consensus, well, I've been trying to improve RS/N to stop fringe warriors continuing such conduct (fringe warriors who of course listen to community consensus are welcome, it means, in fact, that they're not fringe warriors at all). Sometimes, sometimes, editors need something a little stronger than a cup of tea when they don't hear what the community says. I find it upsetting, because everybody should be allowed to be wrong, even repeatedly wrong on a point, as long as they retire from their claims when many people observe they are wrong. Fifelfoo (talk) 04:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I work for the Script!

Hi Sitush,

Thanks for your message. I do in fact work for The Script and I'm having real trouble getting info we need added to the page. Other users seem to revert my work even after I have referenced information correctly following guides on wiki.

My other issue is 'My Town' a band the boys previously were connected to but do not want to mentioned on their individual pages or the band wiki page.

Could you provide any advise or an official line on how we deal with this?

Many Thanks.

George James The Script HQ Digital PR / Social Media Essence Digital UK — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheScriptOfficial (talk • contribs) 10:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have already asked other people about this. I can add nothing that you have not already been told. Eg: WP:RS, WP:SPS, WP:BLP, WP:COI and WP:CENSORED. Wikipedia does not exist to promote this or any other entity. - Sitush (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers!

Sitush, thank you for all of your work on the Wesleyan University‎ page, cheers! from Markvs88 - 09:49, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Join the Community!

Hi Sitush,

Belated welcome to WikiProject India. Thanks for joining our WikiProject community! As you already know, I'm a volunteer for the WikiProject and the first guy to approach if you need help! ;)

Do consider joining the WikiProject India Mailing List (https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-in-en) which provides communication for the community.

For other lists which may be of interest to you, see http://wiki.wikimedia.in/Mailing_Lists.

You may also like to add WP:INB to your watchlist.

AshLin (talk) 17:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would the caste warning template be appropriate in this case?

There seems to be some drama on an individual's article page as described in this section. As the person is a political figure, and the warning template specifically mentions political parties, do you think it would be appropriate to place the template on that person's article's talk page? JanetteDoe (talk) 17:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure. Salvio giuliano is often around at this time of the day and is probably well placed to make a decision/advise. My gut feeling is "do it" and Fifelfoo certainly mentions the sanctions in their comment at the WP:RSN spin-off, but it would do no harm to get an opinion from the horse's mouth (so to speak - I am not suggesting that Salvio is an equine administrator etc, although if he is then he is more clever than I already thought!). - Sitush (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interaction ban

Do not bother, I will not be responding to him again. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:45, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will bother. It affects articles, article talk pages and the numerous dispute resolution forums that the pair of you have been using of late. It is ridiculous and it is disruptive. Proposing an interaction ban seems to be entirely reasonable since the pair of you have demonstrated a complete inability to disengage across a swathe of pages. Unless, of course, you are saying above that you will effectively be self-imposing that which WP:Interaction ban stipulates, rather than just referring to conversations on their own talk page? - Sitush (talk) 18:49, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly according to that WP:Interaction ban. I already told TG on his talk I will no longer respond to him so, job done. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:34, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Haven Herefords

I was pleased to see Lewis thehaven (talk) return today, as I was afraid he was a one-off visitor and I wanted to know about his sources; so I poked him on his talk page and got this answer. Since WP:V says "Source material must have been published (made available to the public in some form); unpublished materials are not considered reliable", that's no good. I doubt if the article can be saved - would the sources you found support a basic stub? Is there enough to support a mention in Hereford (cattle), which might be better than a minimal stub if there was no prospect of expansion? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:51, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have struggled with it. As I said on the article talk page, there do appear to be sources out there but I can only see snippet views for them and the one proxy that I found useful for GBooks - in order to see the greater content that is available to people resident in the US - has died. I'll take another look at it over the next couple of days but I do not hold much hope. The only other solution involves library trips and I simply cannot do that. - Sitush (talk) 21:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
eg: "The thought comes after visiting those marvellous Haven Hereford^ during the National Sheep Association's successful Spring Event. Present custodians of the oldest pedigree herd in the world, Messrs, E. Lewis and Son, have no doubts at ..." is a snippet from here. - Sitush (talk) 21:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Anything, really. I've pretty much tagged every sentence in the article. I am going through GNews archives at the moment, which is turning up tiny bits but nothing of great note and nothing (so far) that ties in with existing statements. Eg: this. - Sitush (talk) 21:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Try the Glasgow Herald from 1965, they won a great many awards. [7] Darkness Shines (talk) 21:59, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Found this [8] Cite the magazine the guy uploaded the scan of perhaps? Image should be free to use as well. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 'em coming! I am wading through a book at the moment - can't use search on it. - Sitush (talk) 23:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I just found this book from 1914 [9] Loads of info in it. Darkness Shines (talk) 00:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I had seen that one but was hoping to find a better link - the text formatting is very poor. - Sitush (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe this one? [10] Darkness Shines (talk) 00:31, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kadia kshatriyas

RE: It is always a pleasure to deal with a new contributor in the India caste-related sphere and find them to be reasonable in their discussions! Thank you very much.

I may not be as reasonable as you may think. I'm afraid the irony here is that it is probably my family's perceived varna status that has left me with such a moderate outlook on caste matters. I have always been taught that discussion of caste does not matter; as that kind of jostling for position in the social order is something to be left to the lower orders. However, thank you, I try to stay unbiased and frankly, the only reason I even noticed the article had been redirected and changed was because of research into my family history. I attempted to find a more reliable source than my family and wound up finding that anthropological study. Unfortunately, even after scouring UK journal databases via my university I can only find the smallest of fragments about my ancestors. I guess I'll have to concede, at least for now, that my only source for this information is my family, and the fact that I get mistaken for Punjabi wherever I go, despite my family being from Gujarat.--Splashley (talk) 12:43, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Staying neutral/unbiased here is pretty much synonymous with being "reasonable". It is also not something commonly experienced by me when dealing with caste articles. I wouldn't know a Punjabi or Gujarati from a Martian, I am afraid: people are just people to me, but presumably you are referring to assumptions being made due to your link with a particular community/caste. If so then, well, that is exactly the sort of thing that makes the caste concept so insidious, imo, but neither you nor I are going to change that. - Sitush (talk) 12:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it isn't so much the name of a particular caste. In the Western/North-western states, you can often guess the caste, family, surname of those around you based purely on certain physical features. Of course these aren't always correct assumptions, but for the most part those of a certain community will have common features. I think this has something to do with the endogamy of certain communities. For example, the Kadia Kshatriya. Again, I'm not sure if this is absolutely the case everywhere. When it comes to diaspora, especially within the UK, this stereotyping happens more often with communities mixing a lot. I have been mistaken for Punjabi because of certain physical features, I don't 'look' like a Gujarati. As a family, we have been called 'white' due to our skin colour and Punjabi based on nose shape and body structure, people assume we are aggressive people. On the other hand, it lends credence to the idea that we may be of Rajasthani origin, but again [citation needed]. I find this fascinating because as I have paid more attention to it, it seems that people draw caste lines on mainly racial grounds. That however, is a can of worms that I DO NOT want to open.--Splashley (talk) 13:10, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional endogamy and racial basis for distinction are very good points, although in the caste articles here the POV tends to be more about varna. At one point it seemed as if every community in India comprised warrior-kings and no-one brewed the tea, swept the streets or built houses etc - we are gradually weeding out that rubbish.

Have you read the Herbert Hope Risley article (mostly written by me) or Scientific racism (I've barely contributed to that one). I would be interested in your opinion: these are thorny issues but they do need to be presented in an encyclopedia, with an appropriate amount of care regarding sourcing etc. - Sitush (talk) 13:23, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit of Patna University

You are requested to visit Talk:Patna University to see the justification for my reverting your edit. Arunbandana (talk • contribs) 16:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Already replied there, prior to reinstating my edit. You probably should not have reverted me without allowing a chance for someone to respond to your opening comment, but don't worry about it. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And on a lighter note...

Hi, Sitush. Thanks for the support here. I nevertheless think an immediate Community Ban is in order if I ever use "themself" in articlespace :-) --Shirt58 (talk) 11:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You speed demon, you

I went to all of the effort to type of a 3RR report on User:Zazscholar, and when I went to look at the page to get a link to notify the user, I saw your report just above mine. For the future, report all administrative requests related to Official Cabal Activities via the Red Hotline, please. To all the stalkers--there is no cabal, I promise.Qwyrxian (talk) 13:03, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Filling in those reports at 3RRNB is a pain but I can trump you - I was once edit conflicted by someone posting a report about a contributor for whom I was also submitting my spiel. They are a lot quicker to do if you have about 5 or 6 tabs open simultaneously, but the only thing I know of that is worse and in common usage is the process for merge discussions. - Sitush (talk) 15:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Could do with some Tamil help, please

Hi Sitush, I can converse in Tamil, but cannot read and write that well. I suggest you reach out to User:Sundar. — Ganeshk (talk) 18:17, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks for letting me know. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sundar has responded back here. — Ganeshk (talk) 23:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Regarding deletion of vettuva Gounder referances

COuld you please elobarate on why you deleted the referances i provided for you? i gave referance from books of samgam tamil books — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srinifromsalem (talk • contribs) 14:06, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be little more than a translation of a purana. The puranas are primary sources and have very few uses here on Wikipedia. I have twice provided you with a link to our policy regarding primary sources. You may also want to read the more general article on what qualifies as being as reliable source. Thereafter, if you still do not understand then please could you try to explain what it is that you are struggling with - I'll try to help. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 14:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Yes, the one Sangam Book(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purananuru),
 i reffered has the direct link to all kinds of war, politics, wealth, as well as aspects of every-day living activities done in old tamil period. 
It is a direct source where poet sung about all activities done in that period. Please help me in adding these as  referances.

Various. "puRanAnURu" (PDF). http://projectmadurai.org. Retrieved 2011-12-13. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)

You cannot add that as a reference for Vettuva Gounder, sorry. It is ok for it to be used as a reference in an article about the book itself but not in most other articles. - Sitush (talk) 14:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

could you please tell me what else can i provide as proof. any research books reference will hold good? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.79.40.119 (talk) 16:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RS. If you want to suggest some that you have in mind then do so by all means & I'll take a look at them. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 16:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Thanks very much for the email, I wasn't aware of the history. Will look to revert. Connolly15 (talk) 15:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Austereraj

He's requesting an unblock; I'm letting you know in case the reviewing admin wants to hear from you on the topic, since you warned him several times. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:06, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok, thanks. Well, it's ok if he is not unblocked. Or if he is unblocked and behaves himself. - Sitush (talk) 17:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at JanetteDoe's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Do you see anything familiar about this pattern? [11] JanetteDoe (talk) 18:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. The IP geolocates to Oregon, USA. We have on-off trouble with IPs in New York (especially using the NY Public Library) who do that sort of thing, but so too do many people in India etc. If those sources seem ok to you then I would revert them. - Sitush (talk) 19:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dasuya

I was forced to write to you as you edited something which resulted in wrong information on Dasuya. You have no information on India (read Punjab) I believe, hope you know that election results are still awaited (google it). Someone changed Sahi to Dogra and I removed it indicating vandalism. Once again just for some strange reason you changed it to Dogra who was not even elected in 2007. Please avoid editing article where you have no knowledge. If you are so desperate please google it to verify. You can earn stars for real edits by using google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 17:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I really do think that you have missed the point of my edit. You reinstated 4k of unsubstantiated information. If in reverting you that caused one word to be incorrect then I apologise for that but please do not try to make out that your edit was confined to that one word. If this article was sourced properly, as I said in my edit summaries, then these situations would not arise. I suggest that you practice what you preach in your message above. - Sitush (talk) 18:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wiki has sent several messages to us to start or edit articles in our domain. Infact in every conference they are trying to encourage us to start new articles or contribute to existing articles. Somehow I feel some non-wiki staff members are not ready to allow it. I will certainly raise this issue that people who do not know what does MC stands for in Punjab admin has become editor in Punjab specific articles. Now If i write there is a railway station in Bangalore city or Silk is the famous in Mysore, do I need to provide citation! By this logic, the whole article on mythological stories like Ramayana or Mahabarata should be deleted (as they will not be able to provide citation for existance of Ayodhya or Rama or Ravana). Sorry but you can delete all my contributions and get someone from Kerala to write about Dasuya or Amritsar. Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 18:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have previously pointed out some of our core policies on your own talk page. Have you read those? Contributing here does not give you the right to do as you please, regardless of who it is that has invited you here. - Sitush (talk) 18:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful. According to your logic, a person sitting in Chennai (never visited Cambridge) should ask you to provide the proof that Kings college Chapel is next to the Kings college not Peterhouse. Information, provided was to list accurate and legitimate facts. I had no personal agenda or gain by contributing towards these few articles. Infact I got lots of photographs to provide proofs when I visited Dasuya in Jan but it I feel dealing with peer-reviewers is better than dealing with others. Wiki was arranging special seminar for us next week to make us aware about the 'core policies' but thanks to some smart people it will keep native people away! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 18:48, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what seminar it is that you are referring to but please do attend if you have the time. The core policies, including those that I have mentioned to you previously, are important here. If you cannot attend then there are plenty of people with experience who are willing to help you here, but it is important that you try to meet people halfway: do not assume that they are wrong or start ranting etc. Things must be verifiable using reliable sources. Some things are pretty much self-evident - eg: the sky is usually blue, the earth is not flat - but most stuff should be sourced. - Sitush (talk) 18:54, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)It is not "according to Sitush's logic", it is according to the rules of verifiability. Have you read them? What any of us knows from our own personal knowledge is not relevant. It has to be backed up by reliable sources. The rules are not different for you than they are for anyone else. So that you can get a head start for next week, please also read about assuming good faith on the part of other editors. JanetteDoe (talk) 19:01, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Janette I will accept someone who is familiar with the region to edit articles as they will not questions about the most logical facts or the basic information. Hope you people have experienced 'peer-review' system. Author is asked to provide facts before someone changes the whole story. If Wiki is an open source it should be edited in a good faith. If you feel some one is advertising about him/her self please go ahead and delete it but if it is a mere fact, it should not be touched or atleast give some time to provide proof. I went all the way to Dasuya, clicked photographs (as no information is available on net to provide citations) and came back to see everything is deleted again by the same person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 19:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would have thought that Wikipedia is pretty much the ultimate in peer review systems. Am I misunderstanding you? - Sitush (talk) 19:12, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If (you think) Wiki is the ultimate peer review system then I rest my case as I have never seen any Professor accepting citation/ reference from Wiki in Cambridge or Harvard or Caltech! Point to remember Sitush. If you have some friends doing research please ask and understand how peer review system works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 19:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are mixing apples and oranges. BTW, we do have plenty of academics who contribute to this project, including professors etc. - Sitush (talk) 19:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware of that as I have several students getting C grade for citing Wiki, infact If I see a citation from Wiki, I send the whole assignment back. This was the reason we decided to start improving Wikipedia by providing right information. Wiki is reverting back by arranging information for us. We know what a reliable information is and how valuable it is? In research you can get lots of citations from online resources but if you have ever been to countries like India or Pakistan, you have to struggle to get even a proof that you own a piece of land. This was the reason I went back to get photographic proof. I feel it is easy to publish a new gene for the cancer than writing about existing things in your local city on Wikipedia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 19:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What your students do is your problem and theirs. What you do here is your problem and the Wikipedia community's. Yes, there is systemic bias here with regard to sourcing, access to the internet, literacy and numerous other things. It is known and it is recognised. But it does not absolve you from following our policies and guidelines; similarly, if your students are plagiarising or otherwise misusing Wikipedia's content, well, you know that it goes on but it does not make it right. - Sitush (talk) 19:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a small bit of what I removed from Dasuya

Dasuya is a very ancient town. It is believed that it was known as Virat Nagar in the Mahabharata and the Pandavas spent last one year of their exile in Virat Nagar in the service of its king.

Dasuya is one of the key towns of Hoshiarpur. The per capita income of Dasuya is higher than rest of Punjab which in turn is leading within India. Dasuya is an agriculture-centered community. Apart from routine rice, wheat, maize and sugarcane, farmers also grow sunflower, pulses, potatoes, sesame, peaches, oranges, papaya, grapes, melons and mangoes. Dasuya is located in the Basmati belt of India which extends from Karnal to Jammu region.

Can you explain to me how you think that your photographs could resolve the sourcing of that content (except, perhaps, for photos of crops)? - Sitush (talk) 19:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu temple built by some Sankaracharya with an information board why this temple and pond are famous. It is written on the board that Dasuya was a Virat nagari (if we believe there was something called Mahabharta). Another board near old fort stating this is where Pandavas stayed during agyatvaas. Photographs (and scanned copies) of documents from the MC office giving facts about Dasuya. Think beyond photographs of crops! This one is govt. run site http://mcdasuya.com/ one small link from a newspaper tribune Punjab govt gazette — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 19:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to add info using the websites that you mention. I have doubts regarding whether photos of the information signage would be acceptable but there are stalkers of this page who will probably jump in with comments if you give it a little time. Please note that if the information is not in English then you will need to provide a translation. - Sitush (talk) 20:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, by the way, if you are thinking of using the council website as a source for history then I would advise against it. Try to find something independent because it is not unknown for councils to embellish and censor the information that they show, in the interests of promoting their charge. - Sitush (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the council website, I provided a link to the Punjab govt. gazette which provides a time line in terms of history too. Anyhow I have no interest in taking this matter any further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 20:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I am trying to sort it out using the sources that you have found. One problem that I am having to address is that virtually all of the content remaining was a copyright violation of the council website. - Sitush (talk) 21:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

kushwaha

I respect your dalit activism. However Kushwaha are neither people of Maharastra nor what you portray them to be. You seem to have little knowledge of the matter. pls stop edit war by doing eight edits in such a short time. Revert the article immediately to its previous state immediately. Moriya (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have got a clue what you are referring to when you say "dalit activism". For the rest, please use the article talk page as you were requested to do previously. - Sitush (talk) 14:21, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Austereraj

I've looked at the editing history of User:Yadavrewari, and my sock-o-meter is screaming at the top of its lungs. The SPI is now open. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 00:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've just spotted the SPI thread and have responded. I can revert if that would make life easier. However, as deaf as I am in real life, even I can hear this one quacking. - Sitush (talk) 00:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've also deleted a bunch of the edits he made to Smt. Shanti Devi School of Nursing; that kind of spam doesn't really need to remain in the edit history. I'll trawl through some of his other contributions and see if there's anything else that bad. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Woah, revdel. It seems to me to be justified. Good move. - Sitush (talk) 01:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Could you spare a few minutes here for commenting? Thanks. X.One SOS 14:05, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If only I could! I am afraid that my experience of the cinema industry is minimal anywhere, and I do still get confused with regard to India-related mononyms. I've looked over the thread but, really, I doubt that anything which I might say would add to either side or even advance a solution. It is a complete mess, but it is the fault of no particular person that it is so. I apologise for this but, hey, even I know when my limits are being really stretched. - Sitush (talk) 02:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

University categories

Hi, Thanks for your note. I had merely put most of them into a more relevant category, like that of a university alumni, or faculty. Byomkesh Bakshi (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok. The ones that I saw involved removal of categories even when a more specific alternative existed. I've also just created Category:University of Calicut faculty as a consequence of one of your removals. - Sitush (talk) 17:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Heads Up

I looked at some of the material you referred me to re Yogesh. 3 years ago he was saying Dickens was a "white supremacist". Yes, CD was racist (a better term would be "xenophobic") and a supporter of colonialism, but "white supremacist??? However, on the Talk page I think I will continue to treat him as if he was a stranger. Thanks very much for the heads-up.--WickerGuy (talk) 01:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hindutva is probably the key word. You are just starting to see it at CD, with the references to India. Aside from having read all of the major works of Dickens by the the age of ca. 15 (and I still return, occasionally), the real issue here is related to a somewhat extreme and disruptive personality, in the WP sense. I have had no involvement in the Dickens article that I can recall because the guy is just someone that I read rather than someone that I know a great deal about. IMO, I could say the same of Gaskell or Thackeray, or even Disraeli. YK is clever with the policy obfuscation etc, but rarely anything other than fringe when it comes down to the nuts and bolts. And that is my experience viewed across a swathe of articles, regarding which I could not always be bothered to comment. But you can make your own mind up in what ever context it is that the pair of you meet.YK comes and goes - check the contribution history. - Sitush (talk) 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Caste topics

Thanks for that kind note, Sitush. I am working on the Caste article. All is well so far, but down the road, I may need some guidance. Cheers, ApostleVonColorado (talk) 12:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tod FA

Congratulations! You hung in there and carried the issue. Binksternet (talk) 14:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Outstanding!!!! Congratulations! Well deserved--both you and the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, both. You form an important part of my general thanks below. - Sitush (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Crooke, William (1906). Things Indian. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. p. 324.

List of Rajputs

@Sitush, i feel you should get your facts clear, Thakur Jugal Kishore Sinha and Ram Dulari Sinha are the most prominent Rajput Leaders of their time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prabhatmishra1985 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

Congrats on getting the James Tod article promoted to FA status! :-) Joyson Prabhu Holla at me! 20:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, JP. It was a bit hairy for a moment! I appreciated your comments at FAC etc. - Sitush (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for encouraging me to attend the Manchester meetup, I really enjoyed it. It's the kind of thing that I would normally avoid like the plague, but everyone there seemed fairly normal. Except for you and me of course. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 21:32, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion you may be interested in

See WP:ANI#Block user from creating Indian College Pages. I know you've had issues with this user in the past, so I thought I'd let you know.

I have? It looks now to be resolved but the contributor rings no bells in my head. - Sitush (talk) 06:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

James Tod FA - my thanks to all who assisted

It seems that while I was engaged in Mancunian libations yesterday (still recovering!), James Tod was promoted to FA status. I must admit to some surprise as I had thought that the process would take a little longer, especially given recent events. Anyway, my thanks to all of those who helped with the article and otherwise encouraged me in writing the "opium-eater's tale". - Sitush (talk) 07:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Surnames

My purpose in adding Naga Chaitanya's last name, Akkineni, is for viewers to know that he is the grandson of the famous 1900's actor Nageswara Rao Akkineni and the son of actor Nagarjuna Rao Akkineni.

Dav subrajathan.357 (talk) 19:44, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:COMMONNAME and note that other people have been reverting your original edits and you are reinstating them without discussion. - Sitush (talk) 19:46, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please note

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ror Is King (talk • contribs) 08:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. I see no need to get involved with that discussion right now. - Sitush (talk) 11:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Pernoctator's talk page.
Message added 08:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Pernoctator (talk) 08:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

Hi there. Can you please point me to the RfC that resulted in this? If this is a general decision to remove local names that's maybe 300,000 articles to clean up, more or less :) --Muhandes (talk) 19:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that anyone is preparing to go around mass deleting the scripts - they'll just happen as we come across them. I did the one that you mention purely because I was correcting some spellings in articles that were attempting to link to it. Main discussion here and clarification here. - Sitush (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the pointers. I see this applies only to Indic languages. I must say I am surprised by the consensus, as I always thought the scripts are used for identification, not for helping pronunciation, which seems to be what this means. Well, maybe for India subjects this is true. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 20:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The entire thing is a mess. It should have been notified to the Pakistan project etc because of the cross-over between the pre- and post-partition India regions. - Sitush (talk) 20:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I totally agree on this one, having different guidelines for the two projects is asking for troubles. --Muhandes (talk) 21:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It already is at Muslim Rajputs. - Sitush (talk) 21:03, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
For supporting the cause of assessment in the best possible way by assessments - that too so many!
AshLin (talk) 04:35, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A watchlist item for you

Dedhar. I'll clean it up tomorrow. (Just when you think you're out, they pull you back in!) :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Graffito Condemned to Agony
Argh! Not more! Does it ever end? I'm back sorting out Indian villages at the moment - whoever pushed through the "inhabited places are inherently notable" idea wants shooting. - Sitush (talk) 14:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ha ha ha. Poor Sitush! I'm sorry to say that a new policy just came out declaring "inherent notability for individual clouds". If it is mentioned in a blog, and was a cool shape that looked like something interesting for at least 30 seconds, it's considered article-worthy. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can I not start an article about my street? Its 28 houses have a greater population than Bagar,_Pauri_Garhwal and at least there will be local newspaper reports or something lying around. Honestly, this sort of stuff is pathetic and we should not be hosting it. - Sitush (talk) 17:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nor this one. Pathetic. - Sitush (talk) 18:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Still, it could be worse. Given the predilection to present population figures, it is surprising how many of this ilk also exist. Do we assume a population < 80? - Sitush (talk) 01:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your street could possibly be notable--it's a case by case basis. The guiding essay/guideline/policy (it's debated as to how "official" these rules are) is WP:Common outcomes#Places. Officially recognized locations are always kept. I don't know if India or its states or tehsils or whatever officially recognize villages. If it's not officially recognized (the equivalent in US/UK are named neighborhoods, suburbs, and unincorporated areas) may be kept if there is evidence in reliable sources that discuss the place. For castes/tribes/etc....as far as I know we have no guideline or established practices, which to me means WP:GNG applies. But is it worth the effort? That is questionable. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am a huge inclusionist, but these dinky little villages tend to become engulfed by other developing areas, have the land expropriated for development, etc. I know of villages around here that are now part of Haikou. I worry about the state of these village stubs after 20 year. I guess it's like "notable balloon animals that have since popped". (Sorry, sort of the same joke as the cloud thing. haha.) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plz stop your half knowledge edits

Hello Sitush, Please analyse the fellow wiki author edits and then say that they are nonsense. It clearly seems you are senseless relating to Telugu communities and yourself have added non related stuff in Rajus page. Plase stop your senseless edits and discuss if u have any knowledge on those points. Indianprithvi (talk) 16:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indianprithvi, please see the warning I have just posted to your Talk page, and desist from attacking other editors in this manner -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Rajput

Ha, we both spotted it at the same time, and you just beat me to the revert! It's clearly the same user been on that IP for at least several days, so I've blocked for 24 hours. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is good: that several people spotted it so quickly and without using fancy anti-vandalism tools etc is a demonstration that the "more eyes" approach is having some success. - Sitush (talk) 12:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep - and that one didn't even need the special sanctions -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:32, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Rajputs

@ sitush. It seems your facts are not clear about the Rajput Community and as far as references are concerned about whether a person belongs to a particular community or not, these things are hardly published in India because these are known facts and i belong to the constituency of Ram Dulari Sinha and Thakur Jugal Kishore Sinha, therefore i am aware about their community/caste.

Can you please give the reference of people like Sushil Kumar Singh,Harikesh Bahadur, Nikhil Kumar, Shyama Singh, Uday Singh,Prabhunath Singh and many others.

You Should stop interfering with these articles.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Prabhatmishra1985 (talk • contribs) 08:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"i belong to the constituency of Ram Dulari Sinha and Thakur Jugal Kishore Sinha, therefore i am aware about their community/caste." is NOT a reliable source. Also, accusing others of "interfering" is a violation of WP:AGF. And DO NOT slap that caste warning on people who are not violating any Wikipedia policies - I have removed it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:27, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that, Boing! said Zebedee. I would note also this recent close. Yes, it relates principally to biographical articles but "lists of X caste" are effectively a mini-biography for each individual who is included in them. - Sitush (talk) 08:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Animesh Kulkarni's Talk Page

Just to tell you, I have posted a reply after in in Animesh Kulkarni's talk page--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 05:15, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Modi

Hi! I have posted a new version of the section at Talk:Syed Modi/Temp, what's next...--Ekabhishektalk 05:48, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I don't know. Usually I fix this things as I find them and so I do not have much experience of the process. It just happened that I was trying to concentrate on something else - Sanjay Singh - when I came across the issue from 2009 yesterday. That is also why I left you a little note below the template: I was doing what the instructions said but was aware that you are unlikely to be a serial copyright violator etc!

I'll try to take a look at it later today and see if I can be bold. - Sitush (talk) 14:12, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

tag on list of nadars article

there is a big tag stating that the article will be deleted what does it mean sitush?Mayan302 (talk) 14:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a drive going on at the moment to "tag and assess" India-related articles - see this thread. AroundTheGlobe appears to have selected the "List of X caste" category as an area to concentrate upon while helping with the drive. I am unsure why they have nominated List of Nadars for deletion under the WP:PROD process when they have not done the same for similar lists that they have assessed today. Personally, I agree with their general sentiment that categories would suffice for all such lists but I know for a fact that when these issues have been raised previously at WP:AFD they have invariably not gained consensus.

You could always just remove the tag but AroundTheGlobe would probably then just nominate the list at AfD. I am going to copy your query and this response to Talk:List of Nadars and solicit a reply from that contributor. - Sitush (talk) 14:20, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on the talk page of the said article. Cheers, Around The Globeसत्यमेव जयते 14:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I mean really?

I setup auto archiving and that was it, this leads you to say I need a topic ban? What did I do wrong today? Sheesh. Can I ask you to do something, look at the comment made here[12] by an editor not even remotely involved in these articles. Now tell me if I am as " POV-y" as you think. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:16, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flags

Hi. Thanks for your message. You are correct that MOS:FLAG does make an allowance for representing a country, but in this case (as with the others I've removed) the field being flagged is nationality, which is not the same thing, or necessarily the country represented by the boxer. If you look at other Boxers, you'll see they have a separate info box for their appearance in national teams, which usually does have the flag. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 01:25, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Demanding Citation =

I see that you keep asking for citation on "House of Tulsipur". There are 36 various references. You may know how to use citation in Wiki then go ahead and use the appropriate citation based on those references. Some folks don't know how to use the technology on exactly how to use html and cite. Please don't raise questions of doubt on historical materials that have been researched and referenced in last 200 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.49.14 (talk) 04:47, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The "more footnotes" tag is not intended to reflect badly on anyone. It is a factual note that the referencing needs to be sorted out. I have since deleted some of the sources listed because things such as blogspot and James Tod are not reliable. Nor are we a genealogical website, and stuff that was sourced to Rootsweb and Royal Ark are potentially violations of our policies regarding biographies of living people. You also removed my copyedit tag when, in fact, the article is one of the most severe examples of something in need of copyediting that I have seen so far this year. I have therefore restored that tag. - Sitush (talk) 11:27, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What?

Actually I am not interested in talking with you. But then you mentioned that 'You have done it again'. I would like to know what I have 'done it again', when I asked a specific question on why a particular article was deleted. I arrived there from a link in a external webpage.

As to the other acrimonious posts you find in my talk page, I can very well delete them. But the I maintain them as a record of such posts.

--Ved from Victoria Institutions (talk) 10:37, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on user's talk. - Sitush (talk) 11:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


So many persons have done similar writings on my user pages. Yet, when I explain to them, they do retract. I do not generally follow up these things. For example see this in my talk page:

Quote: Okay, I see. I didn't realize that the toddy tappers person was editing your posts, so I did remove your vandalised posts, but it was not my intention to delete your words. Sorry about that. I have the page watchlisted, and will revert any vandalism of anyone's talk page postings. You are free to do the same. Natalie 15:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I feel we will stop with this, as I do not have time for more debate. --Ved from Victoria Institutions (talk) 11:33, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anticipating drama

Suddenly a bunch of "old friends" are reappearing out of the woodwork, all at the same time. JanetteDoe (talk) 19:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, SNAFU. I am pretty sure that there is also some socking going on but I do not yet have enough material for SPI. They'll trip themselves up eventually. - Sitush (talk) 19:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I wouldn't be surprised. Unfortunately one of them doesn't seem to have learned much during his vacation, and the other currently on vacation, seems absolutely determined to make an old set of mistakes all over again. JanetteDoe (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sitush&oldid=480220959"