Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhurabal

Bhurabal

I list this article here for reasons of process and don't vote myself. It was tagged with template:db-attack. On the talk page concerns regarding WP:NOR are given. --Pjacobi 09:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• The person tagging the attck is notorious for doing so.See Talk:Bhumihar and should not be used to nominate it for deletion.This will only encourage vandalism. Holywarrior 09:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

  Holywarrior's version is hopelessly biased. I have reverted it to Pataniyababu's attempted NPOV version. No vote. - Mike Rosoft 13:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

  Sorry it was not my opinion that you may call biased.Infact what you reverted was not in conformity with discussions on talk page.People not seeing talk page should not revert either.Holywarrior 15:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

  Plz follow the link to evaluate the deeds/misdeeds of editor,contents were intentionally mutilated to suit the delition criteria [1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holywarrior (talk • contribs)

• Delete. Even if it were not attack-like, it is a neologism, mostly dictdef, and at most belongs instead in the Lalu Prasad Yadav article, about the person who coined and politically uses it. —Centrx→talk 21:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Page history indicates that the page was created purely to spew abuse on certain communities. In any case, the word is a neologism. ImpuMozhi 01:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to Lalu Prasad Yadav at the spot presently wiki-linked to this article. Fails WP:NEO to stand on its own, but it is pertinent to the creator of the neologism.GRBerry 02:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• First of all, I would like to remind everyone here that the Wikipedia serves a different purpose than you all think. It is not a dictionary where you can find hogwash neologism uttered by a corrupt, technically illiterate, low-profile and nonserious Indian politician. If any low-caste user likes this word then he may have it listed in the wiktionary. Remember, this is an encyclopaedia and has been created to share great knowledge. I do not see the reason why such things should occupy valuable space on the already overloaded Wikipedia server.

* Another point to note that even if the word exists (though I doubt it), it is an abbreviation and the 'article', if continues to 
 exist (if some ignorant fools have their way), should not have anything more than who was the hick who coined the term and what is the 
 expansion of this word. 
* The vandal User:Holywarrior (who is also a Chandala / Chandal by the grace of God as he has confessed on Khatri talk page) is notorious for cleverly defacing the pages of almost 
 all the upper castes. I find it inappropriate fo him to question the origin of certain castes when he has no sound basis for that. 
How can he add "historians are not certain of the origin of these people"?
 He can discuss such things at the repective talk pages of these castes and not on this boorbaal (or whatever it is) page.
 I would like to ask him: "Are historians sure of the origin of your caste (Chandala / Chandal)? 
If so, how? If yes, why do you not write about it on its page?
 It would be better to block him for good so that his dreams of becoming the first Shudra admin gets shattered.
* Friends, I don't blame him for all this. User:Holywarrior, being from an untouchable caste of India, must have faced discrimination 
 and humiliation from these castes whom he collectively refers to as Bhurabal.
 Consequently, he has become mentally deranged.
 Man, get treated for Antisocial Personality Disorder or schizophrenia or whatever you have.

* I would be back with some proofs of his great deeds of vandalism.

VandalPatrol 06:21, 21 June 2006 (UTC)