Jump to content

User talk:Ikonoblast

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 128.83.131.139 (talk) at 21:32, 25 August 2006 (→Rajiv Goswami). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Click for Instant CHAT

welcome

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:


I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log.

-- utcursch | talk

Old Comments

Please put new messages at the bottom of userpages not above the template. I am a she btw. This is the revert that I did to the page Yadav [1] made by an ip user. I don't see your username in that revert so what is the problem. Thanks.--Dakota ~ 07:03, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have just been going through the Lalu Prasad Yadav article and noticed you made a number of edits during April this year. Whilst I appreciate your input could you in future use [citation needed] and not (citation needed), it just makes the whole thing neater. --Horses In The Sky 17:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abhira kingdom

Hello, I cleaned-up a bit of the page started by you. Please come and help me. Thanks. --Bootblack 16:15, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your user name

Hello. This is to inform you that some might consider your user name to be inappropriate for Wikipedia, because it can be considered inflammatory, i.e. as referring to violent or otherwise illegal real-world actions. Please see the link for more information.

Others might take your contributions less serious because of this, or complain about it. To avoid any hassle, please consider changing your user name, or permanently abandoning this account and starting a new one. Best, Sandstein 18:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC) Reply[reply]
Holy warrior is not at all offensive in indian context.It is equivalent for Dharmayodha in our scriptures used for those who fight for good cause observing sacred rules .It is synonym of noble too. Indians don't consider it offensive.Regarding your apprehensions that ppl may not take my edits seriously,my mission is to do minimum possible edits.I am more of a commentator and observer.I edit only when I have got solid proofs to back my views.Anyway thnx a lot for showing concern.I love my username.Holywarrior 16:46, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What abt user:Rama's Arrow and user:Dangerous-Boy.Another one is user:Frymaster whom is he trying to fry.Holywarrior 06:18, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The irony of it all is, the phrase 'holy warrior' conjures so many different images in different peoples' minds. I assume Sandstein was thinking of a radical Islamic extremist when he saw the username HolyWarrior. HW himself was thinking of something altogether different, and I personally envisioned a radical fundamentalist christian preacher from the American South wearing a tacky suit and carrying a gigantic bible under his arm. I guess we all have different interpretations of what the phrase 'holy warrior' implies. Wandering Star 20:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rajputs and Cowardice

Look you fucking Hindu rat worshipping product of Shiva's black lingam the only low lifes are your fucked up fat nosed Rag-Shit community who would gave all their womenfolk away to the Mughals so they could remain the leaders of a few villages which are nothing but a few typically stinky Indian huts made out of cow shit. Rajputs, Hindus, Caste-System, Sudras, India... LOL, what a FUCKING joke. No wonder every invader from Alexander to Queen Victoria has smacked the shit out of the indians and their dirty Rag-Shit communities. (this unsigned comment was posted by 195.93.21.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) on my talk page)Holy | Warrior 13:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, but this is highly offensive. Nobleeagle (Talk) 06:41, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm... which one is more cowardly: HolyWarrior, who has a user page and a talk page, or 195.93.21.1, who uses a proxy server so he can make offensive edits like this one without having to face the consequences of them? HolyWarrior doesn't appear to be hiding from anybody. 195.93.21.1 is hiding from everybody. Perhaps the person who posted this offensive statement is the spineless piece of shit here. Wandering Star 20:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who's the asshole who posted this? Aside from being offensive to the highest degree, this is also wrong. alexander's forces were kicked out by a united opposition forged by the mauryas and the english were forced to leave through nonviolence.

perhaps he ought to go to india today. whatever shithole he lives in would crumble.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.245.160.178 (talk • contribs)

Khatri

I believe there's a different tag for Requests for Page Protection. That tag indicated that the page was already protected. Nobleeagle (Talk) 06:41, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Bye the way, do you know of some online version of Manu Smriti? In that case, the quotations from the Manu Smriti that you have used could be made directly linked to a readily verifieable source. Since these are sensitive issues, a readily checkable source would be really nice. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I did that already. See "Notes" section. hence I just deleted your extra addition (otherwise becoming double). If you click on the superscripts following the translated shlokas, that will take you to the "Notes" section. On clicking the description of source there (10th Chapter, Works of Manu by Buhler) you will be taken to the 10th chapter of the online Manu Smriti.--Dwaipayan (talk) 08:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fodder scam

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Fodder Scam, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:Fodder Scam. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. TigerShark 12:24, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buchanan

I see that you have put questions about Rajput, Bhumihar and Kayastha lineage quoting Buchanan. However, when the same Buchanan is used to have similar questions about the lineage of Goyalas of Bihar, you call this vandalism. Any explanations?


Pataniyababu 18:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC) Mr Pataniyababu,despite my best effort you fail to understand,rather you have resorted to vandalism.The controversy you tried to cook on Yadav page is already in the article and has been well discussed in Talk page.It is well written with all prevalents POV about the society including all the names they are known as.Your actions are indeed vandalism and your concerns bullshit.Try to help yourself or else you will be booked.Holywarrior 10:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your repeated reversions to the article boorbaal which I tried to clean up is in extremely poor taste. Now that I know wikipedia a little bit, makes me wonder whether the article boorbaal is fit for deletion. An admin may pls take a look.(comments from user:59.94.41.235)
My dear friend what you call clean up is actually vandalism.You have tried to make the page look like a nonesense [2]and then trying to get it deleted based on what you did to the page.It is serious offence help yourself and follow procedures and guidelines.Holywarrior 06:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scythians/Yadava

All I have access ito is the same stuff as any other editor would, by checking through the history of the article. I'm not sure what you're referring to specifically, but the only way I could restore it or put it on the TALK page would be by digging through the article history to a point before it was deleted. Cheers, Tomertalk 00:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Umm...

I'm new yet I have a random message of you insulting me. I suppose it's a computer glitch, as I have never edited facts, just spelling, and I have no idea what Khattri is or anything. Jay Kay 05:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC) Yes,it was a computer glitch,the message was for an anonymous editor.Holy---+---Warrior[reply]

Rajput

please don't join the trolls at Rajput. You are aware of the article's history, and people are extremely trigger-happy banning the sock armies by now. If you want to make changes to the article, do them slowly, point by point, so the other editors can react. Wholesale reverts to the October 2005 version will not be tolerated. dab (ᛏ) 10:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you see, I didn't even look at your edit. All I saw was that half the article was replaced. The semi-protected template was gone, and the October 2005 cleanup template was back. That was a major revert. If you make a single edit to a single section at a time, I won't revert you, that will just be editing as usual: Do one edit at a time, and give other editors time to react before doing major restructuring, that's all I ask. dab (ᛏ) 10:09, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
thank you. dab (ᛏ) 10:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bhumihar

Hello, nice talking to you. I received your message about above page. What type of intervention you propose? --Bhadani 10:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What exact action you want me to take? Regards. --Bhadani 16:39, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have blocked an IP for 31 hours for using derogatory word with a purpose against you: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:59.94.41.81&diff=prev&oldid=59294605 Further action shall be taken after studying the matter. --Bhadani 16:57, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have blocked one for 31 hours/ removed the unauthorized templates/ warned that placing such templates shall attract action. --Bhadani 17:33, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Space between paragraphs

Hi Holywarrier, I saw your edits on Bhadani's as well as some other talk pages. Can I humbly advise you to add a blank line between two of your paragraphs, otherwise wikipedia reads it as a continuation of the same line. So once you edit and sign something, next time just add a blank line and then start the other edit. This will ensure that your new edit begins in a new paragraph. Please let me know if any clarification required in this. -- Lost 18:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Domkatar

You failed to demostrate notablity. It only turns up 18 google links [3]...hardly a notable subject.--MONGO 20:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not notable...you can recreate it if you cite the article with a reliable source that will demostrate it's notability.--MONGO 05:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll watch the article and if you cannot demonstrate that it is notable, it will end up being deleted again...see WP:NOT--MONGO 05:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

blocked

{blatantvandal}} Posted by vandal user:59.94.41.130,
The template you have posted above will be added to your acts of vandalism.ThanksHolywarrior 08:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wandering Star

Hey HW. I just ran across one of your edits and thought I'd check out your userpage. You're an okay guy, you know? :) Wandering Star 16:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You are vandalising caste pages like Chandal and others. {{blocked}-----Unsigned comments from user:PandalPetrol Sp of user:VandalPatrol.I think your block period will never expire.Holywarrior 09:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might consider requesting a username change

I just thought I should let you know that there is a discussion on WP:AN about whether or not your username is appropriate or not.--Conrad Devonshire Talk 19:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:PandalPetrol

Regarding PandalPetrol, I do not know very much about the disagreements you have had with him, but I assumed that you must be in the wrong due to your nomination of the Counter-Vandalism Unit page for deletion, which I took to be trolling. I admit that it isn't my place to try to decide who's right and who isn't, but I advise in the future not to try to have a whole WikiProject done away with just because you have a problem with a particular user who's a member of the project. If you do something like that, people will just assume that you are a troll and won't be willing to listen to you even if what you're trying to say is important.--Conrad Devonshire Talk 05:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, I'm not an administrator, so I don't really hold any more power over anyone than you do.--Conrad Devonshire Talk 05:31, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPA

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. . This is regarding this comment. --Ragib 05:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


What action can I take against ppl who are attakcing me and backing those who are uttering all the nonesense.Plz let me do my job.Your reverts were not in good taste.If you think third rate term was attck i will rv with Liar which surely he is.Holywarrior 05:50, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I don't have the slightest idea what quarrel you have with him, but calling someone "3rd-rate liar" surely falls under WP:NPA. Any further comments like this will result in blocks. Thanks. --Ragib 05:56, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS: What revert!? --Ragib 05:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If third rate is WP:NA under what category these comments fall.[4].And why you take no action against him.PPL backing vandals are no different from them---At least I think so.Yes You may block me after blocking this man and ppl backing him.Do you have it in you.Holywarrior 06:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I myself changed it call him a liar only [5] Holywarrior

CVU

Hi, can you tell me the reason why you want to change the name of CVU?(reply at my talk page) Thanks and take care. Anonymous__Anonymous 10:59, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I have blocked you for 48 hours for persistent disruption on WP:AN, an attacking user page and personal attacks. The block is up for review on WP:AN. Thank you. -- Samir धर्म 20:54, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and Goodbye.I was waiting for this only.Don't ever think of my getting back to you ppl.Manage your affairs as you wish.Perhaps you all wanted this only.Intentions were made clearly in the discussion .only sane person I have seen was Dab ,rest of all are senseless lot.You may review anything but I won't be back.I don't appreciate retaliatery actions like this.I think Wiki belongs to you and your gang.

Good Bye Forever Holywarrior 08:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No,We want you back.Cool down and take this block as usual break Wmnnzzr 11:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would also request you not to go away ... rather you are welcome to edit articles, provided that you refrain from the behavior that resulted in the block. Any productive edits from any editor is always welcome in Wikipedia. Thank you. --Ragib 02:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please reconsider. You aren't as bad as I first thought and it was wrong for me to assume that you were nothing but a troll just based on a few other users comments without looking into things myself. I know now that VandalPatrol has been trying to make trouble for you and he has been blocked as he deserved, but he does not represent all of the CVU nor does he represent Wikipedia, and I only sided with him originally because I didn't understand the situation and thought that you were the sole troublemaker. Nevertheless, in the future try to negotiate with people.--Conrad Devonshire Talk 05:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Holywarrier, I have seen you do good work here. Please consider coming back. -- Lost 05:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Any Person who delinks my Yahoo page link from my userpage would be appreciated.I would like to personally thank him.I just regret having put it there which I cannot myself detach.Holywarrior 09:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Pjacobi 06:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yadav and Corruption

I did not add that category, and I agree that it does not belong there so I will remove it myself. Academic Challenger 21:20, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the grammar on your latest edits to the Lalu Prasad Yadav article. Please remember to put spaces after periods, before the beginning of sentences. Academic Challenger 08:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe "supporters" isn't a good word, but halo is much worse. In general English grammar and Wikipedia, the word halo is never used to describe a person. Academic Challenger 19:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Yes, I agree with the way the article is organized now. Academic Challenger 21:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vote Bank

I've removed the Afd notice as it was inappropriately placed. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I suggest WP:RFCU if you have further concerns regarding sockpuppetry -- Samir धर्म 23:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You.Holywarrior 07:10, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Rajput Page

Should'nt support a version that rajputs do not like.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pulastya ram (talk • contribs) .

Bakasuprman and the Fundy watchlist AfD

Hello Holywarrior. I've responded to your queries on my talk page, which seems to be a convenient place, because there is discussion there regarding you Bakasuprman and some of the antics on the Fundy watchlist MfD which may be of interest to you, as well as claims that you were attacked by Bakasuprman. THanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 04:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Stop trying to get me blocked for dubious reasons9[6],[7] and [8] . Even Blnguyen said you'd look like a fool if that's all you did. Even though I wasn't part of FundyWatch or the other Patriotic Guild or w/e, I can easily see why CONTRIBUTING users would put you on a watchlist. Bakaman Bakatalk 15:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for youe input I am going for 3rd party arbitration for comments if diffs are sufficient for NPA warning.Good luck to you.By that time see WP:VandalismHoly|Warrior 15:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Holywarrior. I do not wish to file a RfC, yet. Let's see what Blnguyen decides first. BhaiSaab talk 16:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK then let it die out.Holy|Warrior 16:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you upset with my response? BhaiSaab talk 16:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not really but I think why so many people should put so much burden on blnguyen.even he has got sick of these issues.Holy|Warrior 16:52, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have little knowledge of the conflict between you and Baka. How long has this been going on? I've had problems with him for about three or four days now. BhaiSaab talk 16:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
He was blocked for sockpupettry because I had listed him in WP:RFCU,prior to that he used his sock to make personal attack on me and got blocked.Holy|Warrior 17:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's actually pretty funny. I was looking over the RfC rules and it states that "at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed." Blnguyen hasn't even decided anything yet, so that requirement has not yet been met. Also it states "This must involve the same dispute with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users" and our disputes with him also do not meet this requirement. BhaiSaab talk 17:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! I caught you liars red-handed Bakaman Bakatalk 22:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please mind NPA. I've commented on the liars thing in more detail on my page.Blnguyen | rant-line 05:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you caught so many of our lies...Wow. BhaiSaab talk 02:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from baiting him.Blnguyen | rant-line 05:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well looks like your conniving, under-handed, conspiracy has been exposedBakaman Bakatalk 03:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Per above.Blnguyen | rant-line 05:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Look at the [9] RfC. Oh wait, its just a dastardly act of harrassment. Bakaman Bakatalk 03:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes because every single RfC is harassment. That's why Wikipedia has the process, so users can harass other users. Didn't you know that already? BhaiSaab talk 03:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I had an RfC launched against me by a sock of a banned user. It got deleted.Blnguyen | rant-line 05:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Holywarrior, I have replied to the latest set of documentation lodged to me by Bakasuprman, yourself and BhaiSaab. Also I have made a comment on the RfC. I am quite concerned with the behaivour of all parties at Talk:Californian Hindu textbook controversy. thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 05:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rajiv Goswami

What about this? - BalthCat 20:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC) Well it reads---He tried to self immolate himself and died recently.Trying self-immolation and having commited are two different things.You may insert the comment quoting source.Holy|Warrior 08:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Do not remove other people's comments from the Talk:Kancha Iliah page. This is vandalism and I will report you if you persist. Do not remove sourced quotes from the article either. This is vandalism too. If you persist then I will report you for that as well.

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ikonoblast&oldid=71887601"