Jump to content

User talk:Hkelkar

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mustaqbal (talk | contribs) at 23:49, 13 November 2006 (Stop being an idiot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6

Things to do

The Wikipedia Neo-Buddhists

Get diffs of their inflammatory comments and submit them to Blnguyen on his talk page.Hkelkar 06:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ambedkaritebuddhist:

  1. Summary [1].
  2. [2]
  3. Massive disruption : [3] (he's done this once before)
  4. [4]
  5. [5]
  6. [6]
  7. [7]

Nothing wrong here, but it's just plain hilarious (Babasaheb Ambedkar "taught us", apparently Ambedkaritebuddhist must be really really old to have been literally taught anything by Babasaheb :-))[8].

Dhammafriend:

  1. Summary:[9]
  2. [10]
  3. [11]
  4. [12]
  5. [13]
  6. [14]
  7. [15]

Bodhidhamma: TBC

Revisit old RFCU

Report Mujeerkhan's sock army to an admin.Hkelkar 06:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • > Please abstain from editing other's comments.Secondly, DO NOT call the serious issue of incivilty as "Ho Hum".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ikonoblast (talk • contribs) .
He will once someone learns not to litter talk pages with bogus warnings.Bakaman Bakatalk 17:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This should be my comment and not Ikonoblast - Pls. recheck "*> Please abstain from editing other's comments.Secondly, DO NOT call the serious issue of incivilty as "Ho Hum".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ikonoblast (talk • contribs) ." MerryJ-Ho 13:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your arbitration case

You should place your evidence on the Evidence subpage in the case. That is where you would place arguments in your defense, any explanation of your actions, diffs showing the bad behavior of others, and so on. Thatcher131 11:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

anon

ok, i'll see if he strikes again in those articles and revert his unsourced edits. tx Idleguy 14:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your case

I provided some evidence. Will put in more as I find it. Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 04:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hkelkar arbitration case

May I suggest that you provide evidence on the evidence page? Descriptions of disruptive editing practices, supported by diffs, will be much more persuasive than unsupporteed accusations. You might want to look over the evidence pages in some prior cases to get an idea of how the process works. Thatcher131 14:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Hi

Ay dude,

I'm sorry i'll not be able to come back before May. I'll be taking A Levels this year you see... So you r a Mumbaikar ha? My mum is from across the Bay, Alibag. Though my dad is a Sindhi-Rajput i identify with Marathis more coz i've grown up with my mother. Still my Marathi is far from perfect! Anyways do you know Alibag had highest percentage of Jews amongst its population until 1960's... One of my cousins is married to a Bene-Israeli. She stays in Ashdod. Neeways take care.

File:England flag large.png अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 14:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheema

I agree, it's a bizarre article. Firstly all that discredited "Martial Race" stuff of which the author appears to approve, and then a very strange narrative based on a single source called the Chach-nama. Articles on castes and sub-castes are always a fruitful source of contention as there are many users who see them as a sort of private online genealogy and repository of cherished myths of origin. However, I find an article which goes on at so much length about how an early Muslim conqueror was a better ruler to the non-Muslims of Sindh and Punjab than the Hindu Rajas who "oppressed" them highly suspicious. If the Chach-nama is a valid source then it is clearly a hagiography which needs to be used with caution. It is also unlikely that the majority of the population of Punjab would have been Buddhist at that date. We should beware of using modern religious terms too freely when talking about such a distant period, but the heyday of Indian Buddhism was under the Mauryas five hundred years previously. It is much more likely that the people of Punjab (a large proportion of whom would have been nomadic then) followed various local deities which have subsequently been subsumed into Hinduism. I also have my doubts as to whether all Cheemas are now Muslims - most of the major Jat clans have representatives on both sides of the border, and are divided between Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs. I can't claim to be an expert on this period as it's really far too early, but I'll see what I can do. Sikandarji 18:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only history of the Jats the Bodleian has is by Kalikan Raja Qanungo and was published in Calcutta in 1925. I suppose I could have a look at that. Sikandarji 19:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop being an idiot

There is no such thing as Islamic terrorism or miltancy. Islam does not teach this. I seriously suggest you get a education of basic world religions.Mustaqbal 23:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hkelkar&oldid=87645148"