Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 04:42, 14 September 2006

Please note that I do not speak any Indian languages, so questionable posts on talk pages, etc, need to be accompanied by a translation. Thankyou.

Survey

Just for my personal interest, and seeing as though I have been administrating ~~some~~ many religious battles - I was wondering if people thought I was running a personal attack policy in a biased way due to religious POV. So I'm holding a survey to see if I am indulging in religious bias.
What is my religious affiliation?
Very serious comments about possible bias in my actions are welcomed

Full results are here
Answer here. ~~~~

You are welcome to leave me a message or request admin action.

Blnguyen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) has been an administrator since 29 May 2006.

The recent semi-protection of the Mahatma Gandhi and full protection of the Military budget of the People's Republic of China and Human rights in the People's Republic of China articles which I enacted here, here and here due to vandalism and edit-warring was reported in the Indian media and the New York Times

Archives

/Archive1: October 2005 - March 2 2006 (44kb)
/Archive2: March 3 2006 - March 23 2006 (40kb)
/Archive3: March 23 2006 - April 7 2006 (41kb)
/Archive4: April 7 2006 - May 2 2006 (45kb)
/Archive5: May 2 2006 - May 18 2006 (45kb)
/Archive6: May 19 2006 - May 26 2006 (43kb)
- /Archive my RfA: separate archive regarding my RfA from 22-31/5
/Archive7: May 26 2006 - June 6 2006 (45kb)
/Archive8: June 7 2006 - June 16 2006 (43kb)
/Archive9: June 17 2006 - June 29 2006 (42kb)
/Archive10: June 30 2006 - July 8 2006 (40kb)
/Archive11: July 9 2006 - July 13 2006 (40kb)
/Archive12: July 13 2006 - July 18 2006 (42kb)
/Archive13: July 18 2006 - July 22 2006 (42kb) (includes most of the Indian religion stuff, which started a while ago)
/Archive14: July 22 2006 - August 6 roughly 2006 (42kb)
/Archive15: August 6 roughly 2006 - August 16 2006 (43kb)
- /Archive16: August 7 2006 - August 10 2006 (41kb) (separate for Indian religion hostilities)
- /Archive17: August 10 2006 - August 17 2006 (41kb) (separate for Indian religion hostilities)
/Archive18: August 16 2006 - August 23 2006 (40kb)
- /Archivesurvey: for the religion survey
- /Archive19: August 17 2006 - September 1 2006(43kb) (separate for Indian religion hostilities + cucumber)
/Archive20: August 23 2006 - September 1 2006 (40kb)
/Archive21: September 1 2006 - September 6 2006 (40kb)
/Archive22: September 6 2006 - (gen)
/Archive23: September 4 2006 - (Balkan battles)
/Archive24: September 4 2006 - (India)

Balkan discussions

Srebrenica massacre

Blnguyen,

I see that you suggest lifting the protection on the Srebrenica massacre page as you see some evidence of fruitful discussion. Although I realize that protecting pages is not a long-term solution I would suggest maintaining the protection for some time longer. Here are my reasons:

There has yet to be any kind of compromise or agreement on a common view with regards to how the article should be written
The protection is the only reason there are some attempts at fruitful discussion. Without it the Bosniak editors would simply refuse ANY edits not to their liking (and I believe their liking is POV).

I would suggest keeping the protection and seeing if other external editors can become involved. Regards Osli73 11:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Denial of genocide

Please look here [1]. As you can see you protected the article after Serb nationalists and vandals removed the main information, which is about the character of massacre (genocide) which is proven by international courte in Den Haag and sourced. So you helped them to destroy all this effort in the past year to source this article by neutral documents. I would like to ask you to return this sourced parts. Tnx. --Emir Arven 18:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you protected the article after nationalists removed the picture of a Bosniak girl hanged herself after Serb soldiers raped her and her 12-year-old cousin (Photo: AP). I think this is really, but really not human. So you should return this parts because they are valuable information, they are sourced, they are proven and just deniars are removing it.--Emir Arven 18:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's better for the admin to not tweak the article before locking it unless there is obvious vandalism, else it leads to claims of impropriety. In any case, why is it possible that the Serbia article describes the KLA as "terrorist". that is not NPOV. The Osama bin Laden article only refers to him as militant. I will unlock the page in a day or so. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Language used in the Srebrenica massacre talk page

Blnguyen, since you appear to have taken an interest in the Srebrenica article I would very much appreciate if you could take a look at the sometimes very aggressive language used on the Talk page.

The most recent example is that by User:Emir Arven, calling a number of editors "Serb nationalists" (see here) - including myself. I'm not sure whether this constitutes a personal attack (I'm neither Serb nor a nationalist) it was certainly meant as one. Likewise calling persons who don't agree with one's own POV "genocide deniers" does not contribute to an open and good discussion.

If that article is to progress I feel that a first step needs to be a more civil language on the Talk pages. Are you willing to try to enforce this?

Regards Osli73 20:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a civil and human behaviour is to respect the dead people killed in genocide and not to hide the truth. So I ask you to see how this user is removing sourced part of some articles in order "to be a civil": [2]. By the way, Osli, this is really pathetic. --Emir Arven 20:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking. I'm away on weekends. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Emir Arven breaking 3RR and personal attacks

Hi, Emir Arven has broken the 3RR (see below) and become quite aggressive in tone (see Personal attack below) and I think some type of corrective action is necessary. I realize blocks and other actions are not meant to be punitive, but in this case I feel that some kind of corrective action is necessary to get this editor to adjust his behavior.

3RR (Naser Oric article):

[3]
[4]
[[5]]

Personal attack (Srebrenica massacre article Talk):

"Serb nationalists: (let's call them the right names, because they are trying to deny genocide proven by international tribunal) KOCOBO, Osli73, Srbijanković, Svetislav Jovanović, and Bormalagurski, are doing what they know the best. Continuing the genocide." [6]

Regards Osli73 22:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't break 3RR check my edits again. Regards. --Emir Arven 22:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Osli has only reported three diffs, but I may look again. Referring to other users as being involved in genocide is a massive personal attack. Looking into it.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blnguyen

In reference to your message @ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:142.179.66.89&redirect=no , what personal attacks are you refering to? I only stated that Srebrenica Genocide article is about Srebrenica Genocide, not other genocides that were not legally proven in court.

I've referred to your page, it was about your comment onn Bormalagurski on Talk:Markale massacre. Thanks, Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indian disputes

Accusatory?

Hi. Are these accusatory comments (in diff below) acceptable as per WP:Civil? Please advise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ALalu_Prasad_Yadav&diff=74629303&oldid=74419398

Hkelkar 05:04, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are mild, but unhlepful. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible vandal on several articles

I think that some of the recent edits made by an anonymous ip are vandalism.

His contrib history is below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=86.143.175.215

Particularly vandalistic are his edits of Eurabia and Bajrang Dal. He has also vandalized my user page, rehashing the old sockpuppetry accusation which has been closed. I have reported him for vandalism, but he continues to vandalize the articles and my fixing it might get me above 3RR. I feel that these edits are vandalistic and so, in my opinion, 3RR does not apply.However, since users have been banned for violating even the precept of 3RR before I'd like your opinion on the situation, since I'm still quite new to wikipedia. Please advise. Thank you.Hkelkar 21:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking. I've locked the Bajrang Dal page. The "terrorist" thing is POV - we don't use it even for Osama bin Laden, but generally you don't get blocked unless it is for naked opinion and commentary, which isn't the case. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh

I don't think there was any major edit warring, just some minor quibbles. BhaiSaab ^talk 02:23, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock User:Mahawiki

Blnguyen, mahawiki shouldn't have been blocked. If he has been uncivil, then so has been User:Vgowda. Check out his comments on my page as well as those of Mahawiki's. I suspect that he is a sockpuppet of User:Dineshkannambadi. Both have been editing pages related to Rashtrakuta and Kannada and both have same views and apart from that it is pretty obvious from the talk page of Rashtrakuta that both of them are sockpuppets. I urge you to please review your decision regarding the block on mahawiki as well as check out the other users

--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 05:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vgowda is blocked. Please use WP:RFCU to lodge a complaint for socking. I stand by my block of Mahawiki. Also I noted your Marathi supremacist rant on Dinesh's page.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why block Mahawiki?

Dear Bingyuyen,

If I am being uncivil so if dinesh and his duplicate id vgowda.It is very unfair and partial of u to just block me.See the talk pages of Rashtrakuta keenly and u will see I only responded to the provocations of Dinesh.Not to forget his contributuions are questioned by many editors in Rashtrakuta,Chalukya and Vijayanagara_empire.So its tagging is only obvious.I was just going to answer about his original research in rashtrakuta where u blocked me unnecessarily.With this id,i wont edit out anything but surely answer Dinesh for his fictional stories of Kanndi superiority.

You are requested to be as fair and impartial as possible.Mahawiki01 05:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you talking about yourself in the first person - confession of sock. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not???I did not wanted to hide it.I made it give explaination to u.U see I am no evil or nothing to hide!I didnt know if one is blocked,u shud not make another id to evade it.mahawiki 03:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blnguyen, since the above user created a sock account to evade the block, I suggest taking that into account and increasing the block accordingly. I have also indef-blocked the sockpuppet account. Thank you. --Ragib 05:33, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it expired just now. You should have taken the bold step and blocked anyway. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blnguyen,

I just wrote this on User:Pamri's page. But looks like he is inactive these days. So just pasting the same on your page. Mahawiki especially has been acting in a very uncouth way for the last 2-3 weeks. He has also blanked out official warnings other editors have placed on his talk page in the past. He has not even put them back even after being asked to do so. He has also slapped me with ridiculous warnings like {defwarn} etc., which you can see here.

Anyway here's what i wrote to User:Pamri.

Please take the strictest action possible on both Mahawiki and Arya rajya maharashtra. Thanks. Sarvagnya 05:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I request Sarvagnya to stop badmouthing me wherever possible.He is taking his inability to push kannadi POV at Belgaum.He has badly failed to hide truths.See Belgaum talks!mahawiki 12:21, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

diffs?? I have a lot of requests as you can see.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah?Dont expect these Kannadi vandalisers to praise me.Just see the articles I posted in my reply,on all the talk pages(of those articles) ppl are against pushing of kannadi POV.mahawiki 03:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kannadisation of articles

User sarvagnya,after badly failing to push his POV on Belgaum page is just taking revenge by badmouthing me.I would request all to see Belgaum talk page where I was constantly giving my sources/citations about why Marathi transliteration was necessary and this user was just ignoring him.At last,when I asked for consensus,he ran away when all of Hindi experts cleared the doubts.I would request him not to take all of it personally!

Before the intervention Aksi_great and Amerique I was being emotional and completely unaware of Wiki policies.Just after their advice,I retained the warnings,I did stop responding the abuses by Sarvagnya.About the word Kannadi,just see kannada page,where Marathi wikitag clearly depicts that Kannada is known as 'Kannadi' in Marathi.Morever these ppl also use terms like Marathis and Marati which I dont take as abuse.Word kannadi is not slang but its the word residents of karnataka are recognised with!

Dont just see Solapur,see Kaveri water dispute,rajkumar,vijayanagara_empire,chalukyas,Rashtrakuta and what all.See their talk pages.Many editors have questioned their claims about 'kannadisation' of those articles.These few Kannadi editors are worst than vandalisers as they wisely choose fanatic sources to market their kannada language and culture.Sarvagnya's vandalism on Belgaum page can be seen here [vandalism of sarvagnya] About the Rajkumar article,first see the length of that article!Its seems it is his autobiography than a encyclopedic article.Secondly they have not mentioned the fact that Telugu was his mothertongue.(see the talk page).Also look Vande_mataram,Jana_gana_mana where these ppl are trying hard to delete Nagari transcriptions! Plz ask User:Amerique about why he did stopped his meditation.It was because the issue was resolved by consensus!Plz see [Amerique's rsolution] (see the last two posts in that section) See the consensus generated Belgaum talk page [Consensus of Belgaum page]which made sarvagnya run away!This instance shows how sarvagnya is expert in distorting facts!In fact dont go by my word ask Amerique why did he stopped responding!See how Sarvagnya was being rude and uncivil [here].

I request to keep a watch on these Kannadi vandalisers who are Kannadising articles by citing fanatic sources and distorting facts. mahawiki 12:46, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pls do do cry vandalism in a content dispute. This is a personal attack. I think that Sarvagnya's respones is about as civil as it gets here. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why dont u visit EACH and EVERY instance i mentioned above?Perhaps then u shall understand how cool and civil 'ur' sarvagnya is!These ppl are just pushing their Kannadi POV on each and every article possible.They are taking readers and kind-hearted admins like u for ride.I strongly recommend to take a look at all the links I gave above.mahawiki 03:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Religious Taunts

Blnguyen, User:Vgowda has been harrasing me for quite some time. However, he crossed the limit this time, when he passed an extremely derogatory and hurtful remark on my religion. He commemted that I am not a Hindu. As a devout practising Hindu, I am deeply hurt. You can find the comment on my talk page here. For your convenience, I reproduce his comment -

" I doubt that ur not a Hindu at all, probably a khatli trying to creat trouble as usual. Bole to remain civil, bolna dun nahi hi khatlion se panga le ne ke liye. Arre computer ID ko dekhna, I am not Dinesh he is in the USA. vgowda "

I request you to block this user as soon as you can. I can tolerate anything but derogatory remarks concerning one's religion does not go well with me. I hope you can understand how deeply hurt and insulted I am. I hope you take the decision as soon as possible. Regards, Arya Rajya Maharashtra 12:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He is blocked.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Vgowda is being extremely rowdy and uncivil.I request a strict action against him.In fact i feel it is Dinesh's other id to make himself feel at ease!mahawiki 12:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vgowda is blocked. Also pls give a translation when necessary. Please lodge a report at WP:RFCU with your evidence. Thanks, Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why block me?

Dear Sir, U had blocked me for no reason as if I was uncivil so were Dinesh and vgowda.If others are being rude and uncivil what should I do?Why block me alone?

If u want I would back out from Rashtrakuta,as I have confirmed that these ppl have not wrote against Maharashtra/Marathi.But the point to be noted is they have claimed that Rashtrakutas were Kannadis which is not true.See talk pages of Vijayanagara_empire,chalukya and rashtrakuta u will find similar allegations made against dinesh by other users.

I would also like to know WHY did u exclusively banned me when other users were equally hostile?How would one behave when other users are provoking and swearing him?I request u to get rid of prejudices u have against me and act in a impartial way.Being a admin is very responsible job.I hope u dont want others to call u dictator!

I repeat,if u want me to stop editing Rashtrakuta I will oblige but make sure u bring truth outta it! Thanks. mahawiki 12:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vgowda has now been blocked too. Also note that your endorsement of Arya Rajya Maharashtra's aggressive rant on Dinesh's page is very poor judgment. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did I even take Arya's name?Whats the question of endorsement then?mahawiki 03:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bl, I'll try and talk to maha for you.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My endorsement? I talked to Dinesh on an unrelated subject.Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:26, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very sorry, I posted it under the wrong comment

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blnguyen (talk • contribs) .

Need help

Dear Sir, thanks for blocking Mahawiki, one of the vusers of the page Rashtrakuta. He claims I have been uncivil, but you can clearly see that's not true, if you read my comments on the page. Also all my information is from the sources quoted by me in the reference section. These are renouned scholars on Indian history. The other user who has been using vulgarities against people of Kannada origin and dravidians in general has a user name starting with Arya..... Please give him a warning too. You will find his user name on the same discussion page.

Thanks - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dineshkannambadi (talk • contribs)

Dinesh Kannambadi

Vandalism by Hibotuk, Hobutok etc.,

Pls take a look at this user.

Hibotuk
Hobutok

sarvagnya 21:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both blocked. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My irritation

Dear Sir, Thank you for you advice. I shall keep that in mind. It took me some time to get irritated as the person(s) who I was dealing with were getting too aggrasive and abusive. However, I shall refrain from using such language in future.

Dinesh Kannambadi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dineshkannambadi (talk • contribs)

Bias

In the case of User Subhash Bose, his diatribes against Islam ( despite being pointed out to you) did not even get him any request to tone down.In the discussion you are asking me to tone down there was also an accusation of my being a troll by Baka, which has not commented upon by you. Whereas in the past I have got rapped ( again by you) for even responding to a taunt( by Subhash). You have been more than zealous to implement wiki policy on all users who get into a discussion with User Subhash and his coterie. The reverse does not seem to have the same zealousness. There are other admins watching the page, I would request that whenever User subhash or his talk page is involved you do ask the other admins to take action as I feel you have taken a stance which is not neutral. Haphar 07:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Plus I do not see any comments from you on the following either [7]. Haphar 07:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)- To quote some of the stuff but in by Subhash himself " which Haphar's self-orgasmic rants here are not). Any user is free to remove what he considers vandalism or bogus warnings from any talk page. baka has done so and I am eternally grateful to him for it. He was not acting as my sockpuppet as I could have done so at any time. I've been busy, else I would have gone on irc and requested Blnguyen or someone to protect this talk page from wikitrolls like Haphar. Haphar 07:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haphar I agree with you there are many ocassions where Blnguyen has failed to take action against these ppl.Phps he is concerned about the survey he is carrying out on top of this page.Not impressive I must say. Ikon |no-blast 08:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once again you assume that I have read his edits and willfully ignored his transgressions again and that I have been protecting him. A comparison of the block logs tells the truth. As to my warnings, it is just a warning, rather than a block as Subhash gets when he crosses the line. Referring to your self-justification for your counterattack to Subhash, please direct me to the part of WP:NPA where counter-attacks are permitted - and also any reader can easily see that Subhash was blocked for longer, and frequently by myself. Anybody who isn't blind or completely mentally polluted or biased can see that Subhash has been taken to account more than you have. If you look at my contrib log you will see that I have been away during his latest tawdry edit. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have not countered Subhash but Baka ( now let's Baka him say that you accused him of being a sockpuppet) in the discussion, and saw no warning from you ( and still see nothing) on his accusing me/ calling me a troll. Thank you for your action on Subhash. Haphar 09:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, Blnguyen has punished ME most of all. I don;t bear any grudge or ill will against him, or any admin who has blocked me, for that matter.In fact, I can object that Haphar, despite his repeated incivility, tauntings and veiled insults, has gotten off easy, as has Holywarrior/Ikonoblast/whoever-the-heck-he-claims-to-be-now.Shiva's Trident 17:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Might want to look at my talk page here and the incivility of Haphar and Ikonoblast/Holywarrior, part of HIS coterie.Plus, his rants were entirely out of place in my talk page as they had to do with him and Baka. He should have bothered Baka on HIS talk page instead.Shiva's Trident 17:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Might I add Haphar still insists on calling me a sock. Replying to Haphar with the Troll definition was perhaps a lapse in civility, but his denigration of my edits and his rehashing of the old "Bakaman is Subhash sock" line got really old.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me where I called you a sock ? I have said it before that you "were accused in the past". That is not calling you a sock. If you insist on getting your edit count into every discussion then please do not get hurt on the issue of qaulity being brought in. Haphar 09:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mahawiki

Hi, Blnguyen. First of all, I apologise for having been uncivil(though not uncouth) in some places in the past. I have stopped it myself for some time now and dont intend to start again. Here, I try to present to you a small sample of the way Mahawiki goes about his edits on Wikipedia. This is by no means an exhaustive compilation of all his misdeeds. I only hope that it will give you an idea of how he operates. Like you asked for, I have tried to give diffs and links to the relevant pages wherever possible. I have spent a lot of time putting this together, so I request you to go through it patiently and in its entirety.

His POV pushing on the Konkani page (article history, talk history )

A glaring example of how he operates. Notice that on May 30 he goes an writes something inflammatory on the talk page. He cites no references but just makes tall claims. The next day somebody responds like they did.

What he wrote on the Konkani talk page and the response he received

And yet, a month later, without any further elaboration or discussion on the talk page, nor with any references to cite, he goes ahead and makes this change on the article page. I was and I am still under the impression that edits like amount to vandalism. Correct me if I am wrong. An example of Mahawiki's POV pushing on the Konkani page

Certainly that comment sticks out like a sore thumb and looks like it made the article worse. We need to put the two arguments on the table with the scholars who said it, their evidence and leave it as is. No vandalism is present. I have made some suggestions to improve the article.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Akkalkot page (article history, talk history)

Here is an example of how he goes ahead and removes referenced information and citations, pushes his POV and goes ahead and indulges in an edit war badgering editors lef, right and center. And in doing so, he brands all editors opposed to him as 'Kannadis/Kannadigas' and vandals/chauvinists at that.

The diff - Note that he removes citations
The next one, note his comments in the edit summary. Also note that he has no references of his own to cite nor any to disprove what has been cited
And then, predictably it gets reduced to a revert war as u can see here
And finally, when other editors tire or just decide to 'let it be', the article ends up like this. Note how he arbitrarily does away even with the mention of the word "Kannada".
And all this, while he engages in ZERO discussion on the talk page.

Yeah, I made more comments on the talk page. If it is a mixed community, then ideally we discuss all of them, with their script in the title, and who deleted the bit about the border dispute. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sholapur page (article history, talk history)

Here again, he dives straight into the article page with no discussion on the talk page and does this. Note how he does away with the Kannada interwiki too!
Impumozhi reverts it and invites him to the talk page as can be seen here.
This is what happens on the talk page. Note his arguments. He wants Marathi theaters to be added, but doesnt add it himself; instead he deletes what is already there. He has a problem with calling the great saint Basavanna a Kannadiga. Would he or anyone have problems if they come across a mention somewhere that Mother Teresa was Albanian or that the Prophet was Arabic?
ImpuMozhi tries rewriting it but still gets reverted with no explanation whatsoever. See here
He takes no further part in any discussions on the talk page, but once again successfully reduces the page to a mini edit war as can be seen here. Note the edit inflammatory and misleading edit summaries each time he reverts.

Do you call this a content dispute or merely vandalism? I am under the impression that any 'content dispute' that happens without the concerned party gainfully and politely engaging other editors on the talk page can qualify as 'vandalism', atleast when the erring editor reduces it to an edit war.

Content dispute. A grumpy one nevertheless, but not vandalism. Same ideals as Akkalkot. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Belgaum District page (article history, talk history )

Note: Belgaum district page is different from Belgaum city.

Ok. Here again, he raids the article page a full month before he condescends to appear on the talk page. And here is the frivolous edit he makes. Note that it is not so much that Marathi needs to get space as in the case of those Sholapur theaters, but he wants to stamp out any mentions whatsoever to Kannada. And whats more, Belgaum District happens to be in Karnataka state where Kannada is the official language unlike Sholapur or Akkalkot which are in Maharashtra where Marathi is the official language. And then an anon editor makes a less than professional(actually looks like a hurried one) edit here. Note that I dont consider this edit as having been done in bad faith, but just a little unprofessional with the construction.

And again, with loads of help from mahawiki, it ends up in a revert war. I make this change.
He reverts immediately but asks for me to cite sources unmindful of the fact that Dineshkannambadi had already provided a reference. See that here
Nevertheless, I add more sources which can be seen here
Then he outright rejects all the references because only one of the references happens to be in Kannada! See that here

Also on both the Belgaum District and Belgaum pages, he goes on to question(nay, summarily dismiss) any reports from Deccan Herald that were added as references simply because the Deccan Herald happens to be headquartered in Karnataka. In this regard I would like to point out to you the following,

Deccan Herald is too reputed a paper of long standing for anyone to wish it away. You dont wish away reports about 9/11 say, the New York Times simply because an editor who is sympathetic to the Al Qaeda questions its veracity.
Deccan Herald has been cited on countless other articles and you can check with any Indian admin about its trustworthiness and reliability.
And most importantly apart from Deccan Herald and a Kannada website, references were also provided to 'neutral'(if you will) sources like the The Hindu, Frontline and others which are based neither in Karnataka nor in Maharashtra but concur with the reports in Deccan Herald word for word.

I think Aksi has fixed this one up mostly. I'll be happy to look. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rashtrakuta page ( article history, talk history )

Here again, without a whimper of a discussion he goes ahead and tags the page as disputed and an advert!! See here. Note that in the edit summary, he says "see talk" while in fact, he is simply bluffing. There is NO explanation from him why he was adding the tags on the talk page at the time he actually tagged it.
Ten minutes later, he gives flimsy reasons for tagging. See here. Note the reasons he gives. He says a concerned wikipedian expressed concern about POV on this page to him(mahawiki). Who is this 'concerned wikipedian' and why did he not express his concerns on the talk page of the article itself? Or is mahawiki simply bluffing? Then he goes on to trash the credentials of Dineshkannambadi who has put in almost a whole year creating and editing articles on history while all the while answering every single question raised on the talk page. He doesnt stop at Dinesh, he paints all Kannadigas(kannadis in his lingo) as 'vandalists'.
Then funnily, after pronouncing his judgement that the article had been vandalised, he 'requests' other 'experts' to take a look at the article and find cases of any possible vandalism etc!!

Note here:

He hasnt given any references or citations to back his claim for having the tags.
Dinesh has answered every question raised by any editor on the talk page.
Mahawiki doesnt take exception to any particular claim in the article, but simply trashes the whole article as being pro kannada.
Finally, this is an article about a Kannadiga empire and it is impossible to write this article without making frequent mentions of Kannada, Karnataka and Kannadiga. How would you write an article about the Roman empire without making mentions of Romans? or about alexander or the greek empires without making mentions of Greeks?

So, once again he uses his usual tactic of making some inflammatory edit on the article page, frays tempers all around and reduces the articles to a revert war. While all the time making no constructive edit either on the article page nor the talk page.

It would be too much for me to explain every diff, but I have to tell you that if you find any instances of 'less than professional' language from either me or Dinesh or any of the other editors anywhere on all the pages I've mentioned here(and many more), it is because of the tactics mahawiki uses. Yes, I agree that we are not supposed to respond in kind to bad language, but when it gets as frivolous and frequent as in the case of Mahawiki, anybody will lose their temper.

It certainly isn't an ad, but needs to be sourced better, and does need improvement. The article seems all about Kannada info, so to remove the script from the front seems rather gratuitous and borders on inept symbolism as the text is not disputed and suggest otherwise.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Belgaum page ( article history, talk history)

This is too long a story for me to explain here or now. Suffice to say that mahawiki, used his trolling and inflammatory tactics here too. And the victory he is claiming now(here) is not a victory or compromise or decision by any stretch of imagination. It is just that his bad language(even AFTER User:Amerique started mediating(upon Mahawiki's invitation)) became too much for me handle and I just bowed out of the debate and have stayed away for some time now waiting for tempers to cool. But Mahawiki seems to be in no mood to let go of his foul temper and foul mouth.

His other indiscretions(including but not limited to...)

Kannadi(sic) : In spite of repeated requests by many many editors not to use that term, he keeps using that term to refer to Kannadigas. So much so he has rubbed it off on you and I saw you use it somewhere too. But then I dont hold it against you since you couldnt have known better. In spite of others taking exception to it, he and his friends continue to use it claiming that it is common usage in North India, which is an argument neither me nor many other editors are prepared to buy. Even if it is a common usage in North India or any part of the world, I find it less than flattering and Wikipedia certainly shouldnt encourage such slangs. I request you to ask him to stop this nonsense IMMEDIATELY.
His wanton use of the word 'Vandalism': If you look at his edit summaries they are full of just one thing 'Kannadi Vandalism'. In his view, any edit that even so much as mentions the words Kannda, Karnataka or Kannadiga is vandalism!! This is not only frivoulous but it has the potential to mislead admins like you who might not have the time to look at each and every diff.
His browbeating tactics: He and his pals like Arya Rajya and Sandipini have made it a routine to leave messages in poor taste on talk pages of other editors. He has even used {defwarn}} on me once, before another admin came it took it off my page and warned him.
Blanking out warnings: He has blanked out official warnings that I had placed on his talk page. Once he even simply copied and pasted a warning from his page onto mine simply because I had 'dared' to warn him. And for all these indiscretions he keeps pleading ignorance of the rules. If he was ignorant at the time he blanked out my warning, why is it still not back on his talk page then? For my part, I had even retained the {{defwarn} warning on my talk page till the admin came and removed it. And I still retain his other frivoulous warnings.
BLATANT ATTEMPTS TO MISLEAD AND CONFUSE: This is an example. Here you can see him complaining about Kaveri River Water Dispute(which is 'under construction' and has been tagged as such), Rajkumar, Vijayanagara_empire, Chalukyas, Rashtrakuta etc.,.

If you may note on the Chalukya, Vijayanagar_empire and Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute pages, he has ZERO edits on both the talk and article pages put together. He has not raised any concern whatsoever on any of those pages and yet, that doesnt stop him from going to town about supposed 'Kanndi' vandalism on those pages!! or perhaps even tagging them as disputed etc as he did on the Rashtrakuta page. I see this as blatant attempts to mislead people and garner some sympathy votes for himself. I am not so much worried about the sympathy he seeks as the confusion arbitrary claims like this can create. Other editors and admins may make the blunder of taking his claims at face value, go to the talk page, see the foul mouthed vitriol he engenders and be mislead in taking decisions that might eventually cost the article its quality, clarity and NPOV. I request you to take his attempts to mislead very very seriously. And this is not the only instance where he has done this. He does this as a matter of routine(I am tiring now of this long post, so if you want me to give you links to other similar attempts by him, please ask me. I will provide you with the links as soon as I can).

And just on the lighter side, I am from where Anil Kumble, Javagal Srinath, G R Vishwanath and other Kannadiga cricketers hail from(Dravid is Marathi but kind of naturalised Kannadiga. And mahawiki has Tendulkar and Gavaskar(who gave his sister in marriage to G R Vishwanath) on his side ;) :)... ha ha.. just kidding.. This dispute here, as u can clearly see is just not cricket.

Thanks,

Sarvagnya 09:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware of the general rowdiness and off-topic argy-bargy about Marathi vs Kannada not relevant to article content. I hope that improves. Teh gratuitous use of "vandalism" is also poor.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>>i HAVE sachin Tendulkar,Gavaskar which will blank out everyone else on his list!!!But lets add Ajit Agarkar,Vinod Kambli,Ramesh Powar,Dilip Vengaskar,Ajit Wadekar,Anshuman Gaekwad,Hrishikesh Kanitkar,Kiran More,Harsha Bhogle,Sanjay Manjrekar,Nayan Mongia,Sandip Patil...Oh see I am exhausted!!Add Sharad pawar to this list!Hahaha!mahawiki 08:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What a joke. You would be best off improving those articles to show us the contribution of MAharashtra to cricket. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

His latest warnings

I feel like a high school kid to have to come running to you everytime Mahawiki opens his mouth. But he leaves me no option. How long do the other editors have to put up with his antics? He just doesnt seem to be in the mood to let the dust settle down. Anyway, here it is.

Pls note his language here - If its too long a read, read from the bottom, his comments are at the bottom. Note the honorifics he confers on me(and Dinesh).
I responded with this on his page.
And he came back with this

I request you to remove the frivlous warning he has given me on my page or atleast permit me to do so. Also please warn him to be civil one last time. Sarvagnya 19:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sarvagnya,its enough now.When did I have personal attacks with u today?Are u OK?I didnt even READ ur comments on Rashtrakuta,forget about replies.I replied to Dinesh,not u so when did I have personal attacks on u?Why did u give me warnings?Stop this yarr.Its enough now.Just like ur badmouthing me here,did I issue any warnings?I dont want to talk to u,let alone personal attacks.Stop behaving like a child.I have even stopped editing at Rashtrakuta and busy editing other articles of my concern.This is my last warning to u.U r purposely creating a scene.Let me again tell u stop taking revenge of Belgaon issue.Make that very clear-U dont deserve my attention and bandwidth let alone personal attacks! mahawiki 20:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You called him names at the bottome of your post. I have responded to both. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sarvagnya, I didnt know u love me so much

After reading all these rantings of Sarvagnya,I am not feeling angry rather feeling pity on him!My god he has tracked my record as i am a deadly terrorist.I wont deny my wrongs I did before I was adviced by Aksi_great about how things work in Wiki.From than,(see the Belgaum talk page carefully,I am talking in 'citation' lingo.This has perhaps made Sarvagnya very nervous since he has badly failed to prove about a controvesial board of Belgaon Mahanagarpalika.He tried to ignore citations,misguide editors and mediators,he tried each and every thing possible.But finally truth came out and he ran off.Ask aksi_great or Amerique if I have misbehaved after their entry.Aksi_great had requested to stop editing for 2 days and this oversmart guy logged off and did what he thought was needful!He himself calls Sholapur when its Solapur,Marati instead of Marathi,Marathis instead of Maharashtrians and when I without any wrong intension say Kannadi to Kannada ppl he gets mad!I have a Kannadi friend and he himself says 'I speak Kannadi and am a Kannadi'.Look at the Marathi wikitag on Kannada page!I dont why these Kannadis feel ashamed of their identity?Insistance of Kannadig is like insitance of 'Marathi maNase' or Bhartiya instead of Maharashtrians and Indians!

The modus operandi of these Kannadis is that they speak chaste English(so they cant be vandalisers or roudy!),they are well versed in Wiki policies so that they can confuse newbies by their warnings.(note that I have retained my warnings just after Sunder/Aksi_great asked me to do so)See the history,I have not done it recently.They carefully choose the citations/sources which would help him pushing their Kannadi POV and ignore everything else.This is even worse than vandalism.They are taking wiki and its readers for a ride.See Kaveri_dispute article,its all kannadised.Chalukyas,Vijayanagara,Rashtrakutas are all Kannadis according to them.Telugu editors are also opposing their kannadisation(see Vijayanagara empire).They even dont want to add info abt Tamil roots of kannada!Rajkumars article is a comedy(see the length when more great actors like MGR,NTR have a brief summary)Rajkumars article is not an article its an autobiography!They have cleverly opposed tamilnation's source about Rajkumars's mothertongue being telugu but if I oppose DH they hate it.Anyways I wont oppose them as I have got my set of citations ready now. Its hillarious that sarvagnya has taken so much pains to bad-mouth me!He is taking his failure of pushing Kannadi POV at Belgaum too seriously and personally.I mean I dont give so much importance to anyone!Nice to know that Sarvagnya thinks and cares abt me so much.Bura hi sahi hamare bare main likha to! And my advice to Sarvagnya-Stop crying for sympathy.I wont allow anyone to defame Marathi and Maharashtra at any cost.I dont give a damn about Kannadisation if its not on Marathi/Maharashtra related pages!Plz assume good faith and dont take anything personally.I am feeling flattered for ur attention!Thanks!After this post,I am not going to respond to ur literature,U dont deserve my attention and my bandwidth.plz dont think i shall get awe of ur rantings and allow kannadisation.Dont think false display of courtesy,mannerisms and chaste English can allow u to carry out ur pro-Karnataka propoganda.Can we talk in citation lingo plz?Stop personal attacks hereafter.God bless u. mahawiki 08:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've lost sight of the point of editing articles. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you

Understand

Tension kay ko leta hai, Dadagiri Kay ko Karta Hai, Gandhigiri ke bare mein suna KYa, who kar. Agreed Maharastra is Great, Marattis are killed in Mumbai trains and what do u do-Nothing-thoda daring hona mangta, Fanatics in Malegaon shout pakistan zindabad and what do marattis do about it-nothing, Dawood rules Mumbai from Karachi what do marattis do about it-Nothing, Malegaon is Little pakistan and not under Maratti control what do u do? nothing, Mumbai film industry is ruled by Punjabis and Muslims and what do marattis do-Nothing and what right have u got to talk about Kannada and Belgaum, first try to keep ur house in order, dont just sit watching lavni.
____
Bingo!mala suddha vatate ki to gouda dineshchach duplicate id aahe.mi tula faktsangitle ki te loke aadhi aaplyala bhadkavtil nantar aapan kahi bolalo ki tyacha viparyas kartil.tyamule jara sawadh raha.BTW mi rashtrakutachi mahiti milavli,marathi va maharashtrachya babtit kahi kanndi fanaticsni 'shahanpana' kelai ka he throroughly tapasle.parantu atlease maharashtra va marathichya babtit kahi anyay zalyache vatat nahi.tu dekhil te article nit vach va bagh kahi loopholes aahet ka,aslyach tar aapan te carefully verify karu.

I'm surprised you got the meaning so well out of Vgowda's statement. Good job. I dont speak Marathi though, so Mahawiki's nice response is a blur to me as well.Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't take much. I can understand the train bombing ref, and I know who Dawood is and the three Khans - Aamir Shahrukh and Salman. I was aware of Belgaum just in the last fortnight. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan zindabad is as good as a swear word in India ("long live Pakistan" is the meaning) and Malegaon is a ref to the 2006 blasts at Malegaon Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well my response was to Arya about possible duplicate id of Dinesh.I asked him to keep cool as he(gowda) is provoking us(to get us banned by kind-hearted admin).Further I said,I checked the rashtrakuta article for any possible bias against Maharashtra,but didnt find one and I asked him to check it himself.

Btw Mahawiki01 was my id,i had made it to give explaination and prostest against my unfair ban.I never tried to hide it,dear!BTW what did u mean by ur near-threat on Rashtrakuta page.Kannadi is the word for Kannada speakers,check Kannada and u shall find Marathi wikitag on that page which is 'Kannado.I urge u to get rid of prejudices!

I also request u to check rashtrakuta for any possible push of POVmahawiki 03:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Well i came to this page by an accident. Since i'm half-Marathi i know a bit of the language...

Bingo!mala suddha vatate ki to gouda dineshchach duplicate id aahe.mi tula faktsangitle ki te loke aadhi aaplyala bhadkavtil nantar aapan kahi bolalo ki tyacha viparyas kartil.tyamule jara sawadh raha.BTW mi rashtrakutachi mahiti milavli,marathi va maharashtrachya babtit kahi kanndi fanaticsni 'shahanpana' kelai ka he throroughly tapasle.parantu atlease maharashtra va marathichya babtit kahi anyay zalyache vatat nahi.tu dekhil te article nit vach va bagh kahi loopholes aahet ka,aslyach tar aapan te carefully verify karu.

Literal Translation: Bingo! I also think gouda is Dinesh's duplicate id (i.e Sockpuppet). I tell you, people will first inflame us, then when we respond, they will tyacha viparyas kartil (not sure what viparyas means but i think it means "answering back". Therefore beware of them. BTW i've gathered some information on Rashtrakutas. I've throroughly (sic) checked whether some Kannadiga fanatics have tried to slight(dunno how shahanpana translates but slighted will cover the meaning) Marathis and Maharashtra. It seems that there has been no injustice done to Maharashtra. You read the article to check loophole (dunno what they mean by it!). If they (loopholes) are there then we can carefully verify them!

File:England flag large.png अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 10:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin and God!!

>> I am aware that Mahawiki does have a very aggressive mindset,<<

This is what u posted on sarvagnya's page!I wonder when r u planning to block me permanently??U have dcided and passed ur judgement,u r not intrested in hearing my plea,my differences with other users,ur just waiting for a chance to get me off here!!

Why dont u see Belgaum's talk page.U will know how sane and kind-hearted this troll is.Just because he writes chaste English doesnt mean he is right and i am aggressive roudy.Plz get rid of prejudices,(again see Belgaum's talk page!).U have powers to block anyone,that doesnt mean u act like a god.U have a responsibilty to perform.I dont have any grudges against u for blocking me,but why spare Dineshkambaddi??How it is justified to block me exclusively.Why r u being so judgemental about me?

To repeat,just see kaveri water dispute,rajkumar,Belgaum,Vijayanagara_empire,Rashtrakuta,chalukyajust see the talk pages and u shall understand there's possible pushing of POV and fabrication of facts.My dear Kannadi friends wisely choose fanatic sources and mould the article in such a way that it endorses Karnataka..Just take a look at those pages.

I dont know what should i say to u when u have my impression as a 'vandaliser'.I can only request u to be impartial,justified and neutral when dealing with controversial topics.With ur attitude,I fear Kannadisation of all articles in near future. God bless, mahawiki 04:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, just that I noted that you view this as a battle with everybody attack Maharashtra. This is not the case. Good content is what we look for. Nobody is a vandal. I've told everbody not to call each other vandals. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mahawiki's Endorsement

Blnguyen, first of all, thanks for blocking Vgowda. He had been extremely uncivil. And even DineshKannambadi has been very rowdy. In fact, the way Vgowda came into the discussion out of nowhere, and used even more rowdy and uncivil language than Dinesh, it seems to a staged ploy. I am sure Vgowda is a scokpuppet of Dinesh. Anyway, about mahawiki's endorsement of my rants, I feel everyone has an opinion. Isn't it ? Mahawiki just supported what I had commented. And I feel there is nothing wrong in that. And really Mahawiki and myself can comment on anything on our own talkpages. Those comments are not really accountable - First of all, they are off-the-record, secondly, they may be personal. And anyway, he hasn't been calling me to the heated discussions, etc. He has already translated what he said on this page, somewhere above, so no need to repeat.

Another thing is that, my comment on Dinesh's talk page was a result of Dinesh's extremely anti-Marathi rants on the Belgaon page. Just check out these samples -

"Its Kannada and it is atleast a thousand years older than your language.

"In the 1950's, the movement to make Belgaum a part of Maharashtra was an emotional one with adequate support from the Maharashtra govenrment. However after the stunning defeat at the hands of Mahajan commission, the Maharashtra government is essentially doing to the Marathis what Pakisthan is doing to Kashmiris in that they are being used for their own election / selfish purposes with really no hope of reverting the decision of the Mahajan commission."

"Also, if the Kannada people of Sholapur are not fighting to Join Karnataka, its because Kannada people are basically decent non-militant people who have shown India and world our calibre by starting and starring in India's IT revolution. The world no longer talks of Mumbai as the gateway to India, but it talks of Bangalore (Bangaluru) as its international gateway. Karnataka is too important for India and the Indian govt. is aware of this. India cannot and will not allow shallow, narrow minded sub-regional fascists to ignite a problem that could spread through out India and damage India's image as a progressive nation. Nor do I believe Karnataka is weak enough to suffer a defeat like the "Battle of Panipat"(This refers to Maratha Empire's loss at Panipat)."

"Lets not forget that through out history, when other empires fell, it was the Kannada empires that stood the test of time to protect Indian Nationalism. The Hoysalas were the last to fall (1343 CE.)to the Khilji invasion while the Yadavas of Devagiri who actually had many cowardly agreements with the invaders were the first to fall (1315 CE.). From the ashes of the Hoysala empire rose the last great Hindu empire, the Vijayanagar empire (note that no historian calls the Maratha empire the last great Hindu empire) to keep invaders out for 250 years when our neighbours to the north were already ruled by the invaders during this period. The Kingdom of Mysore were the last to fall to the British in 1799 CE. under Tippu with the Maratha Peshwas and Nizam of Hyderabad working as agents of the British and actually assisting the British in the Third Mysore War. In return for their service provided, these English agents were given bits and pieces of northern Karnataka which later on became a part of Bombay presidency and Hyderabad presidency. we eventually go back what was ours in 1956. During the British rule, more than anyone else, it was the Kannada people who suffered, being split up into four regions, Bombay presidency, Madras Presidency, Hyderabad and Mysore Kingdom. Yet, by 1875, we had replaced Marathi and Urdu as the medium of education in northern Karnataka with our own language. We did this in a very cultured and educated way. Today we have 7 Jnanpith awards (the highest in India for any language), have won the Ranji trophy 6 times (having entered the cricket arena rather late in 1960's), started India's IT revolution. All this goes to show our resolve."

The above comments are made by User:Dineshkannambadi who has been, as mahawiki said, Kannadizing every other article. But that's not what got me angry, but the above insulting words against Maharashtra. And that's why I ranted on Dinesh's page in the first place. I hope things are clear now. But I still feel, you must check Dinesh's other edits where he has severely Kannadified neutral articles. Bye for now.

--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 07:12, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks?

Do you even know who Robert Vadra is and who are Bhumihars. I would suggest you to refrain from passing arbitrations over articles over Indian people and castes. I am really appalled to see your behaviour. User:Ikonoblast is a well-known vandal who has banned several times. ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 07:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not here to become an arrogant admin. I am craving for what you call "credits". I have a decent social life and banning people without a valid reason is what you can do at the most but do you realize that only USERNAMES can be banned and NOT users. I don't want to know your definition but I do know very well that these people User:Ikonoblast and User:Hornplease are CLEARLY biased and are against certain castes and political parties. Do you want me to show some proofs? And I have long considered reporting User:Ikonoblast's activities to the Admins' noticeboard but now I fear they too would not listen after getting threats of bans from you. And User:Ikonoblast HAS BEEN banned for removing other people's appropriate comments which is considered vandalism by the very same encyclopedia's policies of which you are an admin of. ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 07:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't get your wiki cant but I would like to remind you that as an admin, you have certain responsibilities. You are actually DISCOURAGING users from adding useful information to the wikipedia. Its motto is "Be BOLD". The truth should be exposed no matter how controversial it is. Why are Moslem admins refuting the fact that Aisha was six when she was married to Muhammad? They had locked the two articles. ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 07:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Vadra

"gives the impression"? I do not care about what "impression" do people get and I never called him corrupt because he is not involved in active politics and neiher does he hold an office. What proofs must be provided to "PROVE" that the son-in-law and the daughter of the ruler of India lives in a state-owned bungalow? PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE try to understand that it is INDIA and such things are so common that even telling people about it would be banal. ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 08:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

220.226.73.176

Sir, I need your attention on edits made by this new user. His edit in Vijayanagara Empire page and its talk page are not according to Wiki policies (one is a possible vandalism and another is a direct personal attack on another contributor and a community). Thank you. - KNM ^{Talk - Contribs} 17:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maurya Empire Discussion

Hello Blnguyen,

Regarding your recent message: my reference to aldux being a "thug" was on account of PHG's enlistment of him to use charged language and to intimidate me. It was not meant to be a personal attack but to emphasize how the other party was not attempting to discuss the subject matter but was seeking to coerce others to accept the inclusion of the edit. I will point out the Indo-Greek map debate/edit war between Aldux and Vastu.

Nevertheless, I respect your opinion and wikipedia NPA, and will not refer to him as a thug in the future. But I would beseech you to encourage Aldux to avoid attempting to threaten people by noting that they "will pay the consequences" and used other phrases that are not in line with civility on Wikipedia.

Also, I was wondering what your thoughts were on my compromise suggestion, since I am not the only wikipedia contributor who is concerned with that edit. Thank you for your time.

Regards,

Devanampriya

Hi Blnguyen, I'll just add a few words. First, Dev. says I was "enlisted" by PHG; this is completely untrue, as I arrived instead by glancing at PHG's contributions. I've always much appreciated PHG's featured articles, and in particular his last one, Hasekura Tsunenaga: and when I saw that there was a dispute at Maurya Empire, with Dev. deleting reliably sourced, and relevant material and PHG trying to conserve it; so I made my first edit, a revert to PHG's version, at September 3, 15:53 [8]; for this edit PHG, that was obviously online, thanked me, sending me a message after my first edit, at September 3, 16:01 [9]; and no, before Dev. says this, PHG didn't send me a message by e-mail, as he never has (strangely, considering our common interests, our wiki interaction has been generally quite low, probably because my hellenistic interests are more "traditional" - Egypt, Greece, Syria, Anatolia). Before PHG's message, I had posted at September 3, 16:00 this warning [10], that reads You are in danger, if you haven't already done it, of violating the WP:3RR. Also, remember that removing sourced material is considered vandalism. Now it's up to you to chose: respect the rules, or continue breaking them and pay the consequences (that is, getting blocked). This was a due message, as there was no 3RR warning on his user page, and, well, blanking is considered vandalism. What was unnecessary, I admit it, mea culpa, was the last period: while true (violation of the 3RR does generally bring to a block), the tone was too harsh. But too call sending a 3RR warning "intimidation" and calling using the term "thug" three times [11] [12] [13] "not meant to be a personal attack", shows, IMO, little knowledge of wikipedia rules. And I bet that also saying of me "His charged comments and uncivil behavior stand against the community orientation of wikipedia, and pale only in comparison to his ignorance.",[14] is not for him a personal attack against me. And it's not only with me: many of his responses to PHG at User talk:Devanampriya and Talk:Maurya Empire show the same violation of WP:CIV and WP:NPA.

The same day I entered the dispute, a second editor intervened to oppose the blanking of the new edits, User:Khoikhoi, who started editing Maurya Empire on September 3, 20:01; I swear I didn't call him, but suspect he knew of the dispute through Dev.'s awnser [15] on my user page; me and Khoikhoi collaborate a lot, and it's probable my user page is on his watchlist. Against us Devanampriya has waged at Maurya Empire and Ashoka a one-man-war, even if he tried in an all ways to enlist supporters, as can be seen by the messages asking for support in his crusade he sent to [[16]] (already on August 28!), [[17]], [[18]], [bose], and once again, more insistently, with [[19]], and also with the admin [[20]], to whom he sent a message that I feet only as partisan, but, IMO, highly slanderous towards me. The only one that came in the dispute was Vastu, but who didn't side with Dev. and instead wrote of his general approval of PHG's edits [21].

Since Dev. couldn't find any support (even if he says: "I am not the only wikipedia contributor who is concerned with that edit"; I'd like to know where are the other users so concerned), he started violating systematically the 3RR, but being careful to use anon. accounts, so to not be seen; but he hasn't been very careful, and had forgot that in previous occasions he had used these accounts to write comments in talk pages, often leaving his signature, "Devanampriya". When the article was locked, a brand new editor emerged, User:Pavanapuram, editing only on Talk:Maurya Empire, that interestingly, not only voiced the same opinions of Devanampriya and appeared here on your talk to strengthen Dev. and, he too (how strange) attack me; he is also, and this is of particular interest, always editing, I've controlled, in exactly the same time periods in which Devanampriya was.

From this I awnser that we shouldn't abide to a single editor who is trying to impose his will and erase sourced information; sources that have behind them authors still respected in academia, and that are regularly mentioned in the hellenistic history books bibliographies. I'm no fan of Tarn, quite the opposite: but it's one of those authors that even his opposers feel they have to mention, was it only to counter him with other arguments. Obviously, this theory is just a theory, to mention among other theories; which is done by PHG's edits, and other theories can be added when sourced. I also disagree on creating a new article, in which to throw all Dev. doesn't wan't; there is no reason why fully sourced edits must be exiled for motives that are almost declarately nationalistic.

Sorry if I was so long, but I wanted to give you a full and detailed map of the situation. Ciao,--Aldux 23:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Aldux. I don't think for one moment that your conduct towards other users has been of ill-will. I don't support the excising of the information, but can we get more info from Buddhist oriented sources or Jain sources to make it bigger. Because it does seem as though there is not much detail about Ashoka and Buddhism and Ashoka the conqueror, and the same in the Maurya Empire - at the moment there is lots of information about the Greek connection, which inherently there is nothing wrong, but it may give the impression that Ashoka was a Greek reprentative or something - it just feels a bit too oriented on his bloodline and not what he nor the Mauryans achieved. In any case it was interesting that I got Mahinda (his son, who brought Buddhism to Sri Lanka) and Moggaliputta-Tissa (his spiritual adviser) to DYK in the week leading up to the locking - could we put more stuff about Buddhism into the articles to balance it out as well as his stuff about the Kalinga conquest etc. The Greek stuff is still interesting of course and I don't see a reason to cull it unless there is POV or weaselly stuff compromising it. Anything this old, of course cannot be certain, so as long as we give both a fair hearing then it should work out OK. This could be an interesting case as I am interested in learning more about Asoka. Perhaps I can find more about his Indian activity (religion and miltary) to balance it out. Tell me what you think. Thanks, Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 06:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your prompt and kind response. IMO, what you propose is exactly what should be done; not remove text, but expand the other sections, possibly bringing Ashoka and Maurya Empire to feature status. I'ts very interesting to hear you're interested in Ashoka; I hope you'll find time, as you propose, to add material as you said, on the buddhist and military activities. Unfortunately my knowledge on India tends to start with the Moghuls, so I can't be of much help; but PHG had an important role in writing the feature History of Buddhism, so I think he'll be able to say quite a lot on the buddhism section.

Regarding an argoment that doesn't involve Maurya-Greek relations, what do you think of the section Maurya Empire#Historical Comparison? IMO, this section stinks quite a lot as a violation of WP:V, WP:NPOV and especially WP:OR, offering a quite overtly anti-chinese pov as estabilshed truth. Should this section be removed? Or tagged as OR while we wait for sources, trying in the meanwhile to npovize it? Or keep it at it is? Tell me your view. Ciao, Aldux 11:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I think it should be removed, I can't see how it is useful in any way as at that stage China and India had no contact with each other and it could have comparisions with any other random empire. Apart from that it seems like original analysis and seems vague and wobbly. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets

I can't believe the checkuser came back inconclusive. See [22] and [23]. The editing pattern similarities are quote obvious, and yet everyone believes the story about two different students at the same uni who like to edit the same articles, one editor who registered during another one's block. BhaiSaab ^talk 01:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, I registered at a time Subhash_bose was blocked as well.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu students council must be a big club at UTexBakaman _Bakatalk 01:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When he was on IRC, he was uncloaked, so everybody could see the two IP addresses and they were definitely different. One was a university IP and the other was a commercial internet company. Of course, if he is sneaky, he could be sitting at home with two computers, one using his home account and the other remotely logged into his uni account, to give two locations when he is in one room with two computers. Having said that, there is a definite difference in the style of conduct.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know he didn't get a friend to pose for him using a university computer? BhaiSaab ^talk 02:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hkelkar doesnt use "nein mein freund".Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, firstly he was on at about 6 UTC, which is about 10-11pm Texas time, so he would have required security cards to get into uni. It would be a big move to take this risk of being caught breaching security regulations by taking an unauthorised person into a physics lab with expensive equipment at a higly regarded physics school for a wikipedia stunt. Also I looked at the student list and there are about 220 students [24] in the Physics Dept and 8 are Indian. PhD students need to help supervise lab classes (I do so myself) and share the same lunch room, and are required to attend the weekly afternoon tea and reaserch seminar, so you end up talking to everyone all the time, even though when you are in undergraduate you only talk to a few specific friends, as you now live in the same office 50 hours a week. It's quite likely that 2 out of the 8, at least 25% will be BJP supporters. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppeteer Template

You once said that Subhash bose cannot remove the sockpuppeteer template from his userpage. Does that apply to all users who've been blocked one time or another for sockpuppeteering? BhaiSaab ^talk 02:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. BhaiSaab ^talk 02:06, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sanskrit

yes you may. What content disupte? dab (ᛏ) 06:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ah, are you referring to Spiritindia (talk · contribs)? that was an account adding nonsense (I grant you, possibly out of utter cluelessness rather than malice), revert-warring and in violation of 3RR at the time in top of that. Not a bona fide content dispute. dab (ᛏ) 06:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"7RR"??

Your behaviour is rather unrealistic. You blocked Crculver for rolling back nonsense added to articles? I am sorry, but I think you need to review your notion of 'content dispute'. A newbie account adding random nonsense and refusing to negotiate does not constitute a 'content dispute'. It is difficult enough to keep these articles in half decent shape without your blocks. I cannot see that Crculver has violated the 3RR at all, he reverted various additions, but even if you consider the 'Spritindia' incident a bona fide content dispute, he only reverted three times there. You seem to be handing out blocks rather liberally and rather erratically, and I would strongly recommend you post your decisions on WP:AN/I for review. People investing their time in rolling back nonsense are not in unlimited supply, and if you go about blocking these, you should be asking yourself, do your actions benefit the project? 'Spiritindia' should not have got as far as he did, he should have been {{test}}ed after his first edit.

Regarding your other question, yes, Bharatveer is clearly a bad-faith editor and has proven so in numerous instances. Until he is banned I still acknowledge his additions fall under 3RR, but I see no reason not to roll him back, especially since there was debate (or what passes for 'debate' in Bv's case) ongoing on the talkpage. dab (ᛏ) 06:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your actions are being reviewed here. I can see it both ways. I would've blocked the user myself but like I said, I can see it either way. --Woohookitty^(meow) 08:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems dab is trying to gain the edge in a content dispute. He hates Bharatveer [25] with a passion and hates me too, beause I confronted him about some controversial talk page discussions and edits [26],[27],[28],[29]. Infact even dab suggested I was Subhash_bose's sock.[30]Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed. I don't see the justification for using rollback in this case at all, or for banning users as vandals in this case. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again me!

I respect ur views and I am working on Marathi.But I am again surprised to see that again u have just adviced me!!Why didnt u pass the same advice to Sarvagnya.In fact he is himself starting personal attcks.I just respnded to him!I have other things to do,so I am gonna reply that troll again. But I wish u could have adviced Sarvagnya too.He is too happy to see that u have developed a prejudice against me.mahawiki 08:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eh? "I am gonna reply that troll again". Not a good idea, regardless. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subhash's talk page

Could we just quarantine it? I don't know why people feel the need to constantly spar on that page. I'll take a look. --Woohookitty^(meow) 11:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

General

DYK

On 8 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Samo Ljubezen, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

On 8 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Merv Wood, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Is 2 DYK's an update becoming the average for Blnguyen? I think you're trying to catch up to Ghirla. Cheers -- Samir धर्म 05:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Merv Wood

Hey Blnguyen. Mervyn Wood exists. Merge? -- Samir धर्म 17:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Cough* That was my polite way of asking you to do it -- Samir धर्म 00:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hindu politicians

Its been more than a week. So its ripe time to remove the ugly CfD sticker. :)Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

Hi. Just saw you archiving your talks. Congratulations on the neat work. . --Bhadani 01:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1st poll:

Hi everyone! This is the 1st ever poll to be sent out. Please read the Disclaimer below & enjoy! -- Spawn Man 05:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poll 1 - Wikipedian relationships

Question 1: Do you feel that other Wikipedians are as nice (or as horrible!) as when you started editing Wikipedia as a registered user?
- A)Yes. B)No. C)Roughly about the same. D)Don't know. E)Other... (Please explain). F)Abstain.

Question 2: If you answered "No" above, how have other Wikipedian's attitudes changed?
- A)They have grown nicer. B)They have grown meaner. C)Don't know. D)Other... (Please explain). E)Abstain.

Question 3: Are admins as nice as you think they should be? If you're an admin, try to be truthful...
- A)Yes. B)No, they are nicer. C)No, they are meaner/grumpier. D)Not sure. E)Other... (Please explain). F)Abstain.

Question 4: Have you ever been in a serious dispute on Wikipedia?
- A)Yes. B)No, I've never been in a dispute. C)No, I've only been in minor disputes. D)Not sure. E)Other... (Please explain). F)Abstain.

Question 5: Have you ever been blocked from editing Wikipedia?
- A)Yes. B)No. C)Not sure. (You can find out by checking "My contributions" & selecting "block log"). D)Other... (Please explain). E)Abstain.

Question 6: Have you ever met another editor on Wikipedia in real life?
- A)Yes. B)No. C)Not sure. D)Other... (Please explain). E)Abstain.

Question 7: Do you enjoy communicating or working with other editors on Wikipedia?
- A)Yes. B)No. C)Sometimes. D)Not sure. E)Other... (Please explain). F)Abstain.

Question 8: Have you ever taken a "Wikibreak" due to stress from other editors?
- A)Yes. B)No. C)No, I've only taken a "Wikibreak" due to un-editor related stress. D)Not sure. E)Other... (Please explain). F)Abstain.

Question 9: Have you ever collaborated on an article with another editor on Wikipedia?
- A)Yes. B)No. C)Several times. D)Not sure. E)Other... (Please explain). F)Abstain.

Question 10: Do you envy other editors on Wikipedia for their achievements or good fortune? Be honest...
- A)Yes. B)No. C)Sometimes. D)I don't know. E)Other... (Please explain). F)Abstain.

Disclaimer

Hi everyone. If this is your first time filling out a survey, read this. To fill out a questionaire sheet, simply send me a post to my talk page, clearly stating your choice for each answer. For example: For Question 1, you might choose to place on the message, "Q1: A)" or "Question 1: Choice A." etc etc. It's up to you, as long as I get the general jist of what your choices are. You have around 1 week to return a survey sheet, but late entrie's will be accepted.

Remember however, your personal choices may be read whilst they are on my talk page. I will understand if you don't wish to answer some or all of the survey due to this. For this reason I have also placed an "Abstain" choice for each question. Try & answer truthfully, or don't answer at all if you can't.

However, your personal choices will not be expressed on the survey's outcome, instead it will be part of a larger finding, such as "60% of people eat chocolate, 25% never eat chocolate & 5% of people chose to abstain from answering..." I will never say, "90% of people eat chocolate, while only Fruityman said he didn't..." This would be an invasion of privacy. However, if a question has (Please explain) or (Please elaborate) as a choice, your specific answer may be used in the survey outcome, although your name will not be. If a question does not have (Please explain) as a question choice, but your intended choice is not represented on the choice list, then feel free to provide another choice which fits your description.

You're probably getting bored reading all of this so I'll wrap up. To see outcomes of the results, see my Polls subpage. Feel free to comment on anything! Feedback is always welcome. Most importantly, have fun. Topics will vary greatly & surveys may be resent out at later times to re-assess a consensus if survey numbers have grown significantly. If you know anyone who would be interested in these surveys, send them to my talk page or if you see this survey sheet, send your own answers in! Thanks. -- Spawn Man.

Hey

Hey Blnguyen. As a DYK-updating admin, we'd appreciate your opinion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Many thanks -- Samir धर्म 00:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. Samir धर्म 08:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Glenn McGrath

Warning removed, I didn't know. :) --Core des at talk! 05:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and thanks for the vandalism revert on my userpage. :D --Core des at talk! 06:06, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here and there.... around the place

Hi! Thanks for your concern. I am still with you guys, but lately life has been a struggle. Its nothing to do with wikipedia, just my business in general. Cheers, --Ali K 08:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Violation in Sanskrit article

BInguyen, Pls see Sanskrit. User:crcluver has reverted about 4 times regarding "mother of languages " edit . See 1 ;2 ; 3 ; 4 .

Also see the number of reverts that editor has made today(which becomes more like 'owning' the article). -Bharatveer 15:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page, monkey! :) --Andeh 16:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Consensus science (2nd nomination)

You closed this as "delete" but it seems like the article has never been deleted (or maybe it was restored, but the AfD tag is still up). ~ trialsanderrors 18:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Closed. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rushbrooke inequality

Hello. I more-or-less accidentally found this article and did a number of format-polishing edits, punctuation fixes, link fixes, etc. on it. Then I noticed that no articles linked to it. I added it to the list of inequalities, and I may add it to a few other pages. Probably you could help think of pages that should link to it and add those links. Also, can you add something that says who it's named after? Michael Hardy 20:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

I'm not sure if I'm ready to be an admin yet. Maybe after another month or two. :) --TBCTaLk?!? 00:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jalandhar

Please - there was no intention of sounding like an "advert for a bus company" - it is meant to be helpful information from a regular traveller to people who would like to know the actual travel options. Punjab roadways and PEPSU are govt. undertakings, and I am not their advertisement agent. Moreover, you removed the train services - I took full 30 minutes to write it down and refine it. Trains have multiple options, so the best ones have to be told, ain't it? EyeMD 05:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It just happens that Indians like a personal touch and do tend to pass on personal experiences, in terms of recommended lists and things to watch out for, since that really helps the next person. Getting such info beforehand helps avoid planning-disasters. The article you mentioned, on Sydney, is bereft of such knowledge, so a person trying to plan a trip will have no idea of how to go about and what to watch out for. That I think is a much need feature, which unfortunately until the restrictive policies are removed, would not be possible on Wikipedia. Maybe we need a travelogue portion on Wiki. EyeMD 06:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sameness

Yeah, it's true. There is nothing to write about most of the ODI innings except quote two or three numbers, and after one or two innings even that becomes repetitive. Tintin (talk) 10:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Blnguyen, Nice to know that you are also a physics student and interested in Cricket and a part of India-related articles in wiki. I was too busy with some work and didn't get much time to do anything with Wiki. Now i have some time and hope to contribute more regularly in whatever way i can! Thanks for the invitation to the wiki cricket project; i shall join soon! Ranjith (talk) 15:40, 13 September 2006 (CDT)

@@ Line 267: / Line 267: @@
 And yet, a month later, without any further elaboration or discussion on the talk page, nor with any references to cite, he goes ahead and makes this change on the article page.  I was and I am still under the impression that edits like amount to vandalism.  Correct me if I am wrong.
 [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Konkani_language&diff=66819975&oldid=66366078 An example of Mahawiki's POV pushing on the [[Konkani]] page]
+:''Certainly that comment sticks out like a sore thumb and looks like it made the article worse. We need to put the two arguments on the table with the scholars who said it, their evidence and leave it as is. No vandalism is present. I have made some suggestions to improve the article.'''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 ===[[Akkalkot]] page   ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Akkalkot&limit=500&action=history article history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Akkalkot&action=history talk history])===
@@ Line 276: / Line 278: @@
 *And all this, while he engages in ZERO discussion on the talk page.
+:''Yeah, I made more comments on the talk page. If it is a mixed community, then ideally we discuss all of them, with their script in the title, and who deleted the bit about the border dispute. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 ===[[Sholapur]] page    ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Solapur&limit=500&action=history article history],  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Solapur&limit=500&action=history talk history])===
 *Here again, he dives straight into the article page with no discussion on the talk page and does [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Solapur&diff=55926719&oldid=55925947 this].  Note how he does away with the Kannada interwiki too!
@@ Line 284: / Line 287: @@
 *Do you call this a content dispute or merely vandalism?  I am under the impression that any 'content dispute' that happens without the concerned party gainfully and politely engaging other editors on the talk page can qualify as 'vandalism', atleast when the erring editor reduces it to an edit war.
+:''Content dispute. A grumpy one nevertheless, but not vandalism. Same ideals as Akkalkot. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 ===[[Belgaum District]] page  ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Belgaum_district&limit=500&action=history article history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Belgaum_district&limit=500&action=history talk history] )===
 Note: Belgaum district page is different from [[Belgaum]] city.
@@ Line 300: / Line 303: @@
 :*'''And most importantly''' apart from Deccan Herald and a Kannada website, references were also provided to 'neutral'(if you will) sources like the [[The Hindu]], Frontline and others which are based neither in Karnataka nor in Maharashtra but concur with the reports in Deccan Herald word for word.
+''I think Aksi has fixed this one up mostly. I'll be happy to look. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 ===[[Rashtrakuta]] page   ( [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rashtrakuta&limit=500&action=history article history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rashtrakuta&action=history talk history] )===
 *Here again, without a whimper of a discussion he goes ahead and tags the page as disputed and an advert!! See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rashtrakuta&diff=74719211&oldid=74654899 here].  Note that in the edit summary, he says "see talk" while in fact, he is simply bluffing.  There is NO explanation from him why he was adding the tags on the talk page at the time he actually tagged it.
@@ Line 314: / Line 318: @@
 It would be too much for me to explain every diff, but I have to tell you that if you find any instances of 'less than professional' language from either me or Dinesh or any of the other editors anywhere on all the pages I've mentioned here(and many more), it is because of the tactics mahawiki uses.  Yes, I agree that we are not supposed to respond in kind to bad language, but when it gets as frivolous and frequent as in the case of Mahawiki, anybody will lose their temper.
+:''It certainly isn't an ad, but needs to be sourced better, and does need improvement. The article seems all about Kannada info, so to remove the script from the front seems rather gratuitous and borders on inept symbolism as the text is not disputed and suggest otherwise.'''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 ===[[Belgaum]] page  ( [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Belgaum&limit=500&action=history article history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Belgaum&limit=500&action=history talk history])===
@@ Line 331: / Line 337: @@
 [[User:Sarvagnya|Sarvagnya]] 09:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
+::I'm aware of the general rowdiness and off-topic argy-bargy about Marathi vs Kannada not relevant to article content. I hope that improves. Teh gratuitous use of "vandalism" is also poor.'''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 >>i HAVE [[sachin Tendulkar]],[[Gavaskar]] which will blank out everyone else on his list!!!But lets add Ajit Agarkar,Vinod Kambli,Ramesh Powar,Dilip Vengaskar,Ajit Wadekar,Anshuman Gaekwad,Hrishikesh Kanitkar,Kiran More,Harsha Bhogle,Sanjay Manjrekar,Nayan Mongia,Sandip Patil...Oh see I am exhausted!!Add Sharad pawar to this list!Hahaha![[User:Mahawiki|mahawiki]] 08:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+::What a joke. You would be best off improving those articles to show us the contribution of MAharashtra to cricket. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 ===His latest warnings===
@@ Line 344: / Line 354: @@
 [[User:Mahawiki|mahawiki]] 20:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+:You called him names at the bottome of your post. I have responded to both. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 ==Sarvagnya, I didnt know u love me so much==
 After reading all these rantings of Sarvagnya,I am not feeling angry rather feeling pity on him!My god he has tracked my record as i am a deadly terrorist.I wont deny my wrongs I did before I was adviced by Aksi_great about how things work in Wiki.From than,(see the [[Belgaum]] talk page carefully,I am talking in 'citation' lingo.This has perhaps made Sarvagnya very nervous since he has badly failed to prove about a controvesial board of Belgaon Mahanagarpalika.He tried to ignore citations,misguide editors and mediators,he tried each and every thing possible.But finally truth came out and he ran off.Ask aksi_great or Amerique if I have misbehaved after their entry.Aksi_great had requested to stop editing for 2 days and this oversmart guy logged off and did what he thought was needful!He himself calls Sholapur when its Solapur,Marati instead of Marathi,Marathis instead of Maharashtrians and when I without any wrong intension say Kannadi to Kannada ppl he gets mad!I have a Kannadi friend and he himself says 'I speak Kannadi and am a Kannadi'.Look at the Marathi wikitag on Kannada page!I dont why these Kannadis feel ashamed of their identity?Insistance of Kannadig is like insitance of 'Marathi maNase' or Bhartiya instead of Maharashtrians and Indians!
@@ Line 351: / Line 362: @@
 And my advice to Sarvagnya-Stop crying for sympathy.I wont allow anyone to defame Marathi and Maharashtra at any cost.I dont give a damn about Kannadisation if its not on Marathi/Maharashtra related pages!Plz assume good faith and dont take anything personally.I am feeling flattered for ur attention!Thanks!After this post,I am not going to respond to ur literature,U dont deserve my attention and my bandwidth.plz dont think i shall get awe of ur rantings and allow kannadisation.Dont think false display of courtesy,mannerisms and chaste English can allow u to carry out ur pro-Karnataka propoganda.Can we talk in citation lingo plz?Stop personal attacks hereafter.God bless u.
 [[User:Mahawiki|mahawiki]] 08:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+: I think you've lost sight of the point of editing articles. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 ==Do you==
 Understand
@@ Line 400: / Line 411: @@
 [[User:Mahawiki|mahawiki]] 04:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
+:No, just that I noted that you view this as a battle with everybody attack Maharashtra. This is not the case. Good content is what we look for. Nobody is a vandal. I've told everbody not to call each other vandals. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 == Mahawiki's Endorsement ==
@@ Line 450: / Line 462: @@
 :From this I awnser that we shouldn't abide to a single editor who is trying to impose his will and erase sourced information; sources that have behind them authors still respected in academia, and that are regularly mentioned in the hellenistic history books bibliographies. I'm no fan of Tarn, quite the opposite: but it's one of those authors that even his opposers feel they have to mention, was it only to counter him with other arguments. Obviously, this theory is just a theory, to mention among other theories; which is done by PHG's edits, and other theories can be added when sourced. I also disagree on creating a new article, in which to throw all Dev. doesn't wan't; there is no reason why fully sourced edits must be exiled for motives that are almost declarately nationalistic.
 :Sorry if I was so long, but I wanted to give you a full and detailed map of the situation. Ciao,--[[User:Aldux|Aldux]] 23:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
+::Hello Aldux. I don't think for one moment that your conduct towards other users has been of ill-will. I don't support the excising of the information, but can we get more info from Buddhist oriented sources or Jain sources to make it bigger. Because it does seem as though there is not much detail about Ashoka and Buddhism and Ashoka the conqueror, and the same in the Maurya Empire - at the moment there is lots of information about the Greek connection, which inherently there is nothing wrong, but it may give the impression that Ashoka was a Greek reprentative or something - it just feels a bit too oriented on his bloodline and not what he nor the Mauryans achieved. In any case it was interesting that I got [[Mahinda]] (his son, who brought Buddhism to Sri Lanka) and [[Moggaliputta-Tissa]] (his spiritual adviser) to DYK in the week leading up to the locking - could we put more stuff about Buddhism into the articles to balance it out as well as his stuff about the Kalinga conquest etc. The Greek stuff is still interesting of course and I don't see a reason to cull it unless there is POV or weaselly stuff compromising it. Anything this old, of course cannot be certain, so as long as we give both a fair hearing then it should work out OK. This could be an interesting case as I am interested in learning more about Asoka. Perhaps I can find more about his Indian activity (religion and miltary) to balance it out. Tell me what you think. Thanks, '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 06:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-::Thanks for your prompt and kind response. IMO, what you propose is exactly what should be done; not remove text, but expand the other sections, possibly bringing Ashoka and Maurya Empire to feature status. I'ts very interesting to hear you're interested in Ashoka; I hope you'll find time, as you propose, to add material as you said, on the buddhist and military activities. Unfortunately my knowledge on India tends to start with the Moghuls, so I can't be of much help; but PHG had an important role in writing the feature [[History of Buddhism]], so I think he'll be able to say quite a lot on the buddhism section.
+:Thanks for your prompt and kind response. IMO, what you propose is exactly what should be done; not remove text, but expand the other sections, possibly bringing Ashoka and Maurya Empire to feature status. I'ts very interesting to hear you're interested in Ashoka; I hope you'll find time, as you propose, to add material as you said, on the buddhist and military activities. Unfortunately my knowledge on India tends to start with the Moghuls, so I can't be of much help; but PHG had an important role in writing the feature [[History of Buddhism]], so I think he'll be able to say quite a lot on the buddhism section.
-::Regarding an argoment that doesn't involve Maurya-Greek relations, what do you think of the section [[Maurya Empire#Historical Comparison]]? IMO, this section stinks quite a lot as a violation of [[WP:V]], [[WP:NPOV]] and especially [[WP:OR]], offering a quite overtly anti-chinese pov as estabilshed truth. Should this section be removed? Or tagged as OR while we wait for sources, trying in the meanwhile to npovize it? Or keep it at it is? Tell me your view. Ciao, [[User:Aldux|Aldux]] 11:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+:Regarding an argoment that doesn't involve Maurya-Greek relations, what do you think of the section [[Maurya Empire#Historical Comparison]]? IMO, this section stinks quite a lot as a violation of [[WP:V]], [[WP:NPOV]] and especially [[WP:OR]], offering a quite overtly anti-chinese pov as estabilshed truth. Should this section be removed? Or tagged as OR while we wait for sources, trying in the meanwhile to npovize it? Or keep it at it is? Tell me your view. Ciao, [[User:Aldux|Aldux]] 11:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+::Personally I think it should be removed, I can't see how it is useful in any way as at that stage China and India had no contact with each other and it could have comparisions with any other random empire. Apart from that it seems like original analysis and seems vague and wobbly. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 == Sockpuppets ==
@@ Line 464: / Line 477: @@
 :How do you know he didn't get a friend to pose for him using a university computer? [[user:BhaiSaab|BhaiSaab]] <sup>[[user talk:BhaiSaab|talk]]</sup> 02:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 Hkelkar doesnt use "nein mein freund".[[User:Bakasuprman|Bakaman]] <font color = "blue"><sub>[[User talk:Bakasuprman|Bakatalk]]</sub></font> 01:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+Well, firstly he was on at about 6 UTC, which is about 10-11pm Texas time, so he would have required security cards to get into uni. It would be a big move to take this risk of being caught breaching security regulations by taking an unauthorised person into a physics lab with expensive equipment at a higly regarded physics school for a wikipedia stunt. Also I looked at the student list and there are about 220 students [http://www.ph.utexas.edu/physics_grad_students.html] in the Physics Dept and 8 are Indian. PhD students need to help supervise lab classes (I do so myself) and share the same lunch room, and are required to attend the weekly afternoon tea and reaserch seminar, so you end up talking to everyone all the time, even though when you are in undergraduate you only talk to a few specific friends, as you now live in the same office 50 hours a week. It's quite likely that 2 out of the 8, at least 25% will be BJP supporters. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
+== Sockpuppeteer Template ==
+You once said that Subhash bose cannot remove the sockpuppeteer template from his userpage. Does that apply to all users who've been blocked one time or another for sockpuppeteering? [[user:BhaiSaab|BhaiSaab]] <sup>[[user talk:BhaiSaab|talk]]</sup> 02:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+:[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:CltFn#You_have_been_blocked Nevermind]. [[user:BhaiSaab|BhaiSaab]] <sup>[[user talk:BhaiSaab|talk]]</sup> 02:06, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+==Sanskrit==
+yes you may. What content disupte? [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''&#5839;''')]]</small> 06:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+:ah, are you referring to {{user|Spiritindia}}? that was an account adding nonsense (I grant you, possibly out of utter cluelessness rather than malice), revert-warring and in violation of 3RR at the time in top of that. Not a bona fide content dispute. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''&#5839;''')]]</small> 06:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+=="7RR"??==
+Your behaviour is rather unrealistic. You blocked Crculver for rolling back nonsense added to articles? I am sorry, but I think you need to review your notion of 'content dispute'. A newbie account adding random nonsense and refusing to negotiate does not constitute a 'content dispute'. It is difficult enough to keep these articles in half decent shape without your blocks. I cannot see that Crculver has violated the 3RR at all, he reverted various additions, but even if you consider the 'Spritindia' incident a bona fide content dispute, he only reverted three times there. You seem to be handing out blocks rather liberally and rather erratically, and I would strongly recommend you post your decisions on WP:AN/I for review. People investing their time in rolling back nonsense are not in unlimited supply, and if you go about blocking these, you should be asking yourself, do your actions benefit the project? 'Spiritindia' should not have ''got'' as far as he did, he should have been {{tl|test}}ed  after his first edit.
+Regarding your other question, yes, Bharatveer is clearly a bad-faith editor and has proven so in numerous instances. Until he is banned I still acknowledge his additions fall under 3RR, but I see no reason not to roll him back, especially since there ''was'' debate (or what passes for 'debate' in Bv's case) ongoing on the talkpage.
+[[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''&#5839;''')]]</small> 06:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+:Your actions are being reviewed [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#block_review.2C_please|here]]. I can see it both ways. I would've blocked the user myself but like I said, I can see it either way. --[[User:Woohookitty|''Woohookitty'']]<sup>[[User talk:Woohookitty|(meow)]]</sup> 08:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+::It seems [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Rajput/Proposed_decision#Expression_of_ethnic_contempt_by_Dbachmann dab] is trying to gain the edge in a content dispute. He '''hates''' Bharatveer [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABharatveer&diff=68215934&oldid=68204800] with a passion and hates me too, beause I confronted him about some controversial talk page discussions and edits [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADbachmann&diff=72654081&oldid=72644803],[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hinduism&diff=72571240&oldid=72416619],[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADbachmann&diff=72573052&oldid=72522062],[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dbachmann&diff=72472159&oldid=72470127]. Infact even dab suggested I was Subhash_bose's sock.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AIndo-Aryan_migration&diff=72468447&oldid=72467043][[User:Bakasuprman|Bakaman]] <font color = "blue"><sub>[[User talk:Bakasuprman|Bakatalk]]</sub></font> 01:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
+::I noticed. I don't see the justification for using rollback in this case at all, or for banning users as vandals in this case. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
+== Again me! ==
+I respect ur views and I am working on [[Marathi]].But I am again surprised to see that again u have just adviced me!!Why didnt u pass the same advice to Sarvagnya.In fact he is himself starting personal attcks.I just respnded to him!I have other things to do,so I am gonna reply that troll again.
+But I wish u could have adviced Sarvagnya too.He is too happy to see that u have developed a prejudice against me.[[User:Mahawiki|mahawiki]] 08:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+:Eh? "''I am gonna reply that troll again''". Not a good idea, regardless. '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
+== Subhash's talk page ==
+Could we just quarantine it? I don't know why people feel the need to constantly spar on that page. I'll take a look. --[[User:Woohookitty|''Woohookitty'']]<sup>[[User talk:Woohookitty|(meow)]]</sup> 11:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+:OK, '''[[User:Blnguyen|Blnguyen]]''' <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[User talk:Blnguyen|BLabberiNg]] 04:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 = General =
@@ Line 578: / Line 623: @@
 I'm not sure if I'm ready to be an admin yet. Maybe after another month or two. :) --[[User:Tree Biting Conspiracy|<font style="background:red" color="#FFFF00">'''TBC'''</font>]]<small><font color="red">[[User talk:Tree Biting Conspiracy|TaLk?!?]]</font></small> 00:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-== Sockpuppeteer Template ==
-You once said that Subhash bose cannot remove the sockpuppeteer template from his userpage. Does that apply to all users who've been blocked one time or another for sockpuppeteering? [[user:BhaiSaab|BhaiSaab]] <sup>[[user talk:BhaiSaab|talk]]</sup> 02:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-:[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:CltFn#You_have_been_blocked Nevermind]. [[user:BhaiSaab|BhaiSaab]] <sup>[[user talk:BhaiSaab|talk]]</sup> 02:06, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 == [[Jalandhar]] ==
@@ Line 589: / Line 629: @@
 :It just happens that Indians like a personal touch and do tend to pass on personal experiences, in terms of recommended lists and things to watch out for, since that really helps the next person. Getting such info beforehand helps avoid planning-disasters. The article you mentioned, on [[Sydney]], is bereft of such knowledge, so a person trying to plan a trip will have no idea of how to go about and what to watch out for. That I think is a much need feature, which unfortunately until the restrictive policies are removed, would not be possible on Wikipedia. Maybe we need a travelogue portion on Wiki. [[User:EyeMD|EyeMD]] 06:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-==Sanskrit==
-yes you may. What content disupte? [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''&#5839;''')]]</small> 06:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-:ah, are you referring to {{user|Spiritindia}}? that was an account adding nonsense (I grant you, possibly out of utter cluelessness rather than malice), revert-warring and in violation of 3RR at the time in top of that. Not a bona fide content dispute. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''&#5839;''')]]</small> 06:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-=="7RR"??==
-Your behaviour is rather unrealistic. You blocked Crculver for rolling back nonsense added to articles? I am sorry, but I think you need to review your notion of 'content dispute'. A newbie account adding random nonsense and refusing to negotiate does not constitute a 'content dispute'. It is difficult enough to keep these articles in half decent shape without your blocks. I cannot see that Crculver has violated the 3RR at all, he reverted various additions, but even if you consider the 'Spritindia' incident a bona fide content dispute, he only reverted three times there. You seem to be handing out blocks rather liberally and rather erratically, and I would strongly recommend you post your decisions on WP:AN/I for review. People investing their time in rolling back nonsense are not in unlimited supply, and if you go about blocking these, you should be asking yourself, do your actions benefit the project? 'Spiritindia' should not have ''got'' as far as he did, he should have been {{tl|test}}ed  after his first edit.
-Regarding your other question, yes, Bharatveer is clearly a bad-faith editor and has proven so in numerous instances. Until he is banned I still acknowledge his additions fall under 3RR, but I see no reason not to roll him back, especially since there ''was'' debate (or what passes for 'debate' in Bv's case) ongoing on the talkpage.
-[[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''&#5839;''')]]</small> 06:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-:Your actions are being reviewed [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#block_review.2C_please|here]]. I can see it both ways. I would've blocked the user myself but like I said, I can see it either way. --[[User:Woohookitty|''Woohookitty'']]<sup>[[User talk:Woohookitty|(meow)]]</sup> 08:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-::It seems [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Rajput/Proposed_decision#Expression_of_ethnic_contempt_by_Dbachmann dab] is trying to gain the edge in a content dispute. He '''hates''' Bharatveer [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABharatveer&diff=68215934&oldid=68204800] with a passion and hates me too, beause I confronted him about some controversial talk page discussions and edits [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADbachmann&diff=72654081&oldid=72644803],[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hinduism&diff=72571240&oldid=72416619],[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADbachmann&diff=72573052&oldid=72522062],[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dbachmann&diff=72472159&oldid=72470127]. Infact even dab suggested I was Subhash_bose's sock.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AIndo-Aryan_migration&diff=72468447&oldid=72467043][[User:Bakasuprman|Bakaman]] <font color = "blue"><sub>[[User talk:Bakasuprman|Bakatalk]]</sub></font> 01:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
-== Again me! ==
-I respect ur views and I am working on [[Marathi]].But I am again surprised to see that again u have just adviced me!!Why didnt u pass the same advice to Sarvagnya.In fact he is himself starting personal attcks.I just respnded to him!I have other things to do,so I am gonna reply that troll again.
-But I wish u could have adviced Sarvagnya too.He is too happy to see that u have developed a prejudice against me.[[User:Mahawiki|mahawiki]] 08:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 == Sameness ==
 Yeah, it's true. There is nothing to write about most of the ODI innings except quote two or three numbers, and after one or two innings even that becomes repetitive. [[User:Tintin1107|Tintin]] ([[User_talk:Tintin1107|talk]]) 10:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-== Subhash's talk page ==
-Could we just quarantine it? I don't know why people feel the need to constantly spar on that page. I'll take a look. --[[User:Woohookitty|''Woohookitty'']]<sup>[[User talk:Woohookitty|(meow)]]</sup> 11:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 ==Thanks==