User talk:Rocksanddirt/Archives/2007/August

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Socionomics AfD

Hello Rocksanddirt,

Thanks for your comment in the socionomics AfD -- your opinion of whether to Keep or Delete the article seems clear enough, but please let me suggest that you remove all doubt by specifically saying which outcome you are for. Thanks again--Rgfolsom 00:54, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your advice and well wishes on my talk page -- many thanks again for the vote.--Rgfolsom 19:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

DAB's Abuses

DAB is spreading false rumours about me that I am adding unsourced statements to Wiki. My well sourced contribution to Rgveda (2 August ,2007) was deleted but unsourced and false etymology of Rgveda was not corrected in spite of protests. I discussed it on Talk:Rgveda under 'Wrong Etymology of Rgveda' on Aug-3, DAB refused to mend it (Aug-7); I again asked (Aug-10); lastly I used more explicit words pointing at his errors at 16:35, 10 August 2007, and just 4 minutes after he corrected the error. It proves that DAB has no knowledge of fundamentals of Sanskrit grammar, yet did not rectify his error till I insisted again and again . But this resulted in his ill-will towards me and he called me silly and erratic just two hours later (on Talk:Utpala on 10 August 2007, 15:41 UTC ) without any cause of provocation. It is against Wiki policy of WP:CIVIL. On Abecedares talk page DAB says about me "In terms of general education, he plainly isn't: his opinions are rife with naive non-sequiturs"; it is again a personal attach and insult. In Balance Restore's talk page he calls me the least knowledgeable person in the world. In Dark Fall's talk page he called me insane and crank, because I compelled him to correct his grammatical errors in the opening lines of Rgveda. He has falsely charging me of WP:OR, but is himself keeping some material in Surya Siddhanta which are WP:OR, in spite of my repeated protests (see Clarification by User:Vinay Jha in Talk:Hinduism). He deleted my active talk on Rgveda aimed at methods for imroving this article which is against Wiki rules. Another user IAF deleted a sentence of DAB's talk just for testing the reaction, and was banned for 96 hours by you just 7 minutes later ! But DAB deletes my talks, deletes my well sourced edits, abuses me everywhere, and nobody can check him !! DAB says that I am putting unsourced statements on talk page and that is why he deletes them. Does he put sourced statements on talk pages ? I have cited only a few instances. He has abused me so many times that a good libel case can be filed in a court of law. But I will not do that. I am just enjoying the hospitality of Wikipedians, being a new user. DAB treats me like a servant, because he does not want a knowledgeable person who can check his errors, as I did (Rgveda etymology). Students guided by me decades ago are now heads of departments, but in Wiki I am the least educated person, silly, crank, insane, erratic, etc, although DAB himself collaborated with me in many articles and I can cite many notes from him in which he calls me a good scholar and editor. Who, then, is erratic ? I have stopped editing Wiki articles which he edits, to avoid his abuses. - Vinay Jha 21:53, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

see reply on my talkpage. I am not this user's mentor or wetnurse. Ask him to respect policy, to cite his sources, and to try and avoid his unreadable rambling and make some sort of point instead. Until he does, I will continue to ignore him. I have never "abused" him, I have asked him to respect Wikipedia policy. If that is "abuse" in his book, Wikipedia is probably not for him. He is about the 200th crackpot I am dealing with, so I hope I may be excused that I do not have unlimited time to squander pampering his ego. dab (𒁳) 06:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
If "insane, silly, crackpot", etc are not abuses, abuse must be redefined !-Vinay Jha 07:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced contribution

You have wrongly charged me of making unsourced contributions, misled by others. See my answer on Talk:Indian astronomy. -Vinay Jha 07:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

The introduction to Indian astronomy was unsourced before I joined Wiki, I merely expanded it somewhat to include some important aspects of history which were amiss in that article . I would have liked to refine this article, but DAB disturbs me everywhere. Do not be misguided my DAB's accusations about me, my recently edited article is svadhyaya (in collaboration with Buddhipriya), in which a well sourced account of such a topic was successfully produced which was totally undocumented in Western literature. But even DAB liked it, because Buddhipriya was there . Whenever I work alone, I am abused and reverted. I have received FINAL WARNING from Moreschi today for adding POV or WP:OR in Indian astronomy, after I announced in Talk:Indian astronomy that I am unwilling to contribute anything there. Moreschi did not care to look at that article. This threat implies I should not contribute anything anywhere. Even my talks are being deleted by DAB almost daily. If I leave Wiki, you will not find anyone on a number of topics, but DAB thinks me to be insane, silly,crack, etc, just because I have never used a foul word for anyone. Bharatveer retorted to DAB's abuses to him in DAB's language and DAB became civil to him (last year). But my students are judges, teachers,heads of departments, etc. I cannot stoop so low. The section 'Merucentric Astronomy' had 17 secondary and 16 primary references; it was deleted by Bharatveer (in a hurry) and he now asks me to contribute to modern science and not waste my time over history ! Bharatveer's intentions are good, but he underestimates the importance of history. I do not know what to do : I do not wish to touch that article under present hostile circumstances. Bharatveer and others can be persuaded, but no one is going to stop DAB's daily abuses to me. I am emailing this to you also, because DAB deletes my talks everywhere he finds them. - Vinay Jha Vinay Jha 15:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Sources in lead

In Rgveda, I found a statement about dating (1700-1100 BC) which was wrongly sourced to Max Muller. I corrected it by citing Max Muller from the source previously mentioned (1500 BC). DAB felt insulted, instead of being happy to find to find a collaborator, and removed the entire citation to another section, and the dating (1700-1100 BC) is in the lead without any source at all ; Abecedare told me that lead does not need a source because the source is given in another section. the dating (1700-1100 BC) was a minority view according to DAB himself, but he refused to give the majority view (Max Muller) in spite of my insistence, answered me with abuses, and labelled me with charges like Indocentrist, mediaeval mindset &c. An Indocentrist with a mediaeval mindset would have insisted on Rgveda being eternal without any date at all ! Accepting Abecedare's logic, I said on Talk:Indian astronomy that statements in lead should have sources in subsequent sections dealing with those topics ; it was Abecedare's idea actually. I accepted it in order to avoid conflict with DAB. I have closely watched DAB's discussions with Hindutva supportes, DAB deals with them more politely because they form a group. I am alone, and it is safer to abuse me. My misfortune is my knowledge of certain topics. For instance, I have indepth knowledge of ancient and mediaeval Indian astronomy, because many Indian religious almanacs are still being made from outdated theories and I am deeply involved in almanac reform in India. I had to study history in order to counter inaccuracies. Many governmental and non-governmental organisations are publishing almanacs from softwares developed by me ( I do not sell my labour). But in Wiki, I find persons little interest and knowledge of a field decide what is good for an article. Both pro and cons of Hindutva were against my edits in Indian astronomy, although my contribution had nothing to do with nationalism or Hindutva. On [DAB's Courtesy], you will find some obsene remarks DAB made for all Indians (which he later changed to all rural Indiand). DAB's general hatred for India has more to do with his misbehaviour with me. I keep away from groups, and am a soft target. As for my editing quality, you may glance at svadhyaya which is a result of just two editors (Buddhipriya collaborated with me). Merucentric cosmology is extensively mentioned in all ancient Indian texts of astronomy,besides in a lot of other ancient texts. Some people want to delete this section due to their ignorance, because it was a forgotten chapter of history which was almost a fable by 500 AD. I have cited Herodutus and a historian from Oxford also, which shows Meru was not in India. Vinay Jha Vinay Jha02:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:AN/I

I've replied to your query at WP:AN/I#Repeated personal attacks by Rondus (and his sock C00483033). IPSOS (talk) 22:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

CSN

Chrisjnelson went back on his decision to stop edit warring - that's what happened. If you would like links, i'll toss em your way - but this is a pretty frustrating thing for me. I am sick of having to go to the ANI boards to deal with this. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  23:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I was just commenting that if the aggreement worked out is not valid it is not valid. I would recommend that you reference it in your ANI reports, as I think many of the regulars there don't look at CSN much. --Rocksanddirt 23:47, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I would love to but it's hard to find all the different pertinent edits. I hope you don't mind the refractor, i just wanted to keep this in one place. I'm so sick and tired of this - the onus continues to be on me when this guy goes so far as to refuse to leave me alone ([1]) I'm as upset with the admins as i am with anyone. If one user cant control himself, it's hard to expect him to change - but admins are letting this slide. I'm not saying i'm innoccent of bad behavior - but i am not the instigator of this and i've been trying for months to get this solved. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  23:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
well...maybe just a note to Durova who helped with the aggreement, that it no longer is valid. and regardless of what he puts do not respond to it. part of his enjoyment (my own OR here) is that he get's a rise out of you. --Rocksanddirt 23:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Did that already, he hasn't commented (i since stopped watching his tp). Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Further proof that i'm not the problem - he just does what he wants regardless of others [2]. Trouble is brewing, i'm leaving for a while (as in signing off), but i'll be back later. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

To answer your question to Durova (and she can throw heavy objects at me for jumping in if she likes :) ), the matter between Jmfangio and Chrisjnelson is at arbitration, in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson. Realistically, since the arbitrators have the case, they have the final say here, so we may as well let the process work through. However, you're welcome to submit evidence or Workshop suggestions if you believe you have something that would be helpful to working through it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I think if the deal brokered at CSN had actually solved the problem, the arbitrators would have voted to suspend or reject the case. I wish it had been able to end that way, unfortunately, it seems that it was not. Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Not sure if this should be made here or at Seraph's talk page. I totally agree that the RFC and ArbCom should be allowed to run its course. I have however, done what i said i would do and i was also willing to go into a join "full topic" ban (or block or suspension - whatever). The problem now, and i guess part of the problem always, is that there is no patience by CJN and he openly admits to following me around - and yet nobody does anything. I'm happy to go through with these processes, and I have for all intensive purposes left 99% of the articles where chris follows me to (the only exception i can think of now is Michael Vick). His personal attacks are unfiltered and unchecked - and I'm still having to put up with this. There needs to be some protection while the process runs its' course. I remain receptive to suggestions (short of me leaving the topic and him continuing to edit there). Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  01:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Chaminade lawsuit

Thanks for your help, especially on formatting the reference links. I'm really trying to be fair both to the school and to Lynne Creamer; such allegations must not be suppressed, but must be properly sourced as well. I fear I suspect the IP who keeps taking the lawsuit out is trying to protect the school from one of those uppity outspoken women who don't know their place. --Orange Mike 15:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree and that's why this sort of thing must be very solidly sourced. --Rocksanddirt 15:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)