| Revision as of 04:35, 6 July 2009 editOnopearls (talk | contribs)Rollbackers4,201 edits →Sai Baba again← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:12, 5 October 2009 edit undoCrotalus horridus (talk | contribs)Rollbackers7,850 edits →Arbitration Committee ban: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
| :Its linked because it is a very relevant article (further reading, if you will) to something covered in the article itself. If you would feel more comfortable adding more news story links, then by all means do it. But we can't get back into the game of "if we have one bad thing there, we should have a good one too" or it will soon become swamped with articles. If you believe there is something in the story that requires further reading, add it. Thanks, ] <sup>(]/])</sup> 04:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC) | :Its linked because it is a very relevant article (further reading, if you will) to something covered in the article itself. If you would feel more comfortable adding more news story links, then by all means do it. But we can't get back into the game of "if we have one bad thing there, we should have a good one too" or it will soon become swamped with articles. If you believe there is something in the story that requires further reading, add it. Thanks, ] <sup>(]/])</sup> 04:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == Arbitration Committee ban == | |||
| Based on your editing patterns and user name, it appears that you are the same person as ]. You were banned from ] by the Arbitration Committee, and I have requested enforcement of that ban. See ]. ] 14:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:12, 5 October 2009
Sathya Sai Baba
To fix this article, please see my comments on the bottom of the sai baba talk page. My idea is to find the relevant information, post it in my sandbox, and work together to get it to the point that we can add it into the main article without removing a ton of info from the current article. Thanks, Ono (talk) 21:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi
I think President visiting Sai Baba is a notable event. http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Sathya_Sai_Baba&diff=291486589&oldid=291297571. Please also provide the news link in the reference. In wikipedia reference source is very important. Yes. This article is in bad shape. If you have questions you can reach me at rad0909@yahoo.com. Radiantenergy (talk) 02:20, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- I received your email. I will reply shortly. Thanks. Radiantenergy (talk) 21:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Sai Baba
While I agree with you, I do not believe you are taking the correct approach to fixing the article. You will run into harsh criticism when trying to add "his own words". You must be able to back up what you add with Reliable sources. Before you add the reference, be sure to check and see if they are considered reliable. If they arent, you would not be helping the article, as the info would be disputed and ultimately removed. Might I suggest you edit the paragraphs here first. Then we can collaborate on how to best move forward (and I can edit the writings to make sure they are easy to understand.) I would also be happy to help you find sources for the info. Thanks, Onopearls 18:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- Follow this link and make the edits as you would on the actual page. It will show up, and then Radiantenergy or I will help you out with syntax and such, so it is easier to read, etc. Thanks, Onopearls 19:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- Your name, writing style, and manner of editing are all suspiciously similar to SSS108's. He was barred from editing the Sathya Sai Baba page, and "retired" from wikipedia. Your sudden appearance, with such a similar name and your focusing on many of the same articles he did, has made me (and I'm sure other people) significantly suspicious. However, I am assuming good faith that you are a different person. I am glad to help get the Sathya Sai Baba to a level worth of FA status. Thanks, Onopearls 21:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- I am not entirely sure why Dilip removed the information. If you believe that the information will bring a positive change to the article, by all means add it. Thanks, Onopearls 17:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- I wanted to update you about this discussion - http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Concerns_regarding_removal_of_info_on_Sathya_Sai_Baba. Radiantenergy (talk) 04:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- Just a reminder: Always log in when you edit a page, lest you want to be accused of sockpuppetry. As of now, I wont report it, as I think it was probably an accident. Thanks, Onopearls 23:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- I am planning to move the sandbox changes to the main article as instructed by OnoPearls. I hope we won't have surprises / edit-warring for these changes. Radiantenergy (talk) 04:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
SSB
A vote on adding the youtube videos to the Sathya Sai Baba page can be found here. Your opinion on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Onopearls 02:36, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I have requested that all editors on the SSB page agree to no more than one revert per day. If you agree, please sign your name on the list. Thanks, Onopearls 19:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Arbitration Enforcement Case on Dilip Rajeev
Here's the link to the case. http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Dilip_rajeev. Radiantenergy (talk) 15:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
3RR
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Onopearls 17:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- Please Sbs108, listen to reason. I dont want to report any of the editors (you, Dilip, or Radiantenergy) for edit warring. Please take your concerns to the talk page. Thanks, Onopearls 17:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Just a tip
It's usually considered in bad taste to edit another editor's posts. I doubt JS29 will care, but some editors get rather hostile about people editing their posts. Just a friendly tip ;). Thanks, Onopearls 20:51, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- He is new and messed up his entry, I didn't change any content. But thanks for the heads up.Sbs108 (talk) 20:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Sai Baba again
I replaced the wikinews link to SSB being accused of pedophilia. I disagree that it is "highly POV" as it is merely a link to a news article. I would love to hear your rationale behind removing it on the talk page, as I personally believe that it is a neutral redirect to a relevant story on the subject. Thanks, Onopearls 04:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
- Its linked because it is a very relevant article (further reading, if you will) to something covered in the article itself. If you would feel more comfortable adding more news story links, then by all means do it. But we can't get back into the game of "if we have one bad thing there, we should have a good one too" or it will soon become swamped with articles. If you believe there is something in the story that requires further reading, add it. Thanks, Onopearls 04:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Arbitration Committee ban
Based on your editing patterns and user name, it appears that you are the same person as User:SSS108. You were banned from Sathya Sai Baba by the Arbitration Committee, and I have requested enforcement of that ban. See Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. *** Crotalus *** 14:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)