Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
Don't bother to reply; I won't be looking at this page again. ] 10:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Don't bother to reply; I won't be looking at this page again. ] 10:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
::Read ]. I am within my rights to use Elst quotes as primary sources per wikipedia policy.] 08:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
::Read ]. I am within my rights to use Elst quotes as primary sources per wikipedia policy.] 08:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
oh dear, I've done it again haven't I. I was referring to the sock artists. It seem obvious to me that you are not a sock of the Bose-Singh-continuum. I apologize I made it sound that way, I am just frustrated with the situation in general. Regarding the point just above, you are free to quote Elst in articles that deal with Elst or his "non-invasionist model" in particular. You are not free to quote him as a ''reliable'' source on articles that are not directly related to this: he is not. He is a rather dubious fringe author, and should be identified as such, or at least as present his views as those of an isolated author and not as if they were seriously entertained in mainstream scholarship. regards, ] <small>]</small> 10:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Revision as of 10:22, 2 October 2006
This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 20 days are automatically archived to Talk:Hkelkar/Archive 2. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
I read your anti-Buddhist comments on the article. It is better you concentrate on Hindu Religion, Caste System and Untouchability. That is your religion. Buddhism is a religion based on Equality, Liberty and Fraternity. It is difficult for ShudraVarnaHindu people like you to understand Buddhism and its great heritage. You people are caste ridden and you have forgotten your own Varna-Ashram Dharma. Understanding all religions with their good and bad sides is a good key for religious peace and harmony. Don't be anti-Buddhist Or anti-Christens because these people convert others. Better understand good and bad things of your religion before you blame others. Because of Hindu Casteism and Hindu Untouchability many oppressed people are converting to Buddhims and Christenity. Dhammafriend17:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Which Varna Do you belong?
All so called Hindus must ask a simple question to their own heart 'Which Varnas they belong?' Especially as per Hindu philosophy every Hindu is a Shudra by birth and only by Karma he can change his Varna. So those who are not priests in Temples are not Brahmins by Varnas, Those who are not in Military are not Kshatriya those who are not businessman are not Vaishya so majority belongs to Shudra Varna. So Mr. Kelkar Shudra like you should understand your own religion first. Especillay this is Kali Yuga so all non-priests are Shudra! What is wrong? Its a VarnaShram Dharma preached by Veda and Dharmaśāstra like Manusmriti etc. So in next birth you will certainly become Brahmin. So don't just be anti-Buddhist Or anti-Muslim understand your own religion first. Even Geeta mentions Varna castiesm by Karma etc. Please read the book Shudras who were they? Riddles In Hinduism written by Dr. Ambedkar for more information. Be a positive contributor don't try to hide the truths. All so called Hindus are Shudra then its not a wrong thing. They can certainly become Brahmin by doing good Karma. That is Karma Yog by Geeta. Dhammafriend17:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Bodhisattva Dr. Ambedkar has single handedly and non-voilently led a Buddhist revival movement in Indis with 22 vows and his strong philosophical weapons. In world Buddhist Conference in 1954 the Buddhist world awarded him the second highest title in Buddhism i.e. Bodhisattva. He faught against Hindu Caste System and Hindu Unotuchability forever his life. So his views on Hinduism are more relevant to understand the present India Buddhist Movement. Dhammafriend12:34, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Wasn't Nehru a Kashmiri Pandit? That makes him Hindu by default. I did not see any coherent arguments to suggest his athiesm (just one section in the talk page that said "search google"; I did and found no credible evidence to suggest a declaration of athiesm).I did not see any argunemts in the talk page archive either.Care to point me in the direction of any talk page argument or debate to that effect?Hkelkar02:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
(1) Please note, in general, that henceforth the religion people were born into, especially for twentieth century figures, cannot be taken as being the religion for WP purposes unless we can cite their self-identification. (2) IF you had read the article itself, much less the talk page, you would have seen two fairly anti-religion quotes in the quotes section. If the first page of google results were not enough for you - surprising enough - try google books for explicit references. THe point is, you did neither, merely removed a long-standing element in the page without checking. (3) I fail to see how pointing this out and noting that it is something that will lead to assumptions by others about your willingness to take the time to check your edits is a violation of any WP policy. Please stop throwing all this around. Hornplease06:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately I have had to remove the speedy tags as it does not qualify as an attack page (nor for any CSD criteria). Your only recourse is to file an WP:AfD - sorry for the inconvenience - Glen13:40, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Please abstain from mentioning Hinduism as ethnicity as the literate world recognises Hinduism as religion and not as ethnicity..and wherever you mention that write also why and on whose authority do you write Hinduism as an ethnicity.TerryJ-Ho00:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Right now i have my midsem papers. Anyways, i dont have much knowledge about the subject but i will try to help you out once my papers are over.nids(♂)16:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I definitely support a WP:RFAR. I wasn't very clear on the steps that can be taken, which is why I hadn't done it myself. I'm sure that other users will back us up here.Gamesmaster G-920:20, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Islam and the Sikh panth
Concerning the question you asked on my talk page, I will try to add as much as I can. However, I am not greatly literate on that particular topic so I will first have to do some research.
Also, I am not so sure that I have read anything on any one of Guru Gobind Singh's family members being skinned alive, although I have read about his four sons' and father's martyrdoms.
When you say it renders poorly what do you mean? If it's too long then... yes, that's a problem because there's not enough text to go with it and you can always {{clear}} it. For me it renders perfectly in both Firefox and IE. If you mean that it extends past its section then that is just what happens sometimes with larger data sets. It may not be preferable but I think it is better than having data as a raster image that you have to click to enlarge. If you really wanted you can make it into a show / hide box (like on Template:Cold War) but that seems unecessary. grenグレン09:51, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Imagine the mess if we all discounted others comments. It'd be, well, it'd be Misplaced Pages :) Have a nice day. -- Longhair12:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
mistake with template
I had posted that welcome template to several IP's talk pages, and I feel bad for what it said. I've corrected most of them, but I'm sure other used it in that time too. Oh well, life goes on. Desertsky8545101:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes it was a mistake. I meant to give it to a particular user but mistakenly put in in the welcome template. I will apologize in the taalk page.Hkelkar04:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I came off as abrasive when I first appeared on the talk page. But, if you really want constructive dialogue, why do use section headers like "Indian Buddhist (so-called) Movement"?—Nat Krause17:42, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Indian Nationalism
Thank you for your informative edit summary. I am not reverting your removal at the moment. I would like you to answer however, why Rana Pratap and Shivaji are treated as identical in their opposition to 'invaders'. While the Mighal empire might arguably be foreign for the Confedracy in that it was from the North, Pratap was fighting an army including large numbers of his fellow Rajputs under the banner of a fairly liberal ruler. Unless you want to remove the reference to Akbar right below? Hornplease02:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt response. You are entitled to your opinion about what you call (grin) the 'Second Islamic Empire'. However, the fact that Akbar was supported by a large proportion of Rajputs who were only too happy to fight Rana Pratap suggests that in that case, at least, saying "what he viewed" is appropriate. Please be prepared to compromise now and then! Putting in qualifiers wherever they are appropriate encourages readers to think about whether or not they are justified, which may be helpful in making the points that it is possible you wish to make. Thanks.Hornplease02:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
You say that only 'Rajput mercenaries' served with Akbar. Please see the Mahrana Pratap article: "Even Pratap's own brothers, Shakti Singh and Sagar Singh, were serving Akbar. Indeed, many Rajput chiefs, such as Raja Man Singh of Amber (later known as Jaipur) were serving as army commanders in Akbar's armies and members of his council. Akbar sent a total of six diplomatic missions to Pratap, seeking to negotiate the same sort of peaceful alliance that he had concluded with the other rajput chiefs. Pratap roundly rebuffed every such attempt. Pratap particularly insulted Akbar's special envoy, Raja Man Singh of Amber (Jaipur)." I think that the qualification is desirable here. Hornplease02:58, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
None of this is relevant. The fact that his brothers served under Akbar does not make Akbar "domestic". Many Muslims of the upper biradaris perceived themselves as ethnically Arab (still do). So even their perception of themselves is foreign.Hkelkar03:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
You've also replaced the Elst citation. With a note saying "per consensus". What consensus? I have no doubt Freedom Skies, Nobleeagle, you and Baka agree. (I must admit I havent seen you disagree, so pardon me if I'm a little un-amazed.) But, as AfD has pointed out, on WP consensus is more than numbers, its also what emerges through discussion. The discussion isnt over. Please remove the citation while it continues.Hornplease07:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
sub category
Should we create a sub category anti-hindu people in Category:Racism. There are plenty of candidates for that.nids(♂) 03:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
that.nids(♂)03:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Well many argue that Jews are not an ethnicity wither but anti-semitic people exist under racism. Also, the argument is not whether Hindus are a race but the category is for people who hold racist attitudes against Hindus, which people do.Hkelkar03:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Not sure I agree, but go ahead. Only I think that then people like Dalit campaigners and what not should not be part of any cat, as it is a little doubtful to categorise them as racists, however extreme they might be about Hinduism.Hornplease06:45, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
They say the same thing about Ahmadinejad too. The fact remains that if people make hate-speech against Hindus like Kancha Ilaiah then they will be catted.Hkelkar07:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid we will have to disagree there. Merely "hate speech against Hindus" is not racist. The Hinduism=Judaism analogy only gets you so far; Hinduism is not explicitly an ethnic religion as is Zoroastrianism and Judaism; and I would have thought that its a little difficult to be racist if you're claiming to be the same race. I'm sure that other people will be willing to take you on there, and I dont know enough about it to make pronouncements.Hornplease07:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Wow, that was rude, and, I think, quite unprovoked. What bit was arguing? Lets recap: I was suggesting to Kelkar that if he wants to avoid a bit of a hassle later, ask around first, as if I didnt think it was an appropriate cat, there would be others, more bold than I, who might agree. If you wished to avoid confrontation, I suggested that consensus first would be a good thing, and suggested that KAncha Ilaiah might be an excessively controversial cat. When Kelkar said he intended to cat him, I merely said that I disagreed with the basis that he had stated - "Hate speech against Hindus" - and indicated that I thought racism would be difficult to prove for everyone satisfying that condition. About Ilaiah, I know that his page has seen a lot of back-and-forth, and I have never been on it, so I dont know whether he views himself as a different race from the upper castes. So I said I couldnt make pronouncements. Now, any particular reason why that somewhat complex interaction was summed up so rudely and inaccurately by you? Hornplease08:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
What i could make out from your earlier post is that you think that a jew cannot be placed in a anti-semite category, no matter what he does. Am i right in my analysis.nids(♂)08:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Given that I spent that entire post explaining I wasnt arguing, it's likely I was talking about your one-line post, wasnt I?
And about your 'analysis': I see no reason why a Jewish person might not be called anti-semitic. However, all forms of anti-semitism are not, I think, considered racist. See, for example New Anti-semitism. So you see, there are subtleties. I merely indicated that I was unaware of Ilaiah's particular stand on race, so I could not speak about it. But "Anti-Hindu hate speech" alone does not a racist make. You also have to have beliefs about who is Hindu. Racism has a very particular definition.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hornplease (talk • contribs) .
So i guess you have a problem if this is a subcategory to Racism. But you wont protest if it is a separate category.nids(♂)08:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I definitely have a problem with it being a subcat. As a separate category, I'm not really familiar with the term, but if it's used, then I dont think there's anything wrong with the cat. As long as the people in the category are cited as being anti-Hindu with the same level of precision as people in the -anti-Semite cat, I dont see why not.Hornplease08:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I thought I should duly warn you against removal of sources from Votebank as you did here and tagging bogus templates as you often do on many articles and presently has made article Lalu Prasad Yadav your no1 target. You can contribute on wikipedia in many ways.Since it appears you don't have anything substantial to contribute on any article,I advise (but it depends on you) to take rest till your head and heart is relieved of malice.Otherwise you know you may be forced to cool down. Ikon |no-blast12:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Allegations of Vandalism
With regard to your edit summary for diff "I've had enough. The next time a well-sourced statement gets removed I'm going to report it as vandalism.", please substantiate your claim, which to my mind appears to violate a million different WP policies as well as common sense. I note you have not responded to my several concerns about the two quotes under consideration that I raised some time ago on the talk page. If you have an explanation, I would be fascinated to hear it. Hornplease04:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Tipu Sultan
Hey, I stumbled upon your problem and did some quick research. In addition to the dodgy claims, the fact is that the claims are not made up by random pro-Tipu people. It's worse (in some eyes anyway), they are plagiarised by those random pro-Tipu people. See this Hindustan Times Article. Nobleeagle (Talk)07:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Just an FYI. Although Tipu is often creditted with early use of rockets for military purposes, some of the references that I have seen assert that Tipu's father Haider Ali actually deserves credit. (lthough it may be possible that Haider used the rockets while alive, but Tippu was the real motivating force -- I don't have the answer to that.) I can look up sources if you want. Regards. --BostonMA11:23, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I have temporarily blocked Dhammafriend for disruptive incivility. Make sure you do not respond in kind. I told him when he returns to comment on content, not other people; that is good advice for all of us. Tom Harrison12:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
1. No one can refer a user with Islamic Thinkers Society which is linked with terrorism activities.
2. cant tell a user efforts as "rubbish" with the hard work he has done to the article, infact which amounts to personal attack!
3. "Plus, there are entire countries in the muslim world that massacre non-muslims and spread hate against them (Pakistan against Hindus, Saudi Arabia against Christians, Iran against Jews etc.)" this also amounts to personal attacks on a relegion which is indirectly said to a user.
Pls explain why each of the obove "comment on content and not on contributor" does not amount to personal attack on a user.
Every one with whom you regularly edit knows actually WHO YOU ARE.So it is rather an easy guess that you have learnt a lot from your past experiences. Ikon |no-blast12:18, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
I know its Persian. In Hindi, however, due to the Persian influence, it is used as such. I meant Hindi/Sanskrit as Hindi and its more sanskritic base, as opposed to Urdu and its more iranic base (in terms of vocab, not linguistic roots which are both the same). Sorry for the wrong impression. Afghan Historian13:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Please follow the guidelines of Misplaced Pages
I have been telling you that we are two different persons. One liing in germany and other in USA.
All I am asking is before you publish anything related to buddhism on Hinduism pages please come forward with scholarly documents. Who on the earth in 21st century would believe that Buddha was an Avatara of Vishnu. Is there any valid documentation? Why Buddhism should be part of History of Hinduism? Those are completely diffrent religions. One believes in "Purusha Theory" Other does not.
I hope, that has made you happy and I am happy that I could bring that happiness to you.
Mr. HKelkar, Misplaced Pages uses, TimeStamp, IP addresses and blogging information to locate/indentify person. If you could have seen my timestamps and IP addresses, you could have saved the Administrators time.
Offcource we are one but only by mind. Physically there are hundreds and hundreds are still waiting. May the Truth prevail. Long live Indian Buddhist Movement.--Bodhidhamma17:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
I am sending you this link before he sends it to you. :-) I know you are buddies.
Please read his talk page and answer if you could.
The way you answer it , will decide whether you are an honest/credible person or just an hypocrite. (If this word is not according to wikipedia standards, my apologies.)
about your talk
Sorry if I got angry. It's just very difficult for me to tolerate obnoxious prosetylizing and virulent racism that comes from missionaries of any religion, and wikipedia is no place for such things anyways.Hkelkar20:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
My answer: People get angry when they do not have answers to their problem. As simple as it is. Get away for a while. Try to put urself in that person's shoe, and think what could be hurting him and why. You will find an answer and will help you calm. This solution doesnt work for hypocrites though. Respect and love, this what buddhism is based upon.
Why do you think it is vandalism?
Please answer the questions insted of pointing technical errors.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bodhidhamma (talk • contribs) .
I am here to provide positive information
Mr. HKelkar,
I am here to provide positive information/view. I have already apologised to the administrator for my technical errors. I am learning it.
I expect others to provide references/documentation before you claim anything. If there are supporting authorative documents who am I to challange that? But I do not want cooked stories to be published just like a street gossip. Wikipidia has to be an authorative source for any kind of information on any subject. And hence we should work together to bring the truth (what we collectvely believe and agree upon) in front of the word.
Please look up the puranas and make sure those are valid documents.(From an accnowledged library and other scholars have varified and used it as a reference) Once I get them I will send them to Buddhist Monks associations in various countries to varify the claim. As I am not an authority in Puranas/Vedas. I just read things about other religions from www.sacredscripts.com.
Make sure until that period the NPOV status is maintained. If you could not find valid documents I will assume that we agree to delete the section.
I havent provided any reasoning? They are all questions my friend? And these are very logical questions. You dont need special documentation for that. I hope you know basic geometry. If first triangle is similar to second triangle and second triangle is similar to third triangle then first trianle has to be similar to third on. Simple logic.
If Buddha = Vishnu's avatar
And Adi Shankaracharya = Follower of Vishnu
Then Adi Shakara should be Follower/believer of Buddha.
Hey. Regardless of what you think of FOSA, the sentence I edited out had to do with what FOSA thought about the edits. Surely FOSA themselves are a reliable source of their own beliefs! --Xiaopo
Sure I can. The section has to do with examples of the proposed changes to the textbook, not what the HEF thinks about FOSA's reaction to the proposed edits. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the article doesn't need to cover every claim and counterclaim made by all the different sides in this mess. --Xiaopo
Look, could you stop reverting the article there? You misread the citations; read the talk page. If you want to discuss specific portions of the edits, then we can do that. On the talk page. --Xiaopo
Check out WP:RS—there's nothing about tax-exempt organizations or organizations with ties to terrorists being more reliable. Both the HEF and FOSA are lobby groups, and thus only reliable sources insofar as they're primary sources. That means the HEF isn't a reliable source as to what FOSA thinks (and vice versa). And neither of them can be cited as an unbiased third-party, the way the Christian Science Monitor can be (for example). --Xiaopo
I did, RS states that non-partisan sources can be quoted qithout qualification and partisan sources must be handled with caution. HAF is recognized as a non-partisan org by US government and FOSA is not.Hkelkar03:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Uh, I don't think you understand what "tax-exempt" means. It just means the organization is a nonprofit—the National Rifle Association and MoveOn.org are tax-exempt as well. The IRS doesn't certify anyone as non-partisan—"non-partisan" means they're not a party to the conflict, which the HEF obviously is. See the paragraph under "Company and organization websites." --Xiaopo
Hey, thanks for working with me here. I really don't want this to get contentious, and I understand that you distrust several of the organizations and people involved in this. I'm a Hindu myself, so I want to make it clear I'm not approaching this from any sort of virulent anti-Hindu perspective. --Xiaopo
Warning against vandal rv (see above posts for similar bogus warnings)
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. .This was regarding . Ikon |no-blast10:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
User:Kathanar
Just a note, I think you are being a little heavy handed in your dealings with User:Kathanar. Jumping straight down his/her throat for making a few edits is going overboard. Please assume good faith in your dealings and if they is a dispute please try and discuss it on the talk pages instead of engaging in edit wars and plastering large scale warnings on the users talk page. Calm down, step back and treat these issues like the adults you are. Ben W Belltalk14:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
You are just being nonsense.
You do not have basic decency of accepting/respecting POV.
Why dont you accept that, that section is disputed and has factual errors.
I do not have any words for your behaviour and I do not think I have made personal attat. I Am a buddist follwer and my religion does not allow me to attack on any one. Why you are changing the disputed text. I moved NPOV to Dispute according to the NPOV described on talk page.--Bodhidhamma22:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
What you fail to understand is that you have been the most hatemongering distorter of facts on wikipedia to date. You have persistently deleted sourced info, vandalised articles, harrassed users across the board, and made so many tendentious edits that I can;t even count them anymore. Some Buddhist you are! You have even angered another BUDDHIST user thegreyanomaly, who has complained against you. This clearly demonstrates your trollish attitude if those of your flock dislike you. I am tired of your wikitroll behaviour and will simple report you if you vandalize articles further. You will receive no further warnings from me.Arguing with you is a waste of my time so I won't.Hkelkar23:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Hkelkar you have clamed that you a 'Jewish' on my talk page. If you expect Buddhist writer to give references and proofs for each and every line then I think you should also give proofs for your comments anywhere. But please don't give vague references of some old texts which nobody knows who has written them in which century? Dhammafriend16:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Accpet that you cannot argue with me because you do not have any answer. Your vague reference "Purana" does not mean anything. Learn to write religios documents, if you dont stop doing it. Leave that job to others. you are just a Hindu right wing propaganda machine and run from giving valid proofs. --Bodhidhamma23:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Though I agree with your anger against the contentious editor, calling someone a "fake" doesnt help your rapport on wiki. You have never been blocked. Please try and keep it that way. BakamanBakatalk00:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Your edits to Khalistan
Thanks for rectifying the POV tag on the Khalistan page. However, now there is a lot of blank space appearing between the article heading and the Tag. Could you check that please. 203.197.216.505:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Indian Buddhist Movement and Reverting the Article
What are the 'racist' comments you found?? Can you please list them so that I will clear all points. You are blaming me with so many offenses that even I am surprised. So I would like to know all your concerns. Dhammafriend16:14, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Stoip the insults or I will report you
Don't bring my Jewishness into this. regardless of my faith I have every right to question trollish edits and various form of POV pushing in any article. Shalom Aleikhem.Hkelkar16:38, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Can you please explain what kind of insul I am doing with you? I have asked the list of offenses that you are claiming again and again ?? You said that I wrote 'racist' remarks agaisnt you. Can you explain what kind of remarks? Dhammafriend16:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Don't bring my Jewishness into this. regardless of my faith I have every right to question trollish edits and various form of POV pushing in any article. Shalom Aleikhem.Hkelkar16:38, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Characterizing my faith in order to judge my edits is a violation of WP:NPA. Comment on content, not contributor. When you mistakenly tought I was a Hindu, you engaged in anti-Hindu racist attacks that would put most neo-Nazis to shame.Please stop this. Plus, stop making ridiculous claims that you can't source.Hkelkar16:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Until you treat people (Hindus or anyone) with respect and courtesy my "charges" still stand. If you have to make anti-Hindu accusations then at least have the decency to source them.Hkelkar 16
45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
I never though that you are a 'Hindu'. This is an absolute false explanation. Because deciding somebody as Hindu is certainly a very very difficult task. We can sometimes find BrahminVarnas OR ShudraVarnas people as per the Veda and other religious law books known as DharmaShastras. So I don't know who is Hindu ! I never call anybody as Hindu and I don't have any right to brand anybody as Hindu! You again insulting me as anti-HinduDhammafriend16:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
User Hkelkar has insulted me as 'racist'. I demand explanation from him. Till he is not giving explanation I request all administrators and so-called administrators to block him. Dhammafriend16:57, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Don't mix Caste with Varnas. I am not caracterizing anybody's caste. These two are separate issues. Brahmin OR Shudra is a social and religious classification or identification as well as please read Varnas on same Misplaced Pages. This you can find in Veda and DharmaShastras it means you want to say all those people who believe in these scripture or follow these scrtiptures are 'racist'?? This is not too much Mr. Hkelkar. Please give some acceptable and logical solution before calling somebody as 'rasict' and read Racism. Racism and Casteism are two social separate issues of discriminataion. Don't mix them. We are an anti-caste people and I always proud that we belive in Equality, Liberty and Fraternity. I am a Buddhist working for Indian Buddhit Movement and we are against Castiesm and against Racism! For your kind information I am an Indian as well as my colur black. That is why I asked you to come and meet anywhere to clear any misconceptions. Don't you think calling a non-White person like me as 'Racist' is too much 'Hypocricy'. Dhammafriend17:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Oh, so non-whites can't be racists? Ridiculous (and, in on itself, a racist claim)! Look at Louis Farrakhan (a black racist) as an example. There are many Arabs who are racist, as well as many Indians (the more kooky elements of the Hindu Nationalist movements). There are also racists among my fellow Jews. Racists come in all shapes, sized and colours.Plus, the term "Racism" (in the modern world) is generally used to mean any ethnocentric attack. regardless of whether the ethnic division is racial, religious or social. Whether you attack users by Caste, Jati, Biradari or Varna, they are all patently racist attacks.Hkelkar17:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Ok. You want to say that Veda, DharmaShastra all are racist religious books? All who follow and believe these religious books are racist? But at least I don't follow Veda DharmaShastra or any other 'racist' sects. So don't call me racist! I think at least now your issue has been sorted out. Dhammafriend17:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
User:Hkelkar IF you continue to attack and harass me and make threats, you will be one to be blocked from wikipedia, I'll go ahead and work on that. I consider this a personal attack and defamatory, there will be consequences--Kathanar19:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Right you two, I am posting this message to both your pages. STOP IT!!! You are both acting like kids in a playground. Now I don't know anything about the topics under discussion but both your actions are becoming disruptive to Misplaced Pages. Now I've been very busy with other things these last couple of days so I haven't been able to intervene as was probably needed. I would like to point out a couple of things to you.
Go and read WP:Vandalism. People making edits you don't necessarily agree with isn't the same as vandalism, it is a content dispute. Warning each other for vandalism for doing and undoing each others edits is disruptive and just plain wrong.
There are talk pages attached to every single article in Misplaced Pages. There are talk pages for specific areas and projects within Misplaced Pages. Content disputes and differing ideas should be discussed on these pages. I note there has been a whole lot of reverting, vandalism warnings back and forth and such like, but very little in the way of attempting to actually talk to each other. Use the pages. Don't make more than one revert without discussing your differences, one person't vandalism is another's good faith edit.
Stop being so diruptive. My talk page, and every other talk page, are not areas for you to attack one another and try to outdo each other. Reading through my talk page it reads like two kids coming to mother and saying "he did this" and "he did that". Please stop it.
POV. Please read the Misplaced Pages article WP:NPOV. Misplaced Pages is supposed to be a neutral encyclopaedia. Your personal views and opinions should be irrelevant to the maintenance of a neutral encyclopaedia. If you feel really strongly one way or another on a particular subject, then you probably really shouldn't be editing it as your bias will come through.
So in closing, what you two have is a content dispute. Who is right, I really don't know as I'm not au fait with the topics. What I do know is it isn't deliberate vandalism so stop with the vandalism warnings. If either of you reverts and puts a warning of vandalism on the other users page for what would seem to others to be a good faith edit, I'll consider a temporary block on that person for disruptive behaviour. Also skirting close to the WP:3RR may also result in a temporary block for undermining the spirit of the policy if not the letter of it.
So please, discuss your differences, use the talk pages constructively and talk calmly. If you see an edit that gets your blood up and you have to strike out against it, turn your computer off for a few hours, go away and do something relaxing and calm down. You know what they say "edit in haste, repent in error", which reminds me of the time an email annoyed me at work and I accidentally hit Reply To All and didn't realise the CEO and company Board were included in the reply list, but that's another story. Thank you. Ben W Belltalk06:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
"I'd appreciate some patience with you and other meatpuppets of the Muslim Guild." With messages like that, you expect patience? Funny. BhaiSaab18:47, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I can certainly be objective but I don't have the patience to deal with sockpuppets who continue to deny that they are a sockpuppet. BhaiSaab18:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
You are simply avoiding being caught by checkuser because you always use the Shiva's Trident (Subhash bose) account from your home computer, and you use this Hkelkar account only on campus. BhaiSaab18:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I have always suspected this account of being a sockpuppet, and until I see some compelling evidence that it is not, I will continue to assume that you are Subhash bose. There's no "hostility." BhaiSaab19:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
And the checkuser came back as "likely." It looks like you accidentally logged in as Subhash bose from the university computers or accidentally logged in as Hkelkar on your home computer. BhaiSaab04:11, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
This pertains to other anti-Hindu pogroms in NWFP and Punjab as a consequence of Direct Action Day. I managed to put it in based on whatever little refs I could find online. Could you suggest some books I could see for additional data (exact death-toll, specific incidents etc.)?Hkelkar20:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
The books on partition of India provide the information and graphic narration .There are lots of them . I will provide the titles to you soon.Thanks .)?Shyamsunder09:53, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Dmcdevit is the checkuser who answered the request. He is likely the one you want to contact. Don't be surprised if he doesn't send you the evidence, however. I've only once seen it published. Kevin_b_er22:11, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
That is great about your decision on Tipu Sultan ..but let me warn you, never call a muslim a mohammedian as this means 'muslims workship' mohammed as god and not Allah this is a direct insult to muslims as we are followers of islam and mohammed came as a prophet and please dont make this another issue in Tipu Sultan. perhaps you should apologize to muslim users.
Well the term "Mohammedean" is generally used by scholars to refer to Muslims so I used it also. There was no insult implied, nor did I make any claims that Muslims "worshipped" Mohamed. Plus, I'm sure that Jews, Hindus, christians, and Baha'ii would feel the same way about being routinely called "Kaffir" or "Dhimmi" of "Dar-al-Harb" yet the terms are frequently used by Muslims.Hkelkar12:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Most of his books were published decades ago. The word is not in common use now, except by Islamophobes. BhaiSaab22:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Decades ago is not "15th century". Besides, which "Islamophobes" (in on itself an absurd neologism) are you talking about?Hkelkar22:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Mohammedan is considered offensive, which is why it shouldn't be used in Misplaced Pages. And no one uses "Mohammedan" nowadays except for Catholic Encyclopedia and the like. Mar de Sin23:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
As long as I restrict my references to him, neither do I. I become incivil only if I use it outside of his context which I have notHkelkar01:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Are you suggesting it would be acceptable to refer to Jews the same way the Hitler did? Your behavior on Misplaced Pages is governed by policy; you can't just say others did the same as an excuse. BhaiSaab01:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I (possibly) have a way for you and Netaji to conclusively prove that you are not the same person. Please let me know if you're interested. BhaiSaab03:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
If you did that, then the last RFCU wouldn't have come back as "likely." It would involve the use of your university email. BhaiSaab03:38, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
You have once again reverted to your old version, which does not attempt an overview of both sides of the controversies with regard to Koenraad Elst, but simply uses buzzwords and quotes from the controversial person himself to present one side of the picture. Any attempts to let users see that the issue has two sides (without taking sides) are called "vandalism" by you. We can carry this game on ad infinitum, but it serves no purpose. You are obviously not used to scholarly debate, which abides by certain rules. I shall therefore let you write what you want to, and not attempt to alter anything any more, as it seems pointless to attempt a discussion with someone who is interested only in portraying his own version of things, and not in reporting various sides of an issue while putting his own predilections in the background. But be assured that this sort of behaviour is ultimately self-defeating. It simply puts people's backs up and serves to make anything on the subject published on Misplaced Pages to be regarded as propaganda. A pity.
Don't bother to reply; I won't be looking at this page again. Kochank10:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
oh dear, I've done it again haven't I. I was referring to the sock artists. It seem obvious to me that you are not a sock of the Bose-Singh-continuum. I apologize I made it sound that way, I am just frustrated with the situation in general. Regarding the point just above, you are free to quote Elst in articles that deal with Elst or his "non-invasionist model" in particular. You are not free to quote him as a reliable source on articles that are not directly related to this: he is not. He is a rather dubious fringe author, and should be identified as such, or at least as present his views as those of an isolated author and not as if they were seriously entertained in mainstream scholarship. regards, dab(ᛏ)10:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
