Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:29, 17 October 2006

Archives

1 2 3 4

Suggestions for dealing with Tequendamia

I would love to help, but I am probably not the best candidate because I need to sleep right now (It's 1:30 am where I live) and I have only a superficial knowledge of India. However, I would make two suggestions based on my review of the dispute:

1. If he is adding information to the wrong articles, try directing him to a relavent page where he can add the information. Caste, perhaps? It appears to have sections for various countries. Some of his information is referenced and would merit inclusion somewhere.
2. Try refactoring his additions to articles into neutral prose rather than using whole-sale reversion. This may be irksome to you in cases where you disagree with his statements, but if you are able to rewrite his POV-laden statements into neutral ones, it should simultaneously improve the article's comprehensiveness, calm him down, and improve your own ability to disasssociate yourself emotionally from the subject matter. It would similarly be good of you to stop removing his talk page comments. It will simply escalate the dispute by angering him.

Best of luck to you, the best way to deal with people like him is to stop viewing them as opponents and instead attempt to work with their contributions, insisting on sources but allowing their sourced information into the articles after it is neturally rewritten. By doing this, you will hopefully be able to train them in neutral writing so that they become a valuable contributor, rather than alienating them. I'll also leave a note by Teq's talk page before I go to bed. --tjstrf 08:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Barrani is a historian not a Cleric

Barrani's two books are still read for Indian Medieval history in universities: Barani, Ziauddin Tarikh-I-Firuzshahi, Barani, Ziauddin Fatawa-I-Jahandari, TerryJ-Ho 10:23, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for WP:3RR violation

Gwernol 13:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

unblock

{{unblock reviewed|I think there has been a misunderstanding again. I did not commit 3RR on Indian caste system. Not a single edit of mine was a revert.Point of fact, the user User:Tequendamia violated 3RR. Not a single one of my edits were reverts, and in the talk page of the article I was reverting HIS vandalism of my edits which he was unilaterally deleting.Please see my talk page for a summary of my diffs, not a single one is a revert. This user refused to discuss with me despite my pleas to talk to him and was even admonished by an admin.Please understand I was not violating 3RR|see below}}

My diffs:

No I have not.I am very careful not to violate 3RR EVER!I rarely even violate 1RR unless it's overt vandalism.

None of the diffs beyond my first revert for the day were reverts. See for yourself:

Not a revert: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indian_caste_system&diff=81970320&oldid=81968853

Not a revert: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indian_caste_system&diff=81972522&oldid=81970739

Terry's reverts lie between these diffs.

In fact, it was User:TerryJ-Ho who started the reverting of my extremely well-sourced edits with a summary that shows clear WP:NOR violation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indian_caste_system&diff=81969852&oldid=81968853

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indian_caste_system&diff=81971875&oldid=81970739

Both of his (not mine) edits are bad faith reverts of my sourced edits with his dubious assertions and attributions to sources that don;t contain the things he says they do.

Plus, latter edit diffs:

Not one revert among these: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indian_caste_system&diff=81988861&oldid=81986851

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indian_caste_system&diff=81989280&oldid=81988861

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indian_caste_system&diff=81989709&oldid=81989280

In contrast, all of Teq's edits WERE revertsHkelkar 13:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm declining to unblock. Looking through the diffs, you removed the "racism" category 4 times. Although you also added new categories, that's a revert-based edit war, which is what the 3RR really refers to. You're right that Tequemandia was violating the 3RR, but he has also been blocked for it. Mangojuice 13:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

yes but he evaded the block with a sock. WP:Sock Puppetry says that his block timer should be reset but it has not been.Hkelkar 14:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

{{unblock|Per discussion on irc, I now formally apologize for violating 3RR and beg the admins to consider my case as I have been very respectful of ] ] and ] and have spent close to 6 hours a week in library doing research for my edits to wikipedia and got upset when (I felt) vandal users undid all my edits and replaced them with offensive content.Please forgive me for I lost my cool.}}Hkelkar 14:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I am assuming good faith in your case. I have your word that you will not be breaching WP:1RR on a single article. Discussion on talk pages is always a better way to resolve disputes. In case you have a problem with another user, you could try Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution or contact another user/administrator who has been regularly contributing on the topic or might be knowledgeable on the subject. Please assume good faith while dealing with other editors. — Nearly Headless Nick 14:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I still appear to be blockedHkelkar 14:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

You will not be editing the articles on which you were blocked for WP:3RR or any other related articles for a period of 21 hours. Thank you. — Nearly Headless Nick 14:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)