User talk:Ganesh J. Acharya: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 00:30, 7 March 2010 editGanesh J. Acharya (talk \| contribs)2,611 edits →Articles for deletion nomination of B2C Jewels ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 09:32, 29 January 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk \| contribs)11,637,095 editsm Replaced obsolete font tags and reduced Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB
(493 intermediate revisions by 40 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
	If you need any information or detail related to my edits kindly let me know about the same.
			\|maxarchivesize = 200K
			\|counter = 1
			\|minthreadsleft = 5
			\|minthreadstoarchive = 2
			\|algo = old(14d)
			\|archive = User talk:Ganesh J. Acharya/Archive %(counter)d
			}}

			{{archive box\|auto=yes\|search=yes}}
	==B2CJewels an orphan?==
	{{tnull\|helpme}}
	Why is this put up? ] (]) 09:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
	:The article is an orphan - it is not linked to from many other articles. — ]<sup><font color="purple">]</font></sup> 09:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
	::Thanks for the update.] (]) 10:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
	::: There's a huge list of references for this article http://www.b2cjewels.com/b2cjewels-in-news.aspx. I have added more references to the wiki article as well. Can the orphan tag be removed now? ] (]) 03:28, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	::::Being an orphan is nothing to do with references: it means not many other Misplaced Pages articles link to this article. In fact, no articles contain links to ]. The tag shouldn't be removed until appropriate links to ] from related articles are added. ] 03:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

			If you need any information or detail related to my edits kindly let me know about the same.
	== Talkback ==


	] (]) 04:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

	==Paid Ref==
	{{tn\|helpme}}
	Can this '''paid''' reference be used? as seen here . The complete open article is anyway available here http://www.b2cjewels.com/NorthJersey.html ] (]) 08:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

	:Yes, it can be used - because what is being referenced is an article in a published newspaper. The fact that it happens to be available online for a fee is besides the point. When you cite a publication, you are not citing the website - you can provide the URL as a 'convenience link', but that's all it is.

	:In the same way, you can cite a book. The fact that the individual reader who wants to verify the information would have to pay for the book is beside the point.

	:I hope that makes sense. For more help, you can either;

	*Leave a message on ]; <code>OR</code>
	*Use another <nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki> here,; <code>OR</code>
	*Talk to us live, with or .

	:Best wishes, <small><span style="border: 1px solid; background-color:darkblue;">]]</span></small> 08:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

	==Re: Poor diamond reference==
	Almost any "poor" link can be appropriate to demonstrate something, thus my answer is a guesswork as I don't know what it is all about. This link would be poor for many WP pages and facts, for several reasons: (i) too much trivial commercials around the text make it look unreliable, (ii) It seems like a news site, yet the story is unsigned (iii) the message is focused on how to ''buy'' which would not look good at most WP articles on diamond, and the only name supporting it is of a website owner, which website again focuses on selling. Regards. ] (]) 00:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

	==Proposed deletion of Ratna Pariksha==
	]

	The article ] has been ] because of the following concern:
	:<b>This article does not meet the ] - for inclusion, an article requires '''significant''' coverage in ''']''' that are '''independent''' of the subject. The only source here is a ], hence the article is not ].</b>

	While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be ].

	You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the <code>{{tl\|dated prod}}</code> notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].

			== You have a message ==
	Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing <code>{{tl\|dated prod}}</code> will stop the ], but other ]es exist. The ] can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> <small><span style="border: 1px solid; background-color:darkblue;">]]</span></small> 04:18, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

			<nowiki>{{Talkback\|Whpq}}</nowiki>replied
	{{user:chzz/tb\|Ratna Pariksha}} <small><span style="border: 1px solid; background-color:darkblue;">]]</span></small> 09:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

			== Invite to WikiConference India 2011 ==
	:The above has been archived; it is now in ] <small><span style="border: 1px solid; background-color:darkblue;">]]</span></small> 21:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

			<div style="margin: 0.5em; border: 2px black solid; padding: 1em;background-color:#E3F0F4" >
	==Recreating TalentSmart==
			]<br/>
	I was coming across this company TalentSmart in google.com as I wanted to know it's review, Negative comments, and information by wiki is very important for me. But, since this page was deleted before I do not know if it was advise-able to re-create this one again. To check the credibility of this company I checked http://books.google.com/books?q=TalentSmart&lr=&sa=N&start=10 where I found good amount of references. But, again since the article was deleted before, so I wanted to was it safe to re-create the article. But, again since I am not following this company I do not know much of its background. So, would it be OK if I re-started the article?
			{\| style="border:1px black solid; padding:2em; border-collapse:collapse; width:100%;"
			\|-
			! style="background-color:#FAFAFA; color:#1C2069; padding-left:2em; padding-top:.5em;" align=left \|Hi {{BASEPAGENAME}},
			<span class="plainlinks">The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011.<br> You can see our ], the and our .</span>

			But the activities start now with the ].
	{{tn\|helpme}}

			As you are part of ] community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for ].
	:Could you please write it in ] - that is, a page in your own userspace, not live - and then use another {{tn\|helpme}} to get it checked over, before moving it to the live area? Thanks! <small><span style="border: 1px solid; background-color:darkblue;">]]</span></small> 06:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
	::ok] (]) 11:39, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

			We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011
	==Fair Use==
			\|}</div>
	{{tl\|helpme}}
	How much of referred content is considered as fair use?
	] (]) 10:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
	: I don't think there is a specific amount above which it would be counted as unfair use! ] says that "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea. Copyrighted text that is used verbatim must be attributed with quotation marks or other standard notation, such as block quotes.". Perhaps if you gave an specific example, I could be more precise - but without knowing what you intend on using (and how much), I'd say a couple of sentences are OK, but probably not much more than that. -- ''']''' (], ]) 12:59, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
	::For example http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Ganesh_J._Acharya/TalentSmart "TalentSmart is a EQ training provider to corporates, and as on 22 Oct 2009 it claims to be serving more than 75% of Fortune 500 Companies." the line is getting adopted from http://www.talentsmart.com/whoweare/ so does that fall under fair use? ] (]) 05:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
	:::In this case I would be referring (but not copying) to content directly from the copyrighted website and adding that to wiki, so does that fall under fair use?] (]) 05:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
	::::It is best to phrase words in your own writing, whenever possible, or to include short quotes (which is covered under our ]). The former is preferable as we wish to use free content ''whenever possible''. And when including quotes, always remember to source them back to where they came from. —] 06:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
	:::Is adapting about 300 words from a copyright text '''in my own words''' considered Fair Use?] (]) 12:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
	::::No it is not considered fair use because fair use only applies to things that ''can be copyrighted'' and ideas and information are not part of that equation. It is the order of the words; the uniqueness of phrasing; the particular syntax and so on that is copyrighted. If you take information from a source and truly state it in your own words, that's called 'research and writing'. You should absolutely ] your source and your source should be ], but copyright doesn't even enter the picture and so the fair use doctrine is not applicable (or needed). That having been said, note that taking a source's content and closely paraphrasing it by copying and ''superficially modifying'' it will not meet this mandate. It must really be your own words.--] (]) 13:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

			== March 2014 ==
	==Adapting content from wikipedia==
			<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' '''indefinitely''' from editing for misconduct as discussed at . If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may ] by adding the following text below this notice: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx\|" code. -->{{tlx\|unblock\|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}. However, you should read the ] first.  <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 15:32, 12 March 2014 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-blockindef -->
	{{tlp\|helpme}}
	If I use content from wikipedia on one of my webpages, do I need to add a link back to wikipedia, and state that I've referred the content from wikipeda?

			Request readers to go through this complaint and the quick arbitration processes. Obviously editors/admins around are dangerously editing. It becomes more necessary to highlight these or otherwise people around will start fighting falling prey to these conspiracies. Please check the complaint against an administrator to understand why this sanction became necessary for these administrators :-) ] (]) 16:25, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
	: Full details can be found at ]. <span style="font-family: fontin, serif;">]]</span> 06:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
			=== Why I started highlighting the ===
	:Per ], whenever you include excerpts of our content on a different website, you must reference (or link to) Misplaced Pages. To do so, feel free to use ] and choosing the format of your choice. —] 06:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
			# The original Vishwakarma_(caste) was moved to Vishwabrahmin and then a revert of the article back to Vishwakarma_(caste) discussion was started ''"Requested move (modified 23 June)"'' and comments such as ''"while appreciating the caste's ambition for self definition as Vishwa Brahmins,"'' started appearing which would obviously irritate most Vishwabrahmin. . Everyone who reads the shastras know LORD Indra incur brahma-hatya (the sinful reaction for killing a brahmana;) on killing Viśvarūpa who was son of Twastha. Manu, Maya, Twastha, Shilpi and Visvajna are brothers and the fore fathers of the current Vishwabrahmins who are also called Kammalans in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andra and Karnataka. So, there is no doubt among the people who study the shastra about Vishwabrahmins. The problem only comes with people who do not read the Shastras. The truly educated ones are aware. Also page moves are immediately reverted if they are a mistake. But for this move Vishwabrahmin to Vishwakarma_(caste) a discussion was started.
	::I've just copied ] to our newly created http://cricfaqs.com/Cricket page at cricfaqs.com. Just adding a '''<nowiki><ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Cricket&oldid=325163947</ref></nowiki>''' to the page http://cricfaqs.com/Cricket, justify the policies? ] (]) 16:21, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
			# Over IP address 106.67.133.238 commented over "Sanskritisation ? genetic code says the truth," and posted an utterly biased genetic report which overlooked lot of other facts. And then ] started engaging over that. Finally I have to get with "In neighboring Tamil Nadu, geneticists testing DNA of local peoples, genes have been found from 50-60,000 years ago." ... "there are ancient Brahman chants" http://www.drsheedy.com/early-humans/up-to-12-000-years-ago.php to refute that discussion.
	:::Currently I've added a section at the bottom.] (]) 16:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
			# Prasanthnnamboothiri, while editing the very first edits changed "Nambudiris '''are''' considered as the most orthodox Brahmins." to "The Nambudiris '''were''' treated as most orthodox brahmins". And then immediately after that started poking Iyers and Iyengars as foreigners "The migrant (foreign) brahmins such as Iyers and Iyengras" So obviously this was to highlight a divide between communities. If Iyers or Iyengars cross checks who edited they would see Prasanthnnamboothiri. So the chances of fights between Iyers, Iyengars and Namboothiri increases as it is a use with namboothiri id editing these. After a little while what the id with Prasanthnnamboothiri does is writes the following at "Sankaracharya cannot be in Visvakarma caste because Viswakarma is a caste of recent origin." So... that puts the Viswakarmas against the Namboothiris as well. If Prasanthnnamboothiri is really a Namboothiri why would he change '''are''' to '''were'''? And if he is not a Namboothiri what is the purpose behind using the ID suffixed Namboothiri?
	::::From my reading of the policies, that would probably be sufficient - however, if I was using it, I would probably mention the fact that material was from Misplaced Pages somewhere at the top of the page - mainly on the principle that if a reader didn't get to the bottom of the page, they may not see the notice, whereas if it's at the top, everyone can see it! However, there is no requirement to do this. -- ''']''' (], ]) 17:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
			#] was reverting every credible edit only under 1 reason ]. Anyone can just keep removing sources and start discussions over talk page. But the strangest thing he again did which went inline to what these hidden ips and fake ids were doing, i.e. putting communities into quarrel.... he finally started this thread over ] which now put other brahmins and Visvakarma Brahmins relations into trouble. " I'd go so far as to suggest that the original publication may have been more or less an academic hoax." and further has quoted "That claim has been pushed tendentiously on Misplaced Pages by self-identified community members, usually by citing Roberts, and we really do need to put a stop to this." Institute such as "Andhra Historical Society, Rajahmundry" put up a query from "Sri A. Padmanabhan" and never seemed to have answered them for years together. Please remember Roberts is not any tom dick and harry he worked as a ] at the supreme court. And I finally decided to report it as things online seemed dangerous. But as suspected was laughed out .
	:::I don't mind that too, http://cricfaqs.com/Cricket#Original_Content_Source so long as everyone's happy about it. The content out at ] is only because of wiki's efforts so far. Please have a look at it and let me know if it looks good now?] (]) 17:38, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
			#References removed so far by User:Sitush
	::::I took the liberty of editing it! I hope you are happy with the way I have done the notice at the top of the page.
			## K.S. Krishna Rao Global encyclopaedia of the Brahmana ethnography year=2008 publisher=Global Vision Pub. House, location=New Delhi, India, isbn=8182202086\|edition=1st ed., url=http://books.google.co.in/books?id=M5EWgRdnLxAC&lpg=PA520&dq=vishwakarma&pg=PA519#v=onepage&q&f=false, accessdate=22 January 2014
	::::Another thing to note is that on Misplaced Pages, we are kind of spoiled! We have a ''lot'' of templates which are not standard on Wikis. To get things like <nowiki><ref></nowiki> to work, you need to have the templates on your wiki. When you edit the "Cricket" page, you will see there is a list of templates used on the page - below the edit summary. If they are in red, then they aren't on your wiki! You can, however, copy them over to your wiki. (You may find, however, that they in turn need other templates... etc)! To see the source for a template, copy it from the list on your Wiki (e.g. ''Template:Abc'') and then do a search on Misplaced Pages for that template (exactly as written, including the ''Template:'' bit). You can then either ''Edit this page'' and copy it (then paste it on your Wiki with the same name template) - or if it is protected, you can ''View source'' and copy and paste. I have done this for a couple of the templates showing you examples of how to do it. I hope this helps - it may be a lot of work for you though (and that's before you even copy other articles for your red links!). Good luck! -- ''']''' (], ]) 18:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
			## Kashyap Rangasami Laksminarayana ''Kr̥ṣṇayajurvedīya Taittirīya-saṃhitā, Volume 2'' year=2002 publisher=Sri Aurobindo Kapāli Sāstry Institute of Vedic Culture, isbn=8179940055, page=40, url=http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=RiCYT6aJIc_nrAfXtOnBAQ&id=hZwoAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22The+Vishvakarma%22+%22who+build+temples+and+sculpt%22&q=Vishvakarma+Brahmins#search_anchor User:Sitush has given reason "Discussion does not give you the right to reinstate - consensus following discussion does." when user:sitush is found pinging editors (ref ) what consensus is he talking about? This can be pure lobbying?
	:::Thanks for all the explanation you've added here. I'll start fixing the Templates 1 by 1. I've changed the GNU message you wrote a bit. I had selected GNU licence when installing, I do not know why that is not seen now. I think I might have to modify some code to fix the licence problem.] (]) 02:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
			(This is all for today, I will gradually highlight all that I found... there are lots of these. These are not just over wikipedia, these are happening even over Facebook. There (Over facebook) profiles of people are more recognisable and miscreants are more identifiable... while it is a little difficult over wikipedia as it is all text.) ] (]) 14:22, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
	::::I am sorry I do not know if this is the right place to ask this
			:Hello, Ganesh. When one has been indefinitely blocked for treating Misplaced Pages as "a battleground for contesting worldviews", it is eminently unwise to continue the battle on one's talk page. At this point your ''only'' legitimate use of this page is to request an unblock. If you're not interested in doing that, please stop editing altogether. Continuing to engage in the disruptive behaviour you were blocked for will result in revocation of your ability to edit even this page. —] (]) 14:55, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
	I get some templates those are not on wiki http://www.cricfaqs.com/Template:Reflist ] (]) 02:33, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
			::Under which guideline am I not supposed to put forth and collect my views? ] (]) 14:58, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
			:::See ], and particularly the bit about "misusing user space following a block". —] (]) 15:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
			:::: How do you think any other righteous admin going to follow all the happenings unless I don't explain them systematically what happen? I didn't see any admin so far putting efforts to find out what has happen? If someone had systematically reasoned things would have come out. Which other pages do I have access to? ] (]) 15:12, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
			::::: You have access to no other page besides this one. No admin, righteous or otherwise, is going to consider your report, ''except'' insofar as it relates to an unblock request. If you have no intention of making such a request, then you have no business editing this page. —] (]) 15:17, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
			::::Ok, in that case I would request to unblock. But first I would need to complete my groundwork. Or otherwise I didn't see anyone putting any efforts cross examining. ] (]) 15:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
			====Request to unblock====
			I have put forth above why I felt user:sitush + group were being disruptive. It clearly indicated to me the edits made by user:sitush was inline to what many other obviously fake IDs and unregistered IP were doing, i.e. were trying to bring Indian communities in front of each other. There are lot more edits I am gradually trying to study. Kindly let me know when someone talks about consensus they have to be from honest editors, why does one need to ? See this Youtube "Asch Conformity Experiment" . If the consensus are to be genuine they must naturally come?

			{{unblock reviewed \| 1=I obviously felt being lobbied and I have put forth my reasons ] (]) 05:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC) \| decline = You appear to be unable to see that the stuff you have posted to this page in support of this unblock request is more of exactly the kind of thing that led to the block, and far from being a reason for unblocking, is confirmation that the block should stay. <small>''The editor who uses the pseudonym''</small> "]" (]) 10:31, 14 March 2014 (UTC)}}
	==What is the revenue model of Misplaced Pages ==
			::] I have raised some serious concerns. You have not so far addressed those? Also I didn't see any administrator addressing them? I guess this makes me and would make people in India assume wiki has a Hidden agenda and the Admins around seem to be least concerned about addressing them? If honest you must address those concerns. Also it is not just me around feeling there are fake account created by this group there are others complaining this over User:Sitush's page as well. Currently this comment is around. " I am pretty sure it is also a a fraud, you have given yourself all those accolades using false accounts, created bu yourself." There are complaints all over his page what is going on?
	{{tlp\|helpme}}
	#I heard wikipedia runs only with donations as it does not support advertisements, so where does it arrange the funds from?
	#What if there's insufficient funds to run wikipedia?
	#Were can we get all these references from, are there any other backups?
	] (]) 15:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
	:See ]. <font style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva">]''']'''</font> 16:23, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
	::We accept donations year-round, but we have an annual fundraising effort that aims to raise most of the funds we need to support the 35 people who work for Wikimedia and the server clusters. The current fundraising effort can be viewed ; the financial information and everything can be found in the FAQ, . Hope that helps! Cheers, ] 16:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
	:::It is in a very open way that you people are working. It feels very great that there are people with great though living in this era too when everyone is after money at any cause. ] (]) 06:51, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
	::I wish from my heart, success to wiki. May you enjoy all the good times, and may GOD give you the strength to face all the adversities, so long as you are doing them the right way.] (]) 06:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

			::And if you were in my place ] what would you have quoted and why? ] (]) 12:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
	== ] nomination of ] ==

			:::You are an indefinitely blocked user. Your contributions to this project are no longer welcome, and this includes presenting your paranoid conspiracy claims. For collaboration to work, users have to be able to understand that they can be wrong. You are incapable of understanding that you can be wrong, and that is why you are no longer permitted to collaborate. If you continue to pursue your conspiracy theories on this talk page, I will ask that your talk page access be revoked. ] (]) 18:11, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
	<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>I have nominated ], an article that you created, for ]. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.{{-}}Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. <!-- Template:AFDWarning --> ] (]) 14:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

			====Policy of user id usage: Warring nations can cause unrest among each other by faking local IDs ====
	===Regarding AFD deletion===
			{{helpme-helped}}
	I am not happy with the way the article was recently deleted.
			Is there a policy present over wikipedia which restricts editors from misusing IDs related to regional names. A foreigner from any nation can reach pages related to communities with competing community related names and can start pushing articles only those that are written negative about each other. When readers will look up the ids they would see names of competing communities and would perhaps misunderstand it be written by someone locally while with it would be written by someone abroad and this would start physical quarrels. Has wikipedia considered these problems, since these can cause unnecessary tensions? I am not asking if whether there are restrictions on free thinking, but am worried about wiki's strategic usage to cause unrest. So, is there any policy in practice of reporting those? In this case I notice I had reached IDs with higher or admin privileges, so I would also like to know what are the way around if ids with higher privileges plan misuse wiki? ] (]) 07:58, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
	:The following concerns were raised. '''I have an ex-emp status'''
			:Misplaced Pages's username policy can be found at ]. ] (]) 17:58, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
	::
			::#] I did not notice anything very specific to ''faking local IDs''. Kindly help me with it.
			::#Also what to do when there are users with higher or admin privileges lobbying? Are there any case studies where I can see how these are handled? ] (]) 02:40, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
			:::#If you didn't see anything about "faking local IDs" then I'd fathom your question has been answered.
			:::#It appears that you are asking me to provide you, (an indefinitely blocked editor with a history of irrational editing,) with rational guidance on how to deal with yet another conspiratorial hypothetical scenario? I think I'll pass... ] (]) 03:01, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
			::::] can you specifically point out my irrational editing? ] (]) 03:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
			:::#I did not notice anything very specific to ''faking local IDs'' over . Kindly anyone else help me with it.
			:::#Also what to do when there are users with higher or admin privileges lobbying? Are there any case studies where I can see how these are handled?

			===Studying my own irrational edits===
	==Apology Twasta==
			] can you kindly point out my irrational edits here. Before applying another unblock I will like to carefully study where I made mistakes. ] (]) 03:55, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
	http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vishwakarma_%28caste%29&action=historysubmit&diff=346816144&oldid=346721105

			== Talk page access revoked ==
	Twasta I do not know if it is a Gotra, I commented wrong "twasta is upgotra, not the main 5 gotra".

			<div class="user-block" style="background:#ffe0e0; border:1px solid #886644; padding:0.5em; margin:0.5em auto; min-height: 40px">
	But, it is not one mentioned in Yajur Veda among the 5 important Risi that is generally believed.
			] '''Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an ] has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.'''
			<span class="plainlinks" style="font-size:88%;">( • • • • ] • ] • • }} • ] • • ], unblock request}}}} checkuser] ()) </span>
			{{clear}}
			----
			If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the ], then contact administrators by submitting a request to the '']''. If you have already appealed to the Unblock Ticket Request System and been declined you may appeal to the ]'s '']''. <small>Please note that there could be appeals to the ] that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.</small><p><p>You don't appear to understand the reason for your block and your continued disruptive editing of this talk page is just reinforcing that the block is necessary. Please take some time away from Misplaced Pages, then come back read and understand the applicable policies and appeal at UTRS. <b>]</b> (] • ] • ]) 04:10, 17 March 2014 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:Blocked talk-revoked-notice -->
			{{UTRS-unblock-user\|17862\|Mar 24, 2017 02:38:24\|closed}}--] (]) 02:38, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
			{{UTRS-unblock-user\|18482\|Jun 10, 2017 06:55:46\|closed}}--] (]) 06:55, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

			==Group Member notice==
	Also, we can see Abhuvanasya Risi is already equated with Tvashta by someone else. ] (]) 04:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
			Your name is listed as a participant of the ]. <br>
			I would like to know if you agree with this edit:
			<br>
			] (]) 11:28, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 09:32, 29 January 2022

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

If you need any information or detail related to my edits kindly let me know about the same.

You have a message

{{Talkback|Whpq}}replied

Invite to WikiConference India 2011

Hi Ganesh J. Acharya,

The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011.
You can see our Official website, the Facebook event and our Scholarship form.

But the activities start now with the 100 day long WikiOutreach.

As you are part of WikiProject India community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for your contributions.

We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011

March 2014

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for misconduct as discussed at WP:AE. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Sandstein 15:32, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Request readers to go through this complaint and the quick arbitration processes. Obviously editors/admins around are dangerously editing. It becomes more necessary to highlight these or otherwise people around will start fighting falling prey to these conspiracies. Please check the complaint against an administrator User:Sitush_plus_a_group_is_possibly_trying_to_put_communities_in_India_to_a_fight to understand why this sanction became necessary for these administrators :-) Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 16:25, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Why I started highlighting the User:Sitush_plus_a_group_is_possibly_trying_to_put_communities_in_India_to_a_fight

The original Vishwakarma_(caste) was moved to Vishwabrahmin and then a revert of the article back to Vishwakarma_(caste) discussion was started "Requested move (modified 23 June)" and comments such as "while appreciating the caste's ambition for self definition as Vishwa Brahmins," started appearing which would obviously irritate most Vishwabrahmin. . Everyone who reads the shastras know LORD Indra incur brahma-hatya (the sinful reaction for killing a brahmana;) on killing Viśvarūpa who was son of Twastha. Manu, Maya, Twastha, Shilpi and Visvajna are brothers and the fore fathers of the current Vishwabrahmins who are also called Kammalans in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andra and Karnataka. So, there is no doubt among the people who study the shastra about Vishwabrahmins. The problem only comes with people who do not read the Shastras. The truly educated ones are aware. Also page moves are immediately reverted if they are a mistake. But for this move Vishwabrahmin to Vishwakarma_(caste) a discussion was started.
Over Talk:Vishwakarma_(caste) IP address 106.67.133.238 commented over "Sanskritisation ? genetic code says the truth," and posted an utterly biased genetic report which overlooked lot of other facts. And then User:MatthewVanitas started engaging over that. Finally I have to get with "In neighboring Tamil Nadu, geneticists testing DNA of local peoples, genes have been found from 50-60,000 years ago." ... "there are ancient Brahman chants" http://www.drsheedy.com/early-humans/up-to-12-000-years-ago.php to refute that discussion.
Prasanthnnamboothiri, while editing the very first edits changed "Nambudiris are considered as the most orthodox Brahmins." to "The Nambudiris were treated as most orthodox brahmins". And then immediately after that started poking Iyers and Iyengars as foreigners "The migrant (foreign) brahmins such as Iyers and Iyengras" So obviously this was to highlight a divide between communities. If Iyers or Iyengars cross checks who edited they would see Prasanthnnamboothiri. So the chances of fights between Iyers, Iyengars and Namboothiri increases as it is a use with namboothiri id editing these. After a little while what the id with Prasanthnnamboothiri does is writes the following at Talk:Adi_Shankara "Sankaracharya cannot be in Visvakarma caste because Viswakarma is a caste of recent origin." So... that puts the Viswakarmas against the Namboothiris as well. If Prasanthnnamboothiri is really a Namboothiri why would he change are to were? And if he is not a Namboothiri what is the purpose behind using the ID suffixed Namboothiri?
user:sitush was reverting every credible edit only under 1 reason WP:POV. Anyone can just keep removing sources and start discussions over talk page. But the strangest thing he again did which went inline to what these hidden ips and fake ids were doing, i.e. putting communities into quarrel.... he finally started this thread over Talk:Adi Shankara which now put other brahmins and Visvakarma Brahmins relations into trouble. " I'd go so far as to suggest that the original publication may have been more or less an academic hoax." and further has quoted "That claim has been pushed tendentiously on Misplaced Pages by self-identified community members, usually by citing Roberts, and we really do need to put a stop to this." Institute such as "Andhra Historical Society, Rajahmundry" put up a query from "Sri A. Padmanabhan" and never seemed to have answered them for years together. Please remember Roberts is not any tom dick and harry he worked as a proctor at the supreme court. And I finally decided to report it as things online seemed dangerous. But as suspected was laughed out .
References removed so far by User:Sitush
1. K.S. Krishna Rao Global encyclopaedia of the Brahmana ethnography year=2008 publisher=Global Vision Pub. House, location=New Delhi, India, isbn=8182202086|edition=1st ed., url=http://books.google.co.in/books?id=M5EWgRdnLxAC&lpg=PA520&dq=vishwakarma&pg=PA519#v=onepage&q&f=false, accessdate=22 January 2014
2. Kashyap Rangasami Laksminarayana Kr̥ṣṇayajurvedīya Taittirīya-saṃhitā, Volume 2 year=2002 publisher=Sri Aurobindo Kapāli Sāstry Institute of Vedic Culture, isbn=8179940055, page=40, url=http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=RiCYT6aJIc_nrAfXtOnBAQ&id=hZwoAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22The+Vishvakarma%22+%22who+build+temples+and+sculpt%22&q=Vishvakarma+Brahmins#search_anchor User:Sitush has given reason "Discussion does not give you the right to reinstate - consensus following discussion does." when user:sitush is found pinging editors (ref Thanks_for_the_ping_alert) what consensus is he talking about? This can be pure lobbying?

(This is all for today, I will gradually highlight all that I found... there are lots of these. These are not just over wikipedia, these are happening even over Facebook. There (Over facebook) profiles of people are more recognisable and miscreants are more identifiable... while it is a little difficult over wikipedia as it is all text.) Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 14:22, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Ganesh. When one has been indefinitely blocked for treating Misplaced Pages as "a battleground for contesting worldviews", it is eminently unwise to continue the battle on one's talk page. At this point your only legitimate use of this page is to request an unblock. If you're not interested in doing that, please stop editing altogether. Continuing to engage in the disruptive behaviour you were blocked for will result in revocation of your ability to edit even this page. —Psychonaut (talk) 14:55, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Under which guideline am I not supposed to put forth and collect my views? Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 14:58, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages:User pages#Protection of user pages, and particularly the bit about "misusing user space following a block". —Psychonaut (talk) 15:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

How do you think any other righteous admin going to follow all the happenings unless I don't explain them systematically what happen? I didn't see any admin so far putting efforts to find out what has happen? If someone had systematically reasoned things would have come out. Which other pages do I have access to? Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 15:12, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

You have access to no other page besides this one. No admin, righteous or otherwise, is going to consider your report, except insofar as it relates to an unblock request. If you have no intention of making such a request, then you have no business editing this page. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:17, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok, in that case I would request to unblock. But first I would need to complete my groundwork. Or otherwise I didn't see anyone putting any efforts cross examining. Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 15:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Request to unblock

I have put forth above why I felt user:sitush + group were being disruptive. It clearly indicated to me the edits made by user:sitush was inline to what many other obviously fake IDs and unregistered IP were doing, i.e. were trying to bring Indian communities in front of each other. There are lot more edits I am gradually trying to study. Kindly let me know when someone talks about consensus they have to be from honest editors, why does one need to ping editors? See this Youtube "Asch Conformity Experiment" . If the consensus are to be genuine they must naturally come?

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ganesh J. Acharya (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I obviously felt being lobbied and I have put forth my reasons Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 05:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You appear to be unable to see that the stuff you have posted to this page in support of this unblock request is more of exactly the kind of thing that led to the block, and far from being a reason for unblocking, is confirmation that the block should stay. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:31, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

JamesBWatson I have raised some serious concerns. You have not so far addressed those? Also I didn't see any administrator addressing them? I guess this makes me and would make people in India assume wiki has a Hidden agenda and the Admins around seem to be least concerned about addressing them? If honest you must address those concerns. Also it is not just me around feeling there are fake account created by this group there are others complaining this over User:Sitush's page as well. Currently this comment is around. " I am pretty sure it is also a a fraud, you have given yourself all those accolades using false accounts, created bu yourself." There are complaints all over his page what is going on?

And if you were in my place JamesBWatson what would you have quoted and why? Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 12:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

You are an indefinitely blocked user. Your contributions to this project are no longer welcome, and this includes presenting your paranoid conspiracy claims. For collaboration to work, users have to be able to understand that they can be wrong. You are incapable of understanding that you can be wrong, and that is why you are no longer permitted to collaborate. If you continue to pursue your conspiracy theories on this talk page, I will ask that your talk page access be revoked. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:11, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Policy of user id usage: Warring nations can cause unrest among each other by faking local IDs

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Is there a policy present over wikipedia which restricts editors from misusing IDs related to regional names. A foreigner from any nation can reach pages related to communities with competing community related names and can start pushing articles only those that are written negative about each other. When readers will look up the ids they would see names of competing communities and would perhaps misunderstand it be written by someone locally while with it would be written by someone abroad and this would start physical quarrels. Has wikipedia considered these problems, since these can cause unnecessary tensions? I am not asking if whether there are restrictions on free thinking, but am worried about wiki's strategic usage to cause unrest. So, is there any policy in practice of reporting those? In this case I notice I had reached IDs with higher or admin privileges, so I would also like to know what are the way around if ids with higher privileges plan misuse wiki? Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 07:58, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages's username policy can be found at WP:USERNAME. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:58, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb I did not notice anything very specific to faking local IDs. Kindly help me with it.
Also what to do when there are users with higher or admin privileges lobbying? Are there any case studies where I can see how these are handled? Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 02:40, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

If you didn't see anything about "faking local IDs" then I'd fathom your question has been answered.
It appears that you are asking me to provide you, (an indefinitely blocked editor with a history of irrational editing,) with rational guidance on how to deal with yet another conspiratorial hypothetical scenario? I think I'll pass... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:01, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb can you specifically point out my irrational editing? Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 03:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

I did not notice anything very specific to faking local IDs over Username policy. Kindly anyone else help me with it.
Also what to do when there are users with higher or admin privileges lobbying? Are there any case studies where I can see how these are handled?

Studying my own irrational edits

Cyphoidbomb can you kindly point out my irrational edits here. Before applying another unblock I will like to carefully study where I made mistakes. Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 03:55, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk page access revoked

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If you have already appealed to the Unblock Ticket Request System and been declined you may appeal to the the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Subcommittee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

You don't appear to understand the reason for your block and your continued disruptive editing of this talk page is just reinforcing that the block is necessary. Please take some time away from Misplaced Pages, then come back read and understand the applicable policies and appeal at UTRS. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:10, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Ganesh J. Acharya (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #17862 was submitted on Mar 24, 2017 02:38:24. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 02:38, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

UTRS appeal #18482 was submitted on Jun 10, 2017 06:55:46. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 06:55, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Group Member notice

Your name is listed as a participant of the WikiProject Countering system bias in religion.
I would like to know if you agree with this edit: DIFF.
24.78.228.96 (talk) 11:28, 14 March 2021 (UTC)