Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:56, 22 January 2011

Welcome!

Hello, Doc Tropics, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Timrem 18:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow. I am deeply flattered and gratified. Thank you! It has certainly been an interesting day.... Doc Tropics 20:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Doctor muthu's muthu 17:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

editing comments

I undid your edit to Jimbo's comments because you (or I) are not allowed to edit other peoples' comments. If you want the link I can provide it to you (leave a notice of some sort at my talk page though). Griffinofwales (talk) 23:23, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I saw the reversion, but thanks for taking the time to explain. That's very considerate, especially given that your edit summary was so clear. It's not necessary to provide me a link as I'm familiar with the guideline in question. I do however see a significant difference between "altering another editor's comments" and correcting a small, very blatant, typo. Personally I would say that your reversion was well-intended but unnecessary, and don't otherwise consider it worth pursuing. Thanks again for the consideration you exhibited in coming here, Doc Tropics 23:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Assignment: Underwater

Hey Doc,

Thanks for the correction here. Greatly appreciated! :) Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Great to see you, too, Doc. Feel free to pop by my talk page any time. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:05, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar, DT. It's quite kind of you. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I had trouble deciding whether to give you that or an all-expenses-paid trip to Hawaii, so I'm really glad you like it. Doc Tropics 00:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, this is much better than Hawaii. I've only been to Maui, but I can only assume. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:22, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Much appreciated. Guettarda (talk) 19:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

It was little enough, and long overdue. It was a true pleasure for me to acknowledge a couple of our more dedicated contributors today. Now if only the Barnstars came with a small cash stipend! Doc Tropics 20:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Rooster suction

You were involved in that flare up? How entertaining (for me)! :) I take it you haven't signed on to the No Drama Days 2009 spectacular? I did, but I haven't been 100% faithful. :( Oh well. There's always next year! ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:01, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Funny you should mention that; about the time the DramaOut started, I was getting blocked for an incivil personal attack on another editor, so it seemed that signing on would have been a bit hypocritical. Aside from my recent (regretable) outburst though, I usually spend more time in articles than on the dramaboards, and now I remember why. And hey, as long as someone gets a good laugh it's a consolation. Doc Tropics 05:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

BTW - If an otherwise friendly editor with a lamentable sense of humor left a joke on my page, and if I were concerned that a 3rd party might see it and become upset by misunderstanding it, then I suspect I'd probably remove the comment just to be safe, but maybe with a little smile somewhere to show I got the joke. Hypothetically, of course. Doc Tropics 05:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Well. Before I noticed the cock up... so to speak, I was going to make a statement here about "welcome to the jungle" (which seemed apropos of your username and the editing environment on a certain BLP). It can be rather vicious out there and anything one says can and will be used against them. If you look at my talk page history I even got worried that the smiley face would be misconstrued. Sometimes you just can't win!

I signed onto the no drama days festival with an ironic statement about how I'm never involved in drama so it wouldn't be much of a sacrifice, and the drama hogs went to work gossiping about how outrageous my statement was, despite it's fairly obvious (to me anyway, and I would think to anyone who knows me on here) humor. Anyway, I appreciate your collegiality and good faith. Have fun and take care. I think a kolam barnstar would be cool. What have you been up to in Tamil Nadu? Does it involve idli and vadas? ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:02, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't mean to ignore this post, I just got distracted. I love working on Tamil Nadu-related articles! They are interesting, informative, and the other editors tend to be extremely polite and collegial. They add the useful content and sources, I just clean up the writing. It's a nice change of pace from more stressful articles  : ) Doc Tropics 13:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

A bold proposal

Can you help me make this work: Misplaced Pages:Areas for Reform Slrubenstein | Talk 14:05, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I've continued to follow the discussion, but refrained from further direct comments after my block because it seemed inappropriate. First, because many editors wouldn't take me seriously after the ruckus I caused. Second, because it's entirely possible that anything I put my name to would become tainted by association. In fact, several times I wanted to voice my encouragement and support on your talkpage, but I didn't want you to suffer from the distraction it could have caused. Regarding your proposal, I'm flattered that you consider my input worthwhile. I will review it thoroughly and carefully, and then, if I think I can make a useful contribution I'll carefully consider how to assist without causing more trouble. Thanks for your kind thoughts, and good luck. Doc Tropics 14:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Man, I had no idea you had been blocked. It is hard for me to imagine. Well, when it expires, I hope you will look at the page and decide for yourself if you have anything constructive to add. I have been blocked a few times and one of the most dangerous things that has been happening at Wikipoedia is the believe that (1) blocks are punitive and (2) people who have been blocked are forever stigmatized. I view blocks generally as imposed cool-down periods, and once they have expired they are irrelevant. Anyway, good luck. Slrubenstein | Talk 14:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

It is of course entirely up o you, but seeing as you are unblocked, I would consider it water under the bridge ... Slrubenstein | Talk 15:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I can only hope others are as open-minded. I've read through your initial draft and the recent additions by Collect. I do have some thoughts, and once I clarify them in my mind I'll try to contribute. Overall, I think the discussion is very necessary and I'm glad that you got the ball rolling. The specific issues already raised on that page should certainly generate some much-needed debate. This really needed to be seperated from the non-productive drama that tends to surround ArbCom; now we can hope for less sound-and-fury coupled with more reasoned discussion. Good luck, Doc Tropics 16:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Amthernandez

Just wanted to drop you a note and say thank you for alerting me to the discussion. I removed the message from my talk page because the whole incident was annoying me. I hope you understand (and I'm sure you do) that my removal of this notice was not directed as a slight towards you in any way. Thanks, again. Viriditas (talk) 10:09, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, that was very considerate. I had seen your removal and wasn't worried or offended. I haven't followed up on that discussion yet, but the editor who initiated it may be in for a surprise. Doc Tropics 13:42, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Matt Sanchez

Hey Doc, I think you did some nice work on that article. You may have seen I showed some interest in the lead also, and have no objection to Coulter leaving the lead. I hope you keep on producing good stuff, but I would ask one thing of you, for your own sake: stay away from that Child. He's no good. Next thing you know, you're eating kim chi while listening to right-wing talk radio in a rental car, a tattered copy of Ayn Rand's musings on the passenger's seat and a couple of blocks and ArbCom cases preventing you from doing real work. Later! Drmies (talk) 06:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the good advice Doc! Sadly, I'm afraid it may be too late. I once touched his talk page and am probably already infected; you know how viral Kimchi can be. Thanks also for your interest and participation at the Matt Sanchez article. BLPs like that one are troublesome and more attention from neutral editors can only help. Please feel free to contribute further if you have the time and inclination, you'd be most welcome. Heck, I'd even promise not to call you "Doctor Dutchboy". Doc Tropics 13:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I had an American Lit professor a couple of years ago who was in Vietnam, and told great stories of exploding containers of kim chi that some of the soldiers brought back from their RnR. I'm staying clear of the stuff. I also got infected into looking at that article. CoM is a bad influence, but I have learned lots of things that way--about art deco, Swedish candy, hot sauce, and other indispensable topics. "Doctor Dutchboy" would be better than "Boy Dutchdoctor," that's a fact. BTW, if you are really a tropics doc, you might want to learn Dutch and pick up a copy of Bougainville. Drmies (talk) 16:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Bougainville looks fascinating, and it's been published in French and German as well as Dutch. That means that if I bought a copy of each version I might eventually understand about 10% fo the total. It seems we monoglots will have to wait for an English printing. Alas :{ Doc Tropics 17:34, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Gratitude

Just wanted to say thank you for the award. Everybody likes to find his efforts are appreciated, and you sure made me feel good with that one! RavShimon (talk) 19:17, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, that's exactly what it was supposed to do :) Doc Tropics 19:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The Klan

I've gone ahead and removed the section on the Great Migration and disfranchisement from the Ku Klux Klan. Thank you for your positive comments. It was a pleasure working with you on the article. Pirate Dan (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Long time

Hey long time, remember me? Æon 04:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I do! Enjoyed time away, I take it? Amerique 04:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi guys! It's been a long time. I noticed some activity on your page Aeon, and meant to drop you a note. Glad to see you back in action. I remain your dedicated and slightly demented buddy :) Doc Tropics 14:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I'm stationed in Japan now, so been to busy to bother editing or doing anything like that. Æon 21:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow, exciting and exotic, at least to me! There are definitely worse places to be stationed, anyway. You're still a "professional weather guesser" I take it? At least you can blame bad guesses on Global warming, heh heh. Doc Tropics 21:49, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep, with additional training and qualifications now. Its been good here. Æon 23:23, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Critise

I agree that the section in Critisism of HRW on anti-semitism needs re-wrining, indead I have tried to update it. But it keeps on getting deleted, so huge amounts of effort have been used up just trying to keep it there.Slatersteven (talk) 18:51, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that article is quite a mess; you're braver than I am. I'll look it over a bit more, and the talkpage as well. "Criticism of X" articles tend to have significant issues with NPOV balance, and this one seems to have some problems with sources as well. At least you'll have a chance to make some progress in the next 48 hours  :) Doc Tropics 19:05, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

But his (very low edit) Chort has not, he is now up to the same game. So it may end up being the same undo mass deletions game (with very dubuious rational from the other side.Slatersteven (talk) 15:26, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Mass deletion of sourced material is totally unacceptable; if that happens again I will report it. You're doing good work on the article, I hope you don't mind if I follow along behind and do small cleanup. Do you think it might be useful to expand the intro a bit? It seems a little short given the length of the article, especially after I took out the "counterpoint" which really doesn't belong there. Doc Tropics 15:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

No a problom, I put the countpoint in ,ore as a sop to those who see the artciel as too POV. As to the intro I would like to try to get the body of the text OK first, but I will poter about the intro too.Slatersteven (talk) 13:07, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Well ther was the first mass deletion, so it would seem that it will all start again.Slatersteven (talk) 21:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Golden rice

No worries, it's on my watchlist so all the red stuck out like a sore thumb! Nice toolbox on your userpage btw - I'm nabbing that! Smartse (talk) 05:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Edit my page.

You are very kindPark6354 (talk) 11:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, enjoy! Doc Tropics 22:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Begging and pleading...

The issue of wp:blps is one that confounds and fascinates me. The problem is that once a person attains any notoriety, they tend to start to attract detractors. I came across the article for Lauren Booth once upon a time, quite by happenstance. I didn't know of her, and while I sympathize deeply with both sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I don't have a clear personal position. She took a position, and suddenly her article became one of the most simple examples of wp:undue that you could possibly imagine. When I dared to try to simply tame some of the most weasely words, I got a barrage of personal attacks from the editors owning the article. Shockingly, nobody much cared (although I do recall someone speaking up and saying something to the effect of "Why was this editor not banned on site for that blatant personal attack?")...

Carly Fiorina is a bit different; thank God her detractors don't seem to hate her to that extent. But she certainly somehow manages to push the buttons of some people, indirectly, to the extent that they believe her Misplaced Pages article should pretty much paint the most negative picture possible. I remember, when I first happened across the article, her talk page had all of these incredibly nasty comments that nobody had bothered to refactor (a relatively standard wp:forum and, especially, wp:blp practice. The extent to which, I fear, so many wp:blps go without any significant or stringent watchlisting is, I think, one of the biggest issues facing the project today.

All just my opinion, probably not much of it worth more than 2¢. In any event, thanks for adding that particular article to your watchlist. I appreciate your answering my pleas.  :) user:J aka justen (talk) 21:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I share your concerns, and even some of your experiences. Matt Sanchez appears to infuriate people from across the spectrum and finding reliable sources for his article can feel like an excercise in frustration - there is a ratio of 1,000 incoherently slavering blog entries to every 1 RS. When I first showed up on that Talkpage, to suggest that perhaps the word "faggot" wasn't quite appropriate in the intro, I was immendiately labeled "sockpuppet" by a POV warrior who was later indef-blocked as a sockpuppet himself.

The situation needs a long term solution, but for now I think the best we can do is for neutral, unbiased editors to call attention to problems and support each other in correcting them. Hmmm, would that make us a cabal? Maybe we should start a sign-up sheet, lol. Doc Tropics 22:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup templates

Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "{{Unreferenced}}", "{{Fact}}" and "{{Cleanup}}" etc., are best not "subst"ed . See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC).

Thanks a lot for the pointer, I didn't realize that! Details, details  : ) Doc Tropics 05:24, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks much for your welcome and helpful sueggstions. I've conformed accordingly. The POV was removed, and there is zero copying from the HRW report, but rather a terse summary and citations. --Noiseidea123 (talk) 10:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad you didn't get discouraged, and happy if I could help. I can tell you took it to heart because your very next edit to Syria was flawless. In addition to using your own wording and NPOV language, the reference was very strong; it's unlikely that your contribution would be deleted now because it's well written and follows policy perfectly. Good job! On a side note, it's customary to add new talkpage comments to the bottom of the page where everyone will notice them, so I moved this section here. Feel free to drop me a note if you have any questions or need help with something : ) Doc Tropics 15:29, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks +Barnstar

Thanks for the response to misconceptions :)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Doc Tropics for helping and guiding new usersNotedGrant Talk 16:18, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

NotedGrant Talk 16:18, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

List bluelink clean-up.

I started a section for those of us doing clean-up of the main bluelinks at Talk:List of male performers in gay porn films#November 2009 - thread to ensure main bluelinks accurate. -- Banjeboi 23:22, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Fasad

Do u know that i added loads of references to that fasad page. but u made an edit and there was a conflict.

NOW I HAVE TO ADD ALL THE REFERENCES AGAIN. ARGHHHHHHHHHH

they were references to books and scholars. too me ages. wlel am an idiot for no pressing save bit by bit. i was on that page for about 30 minutes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.223.124 (talk • contribs)

I urge you to review the following policies before repeating your edits or they will almost certainly be reverted again:

• WP:VER
• WP:RS
• WP:OR
• WP:UNDUE

Thanks, Doc Tropics 17:50, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

no u dont understand, am not talking about the references that were already there.

About 30 minutes ago, i added about 5 references new, and a lot more background, but i didnt press submit, at this same time, when i did press submit you made and edit on that page and there was an edit conflict.

All my data got lost which i spent 30 minutes on.

VERY VERY UNLUCKY, VERY RARE, and VERY ANNOYING for somet like that to happen !!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.223.124 (talk) 17:57, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

OK, I understand now, and Edit Conflicts can be a frustration. However, it is usually possible to save your work when that happens. As soon as you get an "Edit Conflict" message, hit the "Back" button on your browser to return you to the previous page; this page should be the one with your entry, allowing you to copy/paste your work onto a new page. Good luck, Doc Tropics 18:05, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Shiny Barnstar!

		The Society Barnstar
		I hereby award you this Society Barnstar for your help in cleaning up List of male performers in gay porn films which helps advance the general understanding of the given society of these performers. When others offered less than inspirational criticism you instead acted and helped clean-up a topic that needed help. -- Banjeboi 00:20, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, recognition from one's fellow editors really counts for a lot! Doc Tropics 04:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Giridharilal kedia District Governer.jpg

Hi,

The image was being used in an article. But it got deleted according to this discussion. The point is that the person was not the governor of any district - he was the governor of Lions club, X district (I forget which). As there is no scope for notability of a district chapter of a club, and no probability of an article for the person, I nominated it for deletion.

Anyway, thanks for the note. Perhaps it can be kept and used when this article grows - but I am unsure of its notability as well. Thanks and best wishes -- Raziman T V (talk) 07:45, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I have nominated it for deletion the non-speedy way. Best wishes -- Raziman T V (talk) 18:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Astoria Regional Airport Page

I agree, the current table is much more fitting. How did you stumble onto that stupid little page anyway? Thanks for the help & suggestions. --Michael.tofte (talk) 00:37, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Esperanto

Thank you for notifying me :) - I responded to your concerns. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

• So far I don't think there were any specific weasel phrases in the section. I'll check again to make sure, but so far I don't believe there are any. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:28, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Ray Franz

Almost all your work at Talk:Raymond_Franz#Sources has been reverted. The article is basically an autobiography. Can you look at trimming its fat again? --71.247.75.118 (talk) 20:35, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that! I restored an updated version of the stub article, but a number of dubious statements remain. I'll try to keep a closer eye on it. Doc Tropics 00:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pearl necklace (sexuality)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Pearl necklace (sexuality). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Misplaced Pages:Notability and "What Misplaced Pages is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Pearl necklace (sexuality) (4th nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance, May still need some help

Thanks for your help on the Lama (martial art) article but anything, right down to items where I provide a source are being deleted and continually reverted.

I have also asked for help from Janggeom as a mediator being a part of the Martial Arts WikiProject but I do not know how much influence he will have on the situation.

Should I just bite the bullet, and create a Pak Hok Pai article? There is so much info and we have one editor that seems to want sole custody of the article Insinr8 (talk) 06:07, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Dusbury riot

When I first restored this material (like you) I could find no reason why this material was considered falsified. There was no explanation on the talk page, as such I resorted it in the expectation that any objections to it would be raised. I then checked on One Night In Hackney assertion that he had indead raised concearns about this, and eventualy found it here the quoted text is as follows. “In contrast to the innovation of the NF in the 1980s, the BNP represented more of a continuation of both the issues and the methods of the 1970s. The combination of a sizeable immigrant community and government attempts to foster a multiracial society enabled it to present the native white population as an oppressed people in their own country. The BNP's 'Rights for Whites' campaign, which took off after a major demonstration in Dewsbury in 1989, marked the behinning of a more active approach. 'The real watershed', as John Tyndall observed, 'signifying the party's determination to enter mainstream politics occurred around 1990” I bleived that my edit here refelcted better what the source was saying then the origional text better.Slatersteven (talk) 21:13, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! It looks like everyone was probably acting in good faith, but Hackney's less-than-ideal responses caused unnecessary escalation. It also seems that your most recent version was quite accurate, and I'm still trying to review and understand why it was reverted yet again. I will try to suggest some sort of compromise wording on the article's talkpage once I have a chance. Doc Tropics 21:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Community restrictions

The article Irish republican legitimatism, along with other articles relating to The Troubles, is currently subject to active arbitration remedies, as laid out during a previous Arbitration Enforcement case that closed in October 2007, and was amended by community consensus in October 2008. The current restrictions are: All editors on Troubles-related articles are directed to get the advice of neutral parties via means such as outside opinions. All articles related to The Troubles, defined as: any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland falls under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per day). When in doubt, assume it is related. Clear vandalism, or edits by anonymous IP editors, may be reverted without penalty Editors who violate this 1RR restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the guidelines laid out in the above link. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it on this talk page first.

O Fenian (talk) 15:18, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Doc Tropics 15:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Please help

as English is not my native language, and I do not have a big experinece of particp

Macroevolution

I think it is important that the concept of the relation of Micro and Macroevolution be established. It was a very small edit but it had enough impact to suggest that the two are closely linked which I think the original articled failed to properly do. As Microevolution is the direct process which brings about Macroevolution it naturally follows that this should be very briefly mentioned. Both versions are correct, to be sure, but I believe my edit adds a bit of needed back up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.253.3.150 (talk) 12:52, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand the point that you are trying to make but have concerns about both the tone (with regard to POV) and technical accuracy of the text you introduced. Since it was later reverted by another editor as well, it seems that the articles' talkpages would be the best place for an ongoing discussion. Thanks for the note of explanation though....always appreciated  : ) Doc Tropics 17:34, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Afghanistan

Doc Tropics, That person has to provide some solid evidence to support his claim. The Sikhs were stopped at Jamrud, a small town near Peshawar, and the Sikhs had never ruled over whole present day Pakistan. You can read Olaf Caroe's book "The Pathans" in which he has discussed the Sikh period in depth. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Domasch (talk • contribs) 15:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Tropics, can I now edit it as I have proved and can further quote from the Encyclopaedia Britannica and Olaf Caroe's book "The Pathans" and from other reliable books to prove that Sikh were stopped at Jamrud and it is also wrong to claim that the Sikhs had wretched whole Pakistan except the province of Sindh .

It has also been added recently that India borders Afghanistan just because the Indian Government claims so. The state Jammu and Kashmir is a disputed territory between Pakistan and India and unless this dispute is resolved peacefully the current boundaries between these countries are accepted throughout the world. The part of Jammu and Kashmir state that borders Afghanistan is under Pakistan control. (Domasch (talk) 08:53, 15 June 2010 (UTC))

Domasch, it would be better to have this discussion at talk: Afghanistan because Profitoftruth seems to be a subject-matter expert (he is a scholar in this area), while I am simply a "random" editor who occasionally participates there. If two sources are both reliable and they contradict each other, it should be possible to mention both and explain that the exact history is not known with 100% certainty. However, I have not seen evidence that the original source is unreliable, so I will still support the original phrasing. Doc Tropics 13:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Response to you message

Thanks for visiting my profile. I would urge you not to do delete, but rather to improve. That's not my POV, that's critics' POV, and it is worth mentioned in the article, thank you Kushsinghmd (talk) 23:41, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand both the POV and the criticism, and it has its place. However, that place is more properly in the article dedicated to criticism, rather than the very first sentence of this article. If you review Criticism of Muhammad and Criticism of Islam you will find that both polygamy and Muhammad's "personal life" are already covered, and some of your text and references would fit better there. Thanks for your consideration on this topic, Doc Tropics 23:55, 13 June 2010 (UTC) Also, I'm going to copy/paste these last 2 comments back to your page to keep things all in one place. I'll watch there for further comments.

Presentation of Award

		The Mensch's Barnstar
		The Mensch's Barnstar shall be awarded to Doc Tropics who has shown integrity and reason while interacting with another user on his/her talkpage. Presented by Mootros (talk) 14:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

oh wow! A Barnstar is always special, but getting one from someone I haven't worked with directly is really a surprise....a very pleasant surprise. Thanks Mootros; Your kindness and generosity is very much appreciated! Doc Tropics 14:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Criticism of Islam sidebar ideas

Doc: I posted a reply at User_talk:Noleander#Hi --Noleander (talk) 17:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

about "edit warring"

yes, sir. And I appreciate your attention to this. But PLEASE do not be too hasty about things....I KNOW what I wrote. Do you know what I actually totally meant? What is the CONTEXT? Nova himself reverts like crazy. And if (within WP's 3RR) I disagree and revert back, then what? An "edit war" will NATURALLY result. BY NOVA TOO, NOT JUST ME. Hence why I say the cliche of "two to tango". (Maybe I should have worded to him as "why start an edit war?", cuz that's really what was meant....THAT BOTH of us would then be in this nonsense, caused and initiated by Nova.) I will NOT start an edit war, or even really engage in one per se. But his own actions (of removing whole sections he doesn't like even though those statements have been factually established and are NOT just "original research", or instead of helping the article by maybe finding better sources, but just deleting things all the time), would also result in "edit warring." It takes AT LEAST TWO on Misplaced Pages to engage in an edit dispute. And why do that?

I mean, is he gonna dispute the FACT that there are "Anti-Catholics" who do NOT recognize the label of "separated brethren"? Also, I can tell you were hasty in your reading, because you said that I called Nova "anti-Catholic"? Well I did NOT call him that at all. In fact, it seems that Nova is probably very PRO-Catholic. I was referring to "anti-Catholics" in general who reject the term "separated brethren", NOT Nova at all. Hence why I worry that certain editors and admins give too hasty an examination to disputes like this. You said it "jumped out" at you, meanwhile I never even called Nova "Anti-Catholic". But just the opposite. "Uptight" yes. But are we gonna be hyper-sensitive to EVERY blunt and frank word and point? I've seen worse editors than me (trust me I have) who NEVER seem to get in trouble, but are always around. I know this one blunt editor who uses insulting terms like "your windbaggery" to editors quite freely. As an example. Anyway, please like I said, do not be hasty about matters. This guy is NOT perfect either. And that's all I'm saying. thank you. Sweetpoet (talk) 15:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

by the way, I just modified a little bit what I wrote on Nova's talk page... I wrote "I'm serious. Why start an edit war? Because another edit war will happen if you do this again. Caused mainly by you." Again, it takes at least two. And Nova DOES revert edits he doesn't like or finds problems with in a row, a LOT. He knows how to hide his rudeness though, because he won't be as blunt verbally, and he knows how to play the game. He likes to get people he doesn't like in trouble, over real or imagined infractions. There've been people who were very rude and blunt with me months ago on my own talk page, AND I NEVER REPORTED THEM. Cuz overall it's minor petty stuff. Nova, on the other hand, runs to Admins and special pages and brings up their history of "blocks" etc etc, simply to get the person kicked off. The guy is very dis-heartening...Sweetpoet (talk) 16:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Sweetpoet, while I appreciate your concerns I'm afraid it won't do you any good to pursue them on my talkpage. As I mentioned on the Noticeboard, I'm not an admin, I just looked over the situation and saw some troubling comments. The fact that you were willing to modify your words after the fact indicates a willingness to attempt civility and work with others, and that's a good thing. On the other hand, you will probably have fewer difficulties in the long run if you think more carefully before you post certain kinds of comments. Good luck, Doc Tropics 16:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The reports of my reliable editing are greatly exaggerated

Thank you for the kind words. Please have a gorilla. And on a very different topic it's now snowing again. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 16:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Linkrot

No problem. Thanks for your help with the article. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 20:56, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I thought I'd stop by to say that I'm also glad we've found some common ground at WP. If I seemed defensive at first, it was because to my eye you had jumped into the fray without having awareness of the history of the article and the edits that have been made to it. Whatever the truth of that may be, you now have a history of good faith edits behind you, so that's not a concern. And, no, your joke doesn't rub me the wrong way. I myself feel rather out of place when discussing the mathless sciences. I generally prefer to edit articles related to voting theory -- all the fun of examining human behavior while still getting to work with mathematical proofs! -- Marie Paradox (talk) 17:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Misplaced Pages:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. MBisanz 02:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)