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.
:::Fine. However, I do not want to comment on anyone with whom I may not be talking in future except under very exceptional circumstances. There are 2 million wikipedians, and two persons not talking with each other hardly matter and shall not negatively impact the project. --] 14:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
:::Fine. However, I do not want to comment on anyone with whom I may not be talking in future except under very exceptional circumstances. There are 2 million wikipedians, and two persons not talking with each other hardly matter and shall not negatively impact the project. --] 14:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
:::Bhadani, you may like to read my regarding this - ] <sup><em>]/]</em></sup> 06:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
:::Bhadani, you may like to read my regarding this - ] <sup><em>]/]</em></sup> 06:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
::::I read the same. They are nice. However, how I am concerned with them when that person no longer exist for me!!!! --] 14:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
::::I read the same. They are nice. However, how I am concerned with them when that person no longer exists for me!!!! --] 14:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
::Bhadani, I came to your page to thank you for expanding ], which was on my to-do list. I came across this discussion, about dab's much quoted outburst. I just want to make two points (1) to say he was impugning 1bn people or being prejudiced in any way is an inappropriate reading even of the quoted sentence. As I recall, he was responding to the extended trolling on the ] page, and inundated with two or three new users - or sockpuppets - a day, came to the conclusion that it must be the case that some previously unconnected part of India, with little or no education, and exposed to constant inter-caste or communal tension, was the source of the plague. The implication is, of course, that he does not think that this is all of India or all Indians. In fact, he has difficult interactions with what some might call extreme nationalists of all stripes, and these words were his expression of the fear that there would be a potentially unlimited source of such conflicts as more people from places where they had no exposure to the rules of online civility and citation enforced here started editing. So judge him, as you will, but do not judge him believing him to be prejudiced or insulting about all Indians, because you would be wrong to do so. (2) You say above that you have lost all respect and trust for dab. That you have lost respect is possible, and I do not have anything to say about that. That you have lost trust is a little problematic. I may not trust dab to keep his temper with newbies, but that does not mean I do not recognise that he is a superb editor, and more, one that has a devotion to his area of expertise. We need more people who choose to limit themselves to an area where they are experts and expand and cite for articles that have reading lists that are obscure for the rest of us. Dab has done that conscientiously. His misfortune is that his area of expertise happens to clash with some issues that are controversial politically, and thus he receives more than his share of new editors, and some established editors who do not share his level of reading and thus are incapable of carrying out arguments at the level of scholarship that he wishes to maintain. I think it is important that you accept that this is so, because at some time in the future you may be called on to intervene at one of these articles, and unless you can trust dab to have the best interests of WP at heart, you will be compromised as a mediator. ] 08:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
::Bhadani, I came to your page to thank you for expanding ], which was on my to-do list. I came across this discussion, about dab's much quoted outburst. I just want to make two points (1) to say he was impugning 1bn people or being prejudiced in any way is an inappropriate reading even of the quoted sentence. As I recall, he was responding to the extended trolling on the ] page, and inundated with two or three new users - or sockpuppets - a day, came to the conclusion that it must be the case that some previously unconnected part of India, with little or no education, and exposed to constant inter-caste or communal tension, was the source of the plague. The implication is, of course, that he does not think that this is all of India or all Indians. In fact, he has difficult interactions with what some might call extreme nationalists of all stripes, and these words were his expression of the fear that there would be a potentially unlimited source of such conflicts as more people from places where they had no exposure to the rules of online civility and citation enforced here started editing. So judge him, as you will, but do not judge him believing him to be prejudiced or insulting about all Indians, because you would be wrong to do so. (2) You say above that you have lost all respect and trust for dab. That you have lost respect is possible, and I do not have anything to say about that. That you have lost trust is a little problematic. I may not trust dab to keep his temper with newbies, but that does not mean I do not recognise that he is a superb editor, and more, one that has a devotion to his area of expertise. We need more people who choose to limit themselves to an area where they are experts and expand and cite for articles that have reading lists that are obscure for the rest of us. Dab has done that conscientiously. His misfortune is that his area of expertise happens to clash with some issues that are controversial politically, and thus he receives more than his share of new editors, and some established editors who do not share his level of reading and thus are incapable of carrying out arguments at the level of scholarship that he wishes to maintain. I think it is important that you accept that this is so, because at some time in the future you may be called on to intervene at one of these articles, and unless you can trust dab to have the best interests of WP at heart, you will be compromised as a mediator. ] 08:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
With Malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wikipedia's wounds, and emerge as Better than the Best. You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. The whole problem with the world wikipedia is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.
It wasn't vandalism - Misplaced Pages says be bold - I am a new user and meant to press sandbox Misplaced Pages says give new users a chance dude - so thank you but unecessary if you waited four seconds i changed it and went back to sandbox. Undestand that even though it is a polemic issue does not give you a right to issue a final warning vandalism note. Thanks!(Smiles and kisses)203.206.26.16000:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC)Eloise
Copied from that IP's page: I understand your concern: . I was not over zealous, but acting in response to an edit by you. Yes, wikipedia says Be Bold, but it also says do not be reckless. Moreover, it also says follow no rule which I was obliged to follow as your edit looked like vandalism, as you had changed the page name. Your knowledge of processes and procedures of wikipedia indicates that you are not very new to wikipedia: please register a user name if you do not have any, unless you want to land yourself in difficulties as you just faced. The warning shall continue to warn any other users who may be editing from this IP address anonymously. Cheers. (Smiles and kisses) and hugs too. --Bhadani01:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Bhadani, could you semi-protect this page, as well as September 12, and 10. If that is not possible I understand. However, there is a sockpuppet who has voted multiple times, was blocked, and he keeps removing the notices that he is a sockpuppet, by using what I strongly suspect are new sockpuppet accounts. Your help is greatly appreciated. --BostonMA02:13, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
These pages are highly visible pages, and no nonsense may continue unnoticed long by others. In case, some one is really a sockpuppet, he/shall gets exposed sooner than later. I think protecting pages would serve no purpose. If some one is removing comments, he shall be treated as a vandal. Please do not worry much. Reply copied from BostonMA's page. --Bhadani 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Bhadani, it's silly to scold Dbachmann for remarks made nearly a year ago. Did you even notice the date? He was tired, he was cranky, and even though you're probably going to decide that I'm a bigot too, I think he had a point. There are people editing Misplaced Pages who have little education and great hatreds. As he says, they can't be greatly blamed for either, but it is wearisome dealing with the results. To keep WP stable, we're going to have to civilize and educate the whole human race -- or at least the portion of it with net access. That's why people get cranky, take wiki-breaks, or give up. Read this much-copied article , have a laugh, and relax. Zora03:36, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to butt-in here, but actually, Bachmann is wrong on 2 counts: 1)there is no "ethnic conflict" in India. (There may be some religious riots, but they are not happening everywhere) 2) The Indians whom he has encountered are angry because of injustice perpetrated upon them, which does not actually amount to hate, but who cares for them anyway? So I feel on account of his valuable contributions towards articles relating to Hinduism and related fields, he must be let off but with a warning. →Talk08:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Bhadani. I agree with Babub that DBachmann has made many valuable contributions, and hence should not be banned for his comments (which as Zora points out were made some time ago). I am quite willing to accept Zora's opinion that the comments were made while DBachmann was tired, or DBachmann's own comments that he intended no offence. However, what I found very sad in DBachmann's behavior, even more than the comments themselves, was his unwillingness to accept that these comments might be offensive, even if he did not intend to be offensive, and to take responsibility for any such (possibly unintentional) offensiveness. --BostonMA13:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Dbachmann, hates Hindus. In fact, I'm surprised to the lengths some Indian users support him. I found Blnguyen to be the only admin who took correct action against dab, by thwarting him on ANI, and backing myself and Bharatveer up. Look at some nice diffs and conversations I had with dab - - - - - - --BakamanBakatalk16:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Bhadani, I am trying hard to AGF here, but I trust you are aware of the history of this? Try to do some research and find out what has been said about this. If, otoh, you are just trying to get my goat, this is an exceptionally poor attempt at trolling. And, I would prefer to speak for myself regarding things I "hate". Not India, or Hindus, to be sure. I have nothing but contempt for militant nationalism, it is true, and I am genuinely saddened to see Hindus represented by the likes of "Bakasuprman" and "Bharatveer". dab(ᛏ)10:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
No comments. I do not care about you AGF or bad faith. I no longer care for you and shall not talk with you unless it becomes necessary to protect the integrity of the Project. --Bhadani13:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I denounce the personal attacks by dab against two users named by him. Really, unbecoming of a serious administrator and wikipedian. I was not aware that we have denegerated to such a low level of personal interaction. --Bhadani13:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Dab, you must AGF here. Having known both of you, let me say that Bhadani is a valuable contributor and is not a troll by any length. Bhadaniji, let me assure you that I know the circumstances under which Dab uttered the oft-quoted piece of text and that he's definitely NOT against Indians or Hindus. He's a valuable contributor to Sanskrit and Veda-related articles and extremely knowledgeable on those subjects. Just that he gets weary often due to newbies coming in and raking up the same-old issues repeatedly (it's not their fault either). Add the cultural and linguistic differences between him and us, his comments sound rude. Please AGF on him. -- Sundar16:13, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Sundar, I have always respected you. I still continue to keep you in high reverence. However, I can not compromise my identity as a citizen of India. I would rather follow A P J Kalam, and would wish to say a final goodbye to wikipedia than to talk with dab. If an administrator like dab can not deal with new wikipedians (he gets weary often due to newbies coming in and raking up the same-old issues repeatedly), he should surrender his administrators tools. However, I shall continue here, as persons like dab (who has lost all my trust and respect) can not force me to say goodbye to wikipedia. I am here with a mission: to contribute to realize the objectives of the dream of Jimbo Wales (the founder and the president of the Wikimedia Foundation) and his team, and shoutings by certain elements would not deter me to stop being a volunteer here. Sundar, in case you feel hurt, I regret. In fact, at the suggestion of Zora, I had posted a message on the page of dab that the matter was closed as far as I was concerned. However, he landed on my page and opened the closed matter. This is really sad, and I am not presuming that he has an ego bigger than most of us. One may have built the entire wikipedia, but by doing this he does not get right to sanction a nation of 100000000 people. --Bhadani16:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not hurt at all, Bhadaniji. You're entitled to your views on him based on your experiences with him. And yes, I must agree with your point that one should not get intemperate even when wearied by newbies. Of late, I notice that he's getting irritated often. -- Sundar06:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
By the way, in a previous discussion, he has clarified that it's a language issue and that he never intended to insult Indians. He even apologised for any unintended hurt it may have caused. Only after this clarification did I take his point. -- Sundar08:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Sundar. I shall be sending you a mail shortly, which has nothing to do with this issue but with the possible visit of Jimbo Wales to Bangalore. Regards.
Hey Bhadaniji, I just wanted to tell you my view on Dbachmann seeing as other people are telling their views. I've only met this user on the Aryan invasion theory and Out of India theory pages and my conduct with him is mixed. Most times the conversation starts on difficult terms and ends on friendly terms and I think there could be two explanations for this. 1) He has mood swings, which is perfectly acceptable considering how many controversial articles must be on his watchlist considering he has over 35000 edits or 2) He just isn't ready to accept other views. I'll just point you out to these comments to editors which he associates to Hindu nationalism (including myself). The fact is that anything outside his point of view on these articles is labelled pseudoscience, propaganda or Hindu nationalism . There are more examples but I don't have much time to sift through them. Thanks. Nobleeagle (Talk)06:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Fine. However, I do not want to comment on anyone with whom I may not be talking in future except under very exceptional circumstances. There are 2 million wikipedians, and two persons not talking with each other hardly matter and shall not negatively impact the project. --Bhadani14:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I read the same. They are nice. However, how I am concerned with them when that person no longer exists for me!!!! --Bhadani14:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Bhadani, I came to your page to thank you for expanding Rajkumari Amrit Kaur, which was on my to-do list. I came across this discussion, about dab's much quoted outburst. I just want to make two points (1) to say he was impugning 1bn people or being prejudiced in any way is an inappropriate reading even of the quoted sentence. As I recall, he was responding to the extended trolling on the Rajput page, and inundated with two or three new users - or sockpuppets - a day, came to the conclusion that it must be the case that some previously unconnected part of India, with little or no education, and exposed to constant inter-caste or communal tension, was the source of the plague. The implication is, of course, that he does not think that this is all of India or all Indians. In fact, he has difficult interactions with what some might call extreme nationalists of all stripes, and these words were his expression of the fear that there would be a potentially unlimited source of such conflicts as more people from places where they had no exposure to the rules of online civility and citation enforced here started editing. So judge him, as you will, but do not judge him believing him to be prejudiced or insulting about all Indians, because you would be wrong to do so. (2) You say above that you have lost all respect and trust for dab. That you have lost respect is possible, and I do not have anything to say about that. That you have lost trust is a little problematic. I may not trust dab to keep his temper with newbies, but that does not mean I do not recognise that he is a superb editor, and more, one that has a devotion to his area of expertise. We need more people who choose to limit themselves to an area where they are experts and expand and cite for articles that have reading lists that are obscure for the rest of us. Dab has done that conscientiously. His misfortune is that his area of expertise happens to clash with some issues that are controversial politically, and thus he receives more than his share of new editors, and some established editors who do not share his level of reading and thus are incapable of carrying out arguments at the level of scholarship that he wishes to maintain. I think it is important that you accept that this is so, because at some time in the future you may be called on to intervene at one of these articles, and unless you can trust dab to have the best interests of WP at heart, you will be compromised as a mediator. Hornplease08:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Bhadani, you know better than me, that Dab contributed enormously into the India-related articles. A year ago he also made an unfortunate note about two Rajput users that maybe interpreted as an offence against one billion of Indians. Since then he many times tried to explain that he did not mean anything of that sort. What is really matter thousand of hours spent wotking on India-related articles or a stupid slip of tongue. The good working relations between you and Dab are important for the survival of the project. I am sure you will find ways to mend them abakharev11:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Bhadaniji, I am sorry to have attacked you. I didn't know you are such a good person. I was really pissed off when you went against me sometime ago. I won't tell you what, when and how, since you will know about me then. But that's the only reason why I personally attacked you. I offer my heartiest apologies. I hope you will forgive me. I admit that Kiran Parmar, the "Bhadva" series users and Jigar Nahta were all my sockpuppets. But Miko Solomon wasn't my sockpuppet. I don't know who it is. But I assure you I will stop my personal attacks from now on. I hope you will forgive me.
P.S. - You can block this account as I already have another account.
I never cared for all which you claim to have done. I do not care at all for such things: I am here with a mission to continue to contribute to the best of my abilities to make the Project better. I do not imply that you also did to the best of your abilities to make the Project degenerate to the lowest possible levels. There are vandals more intelligent than you! I am replying for the sake of good order only. --Bhadani13:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I never forgot the call. I shall call you right now, if you are free. But, I shall be calling from a landline number which you should keep with you only. Please message me on my talk page. I shall call you at the number you called me few days before on 12.09.06. Ok. --Bhadani13:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Please reply to my messages where I make them, as I like to keep my messages in one fine string so that they are all visible without any difficulty to any outsider. Its a part of Wikiquette. ;) --Nearly Headless Nick13:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello Bhadani. Well it has been a year since you became an Admin. You are a wonderful contributor, one of the best we have, which is proven in the contributions log, despite what anybody else or the general populace may think. Take care, Blnguyen | BLabberiNg03:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
How are you ? Well, I have just created an article yesterday. Here it is - Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Historiography. It's quite a long article and I feel that it should be put on the main page in the "Did You Know" section. I don't know much about how to do it though. I have created a lot of new articles, but really none of them really got to the DYK consideration. Can you tell me how can I go about it ? --NRS16:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I went to the article with the intention of helping but its an obvious copyvio from . I am putting it up for speedy deletion. NRS, if you are interested in recreating the article, I can work with you to help it reach DYK. Dont worry, it doesnt have to be large, just relevant. Regards -- Lost18:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
You please do as you wish. In my opinion, a copyvio should first be deleted, and then recreated without the elements of copyvio. --Bhadani18:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi bhadani, thanx for the reply. Yeah, it's an obvious copy. Pity, I didn't check the site earlier. Actually, a user had pasted the whole article on Shivaji page from where it was shifted to the Talk:Shivaji page. I have mentioned it on the article discussion page as well as in the edit summary when I created the article. So I thought the article is authentic. Well, anyway, I would like to have one article atleast to the DYK level. You know, I've created quite a few articles, but I wasn't aware of the DYK system. Thanx again. While creating a new article, I will get back to you.
For sticking up for the little man in the discussion above. I felt like I saw an actual Indian(as in Indian administrator) for the first time.BakamanBakatalk02:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I have no comments to offer. However, I would like to state that I am an Indian first, and everything comes after this, including my being a wikipedian or my being a Hindu or being an idiot to have wasted 1000s of hours doing edits here. In case, some of the elements in wikipedia fail to respect India as a nation, they are higly mis-informed about India. Having said this, I would like to repeat: I am here with a mission: to contribute to realize the objectives of the dream of Jimbo Wales (the founder and the president of the Wikimedia Foundation) and his team. I also denounce the use of wikipedia by certain elements to misuse the privilege to edit wikipedia to launch campaign of hate against India and the Indians. --Bhadani02:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I understand your feelings. However, I am not sure of the extent of the fact that many non-Indians continue to treat Indians as their "subjects" and "slaves", and many Indians continue to be infatuated with the idea of worshipping the "sahibs" and the "mem-sahibs". Personally, I have found that wikipedians by and large are nice people otherwise I would not have continued here for last 18 months despite several sad incidents involving Indians and India. --Bhadani02:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
It's good to see...although I've seen DaGizza also support Hindus in the past and supporting the removal of fascism tags on the BJP and RSS. I've kind of lost contact with them in recent times but Rama's Arrow and Srikeit also seemed like very good and influential Indian users who stuck up for the Indians. Nobleeagle (Talk)07:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Fyb3roptik page
Hello, Bhadani. I'm just dropping by to inquire about the Fyb3roptik page. I know it was deleted, but could you give me the reason why? I don't know how it was written, but it should be written relating to a character from This Spartan Life. If you could give me the full explanation I'll work towards trying to get the page and keep it up to Misplaced Pages scratch. Thanks for your time. --Chromium02:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Kindly give me the relevant details and the links. I shall attend to the matter after few hours. In case, I find that I may have erred, I would surely offer an apology. Regards. --Bhadani02:59, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
