Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:27, 13 October 2006

Archive1 July - August 7 06' (30kB)

Archive2 August 8 - August 14 (?kB)

Archive3 August 14 - August 26 (32kB)

Archive4 August 26 -September 1 (31kB)

Archive5 September 1 - September 11 (40kB)

Archive6 September 11 - September 27 (64kB)

Archive7 September 27 - October 7 (?kB)

I give myself the authority to remove bogus warning templates from my page Bakaman _Bakatalk 04:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

===I have closed off correspondence=== with

• User:Geek1975 in response to the hate attack and his/their persistent vandalism of my user talk pages , , , and ,
• User:Holywarrior - I have nothing to do with Holywarrior anymore
• user:Zora for maligning me on a CfD using emotional blackmail and motive assignment.===Bakaman _Bakatalk 22:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Raja Yoga controversy

Dear Hinduism Project editors,

There is a controversy on the Hinduism regarding Raja Yoga. Please read the debate on the Hinduism discussion page. Your comments are requested on the Hinduism discussion page to help resolve the controversy. Thank you. HeBhagawan 15:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you know why user Swadhyayee is vandalising Hinduism article? I mean (just in case) do you know him personally? I am extremely annoyed about his allegations of sockpuppetting etc. on me just because a user RamRamji joined newly and made an edit and then never came back. I am extremely annoyed. He is another Sarvagnya. Can you help me by providing which Admins I should write to, about this allegation of sock puppetting ? --Apandey 15:57, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Have I been uncivil at any single place in the article or on the talk page. If you believe any one instance is incivil, I will acknowledge it because I believe you are having a NPOV here and would remain fair. Whether these should be in the article or not is a different question but whatever is there, it has to be correct. Everyone except him is saying the same thing. Even other individual articles are also claiming the same. Anyway alleging me for sockpupettng is something I will not tolerate. If you can not(do not wish to) provide the names of good/ relevant admins, it is fine. I will try to search myself. Thanks. --Apandey 16:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Bakasuprman,

I am insisting as I feel I am right. To me Raj Yoga is physical and mental process to meditate whereas Jnan, Bhakti and Karma as it seems to me are sciences. The end result of Raj Yog is attaining Jnan. My fight is supplementary to the goals of HeBhagawan and A.Pandey. I simply could not bear the bullying language of A.Pandey. Some composure and reading would have made them accept my view point or alternatively their logical arguments (except it is in Patanjali Yogsutra) would have benefited me with some additional knowledge. How am I to give citations from Geeta? Do I give them all Geeta available on internet? Should a person writing or editing article on Geeta, not have fundamental knowledge of doctrines of Geeta? A.Pandey is trying to bullying as he feels himself senior to me. I have to bear with this teething problems.Swadhyayee 16:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Swadhyayee"

AfD

Your presence is requested at the Articles for Deletion: Fowler Middle School entry - someone wants to know why you voted keep. Kat, Queen of Typos 18:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Small Help

Can you tell me how to include talk/contrib in signatures. Like for you it comes as Bakaman bakatalk. I wanted my signature to appear like Apandey(talk|contribs) or something similar. Can you help please ? Thanks. --Apandey 19:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for responding but it will not help. What I am trying to say is that my current signature is Apandey (in the text box of preferences), which is expanded to become Apandey when I sign. So what should I put in the text box of preferences to get the desired effect. If I put what I see in the source of my talk page (as per your edits), I will not get the desired output. Can you please send me the exact text of your signature edit box in preferences. I hope I will be able to deduce it from there. Many thanks. --Apandey 21:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again. If I copy paste the code, it will look like this. ]</sup></font>_]]] 21:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Immigration

What is wrong with you? Why are you being so difficult about this? You went on a rampage adding the Indian American cat randomly to anyone who ever spent any time here. Unless you immigrate here, rather than living here on a visa clearly deemed temporary, you do not qualify to be an Indian-American unless you self-identify as one. That is what is stated on the Indian American page. Note that immigration from this point of view does not mean simply living here, but doing the paperwork to indicate a permanent move. That is why visas are relevant, in the absence of self-identification. Is that clear? I cannot understand why you persist in labeling this WP:OR. It would help the rest of us if you didnt try and keep on misapplying WP policy once it has been pointed out to you how you are wrong. Hornplease 22:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Do not overuse the word 'useless'. You use it far to often, and I suggest that you attempt to find a word that more accurately fits the sense in which you use it, namely "something I did not read". About 'rest of us' I mean anyone who actually has an encyclopaedia to write.

In this case in particular, I once again urge you read the immigration page. You can be a professor at Columbia while being on a short-term visa. Many, many people are. The immigration page says very, very clearly in the second sentence - and I reproduce it here to save you the obviously great trouble of actually going there - "Immigration implies long-term permanent residence by the immigrants". So unless you are a permanent resident, with a green card, or a citizen, you have not immigrated to the US. Is that clear? 'Domiciled' is not the word mentioned here, and nor is it mentioned anywhere. And I recommend that you had best care what other people on WP think of you, because this is a collaborative community, and it can be very frustrating if people lose trust in you and start viewing every edit you make as POV-pushing.Hornplease 23:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, I mentioned an 'MBA' in the Naveen Andrews edit summary as an obvious analogy for another reason why someone would come here, for work-related reasons, temporarily, and for the same period Andrews has been here so far. If you failed to understand that point, I apologise. I should have realised that you would be reading it irritably and made it simpler. Hornplease 23:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't think that I havent observed this very carefully. Ragib and the other people involved in Bengal Wikiproject have taken the decision to trust you, and your little DYK project must have given them the impression that you're worth the investment. I personally admire your stamina, but think that your edits have shown a willingness to re-orient citations to serve whatever direction you wish an article to take too often. That in itself would not be a problem, if you werent so incredibly combative at the same time - something which I notice you carefully avoid when talking to other admins interested in India or Bengal. Fascinating. And where have I voted delete on avery Hindu-related AfD? I voted keep on Hindu Unity, I think, the second time it came up, and on many, many others. I voted delete on all religion-and-occupation cats, not just Hindu ones, and made the same argument on them all. Once again, you have chosen to be combative when it was unnecessary. Hornplease 23:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

My objections arent to you removing citations that arent wp:rs. its that you, repeatedly, mischaracterise and misrepresent wp:rs sources. Over here, similarly, you are missing the point; you do this with such regularity that one is forced to assume you do it deliberately. While they are not tourists, they are not immigrants unless they are on an immigrant visa, which should be cited. Immigrants shows inclination to settle, a long-term permanent residency, as is explained on the appropriate page. This does not apply in this case. Please accept that and move on to your next little McCarthyesque war on the Marxists under every bush.Hornplease 23:42, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, about the CfD, my only contribution was to point out the joint notability criterion. That was all, and to suggest that you keep it in mind. Hornplease 23:42, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On 8 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jyoti Prasad Agarwala, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Misrepresenting sources

Please do not misrepresent sources, as you did on Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. The source stated that "Interestingly, the RSS has been criticised by secular Indians for its Hindu supremacist philosophy and its frequent campaign against other religions, particularly Islam and Christianity." You changed it to "Indians that describe themselves as "]" criticize the RSS for its "Hindu supremacist philisophy" and campaigns against other religions in India." BhaiSaab 01:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

how's about you define secular? I think I'm pretty secular myself, or does being a Hindu automatically disqualify me from being secular.01:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes let's start doing our own original research on all of the Misplaced Pages articles and link secular to pseudo-secular in each instance "secular" occurs. BhaiSaab 01:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

No comment...lol. BhaiSaab 02:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Re Mangal kavya

Good read. I will try to add some information tomorrow but tonight I am so tired I'm almost dead. lol... take care man, you rock! --Antorjal 02:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks and congrats! My nomination for DYK was on an impulse. I had not planned anything. I was reading the page and thought let me put it in. -- P.K.Niyogi 05:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Yeah man. Wikibreak. Busy with my classes/papers. Will b back as soon as I can.Shiva's Trident 12:21, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Sarcasm

Sarcasm is incivil, let alone unfriendly. It's not just my opinion, but also Misplaced Pages policy. Thank you. Mar de Sin 15:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you so much ror the reference.

Thank you so much for the reference to understand the otherside in Raj Yoga controversy. You are a real boon.Swadhyayee 01:20, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Udit Raj

Just wanted to point out that the Udit Raj is being POV'ized on a sporadic basis by single-purpose editor User:Muggle1982. I have tried to fix it but he will undoubtable revert like this again. Could you put the article in your watchlist and monitor it for POV/vandalism etc? I have it on my list but am rather swamped with editing several articles.Hkelkar 08:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

If he persists, we can file a joint RfA against him as I have tried to dialogue with him in his talk page but he refuses to respond.Hkelkar 08:55, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Urgent! regarding Udit Raj

That Muggle guy started a mediation cabal POV-izing the Udit Raj stuff on Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-10 Udit Raj.Please contribute your side to the page unless mediators get the wrong idea.Hkelkar 10:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

He violated 3rr and POV-ized the article again. He has also been blanking his talk page of warnings. I have reported him on the 3rr noticeboard but can;t revert any more.Hkelkar 02:32, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Re Jana Gana Mana

I think the Marathi and Kannada speakers are at if from a previous fight... maybe Belgaum? I'm not sure, but nothing was said on the Jana Gana Mana page to incite such strife ;). Take care. --Antorjal 13:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

204.184.18.230

Vandalising Hinduism with slang. See his 1st edit of the day. Can you block him? Swadhyayee 16:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

muggle

Bakaman, kindly stop repeatedly undoing other users' edits to the Udit Raj page. You have already reverted pages over three times, and after doing that, you have the nerve to post a warning on *my* talk page. Chill it. I added several sources and verifiable information to the Udit Raj page. If you want to contest it, talk to me first, instead of repeatedly undoing the edits.

Muggle1982

AfD Nomination: Sabita Banerjee

--TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

History of Pakistan

Please keep that article on your watchlist. I tried making some changes and was reverted. Apparently, some editors believe Pakistan was an independent country prior to 1947 and the spread of migrants from the IVC was an example of Pakistan having control and influence over India. Users try to make it seem like the Indus Valley Civilization was a Pakistani land which was far superior to a Gangetic Civilization which represented India. Wierd that we call ourselves Indians when the Indus Valley was a superior Pakistani civilization that had control over our lands. It also used to state something along the lines of "Ancient Pakistan as an Independent Country did..." when there was no such thing as Ancient Pakistan as an independent country. I discussed this with AfghanHistorian who agreed with my views. The so-called nation of "Ancient Pakistan" should be referred to as the Punjab region or you can say that the IVC lies in what is present day Pakistan and then refrain from mentioning either India or Pakistan. Thanks. Nobleeagle 07:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

RfB With A Smile :)

Sock Puppet ?

Hi, I hope you are aware that Swadhyayee has taken the Hinduism page to medation . In one of the comments on that page , he has alleged all of us (all eight people who voted against him on Raja Yoga Controversy) of sock puppetry in the form of possible friendship etc. to support each other for voting and so on. I just wanted to bring that to your attention. Please express your views (if you desire so) on that page. Thanks. --Apandey 19:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Sare Jahan Se Accha

That could quite be possible, but I wonder what's the history behind the different versions. There used to be a Hindi version on the page, but Sarvagnya deleted it, I'm not sure why. It was pretty much the same as the Urdu version. Could you please give me a link to the Hindi version that you mentioned? Thanks. Mar de Sin 19:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Now I see that there was a revert war and that the Devanagari lyrics are back. I do notice several differences, notably nihaan vs. jahaan and mahram vs. marham. Do you know if these are these mistakes or are they different versions? Thanks. Mar de Sin 23:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I have done as you requested. My argument nevertheless remains weak, as there is so little evidence that says directly that SJSA is considered a national song of India, or that even Hindi speakers sing it, both of course which I'm pretty sure are true. If you have evidence for either point, could you provided it on the talk page? I found a BBC link in Hindi on the topic , but as I can't understand Hindi fully, I cannot comprehend this article. Does it help our argument in any way? Thanks. Mar de Sin 19:40, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Narendra Modi

Watch it for vandalism and BLP violations from TerryJ-Ho.Hkelkar 00:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Incivility

Your edit comment was incivil. I dont want to get into it, but please read the FOSA article on WP for a reference that demonstrates that the 'death to india' placards were not organised by FOSA, and a link to a specific repudiation. A little reading might help. Best to delete the reference entirely, if it makes you unhappy. Hornplease 00:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks Balasuprman for your timely comments to mediation committee talk page.Swadhyayee 01:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Userpage fixin'

Namashkār Bakasupram-Dā. Thanks for jazzing up my userpage! HeBhagawan 02:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Baudhayana and the Pythagorean Theorem

Hi,

Can you help me with the question at Talk:Baudhayana? Thanks.

Happy Diwali

Happy Diwali. Siddiqui 12:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Non-English citations

Namaskar and Happy Diwali.I request ur advice about following issues-

Belgaum_border_dispute is again facing pushing of Karnataka POV with numerous sockpuppets trying to restrict my edits by 3RR rule.My question is Kannada editors are taking help of a fanatic newspaper which endorses K'taka POV.unfortunately I dont have any such English source that will help me to balance the article by Maharashtra POV.Kannada editors are not allowing Marathi citations by demanding translation as per wiki policies.So the question is-Do I have to provide word-to-word translation of any Marathi article/source or only of the quotes/info I intend to use? I dont know where to ask the question,I request u help me on this issue.

Thanks, Mahawiki 14:51, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Categorisation

(12/3/1) is strong consensus to keep. The keep votes were unconditional as well. BLP would have figured at least into the scope of the category, and by the closing admin, meaning its already been taken care of. Your interpretation of how the overwhelming consensus to keep was made is irrelevant.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:26, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Be that as it may, it's not OR to point out (a) what consensus is and (b) to note that BLP is very clear on the subject of categorisation. Your repeated attempts to violate it are not acceptable. Hornplease 21:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

No I think it is OR to twist consensus and BLP to your uses, and somehow try to push your interpretation of BLP as law. Note: I actually dont care what you think is acceptable, since consensus is totally against you, and Akash (the only person who may have agreed with you) changed his vote.Bakaman _Bakatalk 21:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Quoting directly from wp:blp under categorisation, it is required that :

• The subject publicly self-identifies with the belief or preference in question
• The subject's beliefs or sexual preferences are relevant to the subject's notable activities or public life

As you can see, this isnt OR. It's just policy. Find a fight you can win. Hornplease 21:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)