Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:40, 20 October 2006

Headline text

Archives
1 2

Regarding Koenraad Elst

I am trying to contact him and have contacted some of his associates to that effect. Please suspend discussion on this topic and monitor the users who are trying to defame him until I can get him to respond, either directly or through me. If you are as non-partisan on this issue as you imply then you should have no trouble providing the benefit of the doubt. Thanks.Netaji 23:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Discussion can be suspended, and I will monitor the use of his name. Please, however, it would be best if when you approached Dr. Elst or his associates, you did not say that he was being 'defamed', but stated the problem as blandly as possible. Misplaced Pages does not need legal problems. Hornplease 23:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

199.64.0.252

I've looked a bit at this user's contribution history, and there does seem to be some long-term trouble -- however, there are also a few constructive edits, which suggests perhaps multiple people are using the IP address. There haven't been any edits for the past 1/2h, but I'll keep an eye on it. You can also report issues directly to admins on this page: WP:AIV, and they'll be able to look at it right away. Cheers, Marysunshine 23:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Problems

Give me a good reason for why you follow me around on Misplaced Pages and try to undo every edit I makeBakaman%% 15:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Ethnic Cleansing of kashmiri Pandits

If you are serious about accurate representation of Kashmiri Pandits then assist me in improving the s--tty article on the topic, as well as on Terrorism in Kashmir.Netaji 20:15, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Savarkar

Hi - I appreciate your advice. Do review the article and give your comments - I haven't finished adding refs. You don't have to fight trolls/POV warriors by yourself at all times - they'll be defeated at one time or the other. Don't make it personal. Rama's arrow 16:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

There will always be trolls, but our main purpose is to build an encyclopedia. Rama's arrow 16:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't vandalize Calif Textbook article

Don't spam links to irrelevant garbage sites or dead links or I'll report you.Netaji 18:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Holywarrior has not edited the page in recent history. He has only ranted in the talk page. You have added a bunch of links that lead to dead web pages. Plz check them. I will assume good faith on your part that thiswas unintentional and am removing the blatantvandal tag. ok? Check your links for dead pages.Netaji 01:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll have a look. Probably the result of a revert or re-inserting references following the tabbed browsing bug deleting the end of an edit. I havent inserted any new references in that article for ages. Hornplease 02:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Please discuss chowk.com article edits

Please discuss your recent revert/edit in the talk page:

here Thanks. Netaji 00:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Basic Structure

I am afraid your understanding of the Minerva Mills case is in error.

1. Article 368(4) of the Constitution was itself inserted into the Constitution by s.55 of the Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, which states 55. Amendment of article 368.- In article 368 of the Constitution, after clause (3), the following clauses shall be inserted, namely:-

"(4) No amendment of this Constitution (including the provisions of Part III) made or purporting to have been made under this article whether before or after the commencement of section 55 of the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976] shall be called in question in any court on any ground.

(5) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that there shall be no limitation whatever on the constituent power of Parliament to amend by way of addition, variation or repeal the provisions of this Constitution under this article.".

2. Therefore, although you have said that a part of the Constitution itself can violate the Basic Structure of the Constitution, this is incorrect. 3. It is the Amendment Act which violated the Basic Structure doctrine. 4. Secondly, Minerva Mills has nothing to do with President's Rule. It is do with nationalisation of Mills without compensation (hence Article 31-C of the Constitution).

I have changed it back and made it clearer. If you have a problem with this please state it on the Talk Page for the Basic Structure Article.

If you wish to read the Minerva Mills case, you can do so on judis.nic.in

In relation to the Basic Structure, it is best not to trust Seervai as he was always opposed to it although it is now recognised as the Law in India.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.176.79.94 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 31 Jul 2006 (UTC)

2002 Gujarat violence

Please see my proposal at Talk:2002 Gujarat violence#Proposal for informal mediation from Bcorr. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 20:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Wendy Doniger

I would like to help you, but I'm not sure that I can. There seems to be a limited number of Misplaced Pages editors with academic training or standards, and a large number of folks from various pressure groups who insist on enshrining their POV in Misplaced Pages. To a disproportionate degree. We seem to have more than our share of Hindutva.

Unfortunately, my academic training is in Polynesia and I've devoted most of my self-teaching time, of late, to early Islamic history and ancient Persia. I'm not up to date on Wendy Doniger; I haven't read any of her books.

Plus, I'm having a hard time finding a balance on Misplaced Pages, between caring so much that I lose my temper and exhaust myself, and not doing anything at all. It's hard to believe that the sane editors will eventually wear down the idjits. It seems that the project amounts to educating the whole of net-connected humanity. As a Buddhist, I swear to save all beings. It's possible that this is one way of keeping the Boddhisatva's vows, but it's a hard hard path. Zora 07:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

Several users have expressed concern over my block nomination of several college a cappella groups. I would like to apologize for causing a medium-sized ruckus on the AFD page and thereby wasting the time of several excellent contributors. I see now that this was an ill choice for a block nomination. I'll be relisting most of the articles individually as soon as I can double check the list.

In addition, I would like to apologize to you personally for my unecessarily crass and apparently pointless reply to your comment. Again, please accept my apologies. savidan 17:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your note of apology, its rare to encounter that sort of politeness on WP. For what its worth, I think I can understand your motivation here a little. I looked at your userpage; I too for my sins have to spend a great deal of time on the sort of campus where at certain times of year a million a capella groups spring out of the ancient woodwork to sing last year's hits at unwary passers-by. Fall is coming, and every gracious colonnade and awe-inspiring staircase will be crowded with a bunch of kids in tuxedos harmonising happily at me. I dread it. Hornplease 05:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with my alleged personal distaste for a cappella and more to do with musical groups using Misplaced Pages for self-promotion. Perhaps I should propose a new notability guideline: "If no one who isn't a member of your organization would be motivated to (or able to) create an article about it, it's not notable." I think I'll just focus on deleting in-line links to where you can buy their albums for now. savidan 05:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

A useful mental guideline, but I think a little too subjective to be actual policy. Still, I'll keep it in mind. Hornplease 05:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Mahesh Pathak

Well since he is now not the collector of the city, the article can be deleted. But a collector's role is important, and not a minor one. The office of the collector does appear in the papers many a time, so they are notable while in office. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Mani Shankar Aiyar

Hi just noticed you edit on Aiyar.Firstly his own Lok Sabha entry shows his address as Sainik Farm.The ntry is there in the article.The reference to Sheila Dixit came from SUNDAY magazine and Press Council adjudication against him.The willing slave bit was in Rajat Sharma's TV programme Aap Ki adalat. and the bit about Chidambaram was his utterance in Karan Thap

Here is another link http://www.tribuneindia.com/2000/20001123/nation.htm#4

Regards(Vr 07:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

Kirit Shelat

Only persons of Indian Administrative service can become Secretary, Energy Department. He may not have been a direct IAS recruit. He would have been conferred IAS Doctor Bruno 15:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I am fairly sure secretary of the Gujarat energy dept has to be IAS. Certainly the secy of the Bengal energy dept is not. Hornplease 07:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you explain it a bit _Doctor Bruno_/_{E Mail} 12:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

vandalism

Please do not remove content from Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. On the Witzel page, my comments were not even aimed at Witzel , , I was attacking the theory. I will report you unless you reinstate my comments.Bakaman _Bakatalk 16:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I think its quite clear what its aimed at. Please read WP:BLP. If you wish to 'report' me, feel free. I think a discussion of the applicability of this new policy is in order anyway.

Also, please refrain from misusing vandalism templates.

Hornplease 07:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Its aimed at "western scholarship". If you wish to misrepresent my comments and then lie, thats your problem.Bakaman _Bakatalk 16:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It is fairly clear from the context that you are referring to a particular western scholar, namely the one you are discussing. Please realise that I do not need to 'lie' about this, as the records of the page are publicly available, and linked above. If you do not learn not to be unduly aggressive nobody on this project will take you seriously. Hornplease 23:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

No actually I never aimed it that way. FundyWatching will also make nobody on this project take you seriously.Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you not read what I said after you used that term on the page you link to above? I have no idea what it means, and neither, I'm sure, does anyone else. Do try and modify your words based on the feedback you receive, if you do indeed read that feedback and understand it.

Further, if you never meant it that way, I am glad, and since I continue to assume good faith about your actions, I believe you. However, it sounds like you did, and certainly most people proficient in the language reading that will believe that you did. Hence I think it's still covered by WP:BLP. Do take it elsewhere for an opinion if you disagree. Frankly, I just want talk pages to be a bit more WP:CIVIL and if WP:BLP will help enforce that, I'll enforce BLP, however little I agree with it.

Hornplease 05:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Mani Shankar Aiyar

Thanks for your note.I was going to do as you suggesyed but am confronted with a familiar problem:Ashprakash who is either Aiyar's relative or a Tamil diehard(I speak as an Aiyar Tamil myself) is upto his tricks again.I very nearly got into an edit war with him as he believed that Aiyar was one of the best things to happen to Tamils despite his conduct which goes against every grain of Tamil decency I know and kept on vandlising by including terms like Brilliant and well eductaed and deleting even the referenced negative bits.You can see the exchenges I had with him.He has deleted the entire controversies section.As you are an administrator I should like you to look into this please.Thanks(Vr 06:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC))

I'm not an admin, but I'll see what I can do. Hornplease 07:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Indian nationalism

you might want to check the indian nationalism page...Kennethtennyson 02:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I strongly suggest that you double-check any source cited by Shiva's Trident/Subhash bose/Netaji or whatever name he's going by these days.

He has a history of citing sources that don't actually verify his statements.

In fact, I would recommend that you demand page numbers so that you don't waste your time reading the whole book.

Remember, "the obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it."

In other words, you have one of Misplaced Pages's three official content-guiding policies on your side, so feel free to ignore whatever bullshit accusations of vandalism Shiva's Trident and his meatpuppets may throw at you.

Regards,

CiteCop 13:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply

I believe you said that he can be cited with qualification. Bear in mind that he (Elst) is notable enough from the point of view of wikipedia to have a wikipedia article on him. He can be quoted with qualification.Shiva's Trident 08:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

First, an article on WP doesnt mean in itself that he is a reliable source. David Irving has an article.

Second, even if he is cited, which I am coming to doubt having read some of his stuff since the discussion, at most he can be cited with qualification in articles specifically about Hindutva, Hindu nationalism, etc etc, which is self-professed area of expertise, and as a representative of a viewpoint that some believe is unfairly excluded from mainstream academia. An article on Indian nationalism has to have more mainstream citations, especially since we shouldnt have any major POV issues there. (I still dont understand why you need to cite him at all; please reconsider the entire drift of that article.) Hornplease

David Irving is frequently cited with qualification in articles about Holocaust Denial (Irving is a holocaust denier). As far as Indian nationalism is concerned, You may have a point abt citing him. It's just that he is the best ref I couldfind regarding the connotations of Nationalism (something that any well-educated Indian can anecdotally confirm).

I find it a bit offensive that you choose to attack Indians on Indian Nationalism, but don;t extend the same treatment on Pakistani nationalism.Shiva's Trident 08:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

First of all, the point I was making about Irving - who I know is a holocaust denier, thanks, that was the point - was that he would be cited in a holocause denial article, or even a holocaust article, but not (perhaps unfortunately, as his other work on Nazism was done with access to archives since unread) in more general articles about WWII.

As you say, about the connotations of nationalism, I couldnt say for certain. I will just say that if you cant find a ref that seems justifiable, set it aside, make a note, keep looking, and reintroduce the text when you find one. WP isnt going anywhere.

Finally, I didnt even know that Pakistani nationalism existed. I know about this article because I was around when Nirav created it last year and set it aside for cleaning up when I had time. The Pakistan article seems to have appeared last week. I think its a little unfair for you to be offended under those circs, dont you think? Hornplease 08:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Specially since the Pakistani Nationalism article should, in my opinion, be effectively replaced with a redirect to Two Nation Theory.Hornplease 08:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Church of South India

The source is somewhat shady, but it does deal with the church of south India . The COSI also has bishops. I'm reinstating the info. Bakaman _Bakatalk 15:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Hornplease/monobook.js

Please fix your monobook.js file. It's currently showing up in Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion. I suspect it may have something to do with the string "db-" in it. --  Netsnipe  ►  17:31, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I concur, I came here to say that myself --- Deville (Talk) 23:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually I think one of your codes are the soure of the problem. Please see this diff, many thanks. --WinHunter 06:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

re User:Hornplease/monobook.js

This page is appearing in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion, although there's no speedy tag or category on the page. Do you want it deleted, or what? You can just blank it if you want. Herostratus 05:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Fixing this now. Thanks, and apologies. Hornplease 08:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism in Robert Vadra

Please refrain from removing content from Misplaced Pages, as you did to Robert Vadra. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Enjoy the Boston Tea Party and not the Vandals' Revelry. I assume you are not a sock puppet of the Indian National Congress. ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 17:02, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Do the policies say that people like Osama Bin Laden should not be exposed (you read it SLANDERED)? ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 18:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I dont believe I have ever edited the Osama bin Laden article. You'd have to take it up with the editors. I merely suggest you follow policy as laid down following much discussion. Hornplease 18:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I have struck out the bogus vandal warning. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Will you pl. see the India Today article?

Will you pl. see the copy-pasted article of India Today on talk pages of Swadhyay Parivar along with my comments?

Swadhyayee 12:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Mani Shanker Iyer

The contents below 'Controversies' are of hatred nature and it is not suitable for the biography of a living person in Wiki.

Rants

"POinting us to pages that talk abt mathematics in India doesnt answer the point that none of these mathematicians did work that was specifically Hindu, which is the only way in which this cat can be kept as per policy. Nobody in this debate has answered that point. Unless someone does, this cat must be deleted. Hornplease 06:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)"

They called the people "Hindu mathematicians". Good job not reading the source.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Errr.. that the pages merely popped up as a result of a google search for the phrase doesnt mean that they support the arguments that were being raised, namely mathematicians doing work that was specifically Hindu. Could you think about that for a moment, please? Thanks. Hornplease 07:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Its merely mathematicians that are Hindu. Of course not reading the sources and asking questions where you will dispute any answer even if its verified or even (gasp!) correct doesnt make you look smart. Nobody cares for academic jargon, its about common sense. They're mathematicians, theyre Hindu, sources back it up. Done.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:50, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Not done, I'm afraid, whatever your sadly overestimated 'common sense' might tell you. Nobody doubts that they were Hindu. However, I suggest you now recuse yourself from the discussion, since in spite of being told about thirty times, you still haven't understood that that is insufficient for the cat to exist, as per policy. Hornplease 13:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

"per policy. per policy" How about cite something? How about "academically" back it up with "policy"? or is this another WP:OR stunt.Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:51, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Baka, you're skating on perilously thin ice in terms of civility here. You dont want to go through it, I'm sure, so get a hold of yourself. About policy, since you seem to not have found it in spite o the fact that its liberally quoted across the discussion, here it is:

• 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.

For further reference: Have fun. And please, tone down the antagonism. I know I should expect no better from you, but someone else might. Hornplease 06:53, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

incivility

Please regard WP:Civil and WP:NPA regading your last post to my talk page. Thanks.Hkelkar 22:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't Nehru a Kashmiri Pandit? That makes him Hindu by default. I did not see any coherent arguments to suggest his athiesm (just one section in the talk page that said "search google"; I did and found no credible evidence to suggest a declaration of athiesm).I did not see any argunemts in the talk page archive either.Care to point me in the direction of any talk page argument or debate to that effect?Hkelkar 02:27, 17 September 2006 (U

Rajendra Prasad

Actually it was nor me who inserted it-it had been there long before I visited teh article.But I restored it after Atticus had deleted it as 1.it is stated in teh Govt of India release on him'2.there are instances of other personalities whose offspring if they merit an article have been alluded to in the text eg.Vijay laxme pandit whose daughter Nayantara merits an article,my fellow tamil(and Iyer)Dr.Radhakrishnan whose son Gopal merits an article.I am restoring it but should you still feel it does not have to bet there please let me know.Regards(Vr 06:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC))

Read this

After fighting any sort of Nehruvian/Gandhian/PSecular thinking on wiki, check this funny comment. Reply on my tlak page with your responseBakaman _Bakatalk 00:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Pratap and Akbar

Akbar and the Second Islamic Empire were perceived as colonialist foreigners.Akbar was a liberal foreign emperor. What's the problem here?Hkelkar

Just because some Rajput mercenaries served under Akbar is no sign of general perception. Bear in mind that many Scots served as mercenaries under the English during the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314.However, the Scotts still perceived the English as foreigners (some still do).Hkelkar 02:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Responded to your latest post in my talk page

Look at it.Hkelkar 03:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Rollback

Please do not use the rollback button for content disputes, as you did on Francois Gautier. Thanks, Mak (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Is that policy? I havent been able to find a specific reference for that. I've often wished or two buttons on that thing, one which makes you ask for an edit summary, and one that doesnt.Hornplease 22:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if there's a specific policy, but I've seen it suggested a number of places including here. It can also contribute to revert-wars (you know about the WP:3RR right?), and is generally not conducive to collegial editing. You might be interested in looking at WP:1RR, which I try to keep myself to, except in cases of blatant vandalism, and I find that it lowers stress in various editing situations. Thanks, Mak (talk) 22:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your promptness. I have read it with great care, and it's a policy I tend to follow. I used the rollback feature after leaving a message for the last editor on his talk page that wasnt responded to. I usually leave messages on talk pages instead of reverting immediately. If there's no response, I revert, sometimes using rollback, on the assumption that anything that encourages people to check the talk page is a good thing. You probably do good work ensuring that people dont get out of hand, but I've been around for a couple of years now, and I think I heard someone mention WP:3RR at some point. Always good to be reminded, though, in case one forgets. Hornplease 22:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I didn't check, I assumed you had heard of 3RR, but just wanted to make sure. Thanks for using talk pages, I've just decided to "crack down" on such roll-back use, since I think it's a small thing that people can easily fix that doesn't help the community. Clearly, I need to check the situation a little better in the future. Cheers, Mak (talk) 22:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, I saw that the article's talk page was a redlink, so I made wrong assumptions that no contact had been attempted. Sorry. Mak (talk) 22:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Backward Castes

I see that you recently edited Backward Castes. I previously stumbled across this article while on NPOV patrol. After doing a little research, I concluded that Backward Castes was the same topic as Other Backward Class. However, I don't know enough about India to be certain. You seem to be pretty knowledgable in this area; can you confirm whether these two articles are on the same subject? If so, I think the articles ought to be merged. Thanks -Kubigula (ave) 02:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Category:Jewish mathematicians

Hi. You may wish to check the diffs before posting accusations No rollback; rather a correction to an edit based on a careful reading of Misplaced Pages:Categorization of people. Thank you. -- Avi 02:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I am giving you some time to explain yourself again , wow, where did you learn to talk like that ??? from the deadline man ???

Since you like doing the deadline routine I could'nt think of a better title. Anyways what's to explain ?? ?? ?? ?? Got a few citations, removed sentences that the article could have done without (and which had a citations needed tag to 'em) that's about it.

Best Regards I'm sure. Freedom skies 10:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

And about removing the citations needed from the Durant thing, just try , you should come across a mess of Indian sites that echo the nationonalist sentiment, guess Indians just loved what the guy had to say after all, huh ??

Freedom skies 10:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary

I'm afraid that you have misunderstood the situation. The editor was seeking to change the character of the category. It is my considered opinion, and that of others whom I have consulted, that his proposed change violates WP:V and WP:NPOV. If someone is verifiably Jewish, editors have a right to say so and it would violate WP:NPOV to deny editors that right. No guidelines can override WP:V and WP:NPOV. Some have argued that WP:BLP restricts the use of Jewish categories for living people, though this is a misconception (Judaism is an ethnic category), but of course this does not apply to non-living people. Of course, I fully accept his and your good faith, and I hope that you will accept mine.--Brownlee 14:10, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

F.Gautier

Its changed so as to not reflect OR or motive assignment, but taking into account why the French guy has written so much on India.Bakaman _Bakatalk 00:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Re:Nehru

Hi Hornplease - thanks for the input. Do please pitch into its FA Drive. You can leave comments at Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Jawaharlal Nehru. Rama's arrow 22:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Forced conversion

Hi. You removed two small sections from the above article, and I'd like to discuss that with you. Will you please join me at talk:Forced conversion? --Uncle Ed 20:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Rahul Gandhi

You are deleting my edits continuously. I want to ask you 2 questions 1)How do you attribute scuh a his=gh rise in politics to a man who has no great education,no oratory skills and above all\he has not stayed in india during the formative years of ones personality. IS IT NOT OUR duty to make the children who read this article know that it is only due to GANDHI surname. 2)Look it from a perspective of person in india.(I dont know where you are from) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nithyanandkota (talk • contribs) 19:34, 2 Oct 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary continued

Judaism is an ethnic category as well as a religious one. No discussion on AfD or CfD can override WP:V, WP:NOR or WP:NPOV, which are fundamental policies of Misplaced Pages. You needn't worry about repeat nominations for deletion by people who object to the maintenance of these fundamental principles; anybody who tries that would be guilty of violating WP:POINT.--Brownlee 11:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Santosh

You had prodded the Santosh article. I have made it a dab article now. Could you please take a look and check if it is okay to stay? Please feel to prod it back if you feel otherwise. - Ganeshk (talk) 04:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

salman rushdie

i reverted your last edit to this article. the satanic verses controversy is covered in depth in the article about the book, so i tried (repeatedly) to keep the section fairly basic in this article. you will see if you look at some of the older discussion bits. also i think there were changes in several sections that you reverted, because you did not like the changes in one section.trueblood 20:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Please see the talk page of the article, where this concern should properly have been addressed. The older discussion bits are inconclusive, and do not justify your changes.Hornplease 20:54, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Useless rant

"The phrase may refer to someone born in the United States of Indian descent or to someone who has immigrated to the United States from the Republic of India." - Its kind of hard to be a professor at Columbia if you're not domiciled in America. I said its OR because there was no talk of an mba on naveen andrews and no hint of "alien visa" on partha chatterjee. "Rest of us" - you and zora? Like I actually care what either of you thinks about Wikipolicy or my actions. Immigration from your POV is irrelevant in this case.Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:04, 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 rather than POVs to find and protect or push.

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)

That may explain why I have 4 DYK's, and am somehow one of the most active members on Bengal Wikiproject, WP Bangladesh and the like. By your reasoning, they would not trust a Hindutva (in Zora's words "anti-Isiamic fantasist, communal kook") user because I would only write about how Hindus are ethnically cleansed in B'desh. Somehow its like how I lost trust in you and Zora a long time ago. "Encyclopedia to write" - From someone who voted delete on every single Hindu-related afd or cfd.Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Why did you not take me up on the offer on the CfD? For any problematic mathematician after say 19th century I was willing to prove it.Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:20, 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)

Actually all the admins are perfectly aware of the POV fights I've gotten into. Combatative? When people cant cite reliable sources and instead cite Marxist/Pseudo-secular websites and Missionairy propaganda to fill their POV needs its my duty to stop them. Naveen Andrews/Chatterjee are neither tourists nor short-term visitors (especially Andrews judging by the success of the show Lost).Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:35, 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 23:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Living with a significant other and child is not an inclination to settle?Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

No it is not. Inclination to settle involves paperwork. Hornplease 23:46, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your recent creations of important events in Indian political history. Subjects such as the Bhagalpur blindings are under-represented on WP. I hope you will continue to work on them and add information as and when you can. Hornplease 00:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your appreciation.I agree that subjects such as the Bhagalpur blindings are under-represented on WP. Shyamsunder 13:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

J.Jayalalithaa

This is to record my appreciations regarding your recent edit on the article. That has made the paragraph "neutral", while still giving all the information that are sourced and cited  Doctor Bruno  01:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Togadia

I said I was working on it. Give me a few days to gather more information.Hkelkar 23:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

FOSA

FOSA is worse than White nationalists. At least WN people don;t pretend to be a "peace group". They say explicitly that they are racist anti-semites. FOSA is a terrorist cabal masquerading as a peace group. That's worse.Hkelkar 00:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Your response is revealing, and actually quite frightening. But please, read my response to both of you on Baka's talk page. . Hornplease 00:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Maybe, but still FOSA is partisan per WP:RS. Is there a good reason the majority of links from their links section are for Pakistani orgs  ? I feel that FOSA characterizing educated parents as "Hindutva activists" is pretty bad especially when a certain group of people are mired in a whole spiderweb of communism, Islamic fundamentalism, and secularist cabals . What's more frightening is giving this group of people a legitimate voice in an encyclopedia.Bakaman _Bakatalk 00:41, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Dont, then. Delete the mention in the Modi page.

About them characterising parents as activists, the link you sent me to on their webpage merely cites as opponents the Vedic Foundation (VF) and the Hindu Education Foundation (HEF), who dont sound entirely unrelated to Hindutva. But maybe thats just me, and you're right. The second link, to a HVK site, fails to mention any links to Islamic terrorism. Whatever. Hornplease 00:49, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Politicians CFD

The only consensus was that the category stays, meaning there were no caveats like the later CFD's. It was an overwhelming keep. Only two users besides you voted delete; One was made by a troll, the other delete was from a user that thought people like lalu prasad, Nehru, and paswan should be added (none of whom are Hindu, especially not Nehru.Said users vote was an invalid reason to delete. No religion based politician cats have that caveat of "self identifying" on them.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:05, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Read WP:BLP under categorisation. Also note that the delete vote by a 'troll' may have made valid arguments. Finally, read up on what consensus means in deletion debates. Hornplease 01:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

(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)

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, or my interpretation. It's just policy. Find a fight you can win. Hornplease 21:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

In India, politics and religion go hand in hand. Also, the fact that he is a Maharaja may come into play, and verification is already found on the talk page due to his relations with Vasundhara Raje and his own coronation. I guess you assumed I didnt read WP:BLP. Congrats to losing the war. Bakaman _Bakatalk 21:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes but scope of the cat says "born as Hindus". Since he had a Hindu coronation (Nawabs dont have Hindu ceremonies), its obvious he was born a Hindu. Unless you find proof to the contrrary (meaning he converted to Islam, Xtianity, etc), he still is by law a Hindu. Therefore, he fits the guidelines of the cat. I think you are forgetting also which family he belongs to, that makes a difference. As a politician in Madhya Pradesh, religion based politics is the rule, with people like Uma Bharti and Arjun Singh using religion to get votes. In this environment, religion is notable. Bakaman _Bakatalk 21:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S. - Bakht, Naqvi, and Hussain (Shahnawaz) were added by me to the Muslim cat, not the Hindu one.Bakaman _Bakatalk 21:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I was pointing out the absurdity of your statement that he had a BJP relative as proof of his Hinduism. I think that he uses his family to get votes not his religion. (He is in the Congress, after all. Family, not religion, get it?) Be that as it may, my only point here is that wp:blp is stringent about it. The cat was written for anyone 'born Hindus', but that is insufficient per wp:blp, which was made policy after the cat was written. I have left a note for Aksi to that effect, as I do not want to change it unilaterally. WP:Bold is all very well, but I'm not that bold. Hornplease 21:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

To further clarify: I do not doubt that the Scindia family is traditionally Hindu. I say we have no citations about how Madhavrao Scindia brought up his family in particular. We need that in order to add this individual to the cat, even as it stands now.

Actually I was issued defwarn for some other article (ambedkar i think) before I created the cat, meaning this came after BLP. Look at the scope for Category:Muslim politicians , Category:Sikh politicians, Category:Jewish politicians (Actually it doesnt even have a scope) and the like. None have scopes as defined as the Hindu cat. Shaukat Aziz has nothing on there defining his religion (except the muslim politicians cat). However Madhvraoji raised his kids, Jyotiraditya had a Hindu coronation, which means he was born Hindu, which means he stays in the cat. Also, Madhvrao Scindia had a hindu death ceremony and the handing over of the pugri was done at the hanuman mandir in a Hindu ceremony, meaning he was by law a Hindu as well.Bakaman _Bakatalk 22:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Defamation warning

Please don't defame biographies of living people. Compare this with Robert Spencer, which also calls someone researcher in the intro. The intro is not the place to place defamations like this. --Bondego 21:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure you know what defamation is precisely. I presume you refer to this edit . It was an attempt at a compromise between you and twohorned. I see no reason why it is defamatory, Please read WP:BLP. Twohorned objected that Dr. Elst was not part of a professional outfit or a research team or a department, you pointed out that research does not require such a setup, I attempted to split the difference. This is not defamatory. Please do watch your words. Hornplease 22:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Amateur has negative connotations. Don't use negative connations without sources, esp. in the intro. It is also very pov, and the word cannot be properly defined. So don't use it. "If someone appears to be pushing an agenda or a biased point of view, insist on reliable third-party published sources and a clear demonstration of relevance to the person's notability." Articles like Robert Spencer also use researcher in the intro, which is comparable. --Bondego 22:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

If you feel so. convince the person you're in an edit war with, not me. I definitely dont think 'amateur' has negative connotations. On the contrary, its an accurate description of someone who doesnt do historical research for a living. (We're amateurs, you know.) Hornplease 08:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

== A strange statement -- Hello HornPlease. As you probably know, I try to maintain the acceptable minimum of honesty and impartiality on the Koenraad_Elst page, which is periodically vandalized by young hindutva supporters. User Bakaman has put quite a strange assertion about you in the talk page which sounds very much like defamation to me (although I don't really understand what he means). Just for info. Take care. TwoHorned 16:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC)