Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hkelkar (talk | contribs) at 11:26, 9 December 2006 (→[] expresses a deep seated hatred and prejudice against Hindus). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please make a header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.

When placing evidence here, please be considerate of the arbitrators and be concise. Long, rambling, or stream-of-conciousness rants are not helpful.

As such, it is extremely important that you use the prescribed format. Submitted evidence should include a link to the actual page diff; links to the page itself are not sufficient. For example, to cite the edit by Mennonot to the article Anomalous phenomenon adding a link to Hundredth Monkey use this form: .

This page is not for general discussion - for that, see talk page.

Please make a section for your evidence and add evidence only in your own section. Please limit your evidence to a maximum 1000 words and 100 diffs, a much shorter, concise presentation is more likely to be effective. Please focus on the issues raised in the complaint and answer and on diffs which illustrate behavior which relates to the issues.

If you disagree with some evidence you see here, please cite the evidence in your own section and provide counter-evidence, or an explanation of why the evidence is misleading. Do not edit within the evidence section of any other user.

Be aware that the Arbitrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent. If you are a participant in the case or a third party, please don't try to refactor the page, let the Arbitrators do it. If you object to evidence which is inserted by other participants or third parties please cite the evidence and voice your objections within your own section of the page. It is especially important to not remove evidence presented by others. If something is put in the wrong place, please leave it for the arbitrators to move.

The Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at /Workshop. /Workshop provides for comment by parties and others as well as Arbitrators. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact or remedies, Arbitrators vote at /Proposed decision. Only Arbitrators may edit /Proposed decision.

Evidence presented by Bakasuprman

TerryJ-Ho (talk · contribs) Labels Users

Here's some diffs to back it up. "fascist" and "fascist 2" and paid agent of the RSS. He also tried to mob me by posting messages on the Muslim Guild about Active hindutvavadis. He also asked USer:Nobleeagle if nobleeagle was "doing a PR for Gujarat government,Narendra Modi and Hindutva organisations". Its also funny how TerryJ-Ho (talk · contribs) uses Hindutva as an insult. Hindutva = Hindu Tattva= Being Hindu . Is being a Hindu now fascism ? ArbCom please give me an answer, I would really like to know. If there are, there are 1 billion fascists around the world.Bakaman _Bakatalk 04:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

BhaiSaab (talk · contribs) has anti-Semitic views

As User:Hkelkar is Jewish, this warrants some discussion. User:Samir (The Scope) has found at least three instances of anti-Semitic views expressed. One is where he states Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (holocaust denier) is an awesome guy on the MedCab page. The next day he decided he needed to get it into Hkelkar's head that he thinks Ahmadinejad is awesome. He also said Israel shouldn't be on a map and Israeli prosperity is a result of leeching off the US. He also called Zionists terrorists. If one looks at the pages Holocaust denial and new anti-Semitism a person could see that BhaiSaab's remarks would have been highly unfortunate anyways, and given the fact that Hkelkar is Jewish, they are downright unacceptable.Bakaman _Bakatalk 00:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Addendum - I found an interesting discussion between BhaiSaab and another Jewish user on User_talk:BhaiSaab/A6#Criticism and User_talk:Dev920/Achive2#Islam_2 . Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I have changed the links to the appropriate archives. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

BhaiSaab (talk · contribs)'s early trolling

My unfortunate run-in with this user occurred at the now notorious "Fundy Watch" Afd. At that time I was a very new editor, not knowing the rules/tricks/etc. of Misplaced Pages. After the AfD, he began to harrass all the Hindu editors (myself, Shiva's trident, and Dboy). It started when him and another user (Timothy Usher (talk · contribs) inactive on wikipedia) tried to get Dboy booked for "Spam solicitation" also . While looking for a page to stamp his POV over, he found Indian caste system. There he vandalized the section on the Muslim caste system under the canard of copyright . While I was reporting him to 3RR here, I was blocked under the canard of "Copyvio" by a solicitation from BS . Then while I was reeling from the first block in bad faith, he decided to get one of his "Fundy Watch" friends to block me. This was an expression of amazing bad faith. After that Blnguyen (talk · contribs) stepped in, and ended the nonsense. BhaiSaab and Ikonoblast (talk · contribs) (nee Holywarrior) formed a cabal against me . And an RFC was filed against me (a copy of which can be found at USer:Bakasuprman/Rfcopy), where consensus supported me against the filer of the RFC, found to have been acting in bad faith. If one refers to USer talk:Blnguyen and numerous archives, they will see the immense amount of baiting and nonsesne we had to deal with. During early august, the diifs are so numerous that its better to merely show logs of his "contributions" here and here. Bakaman _Bakatalk 22:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

TwoHorned (talk · contribs) is a problematic user

Sockpuppetry

In TwoHorned (talk · contribs) 's evidence below, he states that

Well by looking at AlexOriens contribs and TwoHorned contribs around the end of March 2006, one would see both articles solely edited the Koenraad Elst page and the respective talk page. Since he has admitted to AlexOriens being him, there is nothing to prove, TwoHorned was using a sock to edit Koenraad Elst and Talk:Koenraad Elst.

Violation of WP:NOT

Hostilities flared up at Talk:koenraad Elst. After TwoHorned decided to approach me in a sane fashion here and here I decided to work for a compromise with him. On this RfAR he attacked me on the evidence page in one of these numerous diffs trying to show I am in a group of disruptive editors. Once I confronted him on the workshop page, he stated that it was his idea for a "ceasefire". This is where Misplaced Pages is not a battleground comes in. If he had said compromise, I would probably have not made this evidence section, but no we were obviously at war, and it had to be a ceasefire. The he goes on to suggest " I don't like it too, to redisplay disputes on which we agreed. You also are writing hard sentences against me as this ArbCom case is going along, despite our "local" agreement. And I hope you don't like it too. But, well, we have to display admins under what circumstances we get here now. A case is not an easy thing." . I find it highly insulting to be treated as "collateral damage" by a user. This is the amazing lengths users go to to harass other users, they treat good-faith contributors as "collateral damage" in their POV-pushing.

Personal Attacks/Incivility and Vandalism and Lies

He has an issue with referring to users as "bozos". He accused me of hatred and also suggested that I was a sock of Hkelkar (lol other side of country)

He then started littering my page with bogus warnings (none of which were cited with diffs, which makes it vandalism of my user talk page).

After finding out I promptly remove vandalism from my userpage, he went to WP:PAIN with a shoddy case of one-sided half truths , misrepresenting diffs and accusing me of racism (I dont have personal prejudices against any religion or race). After I had responded to his spurious accusations, he found the need to try and lie some more to cover up the lies he had already made accused me of being racist ("anti-european") needless to say "european" is not a race.Bakaman _Bakatalk 04:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Hornplease (talk · contribs) is incivil and is a tendentious editor

Well Hornplease (talk · contribs) has a nice superiority complex that makes him act as if he has the authority to lord it out over editors. Each point will be backed up with diffs supporting it. I admit I have been temperamental, but being belittled by self-righteous users generally does not warrant a positive response. I have had no knowledge of WP:DE before this, nobody cared to tell me about it.

"I want"

Hornplease's I want phrases get annoying especially when editors have verifed content with the only flaw of not meeting Hornplease's POV. One may look at Talk:Jyotiraditya Madhavrao Scindia where I had provided enough proof to create a nice foundation for assertion to meet guidelines for Category:Hindu politicians because of his public, Hindu coronation ceremony.

When I provided proof of self-identification Hornplease repeated the same nonsense over and over , . His "my POV or the high-POV" stance has extended to editors Hkelkar (talk · contribs) as well, as one can see from these diffs.,implying stupidness as well.

"I'm smarter/better than you"/"I am your boss"

Another well-worn tactic of Hornplease. On his own user page he states that he doesnt listen to common sense, only pointy-headed academic arguments.

Lately, there was a discussion on Hkelkar's jewishness on SlimVirgin (talk · contribs)'s page. Hornplease made an attack on another user, an tried to imply we all were stupid because we didnt catch some "irony on SlimVirgin's part.. MAny times he has told myself and other users to "live with it", "don't lose your shirt","find a fight you can win" when he feels he is correct . He also tries to lecture Hkelkar and me here while joining with BhaiSaab (talk · contribs) for POV-pushing , . Of course saying "I've repeated myself the nth time" (if we didnt listen n times there may be a logical reason for that) implies that we have thick skulls . He told Freedom Skies (talk · contribs) to "get a blog" and tried to act as if he had the authority to lord over FreedomSkies . He told me I was "churlish" and that using the word obstinate to describe his actions made me appear vulgar. He accused Hkelkar of breing temperamental here

Also in discussion with Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington (talk · contribs) he tried lecture Nearly Headless Nick about being civil (when Nick was being perfectly civil) and pretending not to be a POV-pusher . He was strongly censured by nearly headless nick for this and his misrepresentations and POV-pushing were unmasked.

Misrepresentations/Double-standards

On Talk:Pseudo-secularism Nidhishsinghal (talk · contribs) had enough to prove that The Hindu's condemnation of the Mohammed Cartoons and upholdment (is that a word? lol) of the paintings of Naked Hindu deities was an example of pseudo-secular conduct. He misrepresented the significance of Khajuraho and when I called him out on those lies he said "the sound you hear is of me not caring" indicating his unwillingness to concede a point. Luckily for him I did not tell him to "live with it" or engage in bloating and self-righteous nonsense like he did to me on other pages. While connecting two-related pages in or on the part of Hindu editors, on Talk:Bharatiya Janata Party he tried to get away with the same thing . On the anti-Hindu Afd page, Hkelkar found proof to show the adjective was not only used by rightwing groups. Hornplease of course, did not concede the point, he reiterated his falsified beliefs here .

He also misrepresented WP:BLP for his own uses, surreptitiously leaving out the word "public" to try and further his argument . I think he was perplexed by how much of a foundation I had built for my case that he contradicted himself here] by saying "a coronation is a public ceremony". Since, its a public ceremony, JMS obviously identified with the Hindu ceremony of his ancestors. He has also violated BLP on Koenraad Elst on the indian nationalism page.

He has attacked Narendra Modi violating WP:NPOV and WP:BLP in the process. After being confronted by Nearly Headless Nick he tried to lie about sources that TerryJ-Ho misrepresented, he proceeded to try to justify himself and accused me and hkelkar of being politically motivated when Hornplease himself edits in a politically non-neutral fashion.

Accusations

After he put a POV sticker on Praveen Togadia I asked him to find sections he had issues with. He accused me of wanting to start a shouting match, he did a similar thing at Category talk:Hindu mathematicians here. He made bogus allegations of incivility here as well saying "I dont want to get into it" (dont be in it at all then.) He accused a good faith contributor (while posing as a third party) to convince the person you're in an edit war with accusing good faith Bondego (talk · contribs) of edit-warring. He accused me of being combatative and indicated his will to quit India-related articles together, because I had called him out on his lies and POV pushing. He also accused Hkelkar (falsely) of making false allegations about FOSA (an advocacy group) . He also has the funny habits of accusing me of not reading things I put in and supporting his incivil friend Zora (talk · contribs) who falsely accused me of "perpetrating massacre" and "separating the sheep from the goats".Bakaman _Bakatalk 19:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism + POV-pushing

From Hornplease's general pattern of editing it is very clear that he sympathizes with the Congress Party and CPI(M), known as the secular parties. The cases below deal with how he has tried to whitewash criticism of these parties, and attack the opposition Hindu parties in India.

Hornplease has a pattern of vandalizing things unsupportive of his POV. On the Brinda Karat page, a well-referenced criticism section was unceremoniously vandalized by Hornplease (using popups as his tool of choice) . If one looks at the page history, my well referenced were vandalized by users sympathetic to the Communists. He also subtlely tried to change the words to make the tone of the article less critical of Ms. Karat when she was sternly rebuked by the majority of sane people in India , . Brinda Karat is a major figure in the Communist Party of India (Marxist), showing his motivations.

On an article I worked on for DYK, G.T. Nanavati, was affected by Hornplease's POV-pushing as well. He used an unreliable source Countercurrents describes themselves as a progressive/alternative site (meaning they are not mainstream and that they are partisan) to attack judge Nanavati. I removed the link per WP:BLP and requested him to discuss (albeit with some Bad humor) . He lies about countercurrents for his reply and claims to have a real citation that he cant cite . Why should I wait for the supposed citation? WP:BLP and WP:RS says all defamatory information not cited by mainstream media should be removed so I did exactly that . G.T. Nanavati and his commission the Nanavati Commission found members of the congress party responsible of the 1984 Anti-Sikh riots in which innocent Sikhs were butchered in the streets of New Delhi. Hornplease again had to attack the truth, and try and find fringe criticism of Nanavati.

On a related note see his whitewashing on Jagdish Tytler, Sajjan Kumar, Nanavati commission, etc.

Analysis

Many editors Freedom skies (talk · contribs), Hkelkar (talk · contribs), AMbroodEY (talk · contribs), Nidhishsinghal (talk · contribs) and Bharatveer (talk · contribs) have felt the wrath of Hornplease's actions. I have interacted with Hornplease for over 4 months, and it has not been productive. His constant self-righteousness and superiority complex wear down on the users he interacts with.

The "new" policy on tendentious edits states that DE "Campaign to drive away productive contributors". Well telling me to "live with it" or "find a fight you can win" shows he tried to coerce me to get out. As a wikipedian, I will not stand for narcissistic users telling me what to do and his attempts to try and bully me backfired with him deciding there was no market for his POV on wikipedia.Bakaman _Bakatalk 19:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, I find it highly peculiar that this user "left" wikipedia but decided to come back for this arbcom. Perhaps he should see Misplaced Pages is not a battlegroundBakaman _Bakatalk 21:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Ikonoblast (talk · contribs) (formerly Holywarrior (talk · contribs)) engages in rampant harrassment

Well Ikonoblast (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) & Holywarrior (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (separate block logs need to be shown)

Trying to find examples of amazingly bad behavior on this user's part is like trying to find hay in a haystack.

1. False Accusations of Sockpuppetry - He vandalized and harrassed Shashis because he thought shashi was a sock of hkelkar (which was proven false)
2. Vandalism with bogus warnings - , ,

1. Personal Attacks - ,
2. Incivility toward a third-party mediator -
3. Vandalism - ,
4. He tried to bait Hkelkar while Hkelkar was a newbie , , ,
5. Angry Ranting -

Bakasuprman (talk · contribs) is a constructive editor

Look at New Pages I created within the last 30 days . Of those Ching-Thang Khomba, Garibniwaj and Kaka Joginder Singh have been DYK's.

I also have practically wrote the history of Manipur on Misplaced Pages (see List of Meitei kings, Category:Meitei royals all those articles barring Tikrendajit have been by me). As Antorjal (talk · contribs), Dwaipayanc (talk · contribs), P.K.Niyogi (talk · contribs), shmitra (talk · contribs), and Ragib (talk · contribs) can attest, I have also created a large amount of articles dealing with Category:Bengali renaissance and Category:Vangiya Sahitya Parishad, filling a void of info on 19th century Bengal history.

Also I have been active on WikiProject Hinduism (and assessment), WikiProject India (and assessment), WikiProject Bengal, WikiProject Bangladesh (and assessment), WikiProject West Bengal, and WikiProject Politics of India.

One can merely look at my creations to see I have 78 articles, 37 categories, one stub, one template, and even a userbox to my name. After searching wikipedia for three weeks after my last block (9/3 was the day of my last block I think) I created my first DYK. I have proceeded to make 8 more, and am in the process of nominating a couple as well.

The community encouraged me during hard times (especially Ragib (talk · contribs), Deepujoseph (talk · contribs), Rama's Arrow (talk · contribs) and Bhadani (talk · contribs)) and they have rewarded me for it.

One can also see I've never been blocked for 3RR, and unlike the other participants, I took Shell Kinney's advice to heart (after my last block) and found better things to do. I find it unsavory that users that think wiki is a battleground harrass me for actions that I did as a wikinoob.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Responses

To TwoHorned (talk · contribs)

Sadly Bharatveer and Hkelkar rarely interact, though I have worked with Bharatveer from time to time, and requested his input on things like Hindu Temples in Kerala, the Kerala School, Bindi, Tagore, etc.

I guess TwoHorned was so busy caught up in feeling important he forgot that I have not edited the Koenraad Elst page after we worked out a compromise during negotiations., and my response here.

I have not interacted with the user above since then. As for his other issue with my edit count, I wish to see what he shows for 5 months on the 'pedia as opposed to my 3.5 months in which I have over 60+ articles created, 20+ categories created, and 8 DYK's. Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Addendum - There was no pattern, it was an isolated incident of laziness on my part. I should have responded to your whimsical nonsense in a numbered list though. I signed my edits on each line I edited.Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

To Hornplease (talk · contribs)

Nothing to say, except his view is a fringe view, rejected by a majority of wikipedians I have interacted with. I have no anti-Islamic bias, as is stated by Ragib (talk · contribs) and by my interactions with SameerKhan (talk · contribs) and Tarif Ezaz (talk · contribs).

Anyway there are a large number of users that disagree with Hornplease including (read the statements section): nids, AmbroodEY, Nobleeagle, Hkelkar, Shiva's Trident, and Dangerous-Boy.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Also I have never been warned for (except by a vandal) 3RR and never been blocked for edit-warring.

In response to a policy I have never heard of . I never "campaigned" for Hornplease to leave wiki, he's not my sockpuppet/meatpuppet meaning he did it out of his own accord. If one sees articles I wrote like Jagrup Brar, Pamheiba, Rana Bhagwandas, and Kaka Joginder Singh they would see these articles (usually barely bigger than stubs) have generally 6-8 references and all things that are not obvious are substantiated. Community input on the rfc against me was followed, I moved further and further from users who I deemed a waste of time.

In conclusion adding links to policy does not fool anyone, neither does trying to accuse me of "running you off wiki" (while you were gone I wrote 4 DYK's and at least 10 articles, so welcome back).Bakaman _Bakatalk 19:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Also it was precisely at the request of Rama's Arrow (talk · contribs), Lostintherush (talk · contribs), Aksi_great (talk · contribs), Ragib (talk · contribs), and Deepujoseph (talk · contribs) that I started to move away from the POV infested quagmire and began to mark my stamp over large fields of articles like Category:Bengali renaissance, Category:Meitei royals, and the Category:Hinduism by country series. I listened to community input (not input from POV-pushing users), and have been rewarded by (newly promoted admins)Lost and Rama's Arrow for it. On this RFA itself Rama's Arrow stated I was a productive editor.Bakaman _Bakatalk 16:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I also love "This was precisely what I personally had wanted to avoid (getting into an argument on the talkpage about something at a tangent to the article subject." - Why did he try to bring his misconceptions to the table?Bakaman _Bakatalk 21:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I have learned my lesson from my interactions with Hornplease. Never again, will I let myself be bossed around, bullied and insulted by a user who considers themself an intellectual.Bakaman _Bakatalk 21:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Also citing diffs made before WP:DE became policy as tendentious edits is incorrect because the policy did not exist. One cannot retroactively redefine a contributors contributions as tendentious using a misrepresentation of later policy. Hornplease's whole case is therefore invalidated because of this retroactive redefining. On a related note, I dont regard POV-pushers insulting me as "community input". The whole case below by Hornplease to drive contributors that stand up to his POV-pushing therefore falls apart. It should be no problem for ArbCom to see through the black veil by which he views wikipedia, and his knowing misuse of the veil to make misrepresentations through which he makes judgementsBakaman _Bakatalk 21:57, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

To Xiaopo (talk · contribs)

On the subject of revert happy, one may consult Crculver's block log (which includes many blocks for 3RR). If I was revert happy, why have I not been blocked for 3RR ever? Also, why have I not been blocked since the one-month span? Maybe its because I got over my past, and worked to build the encyclopedia unlike a large group of users whose only edits seem to have come on the arbcom page.Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Evidence presented by User:BhaiSaab

Hkelkar is a sockpuppet/sockpuppeteer

Context

I'd like to note that the reason I feel sockpuppetry is important here, even after Shiva's Trident has become inactive, is that because if it is true, then Hkelkar has been lying for about two months. This says something, then, of his other edits. I think I had quite a lot of evidence for this in my statement. I realize now that I wasn't supposed to do that, but I'll recap some of it here. As you can see from the sockpuppetry case linked in my statement, I have suspected Hkelkar of being a sockpuppet since his first day here, and as Blnguyen or Hkelkar can tell you, I have always believed that he is a sockpuppet. I believe it was the fault of several admins in refusing to acknowledge the obvious, and it took two entire months to finally ban one of the accounts, thanks to action taken by admin Dmcdevit and admin Aksi great. Admin Blnguyen, who has been involved with these "Indian" disputes for a signficant amount of time, did not believe Hkelkar was a sockpuppet until admin Aksi great showed him his own evidence towards the end of October or beginning of November.

Evidence of Sockpuppetry

Here is some information that I have not previously mentioned:

1. Looking at the history of the talk page of (User_talk:Bakasuprman), it is clear that two users have consistently requested the help of Bakasuprman when they have found themselves to be in conflict with other users. In particular, I found the similarity between these two solicitations interesting: , .
2. Both of their interactions with users such as User:Ikonoblast aka Holywarrior, myself, TerryJ-Ho, User:Haphar, and other editors have been quite similar as evidenced by the conversations taken place on each of the respective users talk pages.
3. Both users have frequently use popups to revert the non-vandalistic edits of users that they are having content disputes with. See their contributions as this is commonly done by both of them.
4. During their extended blocks, both users have typed "to-do" notes for themselves: . Although I have seen one or two editors do the same, this practice is not quite common.
5. A quick overview of their contributions shows that Hkelkar has generally edited the very same or similar articles as Subhash bose.
6. They have both used the logic of Venn diagrams in their arguments. See this sockpuppetry case and a discussion regarding myself on ANI.
7. They show the same general attitude toward major religions and tend to make favorable edits for Hinduism and Judaism, while making negative edits for Islam, Christianity, and Buddhism, although there have been some exceptions. This is a general pattern in their editing that cannot be easily shown by one or two diffs.
8. Both users exhibit a tendency to make the same specific typo when using conjunctions (e.g. "don't" is written as "don;t"). Some examples of these typos in their edit summaries include: , , , .

So now I'd like to recap some facts about this sockpuppetry, and for the sake of being non-repetitive, I'll omit the links that I have already provided above and in my statement:

1. Shiva's Trident had previously used User:Pusyamitra_Sunga as a sockpuppet, the account of which was banned.
2. Shiva's Trident's block began on August 21st. Hkelkar began editing on August 22nd during the other user's block. Pusyamitra Sunga also registered and began editing the day following one of Shiva's Trident's blocks.
3. Shiva's Trident has previously edited from User:128.83.131.121 and User:128.83.131.215 during his blocks. On August 22nd, Hkelkar began editing from User:128.83.131.139.
4. Per the University of Texas's website (linked in my statement), the computer or server that is on 128.83.131.139 is remotely accessible.
5. Hkelkar's first edit (by IP) was on Californian_Hindu_textbook_controversy, a controversial article which Shiva's Trident had worked on as well just up to a few days prior to the IP's edit. The second article that Hkelkar edited was 2002 Gujarat violence on August 23rd, 2006. Shiva's Trident had last edited this article on August 21st.
6. User:128.83.131.215 was able to cite policy (using their shortcuts e.g. "WP:OR") from the very first day here. 128.83.131.215 issued his first warning to another user after less than three days on Misplaced Pages. This was done to User:Ikonoblast, who has had several heated discussions with Shiva's Trident in the past as evidenced by the talk page.
7. They both attend the University of Texas and study Physics (obviously).
8. Dmcdevit stated that shortly after the result of the checkuser he conducted in which he found that sockpuppetry was "likely" in this case, Shiva's Trident became increasingly inactive, and remains inactive till this day.
9. All of this is apparent, in addition to admin aksi great's evidence (Hkelkar had the same username as Subhash bose as found on a yahoo group posting). I assume this evidence will be forwarded privately by Dmcdevit to the arbcom.

Finally, I'd like to note a conversation between myself and Hkelkar in which he seemed to have forgotten which account he used to make a specific edit. In the article, 2002 Gujarat Violence, we can see that Shiva's Trident inserted a source, Ramesh Rao's blog, on August 19th. On November 4th, Hkelkar and I are debating another source, Sabrang, and I choose to bring up his insertion of the blog. I state "Couldn't I say the same thing of your insertion of statements from Ramesh Rao's blog?..." Hkelkar responds on my talk page, and forgets that it was actually the account Shiva's Trident who inserted the material. He says "I think you misunderstand. I am using Ramesh Rao's writeup as a PRIMARY source after qualifying that it is HE who said it..." If you look at the contribution history of the article, you'll find that Hkelkar has actually never inserted or used additional material from Ramesh Rao, nor has he ever "qualified that it is HE who said it..." in the article. Note further that I specifically used the word "insertion" to refer to Hkelkar's edits, to which he raised no objection at the time.

Hkelkar (and his other usernames) have been disruptive

I've decided to primarily dedicate this portion to Hkelkar's previous account, Shiva's Trident, as several other editors have already pointed out how Hkelkar has been disruptive with his new account. These are just a small selection of his many edits that contravene policy. Arbitrators should also note that Shiva's Trident was blocked all times except one under the username "Subhash bose" and the final time under "Shiva's Trident", so you'll only find one block if you look at the block log of "Shiva's Trident."

Shiva's Trident

Incivility and personal attacks:

• Read my damn edits,
• Ahh. the sweet smell of fact distorters in the morning,
• I CITED TAXILA!!! IT IS CITED AND REFERENCED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!,
• Referring to "Muhammad" as a pedophile while addressing a Muslim user,
• All Muslims incite violence,
• Asking a Muslim "either convert them or kill them, right janaab?"
• Too bad, I'm back. Can;t stop the truth mein Freund. Even your Allah said so.
• I don't debate with people who worship with Nazi hitler-youth members like the Catholic pope either, so we're even
• It seems he wants to engage in Jihad on wikipedia.
• Anything to defame Hindus with balls, right?
• I'll bet you've been dancing on the streets of Allahabad together with muslims after they bombed our trains, right? You're the classic example of the self-hating Indian; who consorts with alien Mohammedians who'd cheerfully slit your throat at a moment's notice if their local mullah orders them to do so. Think about THAT and hang your head in shame!
• I'm watching you very carefully.
• Call your doctor, your intravenous drip needs adjusting
• Complaint from other user
• Also, do watch both articles as they seem to be his standard hangouts for soilings (in case I get blocked).
• ...and tons more. As you can see from his block log, his personal attacks did not stop anytime soon.

Removing sourced material: , , ,

Wild accusations of anti-Semitism or anti-Hinduism: His complaint against another user, Look at RSS...

In addition to the copyvio mentioned by Bakaman, he plagiarized here. I later caught the infringing paragraph, after which Shiva's Trident reinserted it and later reworded it.

Hkelkar

• I'm sure you do. However, wikipedia is not the place for ululating. Get a blog for that
• Here in the US of A nobody can behead me for it, or even cop my hands off.
• If you don't want to listen, then congrats, the Mullahs have done a good job.
• removal of sourced material
• removal of sourced material

Hkelkar has also blatantly lied in several instances:

• Regarding the Indian caste system, while I showed several reliable sources on the article's talk page (on November 17), he continued to say that I "used no sources at all" or "cited no reliable sources" (on November 19) while, as you can see, the quotes I provided were from sources like Britannica and Encyclopedia of Islam.
• Attempted to fool an admin into getting me blocked here.

Responses to comments/evidence by other editors

Note: I have provided very little diffs in this section because the relevant pages have already been linked to by the parties to whom I am responding. When necessary, I have added links and/or diffs.

Response to Bakasuprman

This user has presented links for evidence but egregiously misrepresents them. I suggest the arbitrators take the time to read over the dialog we had over the copyvio material at Talk:Indian_caste_system#Vandalism in which Blnguyen established that I was correct about the text being a copyright violation. Bakasuprman in his reverts to reinsert the material probably assumed that I was lying about the copyvio and trying to blank the text defensively since I am a Muslim. As you can see on the talk page, Bakasuprman had said about my edit that I "used POV to delete the whole section on Muslim Caste System (He is a Muslim). I will copyedit and keep section due to this bias." He was later blocked per the clause on WP:Vand which states that repeatedly inserting copied text is vandalism. If you take the time to click through his links for his accusations of "cabals" etc., I think you'll find that they paint a different picture. Note that if you go through my contributions you'll find that I did not contribute a single edit to the RFC filed against Bakasuprman. You should further note that the mentioned ""Fundy Watch" friend" is none other than admin Tom Harrison. I'd like to say that in general I think Bakasuprman is sometimes a good editor, but he assumed bad faith of me in the "copyvio case" because of my religion, got in trouble for that, and still seems to be quite upset about it.

Response to CltFn

I would like the arbitrators to consider this user's neutrality in his comments about me, considering it was I that who established that this user had been using a sockpuppet for several months. I don't think I need to defend myself against any individual allegations from this user since no evidence has yet been provided.

Response to Hkelkar

This is a response to these accusations. The numbers of each response corresponds with the number of the accusation

1. Comment's regarding anti-Semitism are below. I'm sure Blnguyen now realizes that Hkelkar is not Jewish.
2. Shiva's Trident was blocked indefinitely a few days later - hardly a "dead horse."
3. I have continuously accused Hkelkar of being a sockpuppet since his first day here. I stand by my actions, especially now that Shiva's Trident is indefinitely blocked.
4. A discussion regarding the edits on Indian caste system took place here. Hkelkar is currently using the text of a fatwa to say that the fatwas established a caste system among Muslims in India, despite me showing three sources that contradict this. He has provided no other evidence of the impact of the fatwa other than the text of the fatwa itself. I encourage you to read the discussion on the talk page and evaluate who's misrepresenting what.
5. See 4.
6. See 4.
7. See 4.
8. No comment.
9. Hkelkar fails to understand that I have, by default, always assumed bad faith of him. Why? Because sockpuppetry and lying, which he continues to do in this very arbcom case, are indicative of bad faith. It was the fault of the admins in failing to recognize the sockpuppetry for two months. I have only taken some of his edits in good faith when they were apparent in not showing bad faith.
10. Hkelkar(under Shiva's Trident name) and Baksuprman took offense at the "in addition to maintaining offensive activities" clause in the RSS article. This was explicitly stated in the journal source that I used, the Far Eastern Survey, but for whatever reason they wished to censor the clause. This was disruptive both on the parts of Hkelkar and Bakasuprman.
11. This is a repeat of number 8.
12. Regarding Criticism_of_the_Council_on_American-Islamic_Relations, those edits were in fact supported by a consensus formed on the talk page of CAIR (here and here). CltFn was the exception to the consensus, and therefore wanted to ignore it by merging the criticism with the original article.
13. Regarding Craig Winn, I don't think I need to justify removing an enormous list of links within the text of an article. When it comes to him being self-published, see Mr. Darcy's statement on the talk page of the article.

Allegations of anti-Semitism

I have a strong dislike for Israel, and am not inclined to hide my feelings on the activities of that country. Its oppression of Palestinian civilians disgusts me. However, I have no hatred for Jews, and love Jews that equally dislike Israel, as I've stated several times. Hkelkar is in fact a Hindu, as you can see from the userboxes on the past revisions of User:Shiva's Trident user page. When I was making the "Israel shouldn't be on the map in the first place" and other statements, Blnguyen at the time refused to acknowledge that Hkelkar was a sockpuppet, and he blocked me because he perceived my statements to be directed at a Jewish user. I knew however that my statements were being pasted on the talk page of a Hindu, and I didn't find anything inherently wrong with them. Had Blnguyen known that Hkelkar and Shiva's Trident were the same person as he acknowledges now, I don't feel that I would have been blocked. On the ANI discussion regarding this indcident, several users had commented that Hkelkar's statements were equally provocative, but for whatever reason, Blnguyen took no action against Hkelkar at the time.

Hkelkar's response below seems to be reading into my statements a little too much. "Leeching" is a general negative term - I would use the term against anything I dislike and Israel or Jews certainly do not hold any particular claim to the word as used by anti-Semites. When I said "Israel shouldn't be on the map in the first place" I mean the state, as I am aware that there have been tribes of Jews living in the area for quite a long time even before the existence of the current state of Israel. Hkelkar is making his own inference here to imply that I mean "the people of Israel" shouldn't be on the map. One can read into my statements as much as they like - that doesn't mean their interpretations will be correct. So let me clarify my position here with some oversimplified logic: If you happen to support Israel's actions against Palestinians, I don't particularly like you. If you happen to be Jewish and you criticize Israel (as many Jews within Israel do), I like you. If you happen to be Jewish, and you support what Israel does to Palestinians, I don't like you. If you happen to be a Muslim and you support those actions of Israel, I don't like you the same.

Apparently you like me, but saying Israel should not be on the map was quite provocative. Fred Bauder 22:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Hkelkar

Response to accusations of sockpuppetry

I've already gone over this matter in the RFCU filed against me here. However, I will summarize my points and add some more.

• Statement made above

"Looking at the history of the talk page of (User_talk:Bakasuprman), it is clear that two users have consistently requested the help of Bakasuprman when they have found themselves to be in conflict with other users. In particular, I found the similarity between these two solicitations interesting: , "

My response:The similarity is circumstantial at best.Actually, I never denied that I knew Trident and that we converse(d) frequently off wikipedia about wikipedia articles. He was not doing so well with trying to clear them of bias and that's when I stepped in to help.I solicited Bakaman's help on the recommendation of Trident.

• Statement made above

"Both of their interactions with users such as User:Ikonoblast aka Holywarrior, myself, TerryJ-Ho, User:Haphar, and other editors have been quite similar as evidenced by the conversations taken place on each of the respective users talk pages"

My response:I have barely interacted with this User:Haphar (I may have corresponded with him months ago, but not since then). I do observe, that Trident and haphar have had considerable arguments.Of course, Ikonoblast and TerryJ-Ho are pattern disruptors who run around India related articles and fill them with nonsense. I only clean up after them. I will post my evidence concerning this below.

• Statement made above

"Both users have frequently use popups to revert the non-vandalistic edits of users that they are having content disputes with. See their contributions as this is commonly done by both of them."

My response: A bad practice that I stopped after I learned that you were not supposed to use popups except for vandalism

• Statements made above

"During their extended blocks, both users have typed "to-do" notes for themselves: . Although I have seen one or two editors do the same, this practice is not quite common."

My response:Like BhaiSaab said, several editors do this, including trident. I saw him do it, thought it was a rather neat idea, and adopted it myself.

• Statement made above

"A quick overview of their contributions shows that Hkelkar has generally edited the very same or similar articles as Subhash bose."

My response: Like I said, this is the case because Trident intimated to me that these articles were in bad shape and I tried to improve them.

• Statement made above:

"They have both used the logic of Venn diagrams in their arguments."

My response:This is the best BhaiSaab can do? We both use Venn Diagrams so we must be the same person???Both Ariel Sharon and I breathe oxygen. Are we the same person? Both Steven Weinberg and I use Venn Diagrams to present our arguments (attend his cosmology class at UT Austin sometime). We even go to the same department and University.Are Stephen Weinberg and I the same person? I urge the admins to see the obvious, that BhaiSaab clearly has no case and is trying to prejudice you with circumstantial events.

• Statement made above

"They show the same general attitude toward major religions and tend to make favorable edits for Hinduism and Judaism, while making negative edits for Islam, Christianity, and Buddhism, although there have been some exceptions. This is a general pattern in their editing that cannot be easily shown by one or two diffs"

My response:Like I said, all this establishes is that we have similar points of view, which I never denied.Besides, I would not characterize my edits as "negative for Islam". That is really the reason why BhaiSaab is carrying out his little crusade.He's angry that I wrote about some dirty littel secrets among Muslims, like the Muslim Castes, which he tried to whitewash and instigated an edit-war there (I'll post more diffs about this later). He plans to get me banned and delete that section once the article get's unprotected. Such practices are quite common for him and can be seen from his contribs.

• Statement made above

"Shiva's Trident had previously used User:Pusyamitra_Sunga as a sockpuppet, the account of which was banned."

My response:I do not know anything about this matter.

• Statement made above

"Shiva's Trident's block began on August 21st. Hkelkar began editing on August 22nd."

My response:Because Trident told me to.

• Statements made above

"They both attend the University of Texas and study Physics (obviously)."

My response: A fact that I have never denied.

• Statements made above

"Dmcdevit stated that shortly after the result of the checkuser he conducted in which he found that sockpuppetry was "likely" in this case, Shiva's Trident became increasingly inactive, and remains inactive till this day"

My response: I told him to steer clear of wikipedia for a while as he was increasingly getting busy and I less so. He is a theorist and I an experimentalist. Theory people do little work during the summer and mostly work in the long sessions (that's now). I worked a lot in the summer on my experiment, which gave results and I wrote my paper.I now have some time to edit and he doesn't (though I will get busy with the next phase of my work soon). Nonetheless, he wanted to do some editing but I told him to keep off and intimate any interesting articles he saw to me.

I would like to point out that I raised these issues earlier in the RFCU discussion page (which I link here). I will quote from there now:

Link:Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Hkelkar

I would also like for you to look at admin User:Blnguyen's assessment here

and the assessments of User:Dbachmann here Now look at BhaiSaab's response , clearly indicating that he is getting increasingly desperate to sway opinions against me. This puts his objectivity in question.

and that of User:Ben W Bell (in a conversation with User:Ikonoblast) here

• Statement made above:

"Both users exhibit a tendency to make the same specific typo when using conjuctions (e.g. don't is written as "don;t"). Some examples of these typos in their edit summaries include"

My response:An interesting observation.Such typos are not uncommon to many posters on the internet (see any number of slashdot posts where such typos occur routinely, I guess nearly half of them must be my sockpuppets).If you look at your standard QWERTY keyboard (not the DVORAK keybpard), you will see that the apostrophe key and the semicolon key are side by side. OTher common typos that Trident and I (and a hundred million users on the internet) have in common is typing "teh" instead of "the" (see Internet Slang). Let's ban them all from wikipedia, praise G-d. Or how about you don;t whoops don't?

Hkelkar 06:26, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

• Statement made above

"Finally, I'd like to note a conversation between myself and Hkelkar in which he seemed to have forgotten which account he used to make a specific edit. In the article, 2002 Gujarat Violence, we can see that Shiva's Trident inserted a source, Ramesh Rao's blog, on August 19th. On November 4th, Hkelkar and I are debating another source, Sabrang, and I choose to bring up his insertion of the blog. I state "Couldn't I say the same thing of your insertion of statements from Ramesh Rao's blog?..." Hkelkar responds on my talk page, and forgets that it was actually the account Shiva's Trident who inserted the material. He says "I think you misunderstand. I am using Ramesh Rao's writeup as a PRIMARY source after qualifying that it is HE who said it..." If you look at the contribution history of the article, you'll find that Hkelkar has actually never inserted or used additional material from Ramesh Rao, nor has he ever "qualified that it is HE who said it..." in the article. Nowhere in his response to me does Hkelkar state "I did not insert the blog; Shiva's Trident did."

My response:Carefully look at my statement. I said "I am USING the blog" i.e. as part of my argument after Trident put it there and I read it.Did I say that I cited the blog? I did not, Trident did. Why is it necessary for me to mention who put it there first? I am certainly not required to qualify the edit history of every edit made to an article during my discussion. Again, another lame attempt by Bhaisaab to deliberately skew circumstantial incidents. Anybody can do that against anybody. If I was actually Trident, and I goofed up my "nefarious scheme", I would have said "I cited the blog" but I didn't did I? Of course, the truly paranoid can use a double-double deception argument, but I am working on the good faith assumption that Arbcomm isn't populated by tinfoil hat wearing 10 year olds.

Conclusion:Most of this so-called evidence is circumstantial. I have explained why the technical information in the checkuser case was misleading, and the fact that we hail from the same school. have similar backgrounds and often discuss wikipedia matters with each other, which is why I advised him to step back for a while so that nobody can say we're "meatpuppets" or whatever. I have also demonstrated BhaiSaab's real reasons for this RFCU (so that he may have free run to whitewash articles on Muslims). Finally, there have been no edits from Trident in months, which makes the sockpuppetry charge moot. I point you to Misplaced Pages:Suspected_sock_puppets#Reporting_suspected_sock_puppets where it says:

Even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that Trident is my sockpuppet, there has been little or no activity on that account for months (see contribs), and his last edit to an article appears to be on September 3, 2.5 months ago (he's indefblocked now, but that happened on 29th october, 2 weeks ago thanks to Dcmdevit's biased conclusion made largely in bad faith and with extreme malice on his part, for which I opine that he should be summarily desysopped, but I will raise that matter at another time).Therefore, assuming that we are sockpuppets, there have been no abuse, block evasion or any impropriety in months. The policy statement above clearly indicates that there is a precept of reasonable statute in wikipedia policy which is surely less than two months. Since, in the absense of abuse or block/ban evasion, sockpuppetry isn;t illegal, then the issue is moot. This matter has nothing to do with sockpuppetry at all, but is a personal crusade against me by BhaiSaab, who has been misrepresenting sources and whitewashing many article for months before Trident noticed it and showed it to me.I will add evidence on that soon.I should add that BhaiSaab's desperation at smearing me, even to the point of rehashing old accusations of sockpuppetry, should tell you something about HIS edits, particularly Talk:Indian caste system, which arbcomm should peruse carefully.Hkelkar 05:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

User:BhaiSaab has been a disruptive user

Note, I will elaborate more on these diffs:

1. His anti-semitic trolling has already been mentioned (here is admin User:Blnguyen's assessment)
2. Needling and harrassment.flogging a dead horse:
3. Warnings to BhaiSaab by admins to cease and desist in his actions:
4. POV war in Indian Caste System that got the article protected:(He started the revert-war through misrepresentation of sources and I tried to correct his misrepresentations).Rapid-succession revert-warring despite the fact that my edits are well-sourced and his are not.
5. Constant bogus arguments and refuting of well-sourced refs on Talk:Indian caste system, ethnic baiting:(from his point of view, he still thinks I am a Hindu because of my Maharashtrian name "Kelkar")
6. Obstinately arguing against quoted and sourced edits:
7. Whitewashing the obvious:
8. POV war in Bajrang Dal started by him
9. Assumption of bad faith:
10. POV warring on Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh:Following which the article got protected
11. Edit-warring on Bajrang Dal,Also got protected
12. POV warring not restricted to me alone:Warring on Criticism of the Council on American-Islamic Relations
13. POV warring on Craig Winn

If you check the dates of the diffs, it is coear that all of these edit wars were started by him.Hkelkar 15:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

user:BhaiSaab has expressed anti-semitic views

Well I was going to post diffs showcasing his anti-semitism, and I will, for the sake of propriety.This post is in response to his statement above concerning his "love for Jews" and distinction with "hate for Medinat Yisrael".Of course, being critical of Israel does not make anybody an anti-semite. If you red op/eds from Haaretz or Jpost, you will see plenty of criticism of Israel there only.However, BhaiSaab clearly made statements against me, a Jew, supporting a holocaust denier (whose name I refuse to type, but he is the current president of Iran, you know whom I mean) and saying that "Israel shouldn't be on the map in the first place" and "Israel wins only because it leeches off of the US" . Now, the reason why these statements are anti-semitic (and not just "critical of Israel") are as follows:

1. The phrase "leeches" was traditionally used by anti-semites to characterize Jews as a people. The vast literature of anti-semitism clearly shows that Jews were compared to various forms of parasitic life forms throughout the ages by anti-semites.Thus, saying that Israel (with a majority Jewish population) "leeches" (verb form) is indicative of the anti-semitic stereotype that "Jews are leeches", making the sentence an anti-semitic one.
2. It is one thing to constructively criticize Israel. It is another to demand it's destruction. Medinat Israel is s sovereign nation, recognized by all the civilized world as a state with every right to exist. It also has a Jewish Majority with a Jewish Majority government that represents a Jewish majority people and an Arab minority people also. Israel also has among the largest number of Jews in the world. Thus, demanding that "Israel be wiped off the map" is a demand that actions be taken to the end of eliminating the state and it's people. Thus, it demands the ethnic cleansing and/or genocide of the Jewish population. The resultant death toll would clearly be greater than that of the Shoah (the most anti-semitic act in history), making his statement irreconcilably anti-semitic.
3. Regarding his claims of "loving Jews who oppose Israel", I'm sure that everybody realizes that such Jewish groups are a vanishingly small fringe minority who have committed such acts of mishegas against Israel. Naturally, most anti-semites would side with groups that commit such a chilul hashem to try to present themselves as non anti-semites. However, it is clear that siding with such fringe minorities (in on itself not necessarily an anti-semitic thing), coupled together with demands of Israel's destruction, makes his position an anti-semitic one. Hkelkar 08:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

In pre-WWII Europe, Zionists WERE the minority. On the one side, you had the Orthodox Jews who believed that it was up to G-d, not man, to restore Israel, and on the other side, the Jewish Labor Bund, who wanted socialist Jewish solidarity in Europe. Only the tragedy of the Holocaust destroyed many of the anti-Zionists and convinced some of the others to adopt Zionist sentiments. Hkelkar seems woefully ignorant of Jewish history; not only that, it's very strange to hear a purported part-Baghdadi Jew raised in Mumbai using Yiddish. Zora 01:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Using an Eastern European language in Mumbai does seems very strange, but not many people know about the Three Oaths or that Ultra-Orthodoxy was near wiped out because they refused to flee, not even Jews. I'm willing to bet even most Israelis don't know that. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The Yiddishisms were a half-serious identification mechanism, since most Jews in America are Ashkenazim (I'm not an Ashkenazy, obviously...), and I am in America only.Is it correct to say Yiddish is "Eastern European"? It is descended from middle High German, which makes it more Central European (but it probly has a lot of Slavic influences). Hkelkar 11:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

There is a resurgence in Orthodox Judaism in Israel that is overwhelmingly pro-Zionism. The Orthodox anti-Zionist Jews are a minority right now.Hkelkar 11:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Besides, the Bnei menashe who have officially converted are all Zionists, the Bene Israel are all Zionist, and the Baghdadi Jews are also Zionist.Hkelkar 11:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Besides, my take on the anti-Zionist old orthodoxy is that they were that way largely out of antipathy towards the "left-wing" character of Zionism (Zionism started out as a left wing movement), and their overtly literalist interpretation of scripture was an excuse. Political Zionism was a response to antisemitism in Europe. Of course, the Zionism of Indian Jews is not leftist, because there has been no serious antisemitism in India, but Indian Jewish Zionism has the religious dimension.Hkelkar 11:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not disagreeing with you Hkelkar, but that attitude changed after the main proponents of anti-Zionism were wiped out in the Holocaust. As for Yiddish, according its article, "It originated in the Ashkenazi culture that developed from about the 10th century in central and eastern Europe". So we're both right. I guess we'd better stop this conversation now, as this is hardly the page be discussing the niceties of the history of Zionism. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 15:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

User:TerryJ-Ho has been a disruptive user

Note: I will elaborate on these diffs in a few days:

1. incivil (and deliberately false) edit summaries:
2. Hypocrisy:He accuses me of using "Anti-X, Anti-Y", but he himself uses the term anti-Muslim liberally, even to the point of violating WP:BLP against Daniel Pipes.Irrelevant BLP against Pipes: Again:.That's three times, in case anyone's counting
3. More BLP violation on Narendra Modi, using poorly sourced statements to defame personality:
4. Paranoid accusations of "fascist right wing blah blah":
5. Tried to instigate a witch Hunt by filing a medcab, which got resoundly denied:Misplaced Pages:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-08-18_Edits_by_Netaji_and_Bakaspuprman_on_India_related_pages
6. Evoking a commonly false argument to whitewash antisemitism:(TerryJ-HO's not stupid, he is aa very smart man who clearly knew the fallacy of this argument and used it merely to provoke me)
7. Could be ignorance, could be baiting, you decide.Removing sourced edit:
8. Repeated Bad Faith Assumptions:
9. Bad faith AfD (overwhelmingly condemned as such), already discussed by NobleEagle
10. Spamming talk pages of unrelated aritcles with disputes from other articles to try to form coteries of Guild meatpuppets:
11. Further Spamming of talk pages with material that is irrelevant to the topic being discussed, also baiting:
12. Falsified/misleading statements with a clear intent of ethnic baiting:
13. Whitewashing topics without providing any sources. He did this to the point of blanking entire sections,vandalism as well:
14. Again, labeling of users and ethnic baiting on Muslim Guild page to invite mass-reverters etc:

Concerning TerryJ-Ho's obsession with my Jewishness, he has routinely attacked my Jewishness and has constantly harassed me about it . He has been repeatedly incivil to me and been warned by an admin to desist this line of harassment .

Conclusion: Overall, TerryJ-Ho has been better behaved than BhaiSaab.My only fault is falling for his baiting attempts a couple of times. Also, his abrasive brand of English, (full of deliberate bad grammar and aggressive and disrespectful perorations) got to me a couple of times. My fault there too. That's a cultural thing that comes with the baggage of being Indian.It is clear, however, that he, together with BhaiSaab, routinely engage in various forms of ethnic baiting, labeling of users, incivility, and POV against specific ethno-religious groups.Hkelkar 14:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Response to TerryJ-Ho

I know nothing about this "Pussyamitra Sunga" business and will not comment on TerryJ-Ho's obviously circumstantial case.Take this matter up with Trident. As for my views. Well, I never claimed I was a leftie.Hkelkar 17:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The Guardian, an established leftist bias, appropriately criticized by Varsha Bhonsle here, attributed accordingly. Partisan sources must be attributed.Hkelkar 05:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

The "one big penis" comment was in extremely bad taste, I admit (I got blocked for it and I apologized). However, claiming that the Jama Masjid (a Muslim architectural masterpeice) is better looking than the Qutb Minar is hardly "Hindutva". Many Muslims would agree that the tomb of some guy is less important than a holy Mosque dedicated to the worship of "Allah". TerryJ-Ho's clearly getting desperate here.Hkelkar 01:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Qutb Minar is the minaret of Quwwatul Islam mosque complex and also dedicated to the worship of "Allah" and predates Jama Masjid by some centuries,.Another indication that you edit on the basis of your convictions rather than facts..MerryJ-Ho 10:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Er that's just ONE theory about it's purpose. read Qutub Minar. It has been advanced that it could be no more than a simple watchtower, with no religious or artistic significance. The Jama masjid clearly has a religious significance (it's a masjid after all) and is a better example of the influence of Islam in India. Prof that TerryJ-Ho will resort to any number of distortions to advance his hatemongering agenda.Hkelkar 08:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, that does not depreciate the importance of a structural element part of a mosque complex...at least I stand a third of chance being right in the light of that article quoted above by Kelkar than Kelkar's such assertions as "tomb of some guy" or an inverted "Penis" Many architectural experts will disagree to Kelkar's analysis of no religious or "artistic significance" - I will not cite the sources as Kelkar ends up wasting editor's time clarifying mundane and obvious issues.Such dead suredness on a very subjective issue as "the best example of an architecture type" does not lead to a meaningful article writing but is disruptive.MerryJ-Ho 23:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Newer response to TerryJ-Ho:

_{*Shiva's Trident has recieved numerous last warnings and HKelkar himself has recieved them in abundance.If it is established that both are the same person , that is aggravating.As this is not a live audience where the two persons can be called separately, I believe due weightage will be accorded to the circumstantial evidence which is quite strong in this case.}

Yeah, that's how the Dreyfuss Affair went down. Nice, huh?

_{Sammihit Bharat! Raise your guns and fight for the Hindu way of life! The user page - the comments are worth reading RSS is a volunteer organization that aims to speak for the global minority of Hindus who are the victims of apartheid in their own homeland from the Islamofascist-sympathetic UPA government, pseudosecular anti-Hindu cabals and terror-propagandists. They are no different from the Jewish B'Nai B'rith. Only anti-hindus choose to paint them as a parochial and communal organization. None of them have any facts, only polemical attacks. Political Posturing in favour of Hindutva parties - notice evoking similarities with Jewish organisations the only things edited are POV statements made by the Liberal Left If you want to tout the latte-drinking elitist secular fundamentalism of the Liberal Left academia without even following wikipedia.. There is no shortage of hindu-haters among white scholars, or their pinko moonbat lackeys in India. The standard Desi moonbat politburo propaganda really.}

I have already discussed these matters in the RFCU against me (posted in the ArbComm root page) so I will merely summarize my points:

1. All this establishes that we know each other, have similar views, go to the same school and engaged in meatpuppetry months ago.
2. Regardless of whether the ArbComms decision in this particular matter, surely there is a reasonable precept of statute here. If we hypothetically assume that we are the same person, then any block/ban evasion was months ago, since Trident has not edited since then.
3. BhaiSaab opines that, if ArbComm decides that socking has been afoot, then, it means that I have been lying. Hypothetically, if that is the case then so what? Is there a WP:No Liars policy? If you have issues with my edits and/or sources then, by all means, discuss them. If you can establish errors or falsehoods beyond a reasonable doubt then good (they've mostly failed, the couple of cases where there have been issues, and mostly resolved ones too, have been blown out of proportion in the ArbComm, deliberately so in order to get me banned so that they can merrily delete the edits and replace them with biased content).Rehashing this months old sockpuppetry case is clearly an attempt to deflect from the real issue at hand, which is that all of my article edits that presently stand are sourced, attributed appropriately and neutral in narrative, and they neutralize the biases and prejudices of BhaiSaab, Terry, Hornplease, TwoHorned, Ikonoblast and the unfortunate souls whom they have brainwashed into their defense here. Hkelkar 09:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

User:TerryJ-Ho expresses a deep seated hatred and prejudice against Hindus

1. Perpetrators of Godhra Train Burning are innocent and Indian Army are all traitors

but reaction riots in Gujarat were perpetrated by "evil Hindoos" (see his comments below)

1. He uses the declaration of Narendra Modi (a man Muslims hate) to justify violence against Hindus.
2. Muslims are justified in attacking Hindus as a "sponteneous reaction". All this is common Lashkar-e-Toiba and Students Islamic Movement of India rhetoric.
3. Ridicules verifiable claims of brutal atrocities against Hindus by Islamic Fundamentalists (see Persecution of Hindus)
4. Disparaging Hindu beliefs (he should have criticized in a scholarly way, but his tone is mocking, like the tone of an Islamic Fundamentalist) Hkelkar 03:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
5. Here he says I should "thank Aurangzeb" and that historians "don't say that there was any persecution".This is a blatant lie (Richards, John F. (1995). The Mughal Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 130,177:"Jujhar Singh's outright defiance of this order inflamed Shah Jahan. He sent another large army under the nominal command of the sixteen-year-old Prince Aurangzeb to invade Bundelkhand....When overtaken by Mughal troops, Jujhar Singh's principal queens were killed by their attendants, but the remaining royal women were sent to join the Mughal harem. Two very young sons and a grandson were converted to Islam. Another older son who refused to convert was killed outright.""In many disputed successions for hereditary local office Aurangzeb chose candidates who had converted to Islam over their rivals. Pargana headmen and quangos or recordkeepers were targeted especially for pressure to convert. The message was very clear for all concerned. Shared political community must also be shared religious belief").This is highly offensive remark to Hindus and Sikhs (Bear in mind that TerryJ-Ho thinks that I am a Hindu) because Aurangzeb the Islamic emperor was responsible for the demolition of temples, imposition of Jizya, enforcement of Islamic Law forced conversions to Islam, and other atrocities on the Sikh people (see the rest of the wikipedia article and this). Note that the article is protected because pakistani Nationalists want him portrayed as a "great hero" like TerryJ-Ho just did.
6. Here, he says that people are "doing PR for the Gujarat government, narendra Modi etc.... disgusting". Gujarat government under Narendra Modi is the duly elected government, put there by a free electorate. His disrespect for that process indicates a disrespect for that process, and inherently derogatory to the voters of the region. He then has the cheek to accuse me (see diff of his post below) of criticizing Jinnah. Too boot, he misrepresents my comments as usual. I said (he does not cite this, showing his tendency to lie)"very few Hindus supported partition and wanted to coexist with Muslims", which is a true statement. I continued that Jinnah orchestrated Direct Action Day, together with Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, which led to massive atrocities against Hindus in the region perpetrated under Jinnah's direction. Despite that, many moderate Muslims chose to remain in India. Only the extremist Muslims, brainwashed by Jinnah's paranoia about "Evil Kaffeer Hindoos", decided to become al-Mojahirs in Pakistan. TerryJ-Ho's shows a clear fetish for paranoid Islamofascist mass murderers, but lashes out at Hindu leaders like Modi who have not done anything even REMOTELY approaching the atrocities of the Noakhali Massacre or the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities, both at the behest of Pakistan. Hkelkar 11:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

User:TerryJ-Ho supports Islamism and Islamic Fundamentalism

Will submit evidence here

User:TerryJ-Ho deliberately misrepresents sources

1. Here, he cited a partisan group as "independent media" (fixed by me)
2. Same again (sabrang is a partisan Muslim-run lobby group that glorifies Islamic terrorism)

User:TerryJ-Ho uses wikipedia as a soapbox for expressing partisan views

1. Here, makes political statements against Hindutva in an article about riots.
2. Here, he calls allegations of media bias as "ope/eds by Hindu commentators", despite the fact that the religion of the parties are not all established
3. - He cites another partisan opinion (defense council of the victims) with very subtle POV wording.

User:TerryJ-Ho engages in trollish behaviour

1. "Lies lies spread by Hindutvaadis" irrelevant commentary in the talk page of an unrelated article.
2. Yelling (capital case edit summary) that a source is "not NPOV", despite the fact that the link, though to a partisan website, is an exact archive of a news article from an NPOV and reliable Source here. Ordinarily, this would not be all right, but his immediate asppersion to the edit (instead of discussion in talk page etc.) is an indication of his trollery here.
3. Again, well-poisoning and trollery on Talk:2002 Gujarat violence, soapboxing against an incident that did not happen in the period of the article subject (not in 2002, and non-violent to boot)

Some background material

Regarding point #1 above, TerryJ-Ho says below that his screed is relevant because he assigns me a "Hindoo liar" motive, alleging that it is the product of "Kaffir Hindoo historical revisionism". However, the refs I used in that article are shown below:

1. Sharma, H.D (January 16, 1991). The Real Tipu (in English). Rishi Publications, Varanasi.Sharma is an established and accredited scholar at BHU University in India, one of the top ten schools in the country
2. Lewis Rice Mysore and Coorg (a Gazetteer) Vol I Bangalore 1878
3. Meersman, Achilles . Annual reports of the Portuguese Franciscans in India, 1713-1833 p238. Centro de Estudos Históricos Ultramarinos.
4. George M. Moraes "Muslim Rules of Mysore and their Christian subjects" in Irfan Habib (Ed.) Confronting Colonialism. Resistance and modernisation under Haidar Ali & Tipu Sultan Indian History Congress (Delhi: Tulika) 1999 p135
5. Kareem, C.K (1973). Kerala Under Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan P187. Kerala History Association : distributors, Paico Pub. House, 322. (This guy Kareem is a Muslim btw)
6. Lee-Warner, William . “3”, The Protected Princes of India. Macmillan and Co..
7. Rao, Hayavadana C.. History of Mysore 1399-1799: Incorporating the latest Epigraphical, Literary and Historical Researches Vol. 3 pgs 1047-53. Bangalore Government Press.Historian Hayavadana C. Rao has written the most encyclopedic work on Mysore history to date.

So, Kareem, Sharma and Rao are all "Hindutvaadis" according to TerryJ-Ho. This should demonstrate his true intentions, which are to color any perspective not in line with Islamist intolerance and Islamist historical revisionism as "Kaffir Hindoo lies". While some of the older British sources may have a partisan bias, the claims to that effect are presently edited in teh article (works by Irfan Habib, Kate Brittlebank and such), so no partisan bias there.

See the articles below for the truth about historical revisionism in Pakistani schools and the denial of history, painting the mass atrocities of many Muslim rulers as "Kaffir Hindoo propaganda" and portraying them as heroes:

1. School Books That Teach Children To Hate- in Pakistan:

Muslims alone have the right to rule the world and are allowed to kill infidels that stand in the way of Islam. This is the message being taught to schoolchildren through textbooks used in the network of institutions run by Jamaat ud-Daawa, according to a research report on Hate Speech complied by the Liberal Forum Pakistan.

"Infidels are cowards by nature," claims the Urdu textbook used in the second grade (for seven-year-olds). "When a holy warrior attacks them, they scream with terror and fear." Mujahideen are glorified as the alpha male on a mission from God. They are the superheroes that kill Hindus, fashion all sorts of gadgets from found material, and make the infidel world cower in fear.

1. Pakistani social studies textbooks creating havoc:

An alumnus of the University of Texas at Austin, Rosser is a South Asia expert with special interest in the educational structure in India and its tangential impact on the curriculum in the U.S. To legitimise Pakistan as a Muslim homeland, "historians had to nurture the image of the Muslims as a monolithic entity, acting in unison and committed specifically to Islamic values and norms", she says. "In the past few decades," she says, "social studies textbooks in Pakistan have been used as locations to articulate the hatred that Pakistani policy makers have attempted to inculcate towards their Hindu neighbours.

1. The subtle subversion in Pakistan:

scholars A M Nayyar and Ahmed Salim laboriously went through Pakistani textbooks in Social Studies, English, Urdu and Civic Studies prescribed for children studying from class I to XII and have come the conclusion 'that for over two decades the curricula and the officially mandated textbooks in these subjects have contained material that is directly contrary to the goals and values of a progressive, moderate and democratic Pakistan'.According to Nayyar and Salim the Pakistani textbooks narrated history 'with distortions and omissions'. They found:

Inaccuracies of fact and omissions that serve to substantially distort the nature and significance of actual events in our history.

Insensitivity to the actually existing religious diversity of the nation.

Incitement to militancy and violence, including encouragement of Jihad and Shahadat.

Perspectives that encourage prejudice, bigotry and discrimination towards fellow citizens, especially women and religious minorities and other nations.

A glorification of war and the use of force and

Omission of concepts, events and material that could encourage critical self-awareness among students.

The following references are to TerryJ-Ho's usual tirades about "Hindoo lies" concerning Muslim atrocities in India:

1. The reign of Muhammad bin-Qasim is regarded by legitimate scholars such as Upendra Thakkur as "The darkest period in Sind history", with records of massive forced conversions, temple destruction, slaughers and genocides (Sindhi Culture by U.T. Thakkur, University of Bombay 1959).The people of Sind, being inherently pacifist at the time,re-adjusted to the conditions of what has been describes as the "barbarian inroad". Descriptions entail "frightful outbreaks of religious bigotry in several places and temples were wantonly desecrated" during bin-Qasim's rule, and that Muslim travelers often extorted resources from Hindus by legal mandate. Other sources also attest to forced conversions imparted on the native Sindhis by bin-Qasim and a systematic depopulation of the region (Chand, Tara Material and Ideological Factors in Indian History,University of Allahabad, 1966).
2. There are endless refs from Muslim sources that Muhammad Ghori conducted genocide of Hindus at Koi (modern Aligarh), Kalinjar and Varanasi, according to Hasan Nizami's Taj-ul-Maasir, 20,000 Hindu prisoners were slaughtered and their heads offered to crows.
3. Firuz Shah Tughluq was the third ruler of the Tughlaq dynasty of the Delhi Sultanate. The "Tarikh-i-Firuz Shah" is a historical record written during his reign that attests to the systematic persecution of Hindus under his rule

{{cite book | last = Banerjee | first = Jamini | authorlink = Jamini Mohan Bannerjee | title = History of Firuz Shah Tughluq | publisher = Munshiram Manoharlal | date = 1967}} . In particular, it records atrocities on Hindu Brahmin priests who refused to convert to Islam:

Under his rule, Hindus who were forced to pay the mandatory Jizya tax were recorded as infidels, their communities monitored and, if they violated Imperial ordinance and built temples, they were destroyed. In particular, an incident in the village of Gohana in Haryana was recorded in the "Insha-i-Mahry" (another historical record written by Amud Din Abdullah bin Mahru) where Hindus had erected a deity and were arrested, brought to the palace and executed en-masse.

1. Immediately before and during the reign of Aurangzeb, there was massive persecution of Hindus and Sikhs (the article is locked because Islamist editors like TerryJ-Ho want to whitewash this). See Richards, John F. (1995). The Mughal Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 130,177. ISBN 0-521-56603-7. “Jujhar Singh's outright defiance inflamed Shah Jahan. He sent another large army under the nominal command of the sixteen-year-old Prince Aurangzeb to invade Bundelkhand....When overtaken by Mughal troops, Jujhar Singh's principal queens were killed by their attendants, but the remaining royal women were sent to join the Mughal harem. Two very young sons and a grandson were converted to Islam. Another older son who refused to convert was killed outright.”
2. Firishta, Muhammad Qãsim Hindû Shãh, John Briggs (translator) (1829- 1981 Reprint). Tãrîkh-i-Firishta (History of the Rise of the Mahomedan Power in India).The Hindu minority in Kashmir have also been historically persecuted by Muslim rulers. While Hindus and Muslims lived in harmony for certain periods of time (primarily with the Sufi Muslims), several Muslim rulers of Kashmir were intolerant to other religions. Sultãn Sikandar Butshikan of Kashmir (AD 1389-1413) is often considered the worst of these. Historians have recorded many of his atrocities. The Tarikh-i-Firishta records that Sikandar persecuted the Hindus and issued orders proscribing the residence of any other than Muslims in Kashmir. He also ordered the breaking of all "golden and silver images". The Tarikh-i-Firishta further states: "Many of the Brahmins, rather than abandon their religion or their country, poisoned themselves; some emigrated from their native homes, while a few escaped the evil of banishment by becoming Mahomedans. After the emigration of the Bramins, Sikundur ordered all the temples in Kashmeer to be thrown down......Having broken all the images in Kashmeer, (Sikandar) acquired the title of ‘Destroyer of Idols’
3. Under the reign of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, the Muslim cleric Ziauddin Barrani wrote several works, such as the Fatwa-i-Jahandari, which contained disparaging statements against Hindus. Barrani has been described as a "fanatical protagonist of Islam"(Das, Arbind, Arthashastra of Kautilya and Fatwa-i-Jahandari of Ziauddin Barrani:an analysis, Pratibha Publications, Delhi 1996, ISBN:81-85268-45-2 pgs 138-139) and wrote that there should be "an all-out struggle against Hinduism", advocating a militant and dogmatic religiosity (Verma, V.P, Ancient and Medieval Indian Political Thought, Lakshmi Narasan Aggarwal Educational Publications, Agra 1986 pgs218-220). He developed a system of religious elitism to that effect.

All this is but a small cross section of Muslim atrocities in India, based on their institutional hatred for Hindus. TerryJ-Ho and other Islamist users want to dismiss this as "Kaffir Hindoo propaganda", but none of the authors above are Hindus or Hindutva people but accredited scholars. TerryJ-Ho, as uaual, is practising motive assignment (per his most recent tantrums below) that betray his own partisan and extremist intentions on wikipedia. Hkelkar 00:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Terry says that this is a "minority view". In india, all this information is suppressed because of Muslim threats, but the information is from Muslim historical sources, and secular academics from across the board, not a "minority".There are scholars who side with the Islamists, and their views certainly can be mentioned. However, the Islamist editors want all mention of the scholarly view of Muslim atrocities censored from wikipedia, and TerryJ-Ho's distortions below are an example of this trend.

More tendentious behaviour of TerryJ-Ho

Below, TerryJ-Ho says:

_{I suggest the arbitrators to read the reports from journals and newspapers like TIME who have covered these events and compare them to the apologetic tones of the articles} By all means, do so. Also, notice that TerryJ-Ho's sources, like the leftist Newspaper The Guardian and Human Rights Watch have their own biases and prejudices, clearly exposed here (see South Asia Analysis Group for academic refs establishing their non-partisan notability) , here and here. Arundhati Roy, with her anti-Hindu, anti-American and pro=terrorist views, has deliberately fabricated information concerning the riots and exposed accordingly by Balbir Punj here. Muslim mobs attacked and slaughtered low-caste Hindu Dalit as reported by Dalits (ie not "Hindutva") .The attacks on Dalits have largely been ignored by the "secular" politicians, and several Hindu Nationalist organizations such as the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Bajrang Dal came to their aid and that pisses TerryJ-Ho off. The fact that Hindutva groups can care for people goes against the madrassa-inculcated ideology of the "lowly Kaffir Hindoo" who hates Dalits.TerryJ-Ho also wants to eradicate information about Muslims in Gujarat waving pakistan's flag, raided Hindu temples and Human rights watch even reports Islamofascist hate speech being broadcast against Hindus, a ref that Terry cited but did not elaborate on. Terry wants to dismiss this as "Kaffir Hindoo lies" as well, and delete them from wikipedia, regardless of the fact that they are all notable and verifiable.

Response to Mostlyharmless's accusations below

Mostlyharmless holds wikipedia policy in contempt

Please read my contributions to the article in question. They are in scrupulous adherence to wikipedia policy. The narrative is entirely neutral and all claims are attributed as such.My opinions are my own and I have a right to them. Of course, they will not influence the narrative of my edits to articles and , in fact, they haven't. I have established the legitimacy of my edits in the talk page .Mostlyharmless, on the other hand, commented on contributor (me), not content,in his personal attack to me . Per the first paragraph of WP:NPA that is a personal attack. He also declared that he will pursue a witch-hunt against me by "alerting other users" to my views.

This user unilaterally reverted my edits without any reasonable discussion. Massive blanking of sourced edits is vandalism. Plus, there is ample precedent for such criticism in the article per this edit, which has not been contested, unlike my edits. I see a double standard against Indians at work here. Hkelkar 03:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Mostlyharmless promulgates systemic bias

Finally, Mostlyharmless has clearly indicated below that he opposes the opinions of anyone who criticizes his pet organizations. He has engaged in forced censorship (a common practice among libertarians). He removed my edits solely because he disagreed with them, not because of any issues with wikipedia policy, which the edits adhered to rather well. Such editors are unproductive and promulgate the systemic bias problem of wikipedia.Hkelkar 03:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Let me stress that mostlyharmless has made no racist or antisemitic statements, he has quoted an anti-semitic source, which is not the same thing. He just seems misinformed about left-wing antisemitism and too fanatical in his libertarian ways to see the obvious truth.Hkelkar 16:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

New anti-semitism

Mostlyharmless cited left wing countercurrents.org as a legitimate source. I cited an article by them here that showcases serious antisemitic prejudices (Jewish conspiracy theories etc. see New anti-Semitism from the left), thus, my allegations of antisemitism (not against him, but the source) is entirely with merit and the anti-semites in countercurrents.org are certainly not promulgating a "legitimate opinion".Hkelkar 16:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

PLus, the author, Jonathan Cook, is a known sympathizer with extremist terrorism like this neat little propaganda piece, for instance.See this excellent analysis of such bigoted garbage ("The New Anti-Semitism is Blamed (by Jonathan Cook) on a Vast Jewish Conspiracy").Hkelkar 17:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Issues with User:TwoHorned

This is the reason why I suspect him of political and ethnic biases:

User:TwoHorned and Anti-Semitism + Obsession with allegations of Neoconservative/Jewish conspiracy theories:

Misplaced Pages-Fr:

Cet article nécessite une neutralisation évidente. Une phrase comme "... et soutient le règlement pacifique des rivalités régionales et internationales" est véritablement grotesque, quand on connait les prises de position de ce Forum lors de ses engagements pro-israéliens, ainsi que les écrits de Daniel Pipes. La vérité est que le Forum du Moyen-Orient est un des innombrables relais d'une politique pro-guerre et fondalement interventioniste au Proche-Orient, qu'il est aligné sur les thèses néoconservatrices et de la droite israélienne la plus dure. TwoHorned 5 août 2006 à 12:12 (CEST)

Translation:

This article needs neutralization. A phrase like ".....and supports the pacifique settlement of regional and international conflicts" is really grotesque, when one knows the positions of this Forum during their pro-Israel engagments, and also the writings of Daniel Pipes. The truth is that the Forum of the Middle East is one of the countless relays (organisations) of pro-war politics and fundamentally intervenionist in the Middle East, and is aligned on the the most hard neo-conservative and Israeli rightwing theses.

Misplaced Pages-Fr:

Les think-tanks néoconservateurs proches de certains mouvements fondamentalistes juifs ou chrétiens aux US sont d'une nature très particulière, et qui n'a que peu de rapport avec un parti classique conservateur, du type de celui que vous citez. TwoHorned

Translation:

The neo-conservative think-thanks which are close to certain Jewish or Christian fundamentalist movements in the US are of a very particular nature, and which has only little relation with a classic conservative (political) party, of the type that you are citing.

: Here he says that Michelle Malkin is extreme right and very related to the most extremist neocon circles.

Here he attacks Warraq and the ISIS (it is in English) Hkelkar 12:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Notice that he associated "Jews" with neoconservatives, a characterization widely regarded as an anti-semitic ethnic slur (see this).Hkelkar 16:31, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Response to Hornplease by Hkelkar

Hornplease has cited diffs, but has misrepresented them egregiously. Regarding this, it is clear that it represents a scholarly view that satisfies WP:RS and so is admissible. The only reason hornplease wants it taken out is because he wants to promulgate his own prejudices and deny the Noakhali Genocide, much like a holocaust denier, only more subtle.

Hornplease put in a diff of Bakaman's edits in a section titles "Hkelkar has been disruptive". It has nothing to do with me and is clearly another attempt to prejudice the ArbComm. He has cited that anti-semitism of BhaiSaab is an "accusation" whereas I have established it as fact.

I should point out that in his allegation number 6, he has lied through his teeth.Look at the diff carefully. The edits are not misrepresented but constitute a scholarly opinion, entirely citable on wikipedia for which there was near universal consensus (he was the only detractor).

"as well as a complete lack of due diligence when removing statements or demanding citations:"?? Am not required to DEMAND citations per WP:RS. I demanded it, he provided it, I said ok and left the matter alone. Why is he bringing up this non-issue?Again, an attempt to prejudice the arbcomm. Please have immaterial posts removed.

Regarding Point 7, I suggest you look at the entire discussion and you will see an attempt to defame the subject of the article by certain parties, a clear cause for defwarn. Hornplease is again trying to misrepresent the situation totry to get me banned so that he may defame the subject egregiously like he did to so many others.

Regarding point 8, it was a subtle act of vandalism on hornplease's part. He was using one poorly cited source (not by me, but by another user) and using it's removal as a mask to remove a well-cited source. That is a bad faith edit on his part. Again, peruse the diffs and you will see that all my edits have been mainstream sources there and reflected the text, and hornplease only removed them and tried to cover it up with bafflegab to mask his biases

Many of the research involved in making those edits were not done by me but by other users such as User:Freedom skies. I suggest that arbcomm get his side of the story, and he will point out hornplease's egregious abuse in this case. Hkelkar 09:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, take a look at his bad faith edits to the anti-Hindu AfD, making claims that I have demonstrated as falsehoods that I'm sure he knew about.

Falsehoods made by hornplease:

Saying that he hasn't heard of the term "anti-Hindu" and calling it a neologism, when the earliest use of it was by Sir Jadunath Sarkar in the late 1800's, some neologism.

1. Then he claimed that it was "used only by right wing groups", another blatant lie on his part which I proved again by citing academic sources

Then he himself backpedals and admits that non rightwing sources have used the term This shows his intellectual dishonesty.Hkelkar 09:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

1. Finally, hornplease's comment that I ran a googoe book search is another blatant lie. The search was by another user , not by me. Thus, hornplease is an established liar and the arbcomm should take that into consideration regarding his other misrepresentations and falsifications here.Hkelkar 11:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Responses to Twohorned

 Clerk note: Hkelkar's threaded responses moved here. Thatcher131 12:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Please don't lie to blatantly. If you look at Sir Nick's post here you will see that he (a mediating admin) agreed with most of my assertions. Plus, I have clerly established that TwoHorned has made anti-semitic attributes and got rather defensive when I exposed them.Hkelkar 04:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

"nauseating propaganda", if attributed and adequately sourced, is acceptable per wikipedia policy, What is not accpetable is terrorist poison like FOSA and HRW being sourced without appropriate attribution, which is the goal of the Muslim Guild editors (listed and unlisted).Hkelkar 04:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages admins should also be aware that a group of people has, for obvious reasons, the project of using extremist sources like sabrang and imc and others (see my comment concerning Sir Nick's assessment below, on which TwoHorned has lied assiduously) to spread hate against Hindus on wikipedia, a typical tactic used by BhaiSaab and TerryJ-Ho and, evidently, backed by twoHorned in his anti-semitic rants.Hkelkar 04:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

HRW is hardly "harmless", several groups like ADL have confirmed that they are anti-semites and Arvind Bahl has shown that they are anti-Hindu as well. Many reputable news sources have established their pro-Hamas pro-Hezbollah Islamist sympathies. See Human_Rights_Watch#Criticisms, an interesting section that showcases their racist biases.Hkelkar 04:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I have already established that TerryJ-Ho HAS been harrassing me (see the workshop page where even ArbComm mambers have raised this concern).Hkelkar 04:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Notice his baseless comments about "Hindutva rhetoric" where I have used quite legitimate sources to cite facts that have nothing to do with any Hindu group at all (show me where I have done so). This TwoHorned should change his userid to TwoFaced, given his obvious misrepresentations.Hkelkar 04:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I also hope that Arbcom notices his usage of words like "extremist" to denote legitimate think tanks that I have sourced and attributed, as well as websited like http://www.dalithumanrights.com, and others that he dismisses as "Hindutva rhetoric" (see Dalit) should show his own biases on this matter and his attempt to get me banned so that he may put in his own Islamist biases into the articles which I have painstakingly cleaned up and neutralized.Hkelkar 04:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Response to NinaEliza below

In response to NinaEliza's claim of me "misrepresenting" edits, let me point out that all my statements are well-sourced and attributed per WP:RS. In contrast, her friends, several radical Neo-Buddhist editors, have made several misrepresented and biased edits to the Indian Buddhist Movement article, made racist and ethnic attacks against me, and have gotten away with it.They are summarized below:

User:Ambedkaritebuddhist:

1. Summary ."If he would have been anti-Hindu then he could have converted to Islam to take revenge against Hindu Casteism and Untouchability. Hindus fist remove your InHuman Caste System" (using wikipedia as a soapbox)
3. Massive disruption : (he's done this once before)
4. "The link of The-Week? I don't know whos mouthpeice is it?" Accusations against non-partisan sources.
5. There are millions of Ambedkarite all over India and world but all are not converted to Buddhism by taking 22 vows. So the people who are denouncing Caste based Hindu Religon and CONVERTING to Buddhism are Buddhist. Rest of the people in Govt. cencus is FORCIBLY and Cheatingly calculated as Hindu. To prove our point finally we have to give official data. So lets convert more people to Buddhism and show the world that Indian Buddhist Movement is alive and wrowing faster.Don't waste much time with debating hypocrate people but give PROPER REFERENCES and PROOFS and shut the mouth of such people unsourced (and rather outrageous) falsifications. Using wikipedia as a soapbox for missionary propaganda.
6. False accusations of vandalism (ie a personal attack)
7. you both young boys (connotations of paedophilia?). Attacking other moderate Buddhists like Thegreyanomaly:I never asked who are you? OR Never asked your Caste Brahmin by birth or your own religious enlightments?. For that you can write on your own Page. Take care while writings on Buddhist related articles. Wiki Administratotrs please take note of such explanations and the activities of such users.

User Srilankanbuddhist:

1. Using wikipedia for propaganda The article gives interesting and valuable information about Buddhists in India (even though he misrepresented his unreliable sources with false information)
2. Bogus claims of vandalism False accusation of vandalism again
3. Repeated misrepresentations and other forms of vandalism Using an unreliable source that says 3 hundred thousand people converted to Buddhism, then misrepresenting it as 3 million (repreatedly) (see this link to see what the Sinhala Neo-Buddhists have REALLY been up to)

User:Dhammafriend:

1. Tendentious edits: Misrepresentation again (other users agree per by Nineliza herself, no less)
2. Invicil edit summaries Udint (sic) Raj is not lower caste he kicked u r Hindu Religon
3. Why are you worried about Hindu ? u r a Thervada Buddhist so concentrate for positive inputs to Buddhist article Incivil attitude towards moderate Buddhists
4. Caste Brahmins are beggers in Temples - Racist stereotyping
5. meatpuppetry

1. Racist PA from Ambedkaritebuddhist Vandalism by Neo-Jew HKelkar -- Ethnic slur

User:Dhammafriend:

1. Summary:
2. "One more thing BodhiDhamma is my brother in USA so we are not like you people" -- Racism
3. Spamming and Missionary propaganda soapboxing again
4. Again
5. Again
6. idden Attackers Thegreyanomaly and Hkelkar Personal attack to me and a moderate Buddhist
7. Revert-warring

There is much more, and I will elaborate on this matter further. Hkelkar 04:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Arbcomm has to understand that these Neo-Buddhist whack-bags have been getting away with this for MONTHS without any sysop doing anything about them. In the face of such a barrage of insults, PA's and tendentious edits, it is no wonder that I lost my cool on some occasions.Hkelkar 07:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

One must clarify on one thing. There is a Galaxy of difference between the normative Buddhism practised by hundreds of millions of good decent Buddhists around the world, and the poisonous cult of Neo-Buddhism. There are significant similarities between Neo-Buddhists and scientology or Jews for Jesus, bith well-known cults ie, suppressive, secretive, exploitative and often abusive and violent in their rhetoric and action. They are extremely violent, propagandistic, missionary groups who subscribe to Buddhism in name only. Instead, their ideology is basically a form of thuggery with buzzwords borrowed from the Buddhist lexicon (Dhamma etc.). They claim to follow the taeachings of the good Babasaheb Ambedkar, but they misuse his well-intentioned writings to promulgate hatred and violence (see this and this).They, together with the Sinhala quasi-Buddhists, have given Buddhism a very bad reputation and their distortions (and sometimes outright lies) on wikipedia need to be investigated without corrupting our perspective of Buddhism, which is an enlightened system of religious philosophy, millenia old, that has served the spiritual needs of many.Hkelkar 10:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Important update:User:Pkulkarni has been blocked for one month for running these sockpuppet or meatpuppet accounts, as confirmed by User:Dmcdevit:

1. User:Bhangi brahmin
2. User:HKelkar2
3. User:Kelkar123
4. User:Iqbal123
5. User:Dhammafriend
6. User:Ambedkaritebuddhist
7. User:Shrilankabuddhist
8. User:Buddhistindian

The problem users described above were all sockpuppets and were causing disruption, avoiding bans etc.Thus, I was basically right here. Hkelkar 19:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

More regarding hornplease

About hornplease: he's a very biased editor. He goes at great lenghts to denigrate writers sympathetic to Hindu causes like Koenraad Elst (see the long discussion on the Wikiproject about Systematic bias in religion below) or Rosser , sometimes deletes text without reason, or inserts falsehoods. But he's nevertheless careful not to cross the line and appear as a pov pusher (which he obviously is). It seems that while his edit pattern show a consistent and strong pov editing, he is nevertheless always "on the safe side", he takes care not to appear as a pov pusher, though it becomes obvious upon a more detailed examination of his contribs. Here he says "a claim the editors later removed as 'misleading'" which is false and unsourced.

See this little debate below:

1. User:Bondego points out that User:hornplease and User:TerryJ-Ho (formerly User:Lkadvani) are practicing "book-banning" on wikipedia, constantly deleting refs to authors sympathetic to Hindus but having no trouble with authors who exhibit clear signs of Marxist historiography
2. Hornplease replies and Bondego clearly points out the bias on his part
3. Hornplease parries by quoting another opinion
4. Bondego qualifies
5. Bondego points to precedent
6. Hornplease tries to backpedal
7. Bondego shreds hornplease's argument
8. hornplease becomes desperate

The above diffs point to the following:

1. hornplease holds Hindu and Hindu-sympathetic writers to a different standard than he does Muslim or Leftist sympathetic authors
2. He tends to engage in verbal sparring-matches with those he disagrees with
3. He has a clear pattern of bias and double standards Hkelkar 05:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding hornplease's statement concerning "scholars" like Romila Thapar, may I point out that almost ALL of the names he cited, while being published, have been shown to have Marxist historiographical biases, proving my point about his double standards.Thapar is well known to make falsifications, for instance, see & . At best, she is a highly controversial "scholar".Hkelkar 07:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Response to Itsmejudith

I have no animus or ill-feeling against Itsmejudith and would like to work with her to address her issues.I do not have any issues with her edits to the articles as they stand right now.However, I will elaborate on this matter at a later date.Hkelkar 19:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

What I would like to say is that I have not reverted any of her edits since they have unquestionably been in good faith. I disagree with her on some accounts, though. I feel that her post here is s bit skewed since I haven't actually done anything that can be construed as "against her edits" in any way. Once she explains her position articulately and to my satisfaction I have acceded to her edits. I will elaborate on this matter shortly.Hkelkar 19:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

1. My inquiry (not accusation) was based on the legitimate concern that she may be rendering a partisan bias to the said article. Once she explained her position and Basawala (I've got more on him) threatened me I apologized and backed off. Notice that I have always asserted that she is a good editor .
2. Regarding my assertion of "racist wikipedians", it is not entirely unfounded, considering the comments and assertions and POV-warring by the user(s) in question and near-universal consensus against them here,here, here and here.Hkelkar 20:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Evidence regarding ikonoblast

In my opinion, Ikonoblast is among the most malicious and disruptive users that I have encountered on wikipedia so far. He vandalizes articles by removing sourced statements, and tries to edit-war with users by any and all means necessary, upto and inclusing engaging in various forms of baiting, stalking and arguing with admins and even being vicious to them. Here is a small collection of his tendentious edits.

Kancha Ilaiah debate: Attacking reliable Sources on bad faith:

Continuous bad faith assumption:

incivility:

Admin and mediator Ben W bell agreeing with me and the validity of my sources, ikonoblast continued to argue

now just being generally disruptive, since the source in question, Himal Magazine, is well-known. He then tried to deflect the argument

Below are Ben W Bell's reactions:

Finally, Ikonoblast gave up and grumbled away. He then made several incivil comments to Ben W bell: (see summary)

Insulting incivility to admin William M Connolley:

He kept edit-warring on votebank and adding bogus warnings to my page as an intimidation tactic. He kept removing sourced information that the Communist Party of India engages in votebank politics, replacing it with unsourced (and false) information that they did not.

Edit-warring on votebank (vandalistic, since he was removing my sourced edits and not adding any of his own). He violated this proposed principle , made several false accusations of vandalism of Gamesmasterg9's edits

Vandalized a {{dubious}} tag without discussion

Deliberately misrepresented a source (the himalmag ref he cited does not support his edits about the Communist Party avoiding votebank politics)

When I fixed it, he reverted with an incivil edit summary

Persisted revert-warring:

Again, false accusation of vandalism on gamesmasterg9's edits:

False accusation of vandalism on MY edits:

He did all of the above in relatively quick succession, demonstrating an intent to disrupt the editing process in order to push his agenda.

Edit-warring on Laloo Prasad Yadav

Same thing as votebank. False accusation of vandalism in edit summary:

Bogus warnings galore: intimidation tactic accusing me of rv warring, when it was he who who had been misrepresenting sources, and revert-warring to push that POV.

An argument erupted between ikonoblast and gamesmasterg9, where ikonoblast repeatedly cast aspersions on him,assumed bad faith, violated WP:OWN and bullied gamesmasterg9 to the point of frustration:

Incivility to me:

He then accused US of harrassment, to which he was replied by gamesmasterg9:

Hkelkar 01:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Nobleeagle

TerryJ-Ho has a prejudice against Hinduism, Hindus and Hindu culture

The most disturbing bit of this evidence is the heading. Culture of Hate, he then goes to talk about how Hindus in India are prejudiced against Muslims. But what is the Culture of Hate, a religion that has been known for its peacefulness has now suddenly spawned a culture of hate? Clear bias, almost disturbing view of another culture. The rest of the discussion is on Hkelkar's Jewishness. This is not the first time such users have placed huge importance on Hkelkar's religion. just one more example. TerryJ-Ho reckons Hindu culture is a Culture of Hate and then goes on to try and prove Hkelkar is Hindu, which to him implies that Hkelkar is from this Hate-filled culture. I am personally offended. Nobleeagle 04:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

TerryJ-Ho acts in bad faith against Hindu or Hindutva-sympathetic users

First of all. I made a simple good faith merge of seperate incidents on 2002 Gujarat violence. I don't see any bad faith or Hindutva propaganda in my edit. TerryJ-Ho comes back and accuses me of doing a PR for the Gujarat Government and labels my edit as disgusting. see here. I'm offended by that as he effectively accuses me of supporting the killing of innocent people.

Also see the archived deletion debate here. TerryJ-Ho nominates a well-sourced and well-built article for two reasons. The fact that it breeds Hindu sympathetic feelings and the fact that it was created by Hkelkar. Nothing else. He then brings up the point that Anti-Hindu is an adjective. Well then he should've asked for a move or politely asked for a merge. But he acted in bad faith. If you see his first comments he describes Hindutva - the right wing Hindu religio- Xenophobe movement in India and increasingly abroad . Firstly the right wing religio-xenophobe accusation is false, but I shouldn't talk about that here, secondly that proves that his motives for this deletion debate were simply because he wanted to get rid of Hindutva on Misplaced Pages. Nobleeagle 23:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Ikonoblast (previously User:Holywarrior) acts in bad faith

I'd like to draw attention to this little section here on Talk:Khatri. Please take a read through.

First of all he accuses me of sockpuppetry because I sent a Welcome message to their talk page. Then he goes on to say Anon. first of all let me put it very frankly---I have no respect for Anon. editors. Nobleeagle 05:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Ikonoblast spreads rumours about other users

On this very talk page, he said Nobleeagle's misdeeds against me are amazing. I have learnt that he used to leave my signature before abusing some newcommers (anon. IPs), plz check his contributions. He was, I believe, referring to the evidence I presented against him just above. Let me say I have never faked people's signatures, but what Ikonoblast said on this talk page was a blatant lie. Here is the diff for my above evidence, so there was no faking signatures. Nobleeagle 06:20, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Evidence presented by TerryJ-Ho

Responses

If blocks are any indication - I have not been blocked but for 1 hour in total on Bakasuprman's call.HKelkar is increasingly trying to portray my edits in negative light when I have on most occasions avoided rhetoric which is a hallmark of almost all of Hkelkar's interventions even to this date.He seems bent on making me suffer the same fate as him as a result of this arbitration knowing that his position is increasingly becoming precarious.I could personally post in more evidences but I do not have as much time online as HKelkar.I would assume that arbitrators will themselves make an effort to understand the situation and not rely only on evidences here MerryJ-Ho 11:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Response to Bakasuprman

• Just click on Hindu fundamentalism and know the difference between Hinduism and Hindutva on Misplaced Pages itself and know to what "Being Hindu" - Hindutva redirects to MerryJ-Ho 11:45, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• As an example of Bakasuprman's edits - He prefers to remove my edits based on Brittanica and CNN - The actual period of advent of Hinduism in Afghanistan is not certain.The Chinese traveller Hsuan Tsang (Tripitaka)wrote in the 7th century of the existence of Hindu Shahi kingdoms in the Kabul, Gardez and Ghazni areas.Hinduism influenced many Afghan states under the Hephthalites and Sasanids. Some excavations sites in Kabul and Ghazni exhibit common Hindu and Buddhist religious places implying there was significant intermingling between the two religions in Afghanistan.

• and now the same article after HKelkar's edits says triumphatically Hinduism in Afghanistan has existed for almost as long as Hinduism itself while the statement itself does not show on what basis one can say that.

Response to Nobeleagle

• Anyone reading my comments knows what I mean and not what you are trying to project.Another time tested strategy of this group of editors to save Hkelkar's skin - instead of replying to the charges with reason- they will attack othersMerryJ-Ho
• Again - Mr.Kelkar's Jewish religion is being raked by this group and not me or those who oppose the Hindutva - Hindu right wing POV pushing on Misplaced Pages.MerryJ-Ho

Response to Freedomskies

• Double standards - Much hype is being made of my comments on "Culture of hate" - which is a specific instance where I have termed HKelkar's activities as hateful and not "Hinduism" as religion or "Indian Culture" to which I belong too.While HKelkar got some Bhiasaab blocked for comments that were construed as Anti-Semitic - he walks away in all liberty calling me Pakistani - which in Indian scenario is considered an abuse - considering that Pakistan is taken as India's traditional enemy.

Response to Hkelkar

Will write more from home -

1. incivil (and deliberately false) edit summaries:

• Is it a common trend? Anyone looking at the history of that article will know the reason why?..False according to whom?

1. Hypocrisy:He accuses me of using "Anti-X, Anti-Y", but he himself uses the term anti-Muslim liberally, even to the point of violating WP:BLP against Daniel Pipes.Irrelevant BLP against Pipes: Again:.That's three times, in case anyone's counting

• Yes, please do count (the same article shown twice) and also don't forget that I explained the reason later as below:I have taken cue from you .In fact, I have been everyone as Anti-Hindu. ...What is your definition of Liberal usage..one ,two or three

1. More BLP violation on Narendra Modi, using poorly sourced statements to defame personality:

• "The Guardian" published from London..Poor source???..All are invited to look into what was removed by HKelkar

1. Paranoid accusations of "fascist right wing blah blah":
2. Tried to instigate a witch Hunt by filing a medcab, which got resoundly denied:Misplaced Pages:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-08-18_Edits_by_Netaji_and_Bakaspuprman_on_India_related_pages

• As far as I know - it was decided that the issue was not under the purview of Medcab but Arbcomm - whether resoundly denied or otherwise seems another matter..btw ultimately we have reached Arbcomm

1. Evoking a commonly false argument to whitewash antisemitism:(TerryJ-HO's not stupid, he is aa very smart man who clearly knew the fallacy of this argument and used it merely to provoke me)

• HKelkar could also be a very smart man not to fall into such percieved provocations..At least we find him on WP more often than one finds TerryJ-Ho

1. Could be ignorance, could be baiting, you decide.Removing sourced edit:

• Have some shame..it is crystal clear that that item was not supported by any source

1. Repeated Bad Faith Assumptions:
2. Bad faith AfD (overwhelmingly condemned as such), already discussed by NobleEagle

• That AfD was not successful as votes were solicited by HKelkar meaning many editors of a background similar to him voted, rhetoric was built up attacking my and other balanced user's previous edits rather than the article itself.One of the neutral supporter for delete said Delete. It brings together collection of unrelated events and classifies them under term coined here. I see very, very disturbing trend to create "anti-everything" articles on Misplaced Pages. If this gets free I expect to have Anti-Andorraism one day.

1. Spamming talk pages of unrelated aritcles with disputes from other articles to try to form coteries of Guild meatpuppets:

• Yeah until one reads "stop this behavior, there is nothing wrongwith what TerryJ-Ho has said to you, its pretty clear you keep and adding {{dubious}} tags for no apparent reason other then that the information which is presented you don't like"...]

1. Further Spamming of talk pages with material that is irrelevant to the topic being discussed, also baiting:
2. Falsified/misleading statements with a clear intent of ethnic baiting:
3. Whitewashing topics without providing any sources. He did this to the point of blanking entire sections,vandalism as well:
4. Again, labeling of users and ethnic baiting on Muslim Guild page to invite mass-reverters etc:

Concerning TerryJ-Ho's obsession with my Jewishness, he has routinely attacked my Jewishness and has constantly harassed me about it . He has been repeatedly incivil to me and been warned by an admin to desist this line of harassment .

• HKelkar was very eagerly answering the questions until Nick wrote that comment.Why did he not write that he was feeling harassed. What is the defintion of Jewishness that I attacked?

Newer Responses

• _{Request to Arbcomms - please note that there is a significant contradiction to my edits and what has been represented by HKelkar in these allegations.So my humble request is that you check these by clicking them one by one.It is frustrating for me to reply to each of these one by one.}

_{User:TerryJ-Ho deliberately misrepresents sources}

1. Here, he cited a partisan group as "independent media" (fixed by me)

• _{The independent media stuff was from reversion and not my own words.Secondly, apart from PUCL - which is a Civil rights group in India - it is true that independeent media reported the same MerryJ-Ho}

1. _{Same again (sabrang is a partisan Muslim-run lobby group that glorifies Islamic terrorism)}

• _{Sabrang is a Anti-Communalist publication - TRUTH - is that not only Sabrang was linked many independent publications were very clearly linked.I am copying them below:}

-After riots, it’s economic boycott call

_{User:TerryJ-Ho uses wikipedia as a soapbox for expressing partisan views #Here, makes political statements against Hindutva in an article about riots.}

• _{Its a sourced statement of an International Fact Finding Team in Gujarat - this was from Indian Express and based on Indian Press Agency - Press Trust of India.}

1. _{Here, he calls allegations of media bias as "ope/eds by Hindu commentators", despite the fact that the religion of the parties are not all established}

• _{All these are Weasel statements to scale down the magnitude of the massacre in Gujarat}

1. _{- He cites another partisan opinion (defense council of the victims) with very subtle POV wording.}

• _{This report is from Indian Newspaper The Hindu - and those are not my words but are from the Newspapers headlines-bylines}

User:TerryJ-Ho engages in trollish behaviour

1. _{"Lies lies spread by Hindutvaadis" irrelevant commentary in the talk page of an unrelated article.}

_{The article in question covers Tipu Sultan and his depiction in the Hindutvavadi literature as distortion of facts - It is very much related to the article and not a troll.Hkelkar immediately removed it from the talk page as it showed his position in bad light against all WP norms}

1. _{Again, well-poisoning and trollery on Talk:2002 Gujarat violence, soapboxing against an incident that did not happen in the period of the article subject (not in 2002, and non-violent to boot)}

_{Should we take HKelkar's words or of a reputed publication Outlook - that publishes it in context of the Gujarat riots}

1. _{Please pay attention to the fact that HKelkar has written some new evidence that makes one believe that the words that I have boldened in the following text are mine.These are strictly not mine but HKelkar's words} MerryJ-Ho 10:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC) _{"Some background material.Regarding point #1 above,TerryJ-Ho says below that his screed is relevant because he assigns me a "Hindoo liar" motive, alleging that it is the product of "Kaffir Hindoo historical revisionism". However, the refs I used in that article are shown below:}

1. _{Perpetrators of Godhra Train Burning are innocent and Indian Army are all traitors but reaction riots in Gujarat were perpetrated by "evil Hindoos" (see his comments below)}

_{Ohh, Its getting very distracting for me - "evil Hindoos" is not my wordings..Please see the entire thread to learn why I said what I said.Specially, Bakaman's provocations - This is one of the few places I lost my cool MerryJ-Ho 11:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)}

1. He uses the declaration of Narendra Modi (a man Muslims hate) to justify violence against Hindus.

_{:::Same as above.read the entire thread to see why the same has been referred #Muslims are justified in attacking Hindus as a "sponteneous reaction". All this is common Lashkar-e-Toiba and Students Islamic Movement of India rhetoric.}::::

1. _{Disparaging Hindu beliefs (he should have criticized in a scholarly way, but his tone is mocking, like the tone of an Islamic Fundamentalist) Hkelkar 03:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC) - They are not in ridiculing way. MerryJ-Ho}

Evidence showing that Hkelkar is an upgraded version of Subhash Bose, Pussyamitra Sunga et. al

• Shiva's Trident has recieved numerous last warnings and HKelkar himself has recieved them in abundance.If it is established that both are the same person , that is aggravating.As this is not a live audience where the two persons can be called separately, I believe due weightage will be accorded to the circumstantial evidence which is quite strong in this case.

Evidence will be given here

Editing per Pussyamitra Sunga

• Pusyamitra is my brother.We think alike - by the way - as Netaji he confused that he was editing in the same login as Pusyamitra while claiming to be his brother, on realising he covered the tracks by changing it to "Netaji" is my brother
• We edit each other's stuff?So what?Kya Karega be? - The sentence in Hindi meaning - What can you do..
• Notice that we have different IP's
• The reason why one can not expect HKelkar to write German as he used in the previous avatars is that this has already been pointed out
• Hindutva has no fascist inclination because the definition of fascism is different

Editing per Shiva's Trident

• Sammihit Bharat! Raise your guns and fight for the Hindu way of life! The user page - the comments are worth reading
• RSS is a volunteer organization that aims to speak for the global minority of Hindus who are the victims of apartheid in their own homeland from the Islamofascist-sympathetic UPA government, pseudosecular anti-Hindu cabals and terror-propagandists. They are no different from the Jewish B'Nai B'rith. Only anti-hindus choose to paint them as a parochial and communal organization. None of them have any facts, only polemical attacks. Political Posturing in favour of Hindutva parties - notice evoking similarities with Jewish organisations

• the only things edited are POV statements made by the Liberal Left

Editing per HKelkar

• If you want to tout the latte-drinking elitist secular fundamentalism of the Liberal Left academia without even following wikipedia..

Editing per Shiva's Trident

• There is no shortage of hindu-haters among white scholars, or their pinko moonbat lackeys in India.

Editing per HKelkar

• The standard Desi moonbat politburo propaganda really.

Evidence showing that Hkelkar is a Hindutva POV posting machine

Always on - HKelkar goes on like a bulldozer, destroying numerous articles within a single session calling the process as NPOVising the article and balancing the article.

• Incivility in general towards Muslims overflowing in articles and edit summaries Here Hkelkar seems to think he is doing some favour to them by removing Qutub Minar and inserting Jama Masjid in its place saying "Jama Masjid is a better illustration of Muslim architecture. Qutub Minar is basically just one big penis" - as usual this would be in line with the Hindutva agenda of degrading the significance of Muslim monuments- some of which they claim_{....A BBC report goes like this ....Earlier this year, it called for the storming of one of India's landmark tourist attractions - the Qutab Minar in Delhi - and for the takeover of the Quwwatul Islam mosque.}

• HKelkar removes sourced edits critical of Narendra Modi saying rv rubbish edits and BLP violation. Terry if you persist then I will report you for BLP and pastes a BLP warning on TerryJ-Ho's talk page adding (hidden) in the page that
• HKelkar uses incivil language towards the founder of Pakistan M.A. Jinnah (known by his title Qaid e Azam)as recently as yesterday as " The total whack job Muslims, on the other hand, got whackier and whackier, which Jinnah exploited for his own personal gain so that he may call himself "Qaid-e-Azam" and get buried in a fancy tomb instead of the village toilet where his corpse belongs" MerryJ-Ho 09:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

 +  
 + :Support: 
 + :#Fred Bauder 18:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC) 
 + :# I dislike continuances in general, but this is tolerable. Charles Matthews 19:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC) ]