Misplaced Pages

• "Many Luthra's are extremely successful in terms of business."
• "The Gupta Dynasty assumed control of Northern India in 400 CE, and the Luthras joined forces with the Guptas to maintain law and order in what became India's Golden Age."
• Luthras held prominent positions as rulers and warriors.

and adding alleged prominent people with the surname Luthra who do not meet wikipedia guidelines for prominence.

He has since been stalking and vandalising Malhotra, Khatri, Kapoor etc pages by users who have changed his edits to NPOV ones. See his vandalism of the Malhotra page for example where he has removed dozens of lines of entries with authoritative sources such as links to Indian government websites. He has vandalised the Malhotra page again today though I see another user has reverted his edit.

Could dishant please be blocked from doing so. He has already received warnings to stop.

The IP user is mincing facts. The versions that he brings up are long gone and I no longer condone them. Look at the current versions for which he is reverting me for and then make your own decision. He makes outrageous claims such as the idea that Malhotras were descended from Yudhishtira. Please don't listen to his rhetoric, just look at the diffs and decide on your own. dishant 00:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I would just like you to look at the diffs I have presented above, the case is pretty clear cut. dishant 01:06, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: a star

Hi. Thanks for the star. I was amazed that I felt as happy to receive this one as I did for my first star. This will keep me going for a long time. :) - Aksi_great (talk) 18:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Ref:Gandhi and Tagore

See the infoboxes and the article their- place of birth contradict! What shall it be? I'm myself confused. India or British India! Personally,I feel India. I am yet to edit. Thought taking your suggestion on this matter. ~KnowledgeHegemony~ 15:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Help with a page and a user

Hi. I've been engaged in an edit "war" with the user Indian50 on the Punjab (India) page, specifically over the Punjabi culture section. On May 7 I noted the inaccuracy, pov, and overall poor quality of the section, adding a "rewrite" tag and posting a comment on the talk page. Both actions were promptly reverted without discussion. Checking this page today, I noticed this and set it back, after which Indian50 arrived and this all started. Every step of the way I have explained my actions and my genuinely obvious and elementary points, to which in response I have received from him swift, unexplained reversions, and an unfathomable obsession with upholding wholly dubious and unwarranted assertions. Please mediate. Thanks. Tuncrypt 03:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added book literature source to rectify. Thanks Rama's Arrow.--Indian50 03:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

No you haven't. It's a blatantly POV and vacuous sentence that you copied from a website. Tuncrypt 03:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Stop making personal attacks- that sentence has been on wikipedia for over a year so how the hell did i add it. Basically you don't know how to talk to people in a civil manner you have been warned many times about this by others on other articles. I will not be spoken in the way in which you have. You have been warned by many users about your uncivil behaviour you don't know how to behaviour. You are immature and arrogant. I agree with and I'm with the rest of wikipedia memebers that you don't know how to behave without resorting to personal attack when you don't get you way. I've had enough of you don't talk to me.--Indian50 04:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

This frothing of yours doesn't change anything. It's still a "blatantly POV and vacuous sentence" that shouldn't be there. Tuncrypt 04:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. Thanks for protecting the Punjab (India) page. However, in response to what the placed banner asks, only you can resolve the dispute, as Indian50 is not open to talking. It is just a single sentence, "Traditional historic Punjabi culture is renowned for its tolerance, progressive and logical approach to life", whose appropriateness you have to judge. It think it's inappropriate because

• It subjective, opinionated, unverifiable POV.
• The sourcing of it is dubious because:
  • It was originally copied from a casual government/culture website and only now retroactively "sourced".
  • Indian50 reverted at least ten times (half a page of history) before adding the reference (simultaneously reading up on things and engaged in an edit war, how convenient!).
  • It still remains subjective and unverifiable POV. It's nonacademic and thus unlikely to be in that source. "Punjabis are logical", lol.
  • How can the single sentence/tidbit of "Traditional historic Punjabi culture is renowned for its tolerance, progressive and logical approach to life" be spread over 5 pages, according to the reference?
• It even defies common knowledge, as you wrote in your comment to Indian50. Are selective abortion, Khalistan, and the partition riots "tolerant, progressive and logical"?

It's all so simple really, but with this user, Indian50, simplicity and sense cease to be.

Second, I seem to be suffering "Punjabi retaliation" on my Gujarati grammar page. If my revert is current, check the history. The anonymous IP 213.122.29.63 is flagrantly vandalizing it. I'll have you know that 213.122xxxx is the same IP that reverted my initial "rewrite" banner placing and talk page comment on May 7, as well as my initial fixing of that on May 15 (yesterday). Indian50 it must be. This guy is infuriating and baffling and I want to explode.

Thanks for you help. Tuncrypt 01:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay. I guess I can get some people to side with me. Though tell me, we at least make 2 to 1, right? :]

On the issue of vandalism, if you cannot block 213.122xxxx, then can you at least place one of those "only established users can edit this page" banners, to you know, stop him and his anonymous IPs? That would be extremely helpful. Tuncrypt 02:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Dear Rama, - How do I tell you how much I am beholden to you for correcting my mistake in History of Mumbai in thinking that the Vasai-Virar region, with its constituent villages of Nirmal, Remedy, Sandor, Agashi, Nandakal, Papdy, Pale, Manickpur & Merces, are located not on the island of Salsette but on the mainland north of it. How silly of me! Or, perhaps, these places are bilocating, being present both in the Vasai region and on the Salsette island. Dear me! With such a great wonder occuring, we must alert the scientific world so that scientists can throng these places and study this wonderful phenomenon.

Once again, thanks!!!

17:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rama

Left reply on my talk page--Indian50 02:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Some investigation

Some investigation is required to these Anti-Hindu remarks here which describe Hindu scriptures as pieces of low mentality and Hindu sages as worse than the most foolish person on this Earth. Basically a single purpose account has begun work on the Indian caste system page and is systematically insulting the religion. For example, excerpts from the Manu Smriti have been removed to make way for secondary source POV. Please take action, Indian caste system is a page of high traffic and the harm caused because of this negative portrayal of Hinduism is difficult to handle. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by me.

Vandalism on Gujarati grammar

Hello. Could you protect Gujarati grammar? It seems user:Indian50 keeps vandalizing it through different IP addresses. BernardM 11:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Kazi Nazrual Islam

I will dicuss loater on.User talk:Yousaf465

Take a look

• the sages (so called philosophers) are worse than even the most foolish person today
• A
• B Most Hindu scriptures are pieces of low mentality
• C
• D
• Maintenance of incorrect views which demean 75% of Indians
• subhuman practices in the worst social system in the world
• all other Indians apart from Dalits have polluted minds full of theft and corruption

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by me.

Ref:Jana gana mana- Your views?

The following are my personal views:
We all have sung 'Jana Gana Mana' a thousand times right from grade one. So tell me aren't the lyrics:

Jana-gana-mana-adhinayaka, jaya he

Bharata-bhagya-vidhata.
Punjab-Sindh-Gujarat-Maratha
Dravida-Utkala-Banga
Vindhya-Himachala-Yamuna-Ganga
Uchchala-Jaladhi-taranga.
Tava shubha name jage,
Tava shubha asisa mange,
Gahe tava jaya gatha,
Jana-gana-mangala-dayaka jaya he
Bharata-bhagya-vidhata.
Jaya he, jaya he, jaya he,

Jaya jaya jaya, jaya he!

Now I request you to read this:
Version which was reverted by user:Ragib
Don’t you feel that these actual lyrics supported by(below) be included in the article

• National Anthem - Know India. Nation Portal of India. Government of India
• whitehouse.gov

It included the 'hindi version' and the fact that it was adopted in Hindi.

Sources I have cited include

1. • National Anthem - Know India. Nation Portal of India. Government of India
   • whitehouse.gov
   • National Anthem on Lokpriya.com
   • Indian Embassy of Finland and Estonia
   • Indian Embassy of RUSSIA

and now read the current version. Isn't incomplete?

The following are others’ views:

user:Ragib (worth having a look at one of his edit summaries-) reverted the edits saying you cannot include the Hindi version info and the adoption in Hindi info no matter which site you cite because the 'original' discussion this doesn't 'include' anything about Hindi version!

But as you know after discussions a committee is always formed to act over it and make final amends after discussion.

Also if you go by that argument it doesn’t even include the fact that

• Only the 1st stanza is the national anthem.
• A formal rendition of the national anthem should take fifty two seconds.
• Shortened version consisting of the first and last lines (and taking about 20  seconds to play) is also staged occasionally
• Occasions the national anthem should be sung.

As all these rules and regulations are not discussed it is clear that we cannot make the discussion transcripts our Bible.

You may even see a link in that same site leading http://india.gov.in/knowindia/national_anthem.php which includes the Hindi lyrics. (as a matter of fact all these sites are maintained by National Informatics Centre (NIC). It is a premier Science and Technology Organisation under the Department of Information Technology of the Government of India actively working for the past three decades in the area of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Applications in the Government Sector. To read more see: Homepage of NIC)

and also if you see http://www.whitehouse.gov/national-anthem/newdelhi-full.html which is clearly titled India National Anthem: Jana-Gana-Mana (Thou Art the Ruler of All Minds) Original Hindi Words: Latin Transliteration. Even Manorama Yearbook 2003 Pg.519 which has full lyrics, states the-Jana-gana-mana-adhinayaka, jaya he version.

Even the talkpage of Jana Gana Mana (please read it) has had many futile debates.

With allegations by user:Sarvagnya that Hindi is not our National language!!! This is what he has to say

Hindi is NOT the national language of India. Much as you might like to believe so, it is NOT. This is not what I say, but this is what the Constitution of India says. Do some reading of relevant stuff before you make such assertions of your POV Sarvagnya 03:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Whereas the article et. sq.343 clearly mentions Hindi as the official language of the Union and the regional languages as official languages of the states.

SameerKhan came up with a good suggestion:-

According to the government of India and according to facts we should be able to agree on:

1. Jana Gana Mana was originally written in Bengali in Bengali script (although some archaic Sanskrit borrowings are used as they often are in formal Bengali).

2. The Hindi version of Jana Gana Mana was adopted as the National Anthem of India.

Thus, an article written in English about Jana Gana Mana should (I consent) include three languages: English, Bengali, and Hindi, arranged possibly something like:

a. Original Bengali version

b. Romanization of Bengali to English

c. Adopted Hindi version (National Anthem of India)

d. Romanization of Hindi to English

e. English translation

How does this sound? If we agree on these facts (which are backed up by the references in the article), this is the most appropriate way to go, I now feel. --SameerKhan 23:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Note: The following opinions on the topic of all the 'quoted' users may have significantly changed in the due course of time.

Other participants were- deeptrivia, Apandey, Parthi, Tuncrypt], Antorjal, User talk:Bakasuprman, Deepak D'Souza,ppm

So, Now should this version(source from whitehouse.gov) be included or not India National Anthem: Jana-Gana-Mana (Thou Art the Ruler of All Minds) Original Hindi Words: Latin Transliteration

Jana-gana-mana-adhinayaka, jaya he

Bharata-bhagya-vidhata

Panjaba-Sindha-Gujrata-Maharata-

Dravida-Utkala-Vanga

Vindhya-Himachala-Yamuna-Ganga

Uchhala-Jaladhi-taranga

Tava shubha name jage

Tava shubha ashisha mage

Gave tava jaya-gatha

Jana-gana-mangala-dayaka jaya he

Bharata-bhagya-vidhata.

Jaya he! Jaya he! Jaya he!

Jaya jaya jaya, jaya he!

I really want to see what's your say on this? I felt the need to highlight it as it’s a matter of our national anthem.

-~KnowledgeHegemony~ 08:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Place your comments here- Jana Gana Mana talkpage- possible resolution --~KnowledgeHegemony~ 09:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

IIPM

Exactly what I had said has happened. For a month, the vandals at IIPM were laying low, because luckily for them, the version that the page got locked on was their whitewashed version. Now that the editlock has expired, they just keep reverting to that version. I have added new important information (validly cited from mainstream newspapers) about government investigations against IIPM for tax evasion and false ads. Those folks are just reverting them, and are not ready to discuss anything. Makrandjoshi 14:49, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Eveidence

Hello Nirav, I oversighted the email snippets that you have posted because to stay on the safe side, I do not believe that they are supposed to be public. Can you repost the evidence please? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)