Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Yeditor (talk | contribs) at 12:33, 13 August 2006 (Vandalism on Upanishads). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive1 July - August 7 06' (30kB)

Statement

I see that those who cheat the system, stalk contribs, and act in bad faith go unpunished while users that contribute are persecuted for their views. Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Archive

Archive made above page was 30kb

Correspondence with Blnguyen

hi there Bakasuprman. I've replied to a whole bunch of Indian related stuff that concerns you, BhaiSaab and HolyWarrior on my talk page. you may want to have a look there, as it seems convenient to keep 3-4 way converstations in one place. Also BhaiSaab has given me some diffs which you may want to comment on, I'm between university briefings and seminars so I'll look at the diffs and your possible response in a couple of hours. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 02:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC).

Holywarrior is a venom-spitter all around lol. He doesn't need me to have a punching bag, BhaiSaab on the other hand, doesn't contribute to articles and sneakily gets his enemies blocked.Bakaman _Bakatalk 03:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. This is regarding your above comment.Holy|Warrior 15:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe I would if you stopped trying to get me blocked for dubious reasons. Bakaman _Bakatalk 15:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

PS:Dubious Reasons, and see WP:NPA,WP:AGF again.Its informal BTW.Holy|Warrior 15:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I respect the opinion of CONTRIBUTING editors not people on Misplaced Pages who serve no purpose but to get me blocked.Bakaman _Bakatalk 15:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Shakuntala Devi

Hi, I know you seem to be busy with more important things at the moment, but would you mind clearing up this matter? I replied to your comment on my talk page and notified you, but perhaps you missed it. Thanks, Shreevatsa 08:03, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Thaks for remininding me, I replied on your talk page.Bakaman _Bakatalk 15:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Countering systemic bias in Hindu-related articles

Hi, I'm setting up this project as a child project of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Countering systemic bias in religion. Will you be a part of this, per your "fundy list" discussions? --→Talk 11:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:RfC

Hi - this RfC is incomplete and improperly setup, and will be deleted after 48hrs if there is no prior evidence for dispute resolution provided. Rama's arrow 21:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

You stated that you respect my views. So permit me to advise you to preserve self-control, no matter how many people are offensive, pushy or arrogant POV warriors. Such people will at one point or another be flushed out of the system. If you control your passions and uphold Misplaced Pages policies, you will earn respect and appreciation. Its about building an encyclopedia, a collection of knowledge and not proving/disproving different political and religious ideas. So don't be upset or angered if other people don't understand this. Rama's arrow 21:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I'll try, its just that with Netaji gone, people are harrassing those of us who see the positives of Hindutva and don't cheat the system. Netaji makes a lot of noise and doesn't go down without a fight while the rest of us have not learned the ins and outs of all the WP: stuff. Bakaman _Bakatalk 21:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Ayyavazhi

Hi, thanks for your query re Ayyavazhi in my talk page. However I know next to nothing regarding these pages. My only contribution is to keep them NPOV. If you want to insert your query in the Ayyavazhi talk page, I'm sure some one will oblige. - Parthi 22:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Ishwar Chandra Gupta and Sangad Prabhakar

Thanks for taking the initiative in expanding the first one and starting the second article. Keep up the work. --Ragib 23:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Bakaman, please, please stop attacking other editors, . It accomplishes nothing useful, helping only to make Misplaced Pages a depressing place for all.Timothy Usher 03:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, his conspiracy is not a personal attack? Stop persecuting me for my MfD vote.Bakaman _Bakatalk 03:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Bakaman seems to think everyone that says something negative about him is persecuting him. That's not so. BhaiSaab 03:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I've replied to the latest bunch of documents at my talk page.Blnguyen | rant-line 05:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Your Request for Diffs

Provide some diffs. D-boy is right. Bhaisaab does NOT contribute, he merely excites controversy. Blnguyen and Dboy also believe the block was unwarranted. Bakaman _Bakatalk 22:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Diffs for what? BhaiSaab 03:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Reply to your recent message: . --Bhadani 07:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

let it go

there's nothing to fight about anymore....--D-Boy 18:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Anti-Baka

Civility

This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks, you may be blocked for disruption. Tom Harrison 20:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you did call him a wikistalker. I told you not to comment on people, but only on content. I have blocked you for three hours. When you return, do not make any more attacks. Tom Harrison 22:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

This is unfair, I got blocked twice while BhaiSaab never gets blocked.Bakaman _Bakatalk 22:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I see that I am being persecuted for my views. Bakaman _Bakatalk 22:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I've made some comments on the page. Please restrict yourself to citing the diffs and appropriate policies. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 03:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC).

Stuff

Looks like Timothy Usher just vandalized his talk page here. ,

{unblock|Admin involved in a content dispute cannot block a differing POV. Read dispute summary below.}

His view & my view . Then user:BhaiSaab solicited a block from the admin who became hostile when confronted .

Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Truce?

Re to your message:
Hello! First, let me clarify that I'm not a sysOp. I've gone through all the diffs that you provided, and entire conversations on all the user pages. The nature of the articles you (people) are involved in are admittedly controversial. However that needn't mean that one should lose their cool. As far as I can see, there were mistakes (involving personal attacks, incivility and assumption of bad faith) on both sides. Also, ignorance of rules is not an excuse. As such, I would say that there is no point in deepening this debate any further. Instead, I would request the concerned parties to move out of the battleground, and involve yourself towards more constructive editing. Perhaps the whole incident might seem unfair to you. But why not call for a truce and continue editing, keeping in mind the points laid out at Misplaced Pages:Staying cool when the editing gets hot?-- thunderboltz05:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Sure, will do. Have fun! -- thunderboltz18:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Why Can't We Be Friends?

   * Baka wa shinanakya naoranai.
   * Literally: Unless an idiot dies, he won't be cured.
   * Meaning: Only death will cure a fool. / Stupid is forever.

BAKA is forever. Dont be anti-baka. MrTrubak 18:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Truebakasan wa baka desu - Bakaman _Bakatalk 03:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Lol too bad the real Bakasan (his username was like ---suke) was dumb enough to violate WP:AN and vandalized the Baka page. Bakaman _Bakatalk 03:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

O wait he was on Uncyclopedia and got blocked. How baka.Bakaman _Bakatalk 03:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

2002 Gujarat violence/2006 revision

Dear Bakaman,

I saw that you've been contributing to 2002 Gujarat violence/2006 revision, which is great. However, I noticed that your edit summary seems not to conform with the proposal I laid out:

"wow the first thing they do is turn this into a cesspool of anti-Hindutva POV"

One of the guidelines I proposed says:

"2. Avoid characterizing the politics, motives, POV, or objectivity of material added to the article. Simple explain what you disagree with and why you disagree based on accuracy or that it disagrees with your point of view and then explain briefly what yours is."

Could I please suggest that you review Talk:2002_Gujarat_violence#Proposal_for_informal_mediation_from_Bcorr.

I hope this helps, and thank you for contributing your knowledge and expertise to the revision of this article.

BCorr|Брайен 10:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The word "zealot" simply means "one who is overzealous", but it can be taken the wrong way, as you pointed out. Perhaps "fervent" would be a better adjective to describe them. BhaiSaab 00:00, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps we should leave the Babri Mosque out altogether for now, and leave it at the train burning article. What do you think? BhaiSaab 00:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Also try to use English words when possible; readers may not be familiar with commonly used words in India like "mandir" or "puja." BhaiSaab 00:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

You may want to try ] or ]. It will show the English translations while linking to the Hindi words. See Misplaced Pages:The_perfect_article where it states

"is nearly self-contained; it includes essential information and terminology, and is comprehensible by itself, without requiring significant reading of other articles."

Also, may I ask why you removed the New York Times citations I used? BhaiSaab 00:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Although you may feel that "muslims have no justification for killing women/children" (and I would agree with you), it is no reason to delete relevant material from the Godhra Train Burning article. BhaiSaab 20:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

That status of that temple is contentious. See Babri_Mosque#The_Ayodhya_Debate. BhaiSaab 20:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

We probably shouldn't take a stance on the issue in that article - we could leave the issue at Babri Mosque and the temple articles. BhaiSaab 23:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you provide a relaible source for this assertion? Thanks. BhaiSaab 02:12, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Sudama

No problem, Bak Raj2004 00:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thnaks,mate

Nice to feel welcome,It will take me a few days to figure out the rules of engagement here,Thanks for the welcome

--A1trips 01:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC) 01:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Hey Baka, just a quick note to let you know I withdrew my RfA at 13/11/10. Thanks for your support :) --james 11:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Gabriel

Pls email me if you want to know more about him.Bharatveer 03:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Disdain for Hindus?

Hindutva, yes. Hinduism, no. After all, I'm a Buddhist, and Buddhism could be considered a Hindu sect. Hinduism is not Hindutva. Zora 07:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't defame other users/people

This notice has been left for you because another Misplaced Pages user suspects that, perhaps innocently, you may have defamed someone in your contributions. Please recheck your edits. Do not make allegations against someone unless you have provided evidence from a reliable publication, and then make sure you describe the allegations in accordance with our content policies, particularly Misplaced Pages:Verifiability and Misplaced Pages:No original research. Don't rely on hearsay, rumours, or things you believe without evidence to be facts, and don't use sources to create a novel narrative. Misplaced Pages requires reliable sources for all claims. Please see our policy on biographies of living persons.

Comments that defame an individual may leave you open to being sued by them. While Section 230 of the United States Communications Decency Act may protect Misplaced Pages from being sued for defamation, it may not protect the person who posted a defamatory claim on a Misplaced Pages page. The Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees has ruled that: "Where the user has been vandalizing articles or persistently behaving in a disruptive way, data may be released to assist in the targeting of IP blocks, or to assist in the formulation of a complaint to relevant Internet Service Providers." (Wikimedia privacy policy in full)

If you may have inadvertently defamed someone in an article, do two things:

1. Remove the disputed material from the article immediately.
2. Leave a note on the administrator's noticeboard saying that you have accidentally included defamatory claims in a named article or articles. Don't repeat the claims. The claim can then be deleted from the page history.

.This is regarding your edit ,,,.Holy|Warrior 10:25, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply to your post to my talk page

Dear Bakaman, I'm sorry I didn't reply sooner to uour note about Netaji. I think that now that things have started it would be hard to stop the editing, but I will look into extending the editing period for a few more days. Thanks again for your work on the article. BCorr|Брайен 12:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on Upanishads

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Upanishad, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks.

Do not delete just because your feelings that a particular view does not agree with your religious or political affiliations. A view can most certainly be Anti-Hindu. As long as its a fact. This is an encyclopedia, not a Saffron Brigage Stop deleting well researched works by others by calling them POV. All the material in this article under "Criticism" is well referenced.Yeditor 12:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)