User talk:Aban1313

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello fellow Wikipedian. I notice that some of your recent edits have been on talk pages (which is commendable), mostly relating to British affairs and people. You haven't filled in your user page yet, so I'm just curious what it is that interests you so much about that particular country and its history - are you British? I also notice that your edits seem to be trying to suggest darker realities about Britain, like Churchill was the most vile racist of the last century and that Britain should stop being so pretentious about being a great power (because it no longer is). Do you raise these points because you think Wikipedia cherrycoats the two by leaving those out, or do you just not like Britain and figures like Churchill who seem to occupy a very respected position? I'm just curious, as knowing where you're coming from could make working with you to improve Wikipedia would make things a lot easier. Comics (talk) 20:56, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

hello, I am an Indian with a keen interest in World War-2 history. I can assure you that I intend to be a constructive member of this online community, learn as well as teach on Wikipedia and try to make edits based on reasoned debate as much as possible. Aban1313 (talk) 00:40, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Aban1313


 * That's good to hear; Wikipedia is a bit of a team job haha. Say, have you edited Wiki before getting this account? Anonymously or using another account? Comics (talk) 12:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have, mostly on mathematics related pages (being a mathematician by profession). This is the first time I will try on history. I expect more controversy, naturally :)


 * I don't think controversy's a good thing with trying to edit here - it's about reaching consensus, and controversy isn't the best way to build that. I would also like to point out it seems your being suspected by a lot of parties as being a sockpuppet of a banned user - I'd just like to know if you have any comments on that? Being suspected as a sock puppet probably won't look good for you if you try to suggest edits in the meantime. Comics (talk) 02:19, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea what this sockpuppet business is about. I am a newcomer to wikipedia so I am shocked to see this kind of behaviour by other users. Actually, friend, I dont understand what I can do to have my name cleared. Will it help if i disclose my full identity because I am not scared nor ashamed to any extent for my views and not intimidated by frustrated closet-imperialist Wikipedians  in any sense. Aban1313 (talk) 03:23, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Aban1313


 * It's just something some users keep in mind - some people who've been disruptive in the past make a new account and hang around the same pages, and they try to catch people who've come back before they can do any extra harm. Perhaps calling people 'frustrated closet-imperialist Wikipedians' won't help either. I'm not sure fully disclosing your identity is needed, but perhaps cooperation with other editors throughout the suspicion period so that the matter can be solved. It looks like the official sock-puppet case is closing, but most of the other editors on the Great Power's page are still suspicious. I'm inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt though, but I must admit some of your talk page comments were a little suspicious at first. Comics (talk) 03:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I think I am slowly beginning to see what those editors mean. Dont dispute the status of Great Britain as a great power (and imaginary superpower) and it seems I will be left alone. Well, I will just leave those deluded dimwits to figure it out for themselves... Thanks a lot for your advice. I am not planning to debate that rabid crowd anytime soon anymore. They already lost an Empire. I'll let them keep Wikipedia :) And I enjoy the mathematics pages more anyway. Cheers! Aban1313 (talk) 12:43, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Aban1313


 * I think the editors agree with you that Britain isn't a superpower (real or imaginary or created by the great god Ronald McDonald of the Cheeseburgers), but they do believe it's a great power and demonstrates many of the trappings other great powers have (and their precious literature also supports their views - I don't think you've provided literature that they think is conclusive that your views are more credible than theirs).
 * You mentioned that you weren't going to debate with that 'rabid crowd', but it looks as if things have spiralled a little more out of control over on that talk-page. I understand that you have your views and believe that those are views Wikipedia should express, but I don't think you're going about things the right way. Wikipedia aims to be as objective as possible, and to be objective there has to be a bit of compromise. Perhaps if you were to rephrase your argument from 'Britain isn't a great power' to 'Britain is the weakest of the great powers' you might find the other editors more accepting. Your belief that Britain isn't in the same league as the other great powers is acknowledged (in that it's the weakest of the group), and the other editors might be more willing to accept sources and literature that agree with that reasoning since it doesn't negate Britain's GP status.
 * Personally, I think India and Brazil (maybe Italy at a stretch) could also be considered GP's, but that's just my POV and I don't have the literature to support making changes in favour of those :) With these guys it's all about literature, particularly people noted for writing on power projection and other fancy global power stuff. As I said, perhaps you could try to compromise and find literature they like supporting your view - they might be more willing to talk if you do that. Comics (talk) 00:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

All I want is my name cleared off the sockpuppet list and I will be happy never to visit them any more. In fact, I would be happy to be banned from that specific crazy page and have my name cleared as a suspected sockpuppet.Can this be done somehow? Aban1313 (talk) 03:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)Aban1313


 * Let's sit back and look at things, Aban. Say that you're in the right and the editors on that page are 'crazies'. They're all absolutely convinced of their POV, and there's very little you can do. You have two options; first, argue your case vehemently and try to persuade them you're right, but that doesn't seem to have worked. The second is perhaps to be the bigger man and separate yourself from the argument. You say that you're a maths professor; if a class isn't willing to learn there's not much you can do to force them, particularly if you're a new teacher and this class has been together for years and already has a way of operating. To win the class' respect you need to play their game and win them over first as opposed to fighting them, but with things as they are I think it might be best to leave things to cool over for now. Comics (talk) 04:45, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Doesnt matter. I know the loss of Empire rankles with them. At least they cant debate that UK is now OUT of the list of top 5 economies. Terminal decline has taken its toll on the British mood. Aban1313 (talk) 00:22, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Aban1313


 * The British Empire, as a proper Empire with power and stuff, ended at the latest in the mid-70's. There's a chance some of the editors were born around that time, but even so I doubt they're really rankled by the loss of an empire they never actively knew. I think it's just a matter of sources. Comics (talk) 11:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Britain is obsessed with its old empire. There is no other reason they still have a monarchy up and running. Aban1313 (talk) 13:36, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Aban1313


 * Perhaps the reason they still have a monarchy is because it's so entrenched in their culture and 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'. I know that's the case down here in Australia, where there is a somewhat active movement to make the country a republic but no clear idea on how to restructure the country as a result. I'm just curious - is there any particular reason you have such a strong opinion on Britain? Comics (talk) 05:12, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Recent edits 2
"Ya ya...go with Pakistan, who is stopping you... oh it could be that TATA is now Britain's top industrial employer? Btw, I hope you remember how Obama threw the bust of Churchill out of the Oval Office. Wonder why he didn't use flattery in diplomacy...lol! Now go line up outside the new Tata factory in Wolverhampton for a job. Compliments and best wishes from an underdeveloped country that doesn't matter to the world economy. Oh...and enjoy our $10 billion donation to the IMF to save your EU. And send our compliments to your masters in the US. Aban1313 (talk) 13:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)Aban1313"

I suggest you stop the nationalist POV, name calling and personal attacks. The above edits you made today on the Middle power discussion page is highly offensive, like allot of your edits. You are already suspect of Sock puppetry so I think you should take heed of the above conservation with Comics.

Yes, TATA employs 42,000 people in the manufacturing industry in the UK - making it the UKs largest manufacturing business. Yes? And? this helps me not you! TATA UK supports the British economy. Cheers. However, remember, 42,000 people is a small amount out of the UKs 30+ million labour force and there are 100s of manufacturing industries in Britain employing millions of people. Also in terms of revenue it isn't one of the largest, for example BAE systems revenue is nearly 4 times that of TATA and BAE employs around 35,000 people!

Obama didn't throw out the bust of Winston Churchill, he returned it to Britain. The gifts between Britain and the US are often priceless due to the special relationship the two countries enjoy. It is custom to return those gifts in time. Its just sad that just because Obama and his administration had no liking or support for Gordon Brown that sensationalist media with an 'agenda' took the opportunity to force feed rubbish to the American and British public. Obviously you were taken in by the medias rhetoric - and given the sources you provided on the Great power talk page often are. Shame.

Currently India has only given $2 billion to the EU with a potential of $5 billion as part of the IMFs plan to stimulate the economies of Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland. Nobody in Europe even cares about Indias contribution, in the mind of Europeans India is known for being extremely poor with about 29% of the worlds poorest, very high infant and child mortality rates and corrupt politicians that are worse than their previous British colonial rulers.

Europe (UK, France and Germany) are in a totally different league to India and other developing nations that are still commonly termed 'backward'. Deal with it. &mdash; Woe  (talk with 90i)  17:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)