User talk:Aksi great/Archive 14

Capt. Sunil Khokhar
Regarding my edits, the fact remains that notability was not claimed at all in any way in the article in queston for Capt. Sunil Khokhar. If someone were to simply write two sentences and say they received the Congressional Medal of Honor I would react the same way. Both are proud achievements, but notability requires more than hearsay: "A topic is notable if it has been the subject of at least one substantial or multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject and of each other." --BaseballDetective 12:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You are simply wrong. Even following your links to WP:BIO it clearly states "The following criteria make it likely that sufficient reliable information is available about a given person. People who satisfy at least one of these criteria may merit their own Wikipedia articles, as there is likely to be a good deal of verifiable information available about them and a good deal of public interest in them." It does not say that it should be done in absence, but it in fact states that outside verifiability should be EASIER if someone falls in such catategory because there would be pubically accessible records. In this case there is (1) a link to a dead page and (2) a link to a bodybuilding competion in the name of the person. Nowhere near notable or verifiable. --BaseballDetective 12:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, the links that were removed were not arbitrary at all. In this case there is (1) a link to a dead page and (2) a link to a bodybuilding competion in the name of the person. Nowhere near notable or verifiable. But do I enjoy reading each excuse you're making for what is simply a poorly put together article that has no notability cliams whatsoever. --BaseballDetective 12:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hkelkar
Hi Akash - pls see this. I was gonna file for checkuser, but thought I'd let you check this out first. Rama's arrow 12:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

re:RFCU
Everything's archived now.--Ed  ¿Cómo estás? 01:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Look Who is Back: User:Kapilshastri
The same user who has been warned and banned is now attempted to assert himself on Wiki again and again and again. --07:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BaseballDetective (talk • contribs).

Help
If there has been vandalism, do I just revert it or what? Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Teh roflmaoer (talk • contribs).

Mega cities
Hi! Thanks for the budget reference. It will be needed to prove that there are 7 megacities. We need some improvement of Hyderabad now. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Help (again)
If there has been a user who has been vandalising, but he does not have an account, how do I warn him? Teh roflmaoer 21:45, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Fear the Fire
Please go through this section. It is regarding my block. You have really made a mistake.. and if it is intentional, I will have to take help from some other admin..

You have listed User:70.113.116.46 and User:70.113.94.221 as Sockpuppets of User:Sundaram7 where as I have clearly proved that they are sockpuppets of banned User:Hkelkar. But now they are removed... Who removed those?? If it was you, why dint you take any action on my account too..???? Please see point (3) on my arguments, if it is not convincing for you, I will try to give more proofs.. Please tell me on what basis did you establish me as a sockpuppet of User:Sundaram7 --- 59.160.207.14 06:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Ralbianicoopewatixed
Can you block this guy for sockpuppetry as well. Thanks. --KZ      Talk  •  Vandal  •  Contrib  07:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Careful.
Pl. be careful about exercising editor's administrator's rights. I am reverting vandals. Followers of Pandurang Shashtri want to kill old deciples and yet glorify Pandurang Shashtri & Swadhyay Parivar. I think, you are from Ahmedabad and should know this.

swadhyayee 17:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia policy can be interpreted anyway. When Hemendra and others remove contents, you don't find it content dispute and have no objection. Check what is the contribution of Hemendra as an editor? Has been here only to remove facts about Swadhyay Parivar. Be fair and honest Aksi, pl. don't be carried away in haste. swadhyayee 01:58, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Akasi, I feel you to be un-reasonable.
Akasi, I think you are un-reasonable. Who removed the contents and links from Swadhyay Parivar? What's wrong in my writing on your talk page about vandal in response to your notice? Does Hemedra get merit for not approaching you on your talk page? What's your answer to Hemendra's contribution except removal of weblinks from Swadhyay Parivar? Do you call it regular editing and edit-war?

swadhyayee 14:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not seeing sense when you can't make out difference. swadhyayee 14:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Is it applicable to me only?
Is it applicable to me only? Have you noticed, Hemendra removed web-links? I think you have some problem with some people and you would abuse your admin powers and influence. swadhyayee 14:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Did you notice since when these web-links existed on article page? Check, they are not incorporated by me. Hope you will be fair. swadhyayee 14:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Swadhyay Parivar
I have been asked to revert some things that have been deleted from the article by a user. I went to his page and you have discussed with him the the 3 revert rule. I understand. But looking at what the latest editor did to the article he has in his 'cleanup' delted fact tags and not cited. Deleted entire sections especially any contorversy. Links there where there. A very POV oriented edit. I really don't want to get involved to the point of reading up on the subject to truly know whats 'real' and whats not. It seems blatant, but just enough not to be to not want to jump in. What do you think? Should it be revert back to pre major edit status and talk page only concensus major edits? I await your reply. Thanks. --Xiahou 22:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet
Hello Aksi great,

I'm really sorry to bother you with that again, but it seems very likely that user Dutybirds is a sockpuppet of Hkelkar (see recent history of India-Israel relations). Yes, again. I think it will never end. But at least when he sprouts here and there it is worth mentionning... Bye. TwoHorned 15:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Hindutva pseudoscience
There was clear consensus to delete. Do you suggest I re-AFD it, or are you going to delete it because it gets 0 google hits. Its complete dabcruft. Btw, take a page out of dab's book and block, ,. Since he can get away with blocking any Hindu SPA account he sees, you might as well block these SPA Islamofascist trolls as well. Baka man  14:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the prompt action. It seems you are impartial on the matter, and I respect that. While assuming goof faith with all new accounts, I have practically given up on another prolific Hinduism contributor since Nobleeagle left, and Hkelkar's bakwaas. Dabcruft is a phenomena that I was witnessed for a while, characterized by Assumptions of bad faith, unilateral blocks and deletions against consensus, useless redirect creation, and namecalling. According to him I am a chatterbot from BJP headquarters or an angry ABCD (ABCD being American Born Confussed Desi). Baka man  15:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I too would like to re-propose it for deletion. It should be obvious from my comments that I am not a sock of anybody, & have no particular relationship with those disputing over this and similar articles or with the ed. who gave the previous posting.--just a WP interested in NPOV.What are your suggestions for the most appropriate way to do it? I know I could ask for deletion review, but I think we might do better having a new discussion from the start. I am relying on your obvious impartiality. I do not think you closed in error, because it was indeed an illegitimate nomination.DGG 18:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Aksi, that comment was directed at me, and I believe he has a more jaundiced view of me than any user except those trolls that explicitly voted to get me banned. Whatever the Rajput scandal was (I was not an editor then), I am not a Rajput (nor involved in tat fiasco), neither is any other user that Dab is currently in conflict with or was with when he accused me of being a BJP mindslave. His inability to keep cool, abuse of admin powers (has used rollback multiple times in content disputes and blocked ), and patronization of trolls (Bhaisaab, TerryJHo, Ikonoblast/Holywarrior, Hornplease, Timothy Usher) make all such "excuses" null and void. Baka man  19:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I re-Afd'd Articles for deletion/Hindutva pseudoscience (2nd nomination). Baka man  19:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * you may want to speedy-close that one as obvious bad faith, and maybe warn Bakaman that he is close to blockable disruption these days. thanks, dab (𒁳) 09:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I was unaware that AFD'ing something which nets 0 google hits, was trolling. Infact I AFD'd it because aksi suggested it as the course of action. Also it seems dbachmann is unaware of the little fiasco got into after using veiled threats on established users. If anythings changes lately, I've merely been acting more like Dbachmann, hoping one day I can be a admin as well. If he regards my actions as "trolling", the logical conclusion is that he is woefully unaware of the obvious connotation of his own actions. Baka  man  16:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

maps
Thanks. Actually I had just sent a message to Planemad before your response. Hopefully he has time. I have left a message for Mlpkr too. If I dont get a response, I will contact Nichalp.Dineshkannambadi 15:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

RE:RCFU
The result of the RfCU is out. It has been found that all the accounts were coming from the same campus. In other words, you have been caught. This is the only warning you will get regarding the issue. Never violate WP:SOCK. And do not play games with us. The next time you are caught, you will be blocked. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

That is B.S. Just because these accounst may be from the same campus does not mean that they are from me. I have not violated the sock. Wiki Raja 15:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 13:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

biased
Mr. Aksi You are biased. If you can prvent me for edit warring what about MR. Swadhyayee who has virtually hijacked Swadhyaya Parivar PAge and is undoing the edits of any and all users who do not subscribe to his views and remove any of the unsolicited allegations from that page?

Hkelkar
I believe you will be interested in the contributions of these two new editors: 1 2. 217.160.230.182 21:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

RFCU Wiki Raja
Hello Aksi, Can you please look into Requests for checkuser/Case/Wiki Raja‎ ? It seems like this user has evaded a 3 month block (imposed on ) by using a Sockpuppet account as well as an IP address. Also, as you might recall from the previous RFCU, that, 3 or 4 of the suspected-sockpuppets became confirmed-sockpuppets of this user. Thanks - KNM Talk 13:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I was quite suspicious about this, as both have attacked me because of my ethnicity. Indrancroos called me an "Aryan subjugator" or something like that a while back, while Wiki Raja has questioned my "Tamilness". Both share the same DMK style Tamil nationalist worldview, claiming Tamil's are some super race separate from Indians (man I wish I had some Tamil-powers, perhaps eye of a tiger). Baka man  15:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the prompt action, I hadnt really thought of that connection until about last week. Baka man  17:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your investigation and action on this matter. Much appreciated. I just hope he doesn't come up with a new sock(s) to evade the block. Thanks, - KNM Talk 00:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

hemendra
My username is Hemendra.

I am talking about the notice for edit waring you have issued to me for reverting the changes on Swadhyay Parivar page by "Swadhyayee ???". But that is because that "SWadhyayee??" guy is not allowing me ( or for that matter any one else) to modify the page and remove baseless allegations from that page or trying to present NPOV. What I have done is merely re-positioned my edit which were undone by him. You are not looking at how many changes and reverts are done by him on the same page merely to propogate misinformation and preventing anyone from providing true information to the wikipedians.

SPA troll
Please see, personal attack extraordinaire. Baka man  21:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Socks of User:Maleabroad
Aksi, I have heard of your sock-fighting prowess and hope you can help in dealing with the persistent sockpupeteer who has been spamming and POV pushing various Hinduism related pages for months. He has been checkusered thrice but he usually just creates a couple of new accounts every afternoon (operating from University of Calgary). Orpheus, Buddhipriya and I have been reverting his edits and tagging his avatars for quite some time and recognize his signature themes, usernames and (copyvio) image uploads pretty quickly, but since none of us are admins cleaning up after him is all we can do. Admin Aldux has helped in blocking some of the previous socks, but it will be useful to have more admins on the case. Recently we created a subpage here to keep track of new and active socks of the user in one place instead of 'spamming' each others page everyday. Can you please watchlist the page and block the detected/checkusered socks ? Thanks. Abecedare 02:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Maleabroad is a long term problem, perhaps your sock-cataching skills will be useful here as abecedare rightly points out. Baka man  15:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Aksi, I replied to your message on Abecedare|talk page. Thanks for your offer of help. Abecedare 18:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Help
Hi, I have created a stub for pune city Pune-geo-stub without first proposing it, eventually I did propose it and now I am struggling to defend it as it is marked for deletion. Please visit Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/March/30 and help me out, If you think you should.

spacejuncky 05:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

CheckUser
Hi! Today I saw that you requested a CheckUser because my "editing patters were similar to" User:Hkelkar. I wonder from where did you see that, with no reversions/no vandalizing/no edit-warring on my part. There was only one thing that I did: disagree to dab. I wonder did you read this: "(a bare disagreement with the leaders of a wiki is not a valid motive)." But I assume good faith on your part. So if you happen to do some other checks on me, I request you to inform me from next time onwards. Cheers.--Scheibenzahl 18:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No need to be sorry, but thanks anyway :)--Scheibenzahl 18:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree Scheibenzahl is probably not Hkelkar. He does however exhibit pattern similar to those that got Hkelkar banned in the first place. Needless to say, such behaviour is objectionable regardless of whether he is or is not a sock of anyone, but such disruptive behaviour as he may exhibit has to be considered a separate case (this would be so much easier, Scheibenzahl, if you could just edit constructively. If you did, nobody would even think of trying to figure out if you are a sock). dab (𒁳) 18:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Peer review/Shahbag/archive2
I have just put the article to peer review. Would you care to take a look? Aditya Kabir 20:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

 * Hi, my RfA has been successful. Thanks a lot for your support. :) -- soum  (0_o) 08:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

spammers
We have user:Dhanu86we have Special:Contributions/Hoursclear and we have User:58.178.150.126 . Baka man  22:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Blocked me for sockpuppetry .. why!!
Hello Aksi_great, This is regarding the case Requests for checkuser/Case/Pens withdrawn. If you are a neutral administrator, you are responsible to answer on What is your real intenstion in pushing to block my user id ? How I can be a sockpuppet of somebody who are in different countries. All the sock-pupperty case under my id is invalid and they need to be removed. There is only one "SUNDARAM7". Please crosscheck the IP addresses.

If you are truthful, please point out any vandals, 3RR, abuses from my side and why you are not tracking the other users who are really involved in vandalism as explain in this page. -- Sun da ram  7  06:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I have blocked you because you were engaged in sockpuppetry. The checkuser on your accounts returned a confirmed result. Confirm means no doubt. Hence I had blocked you. I don't know anything about different countries. I don't know how you came to know from which country the other account originated. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello Aksi_great, first of all the administrator has first declined the case and then you have forced him to block the ids. and then he confirmed based on a fource from the administrator. There is no reason put anywhere in the case explaining the reason for this change. What heppened in between??. So the credibility of this is questioned. Either you or User:Jpgordon are responsible to prove the credibility of this decision. For me the truth is truth. What I know is that there are many people involved in this case including people from different countries. So the reason for your sockpupperty is not legitimate. For example, The reason for putting the IP 59.160.207.14  under name is not valid. The IP already proved to be socketpuppet of User:Hkelkar. This is a real abuse to your admin power. This IP is from India and I am not in India now. Prove otherwise. Another example is that the user who raised the case user:truehindu is from middle east. See his whois info   --- Sun  da ram  7  14:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps sundaram is not the only sockpuppeteer, and some accounts are not his. That still does not change the fact that the other accounts are socks and SPA's and leads to the conclusion there is either a larger scale sockpuppetry or coordination. Baka man  23:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Aksi_great, I dont want to hear the arguments from somebody who made the vandals ( see the discussion page of User_talk:Fear_the_Fire) on my edits. I need to hear from you directly on this. If you are truthful bring evidences for this sockpuppeteer push . If User:Jpgordon and User:Aksi_great didn't bring any evidence for the reason to block the IDs, I may have to conclude that User:Aksi_great and some of his supporting administrators with some users might be trying to block sevaral IDs which are against their POVs and interests. From dicussion page User_talk:Fear_the_Fire, it is clear that who is really the POV pusher and sockpuppets. --- <font size="2" face="Arial" color="#999999">Sun <font face="Arial" color="#666666">da <font face="Arial" color="#333333">ram  <font size="2" face="Arial">7  04:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I never forced Jpgordon to perform the checkuser. I just asked him why he declined the case. He thought over it again and decided to run the checkuser and gave a confirmed result. Another thing - 59.160.207.14 is not and has never been proved to be Hkelkar. Hkelkar also edits from USA. If you want to continue playing this game, please play it somewhere else, not on my talk page. - Aksi_great (talk) 14:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Please don't simplify others work as "GAME". I am trying my best to contribute to Wiki. I didn't hurt anybody personnally with my edits. But finally I am blocked by you. What is evidnce for you to put 59.160.207.14 as me, for example? You forced Jpgordon and gave wrong information on my edits. In the patition you said article is constantly attacked by vandals. Where is the vandals from me? Why you are interested so much to block me and why you didnt care about the actual abuses, vandals and 3RRs on my edits as explained here User_talk:Fear_the_Fire? -- <font size="2" face="Arial" color="#999999">Sun <font face="Arial" color="#666666">da <font face="Arial" color="#333333">ram  <font size="2" face="Arial">7  09:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Emma Snowsill
If you're going to remove items from articles (i.e images), then at least make sure everything is left in a reasonable condition. Not like you did with Emma Snowsill. Davesmith33 14:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

DYK template
Excuse me, but the DYK template has not been updated for 11 hours: Template_talk:Did_you_know. I would be grateful if you would update it. Thanks! -- : Raphaelmak : [ talk ] [ contribs ] 14:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Atlas Strategic Picture
I was wondering what your reasoning was for deleting the picture of the band Atlas Strategic. Mikqick

Wiki tool
Thanks for your quick note .I have left a message and am waiting for the response .Thanks  Shyamsunder 13:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 9th, 2007.
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

hopeless hindus?
I've decided to start a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notice_board_for_India-related_topics so we can come to a consensus about some unfortunate comments from a user with a predilection toward Hinduism. Baka man  22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Block on Wiki Raja
Could you care to explain me on what basis did you block WikiRaja? The check user link that you provided in the "indefinite block" shows the check user request was denied on account of 'staleness'. Thanks a lot for your time. Praveen 16:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)