User talk:BalanceRestored/Archives/2007/June

Unblock request
Your request for unblocking has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:
 * Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
 * Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
 * If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas.
 * Click View source on that article.
 * Copy and paste the contents of that page at the bottom of your talk page under a new top-level heading (like this: )
 * Propose some significant and well researched improvements to your article by editing your personal copy of the article.
 * When are you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
 * If we are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked and placed on probation.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "" to your talk page. Thank you. Sandstein 10:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for providing me an opportunity. I now find things real tough to follow every rule and edit things at wikipedia. I think this will happen for the first time and I should soon get used to things. I will go through each and every step you have mentioned. Thanks once again for taking all the pain to maintain the standard at wikipedia. BalanceRestored 11:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Indian caste system
The Indian caste system is the traditional system of social stratification on the Indian Subcontinent, in which social classes are defined by a number of endogamous, hereditary groups often termed as jātis or castes. The jātis are often classified among one of the four varnas or classes. Within a jāti there exist exogamous groups known as gotras, the lineage or clan of a person. I think we should consider deleting the above cut sentence due to the following reasons. 1. India is a secular country which is open to follow any religion. 2. The sentence talks specifically about Jati, Gotra, Varna which are commonly known to be a part of Hinduism. Social stratification is also present in other religions. Only talking about Hinduism with in the main definition does not seem to be valid. 3. Can we consider taking the sentence off from the main definition and can consider talking that separately. 4. The topic under discussion is Indian Caste System and not Hindu Caste System. helpme Is what I suggest a valid reason to take the sentence off the main defination and talk seperately as the Topic under discussion is Indian Caste System and not Hindu Caste System. Also please let me know if there is a Policy developed by Wikipedia to check OFF TOPIC DISCUSSIONS BalanceRestored 05:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * what would you like help about? Lmc 169 07:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If there is any policy developed by wikipedia to check "OFF Topic discussion". If everyone starts writing about every religion practiced in India, within the definition it could become a problem. BalanceRestored 07:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Define off-topic Lmc 169 07:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Jati, Gotra, Varna is not practiced among Christan's, Followers of Islam. India is a place where many religions are followed.
 * try here Lmc 169 07:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Let me check. In the mean time. If any one can help me with the exact policy if it is present/absent. It will be very helpful. Thanks!!!BalanceRestored 07:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Happy Editing Lmc 169 07:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Conclusion
169 tired best to explain me with details. Since, it is not yet very conclusive if the sentence is off topic. I am not considering the sentence to be removed for the while.

Indian caste system
The Indian caste system is the traditional system of social stratification on the Indian Subcontinent, in which social classes are defined by a number of endogamous, hereditary groups often termed as jātis or castes. The jātis are often classified among one of the four varnas or classes. Within a jāti there exist exogamous groups known as gotras, the lineage or clan of a person.

The following scored topic is not neutral. Can someone help me to understand the policy regarding neutrality? This sentence is probably hurting sentiments of many citizens from India and Indian Origin. This is a very contradictory statement. Below are objections/discussions raised by many important personalities with regards to Varna and Caste. These will help you understand what the topic is all about.

Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi's Different views about caste and varna WHO WERE THE SHUDRAS Mahatma Gandhi

Please see the meaning of Varna, Caste. Varna and Caste are entirely different. People's minds where physiologically made Bonsai with that very sentence. Sections of society where made stay away from education for decades on the name of caste. So, please help me to understand the policy of neutrality to keep this very sentence away from wikipedia at least.

Sections of society in India say

The jātis are often classified among one of the four varnas or classes.

and Sections of society will object the same.

Since the sentence is a not neutral let me know the policy regarding the neutrality.

helpme If a sentence is not neutral and for decades there is a controversy over this topic. Is there a policy with respect to neutrality as I read one. Please refer to the above details. Let me know if you need further clarification, simplification. I feel the above sentence needs to be either removed or changed so that the sentence does not pin any ones feelings. BalanceRestored 09:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The policy is at WP:NPOV. In all cases, it is best to present just the facts and to back them up with a reliable source.  When there are opposing viewpoints that should be represented, the policy states: When asserting a fact about an opinion, it is important also to assert facts about competing opinions, and to do so without implying that any one of the opinions is correct. It is also generally important to give the facts about the reasons behind the views, and to make it clear who holds them. It is often best to cite a prominent representative of the view.  Minority viewpoints can be presented, but should not be given undue weight.  Does that help? --Strangerer (Talk) 09:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You might also want to bring this up on the talk page of Indian caste system, because I'm not Indian and I'm not at all knowledgeable about the topic. People on the talk page might be able to help this specific instance better than someone from the helpdesk could. --Strangerer (Talk) 09:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Conclusion
Edits with respect to the above sentence is still not conclusive. Will need to wait for more time. I will need to consider more important peoples opinion on this issue, or collect more importance evidence on the same. Also, I am still not clear with the WP:NPOV so, will need to spend more time to understand the same.

you said: "contribution you propose is not sufficiently constructive", please offer an explanation. I tried my best. For further editing I think I will need to contact other members and make use of other tools. I am learning. The help me editors tried their best, they have clearly accepted that they are not in a position to help me further. I don't think I can further edit that article only from the user talk page. Can someone assist me any further?. I am again sorry I do not know if I can use the unblock to convey this message. Please let me know what further is required to get myself unblocked. If you think I am still not trying my best to follow the rules, please let me know. As of now I am really sorry as I do not have any other ideas left with. I was asked to follow the rules and edit what I wanted to. I did try to follow the rules and edit as far as I can. I think I did what was the best. Now what further?? Also, this above set of line you proposed me to get unblocked is normally provided for people who ask for becoming administrator. I am a new user. Don't you think I demonstrated all my efforts to convey that I am trying my best to follow the rules and understand wikipedia better?. "Is BalanceRestored following the rules" is that not what you are trying to be sure about??. Again, please let me know if I am wrong any where. I will try to get that correct. If there is a way.. Let me know. I will try my best following that. Remember HELP Editors gave UP and I am too early to take decisions on my own after having seen these policies. That's the reason these edits where non conclusive. Again, I am not here to be unfriendly and be disruptive. But give me some time to use the discussions at the main article. I can only assure you that I now understand fully what to edit at the main page and what not to. I will edit the main article only if I am 100% sure that it requires an edit. I know for sure I was wrong now reading and being trough the policies. Again... is it ok, if you called my true painful efforts to follow the rules a "jumbled mess"??. and you will again block me if I aggravate.. is that right? What would you had done if you have a little kid and the kid brushed good colors on the canvas and it made no sense? did not all the top artist in the world start this way??? is that not an true attempt. I already told I am new.. I tried my best.. Don't you think that was a little discouraging?

I will unblock you under certain conditions. I am willing to do so because you seem to honestly understand you errors. The conditions would be: I will assume good faith if you are willing to work within these restrictions understanding they would be enforced with zero-tolerance, up to and including the reinstatement of your indefinite block. Please let me know if you will agree. Vassyana 17:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) 1RR. You may only make one revert per article per day. All reverts must be accompanied by a polite explanation on the article's talk page.
 * 2) If consensus is against your view, that you will not continually push the issue.
 * 3) Your contributions must be verifiable in reliable sources.
 * 4) You will not disparage other editors, even if provoked. If someone is being uncivil, you could request sysop intervention from WP:AN/I.
 * 5) You will not edit from alternative accounts nor will you edit while logged out as an IP user.
 * 6) If you cannot resolve content conflicts through a reasonable amount of discussion, you will seek dispute resolution instead of continuing to debate the issue on talk pages.
 * 7) You will avoid any other behaviour that could be considered edit warring or disruptive.

I'm not sure if this is any of my business, but I feel I should intervene
From the unblock requests above, it seems that this user is trying pretty hard to follow the rules and do the right thing. Technically, they were sockpuppeting, yes, but I think that's reasonable given that it's hard to get a response any other way (my IP has been autoblocked before and it's very aggravating). From what I can see (and granted that isn't very much), this person seems to be good at heart, but they've gotten so tangled in techincalities and silly rules that they're essentially without a hope. I recommend that you unblock them, even if for a day or two; if they do bad things, you can revert it and block them with minimal effort. If they do good things, then you've just made someone's day (and possibly week, month, year, etc.) - 2-16 17:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I tend to agree with the above statements. It's really none of my business, but it does look like this user is trying to do the right thing. -- Trumpetband  15:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I am all for assuming good faith and don't even object to unblocking this user, if he promises to follow wikipedia policies and other editors/admins are ready to keep an eye on his contributions. However I do believe that it is a misrepresentation of this user's disruptive editing history to say that this user got "tangled in techincalities and silly rules" especially since I along with several other editors tried hard to help him understand the policies that his edits were violating (see talk page discussion and ANI report). Also his sockpuppetry was not an inadvertent step taken to avoid IP autoblocks; rather this user threatened to use socks even before his primary account was blocked. I quote from :
 * "Also, madam, I know internet far better than you know. If at all you ban my current ID on the name of MISTAKES there are million ways to make MILLION more IDs."
 * In summary: please feel free to unblock this user, but kindly don't insinuate that editors and admins who dealt with this user's disruptive editing before were simply simply enforcing technical or silly rules. The latter group is at least as deserving of good faith as the formerly blocked user. Abecedare 16:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd agree. I contacted the blocking admins to make sure they were aware of the unblock and why I did it. I don't think the admins were acting in bad faith at all. The user seems to get it, seems to understand what they did wrong and agreed to some zero-tolerance restrictions. If you notice something of concern due to the unblock, please don't hesitate to let me know. Vassyana 17:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Asking for help
Don't be shy about asking for help or advice if you feel unsure about something. Most of us are a friendly and helpful lot. :) Vassyana 20:20, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Help Asked and Resolution
Is it possible to check from a huge article the editors details for a specific sentence or word. BalanceRestored 10:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The information's in the history, but somewhat hard to track down. There's a feature request for something like this, but it'll likely take a long time to implement; in the meantime, the easiest way is probably to pick a revision from the history, see if the content's there, then pick a newer or older revision according to whether the content's there or not and repeat until you home in on the revision that added it. (See binary search for an explanation of this.) Hope that helps! --ais523 10:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Deleted a criticism from Iyer
helpmeI've deleted a criticism from Iyer as it was not sourced. Is that valid? Is the step I adopted right now appropriate?? Or I should have done that in a different way?BalanceRestored 07:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Since the criticism was not properly sourced, the deletion is okay for now. It would be best to bring the issue on the talk page upon why you deleted the material. Miranda 07:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your advice, I did the same. I added a discussion in the talk page. BalanceRestored 08:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Line deletion from Indian Caste System
Can I consider deleting a line from Indian Caste System. I have added it's details at the article Indian Caste System's talk pages. I am planning to delete the same and expect editors to revert back on the same about the neutrality and valid source of the line. Is this a valid method. Please suggest. If there's any other better method, I will follow that. BalanceRestored 08:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Before deleting content, discuss the issue on the relevant talk page to gain a consensus. Miranda 08:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * helpmewhat if no one replies? Is there any best practice. Thanks in advance for your untiring efforts BalanceRestored 09:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Someone will reply. Indian Caste System is pretty popular with some users. <b style="color:#990066; font-family:georgia;">Miranda</b> 09:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks like another author has agreed that wrong citations are present. The author says that the citations be present till there's a valuable discussion about the same from other editors. But, those citations could again teach thousands the wrong meaning of our religion and can go the wrong way. I think we can take that down and bring that back if it is felt necessary. Can I know what are the right practices. If I bring that down, should I be violating any rules? Please see the discussions at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Indian_caste_system#Indian_caste_system_.28Main_Defination.29._Source_of_original_narration_looks_unknown. BalanceRestored 12:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * See BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. If you've left a note on the talk page and you reference it in your edit summary, you can take the first step and delete the content you don't agree with.  If someone reverts it, discuss with them.  I've removed the "helpme" because I think you'll know how to handle this.  Good luck! Yechiel Man  12:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Yechiel I understand I was behaving so stupid. Thanks everyone to have shown the right ways to edit. I 100% agree with the way the Admins Blocked me. That experience was necessary, It made me understand the importance of every word. I could have surely edited wrong having taken decisions hastily. I will try taking less help from you all.

Forward Caste
Problem with the definition. This follow page Forward_caste refers http://www.indianexpress.com/sunday/story/5704._.html to hold the definition true. But the reference cited is incorrect. What should be done. I just added a fact tag. Is my step appropriate? helpme re
 * Yes, add a tag to the inappropriate reference. <b style="color:#990066; font-family:georgia;">Miranda</b> 08:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What's to be done about the inappropriate reference
 * Delete the inappropriate reference and replace it with the fact tag. <b style="color:#990066; font-family:georgia;">Miranda</b> 08:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Your question on Indian caste system
Is archiving this way appropriate?BalanceRestored 06:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, see WP:ARCHIVE. By the way, please do not use the helpme template on any pages other than your own user talk page. Thanks, Tangotango (talk) 06:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * My question is not with regards to the archiving I too understand it is required from time to time, My question was to point out the way the talk page is getting archived. I have never come across such kind of archiving in any of the wikipedia pages before. Won't the discussion become difficult for new comers. BalanceRestored 06:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It's pretty standard practice, although usually you would leave the most recent (and relevant) discussion intact. Cheers, Tangotango (talk) 06:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * How can I bring back the recent discussions back? Can someone do that for me. It will help the new comers, visitors to get to the talk sooner.BalanceRestored 06:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You could, by copying and pasting from the archive, but I wouldn't worry about it, unless the discussion was ongoing. - Tangotango (talk) 06:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of page Forward Caste
helpme

The page Forward Caste, no author has ever mentioned about the same anywhere!!! It needs to be deleted. It is more or less personal beliefs of individuals. How do I go about deleting the page. BalanceRestored 09:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Nominate it for WP:AFD. <b style="color:#990066; font-family:georgia;">Miranda</b> 11:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The word is referred by many eminent personalities purposefully to maintain the Caste Based Discrimination in India. But, none have ever referred it with an official definition. Can this article be termed as HOAX, before it is deleted? I think some one has already marked the article for deletion. My question, should this article be defined HOAX before it is deleted? BalanceRestored 11:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Depends on the context of the article. Do a background check of the reliable sources  before determining if the article is a hoax. <b style="color:#990066; font-family:georgia;">Miranda</b> 11:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Suppose a Prominent Minister refers the issue and the media misinterprets it. How should that source from the Media be treated as?

helpme
 * See biographies of living persons on what type of content the article should have. <b style="color:#990066; font-family:georgia;">Miranda</b> 13:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

helpme
 * Balance Restored: Wikipedia articles are created based on notability of subject/content. Forward caste is the word used by many political leaders. Google hit give 1.3 million hits for Forward caste which means this word is used frequently. Wikipedian has recommended article for deletion few months back and after lengthy discussions it was decided to keep article since it met Wikipedia notability guidelines. You can check with me for additional clarifications. Similar articles are available about Other backward classes, Scheduled castes, Scheduled tribes etc--Indianstar 20:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Provide valid references. What if the eminent personality state he did not mean it? Do you have any valid reference?BalanceRestored 06:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * if a word "Forward caste" is popular, but with no single author to take the credibility for the same, because if that's done it would rise the law alarm. But, if that's still present how's that to be treated? BalanceRestored 13:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry don't understand the question <font color="#000888">Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp !  (Whisper...) 13:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Suppose a non dictionary term "Big Bhola" is present and it is a popular slang used everywhere to represent a community of people. The authors may write Big Bhola to refer to certain community, But upon asking to define the same, they will deny about it. Should such a term be considered appropriate to use at wikipedia? Forward Caste is a misinterpreted word. There's nothing as such in real life. But, people commonly use the same. Should that be considered at wikipedia? BalanceRestored 13:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, what help do you need? - Tangotango (talk) 14:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello :)
<div style="float:center; border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Checking in to see how you're doing. What have you been working on with Wikipedia lately? Is is going well? do you have any questions or concerns? If you need anything, please let me know. Cheers!! :) Vassyana 08:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

sos
hello, I want to use the suitable template for leaving wiki for vacation in realword. plz acquaint to me.--Gordafarid 13:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

No Official Definitions
helpme If there's no official definition for a term, but if a term is very commonly used. Can I consider creating a page with this term? BalanceRestored 06:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello BalanceRestored. Please try your term on Google. If it can be found there, you should be bold and write your article. If you should have doubts, just create a short stub. If nobody complains, enlarge it after some days. By this way you do not work for nothing. --Thw1309 06:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * What if I know that by defining the term I am doing something illegal? The right to define the term only can be done by Indian Government Officials? and If unknowingly or Knowingly they have failed to notice the word? Creating a page for this term and giving definitions to the term is that allowed?BalanceRestored 07:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Make sure that this doesn't violate WP:NOR and cite your sources. <b style="color:#990066; font-family:georgia;">Miranda</b> 07:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * What term do you want to see a definition for? Please note WP:NOR and WP:RS.  If you say what you are trying to define, perhaps a reliable definition can be found for you.  Also note that terms in Indian languages are often on Wikipedia in many poor romanizations, so checking to see if the article already exists can take some trial and error. Buddhipriya 07:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * What if I know that by defining the term I could be doing something illegal? The right to define the term only can be done by Indian Government Officials? and If Unknowingly or Knowingly the Indian Government has not yet officially defined the term because of its complexity, would it be appropriate to create this page at wikipedia? Creating a page for this term and giving definitions to the term is that allowed? BalanceRestored 07:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I just happen to read the following "If it is doubtful and harmful, you should remove it from the article; you may want to move it to the talk page and ask for a source, unless you regard it is as very harmful or absurd, in which case it should not be posted to a talk page either. Use your common sense. Do not be inappropriately cautious about removing unsourced material; it is better for Wikipedia to say nothing on an issue than to present false or misleading material." at WP:CITE BalanceRestored 07:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC).
 * The term I will create also has no official significance but is popularly told all over. But citing it will side line half of the country. Is that allowed?BalanceRestored 07:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What is the term? Buddhipriya 07:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * "Forward Caste" or "Upper Caste" is this not side lining half of the country, creating the differences. I have noticed the use of "Other Caste" too done, this official word is not so popularly used. But is the correct one. It does not prick any one and is more appropriate. Why use Forward Caste and Upper Caste.BalanceRestored 07:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Officially it is ST, SC, OBC and Others. Why use the term forward and upper instead? and refer the OBC list and create differences? BalanceRestored 07:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Since the term you want to define is a technical term related to the article on Indian caste system I recommend that you do not try to create a new article unless you have first discussed this matter on the talk page for that article. I do not understand exactly what point you are trying to make, but it seems to do with the exact terminology used in the classification system, which is matter of legal record.  So please take the matter up on the talk page for the article that pertains to that issue so other editors will have some idea of what you are trying to accomplish.  Buddhipriya 07:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Putting a "hoax" tag on an article because you are not familiar with the particular terminology in the article is not an appropriate thing to do: . I see that the issue may pertain specifically to the article on Forward caste, which is where discussing the matter on the talk page, as you are doing, and asking for citations, is an appropriate step. Buddhipriya 07:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

helpme Is there a way to contact the user Buddhipriya off records? The user has not signed with an Email IDBalanceRestored 07:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Leave a message on his talk page. <b style="color:#990066; font-family:georgia;">Miranda</b> 08:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)