User talk:Govindaharihari/Archive 1

Removal of section
Hi. In this edit, you removed an entire section of Justine Tunney, then entitled "Defense of free speech" (a section title I disagree with, but I digress). You did so without leaving an edit summary. Would you mind telling me why you removed it, please?--greenrd (talk) 20:50, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi also User:greenrd. Sorry not to have explained my reason for doing that. I thought it was self promotion of something that was not really much about her and was not widely reported and was not something notable about her, as I saw it at the time, she is of limited noteworthiness and that section, the content was simply some involved attempt to make her appear more important that she actually is in independent reporting- she wrote a blog post, he commented, not really a thing about her, more like bloat actually about another person, she is a blogger, what she blogs about unless it is widely reported is in my opinion unworthy of reporting in a biography about her life. If someone feels it is worth a note in her life story then I have no objections to it being returned to the biography. Govindaharihari (talk) 07:19, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
—Josh3580talk/hist 16:20, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Arjun1491 (talk) 18:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)The criticism content which I added (although bit long) is extremely Important given the scope and range of the philosophical ideas that affects societies and has the power to alter the course of history. This Criticism section is very crucial in order to let the public know about the demerits as well. People have the right to know the negetive side of every issue. Kindly do not delete the Criticism section which I add.

Disambiguation link notification for January 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Justine Tunney, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blogger. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Doron Perkins, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bartlett. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Re S Hunter

 * See subject's talk page for my elaboration as sources are reliable and are often used in this website. Also, I've combined citations of middle name/birthdate after the parenthetical.Proud Austrian Paulinian (talk) 13:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notification - CAM
Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:49, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

cod game makers want to put in more profanity
i put in information regarding the benefits profanity has on call of duty players, but it got removed. can you put it back, it is good information.Lakerfan45 (talk) 07:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Lakerfan45 You can put it back if you add a WP:RS Govindaharihari (talk) 07:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

what is WP:RS? It is some wikipedia code? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakerfan45 (talk • contribs) 07:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Lakerfan45 You need to add a report from the web or anywhere that agrees with your addition, click on the link WP:RS and read all about it Govindaharihari (talk) 07:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

thanks for the tip. Lakerfan45 (talk) 07:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Help with Robert Birgeneau article
Hello, Govindaharihari! I'm working with a conflict of interest editor, Amy Hamaoui (Director of Public Relations at UC Berkeley), teaching her basic encyclopedic writing style, and guiding her through Wikipedia conflict of interest guidelines. She would like to add information to the biography of former Chancellor Robert Birgeneau on his physics career and career achievements prior to becoming Chancellor (being a COI editor, she does not plan on editing mainspace).

We would like a neutral third party to review her work and incorporate any content in her sandbox that would qualify as appropriate for mainspace. Would you be willing do this? You can find the contributions she wants to make in the "ADD CONTENT" section of her sandbox. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!! - Eekiv 23:26, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Eekiv hello. I am not an expert in this topic. Please reply to my question,  have some of the original problems regarding neutral statements in the article been resolved? Please also, is there a WP:RS for the nationalization claim from Canadian to American? Govindaharihari (talk) 06:17, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello again! Which neutral statement problems are you asking about specifically? As for your naturalization question, we spoke to the noticeboard, and the consensus was that since he is a living person, a secondary source would need to be provided proving his naturalization. Amy is currently looking to see if there are any secondary sources available that she can reference. Thank you again! - Eekiv 20:21, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Govindaharihari I really know the Navid khiabani, since 2000 i am chasing his life in  and his activities in hidden manner, during 2004 to 2007 he has office in Iran address:  No: 178 Africa Ave.Tehran-Iran Now he is living in Mc Lean Va USA 22102 this article should not be removed as i am adding new information about his education and political activities with references.

Navid Khiabani
Please do not delete the navid khiabani page, we a group of free reporters and chasing the guy soon we will give more info with references give us time for one month or two.

Disambiguation link notification for April 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Barclay Knapp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Billion. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jonas Jonasson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page OTW. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)
Please nominate the article Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight) for deletion as you suggested it on Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. You're right, it violates WP:BLP1E, WP:NAME and WP:CRIME. I think also WP:UNDUE. It's a ridiculous and disgusting article.--82.113.99.113 (talk) 07:50, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome!
...but I wish that those cookies were REAL ;) And thanks also for putting my edits in Jimmy's page.  I'm sure glad that I can just click on your name, and don't have to type or say it.  And if I have any questions, I'll be in touch  :)   Knowadiz (talk) 13:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism edit
Hello. With this edit to WP:AIV you deleted an entry I filed to replace it with one of yours. Any particular reason, or was this a mistake? Grayfell (talk) 19:56, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow. User:Grayfell No idea how that happened, a program glitch perhaps. Excuse me, it was totally unintentional. Govindaharihari (talk) 00:26, 20 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Cool, these things happen. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 00:38, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

pending changes reviewer right granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.  K rakatoa    K atie   05:24, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Cool, thanks User:KrakatoaKatie .. -Govindaharihari (talk) 07:48, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, Govindaharihari – congrats on being granted Pending changes reviewer rights. I just wanted to drop you a note on your first day of reviewing to suggest that you might want to keep a more critical eye out before approving changes. For example, this revision that you just approved at Saúl Álvarez probably shouldn't have been because, 1) it's overly detailed for an encyclopedic article, and 2) the attached sourcing may not qualify as a WP:RS. In other words, just because someone edits changes, even if they are "sourced", they should still maybe be reverted in some cases. Just wanted to let you know that... --IJBall (talk) 21:15, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi User:IJBall, thank you. I read on the guidelines page that, even if an edit may appear suboptimal, this is in itself not a reason to revert, as for all edits, since they may yet be improved, saying that, a more detailed look at the history shows a problem with this type of addition, I will pay more attention to the edit history patterns and reasons for protection, thanks. Govindaharihari (talk) 06:22, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you. While WP:Reviewing does say what you said, it also says, "If you intend to ultimately revert the changes, then you may do so from the reviewing interface with an appropriate explanation, but as for all reverts they must be supported by policy." IOW, reverting on the grounds of WP:NOTNEWSPAPER or WP:UNRELIABLE is perfectly legitimate. You don't have to accept edits that are contrary to policies or guidelines, and it's worth checking every pending edit for that... --IJBall (talk) 06:33, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Criticism : Content Addition
The criticism content which I added (although bit long) is extremely Important given the scope and range of the philosophical ideas that affects societies and has the power to alter the course of history. This Criticism section is very crucial in order to let the public know about the demerits as well. People have the right to know the negetive side of every issue. At present the Criticism content of "Kant Immanuel" page is blank (with links to few names) but no content. Being a Philosophy Student, I know the importance of ideas (of their constructive as well as destructive power). A Philosophical construct containing the views of those who do not agree with them is very crucial. All the content which I had uploaded (unfortunately removed) had credible sources as references. Kindly let me know your concerns regarding myself adding criticism content to the page, so that I can address them objectively and help build a consensus. Arjun1491 (talk) 18:46, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I am new to wikipedia as an Editor, hence I was not able to find the chat section in the article that you mentioned. And yes that content which I posted was a copy paste from the Internet, of which I have given the exact source in the reference section. The philosopher who had criticised Kant Immanuel is unfortunately no more. But her writings are immortal, hence I want to add her point of view about Kant in the Criticism section. Since she is no more, she cant possibly add it herself, hence I have done the job by giving the reference. Is this considered a violation of the copy rights ? The claim of Authorship of another's ideas amounts to copy right violation, but upholding the Authenticity of an idea with giving the correct reference does not violate copy rights. Arjun1491 (talk) 19:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You can not copy paste content here - see WP:COPYRIGHT - Govindaharihari (talk)

Can I type the same content myself without copy paste ? Arjun1491 (talk) 19:16, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Early work[edit]

According to Lord Kelvin:

"Kant pointed out in the middle of last century, what had not previously been discovered by mathematicians or physical astronomers, that the frictional resistance against tidal currents on the earth's surface must cause a diminution of the earth's rotational speed. This immense discovery in Natural Philosophy seems to have attracted little attention—indeed to have passed quite unnoticed—among mathematicians, and astronomers, and naturalists, until about 1840, when the doctrine of energy began to be taken to heart."

—Lord Kelvin, physicist, 1897

The above passage is the part of Kant Immanuel wiki page. The content is of " Lord Kelvin, physicist, 1897, but added by some editor.  Similarly can you kindly let me know how can I add views of other people ? Arjun1491 (talk) 19:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Small quotes are ok - your massive quote is not. Govindaharihari (talk) 19:25, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Its fine with me then, I will be able to add small quotes similar to the above one right ? Arjun1491 (talk) 19:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I will be considering your reply as "Yes" and move on to add the content in the Criticism section of "Kant Immanuel" page ( Yes, it will be small quotes. Not massive one as you have indicated me as your reason for removal.) Kindly let me know if you have any other concerns, so that we can speak about it and sort out the issue. Thank you. Arjun1491 (talk) 19:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015
Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at User talk:2601:844:4100:D5B9:129A:DDFF:FEB1:CE04. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.  Scr ★ pIron IV 18:06, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * If you look at the [edit history] you can see the two edits happened at the same moment and I didn't delete your message, it is a computor program issue. Best Govindaharihari (talk) 18:31, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Alex Smith
I don't understand what was wrong with my Alex Smith edit. These links show what I put was not wrong: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/story/2012-01-27/2011-all-joe-team/52813584/1 http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2013/02/13/all-joe-team-alex-smith-joe-flacco-colin-kaepernick/1915075/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Sanfranfanad (talk • contribs)


 * Hello User:Sanfranfanad. When I investigated your edit, as I posted on your talkpage on 22 July User talk:Sanfranfanad it appeared to me that the All Joe Team is not wikipedia noteworthy and his inclusion it it was not worthy of mention. Please feel feel to open a discussion on the talk page Govindaharihari (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Anjem Choudhary
My edit may have been unconstructive, but it was true nonetheless. ;-) Peace&#38;Karats (talk) 20:43, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Peace&#38;Karats posting personal opinions will get you blocked, please don't repeat on the talk page. Thanks Govindaharihari (talk) 20:45, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for implicitly agreeing with my opinion. Take care! ;-) Peace&#38;Karats (talk) 20:49, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

hyenas: apex predator
hello. hyenas are not apex predators as big cats do eat them, especially lions, and I've seen a lot of videos of lions eating them. TheFeralCat (talk) 21:14, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, That www page says and many others also say that they are in competition and the Lions will kill Hyenas and not eat them. Govindaharihari (talk) 21:22, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

hyenas and wild dogs
When there is no food for big cats, they will often eat wild dogs, and hyenas are common prey of lions. TheFeralCat (talk) 08:04, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Good day. So TheFeralCat, open a chat on the Talk:List of apex predators talkpage and present reliable support WP:RS for your claim. Govindaharihari (talk) 08:08, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review of Jeffrey Allen Sinclair
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jeffrey Allen Sinclair. Because you participated in the deletion discussion or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. GregJackP  Boomer!   00:20, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Max Clifford
You need to be more careful with your reverts. This is a long-standing part of the opening sentence. There is no blp issue as it's well sourced and appropriate. If you want to pursue this take it to talk but do not revert again. DeCausa (talk) 21:33, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You are completely clueless. What aspect of BLP do you think is infringed here? You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about and will get blocked. DeCausa (talk) 21:48, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Template:uw-3rr --> DeCausa (talk) 21:42, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you completely incompetent? You can remove my edit-warring warning BUT WHAT YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DO IS CHANGE MY POST AND LEAVE IT THERE. Can you not see that you have changed it to "Template:uw-3rr -->" Now, either reinstate my post or remove it COMPLETELY. DeCausa (talk) 22:17, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, are you going to answer my questions on the article talk page. You obviously don't understand BLP. The correct thing for you to do is self-revert and continue to discuss on the article talm page. This is explained in WP:BRD. Read it. DeCausa (talk) 22:36, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Talk:Jimmy_Fallon#Orhalfachance
See Talk:Jimmy_Fallon 67.101.7.187 (talk) 03:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

UK parliamentary protocol (RSVP)
Hi Govindaharihari - you published a message on Wikipedia yesterday morning, following which I now see you state that "you are on holiday". No matter, but you deigned to suggest that I may have a conflict of interest regarding the Sir Edward Leigh article: this I have answered but without reply from you so far. The only interest I have is in getting Wiki articles correct, so perhaps you would be so kind as to reply without further delay as to your motives? I have spotted your intervention in articles requiring knowledge of parliamentary protocol, so perhaps you could set down your intentions for all to see (because they are not entirely clear to me).. I look forward to your promptest reply - many thanks. M Mabelina (talk) 00:41, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Re your latest (unfounded) intervention: what is your background, please (Hindi perhaps)? M Mabelina (talk) 00:27, 12 October 2015 (UTC) Kindly check first before making further unsubstantiated allegations - RSVP many thanks.
 * , please don't ask for personal information. You have enough experience to know better. Govindaharihari, you are under no obligation to disclose any more about yourself than you believe to be necessary. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:32, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Iryna Harpy - unsure what to say about your last, please rest assured that I am neither a as you allege nor have I ever subscribed to any form of watchlist whatsoever (both of which can be verified by the powers-that-be). This line of correspondence I fear is not a savoury one (since the initial premise is wholly unfounded), and should perhaps be removed? RSVP M Mabelina (talk) 23:22, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Erudition and convoluted, verbose responses demonstrating that you can talk yourself into a pretzel shape are not one and the same thing . Do you have any concept of what 'talk page stalker' alludes to? I am the talk page stalker here, and I've left a comment for you to remind you that you should not be asking for personal information per WP:TPNO.


 * Govindaharihari's ethnicity is immaterial, and the onus is on you to assume good faith. Asking someone whether they have COI is fine where warranted (i.e., patterns in editing behaviour indicative of WP:ADVOCACY). Asking another editor to disclose what their ethnicity is, or who they vote for, or what their sexual proclivities are is bad faith behaviour on your behalf. Incidentally, please don't conflate having a POV as being COI. I hope this has clarified the intent behind my missive. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:04, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I did & I still do (but why have you waded in?) - my edit just now was somehow deleted view edit conflict, so presumably you are more significant than me - but I had no personal beef with Govindaharihari although I see you (although I don't know who you are) seem to attempting to create one. Question was whether it is a good idea or not to have updates on the London mayoral candidates campaigns - seems like you veto this - although I don't see why? Moreover, please remove distasteful and utterly unfounded slanderous allegations about (never previously heard of that until you mentioned it) & watchlists (which likewise have never engaged in). RSVP M Mabelina (talk) 00:18, 15 October 2015 (UTC) PS. qv. User talk:Mabelina


 * (ec) Er, do you understand what an edit conflict (ec) is and that it has nothing to do with someone trying to delete what you're posting, nor in any shape or form related to a Wikipedia hierarchy? I suspect that you have WP:COMPETENCE and WP:BATTLE problems. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:29, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh blimey - I look like I'm up against it here - you clearly know more of the terminology & ways and means, so I stand down & shall let you carry on unabated, if this is what you wish for. I do not want conflict but rather collaboration. M Mabelina (talk) 00:40, 15 October 2015 (UTC) PS. do you speak on behalf of Govindaharihari btw? If so, I wish I had counsel to intervene on my behalf like you. M Mabelina (talk) 00:43, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:COMPETENCE WP:BATTLE problems are presumably well known to you already? RSVP M Mabelina (talk) 03:53, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Non-promotional edits (why the hostility?)
On 9 June 2015, Goldsmith announced his interest in running for the mayoralty of London in 2016 after encouragement both from members of his own party and others (notably the Greens). Goldsmith sought his Richmond Park constituents' consent by a postal ballot (at his own expense) before formally declaring. The voters of Richmond Park backed Goldsmith's candidature for the Conservative Party nomination at the 2016 mayoral election by a ratio of 4:1 following which, on 23 June 2015, he formally put his name forward. On the second of October Goldsmith won the Conservative nomination for Mayor of London.

Both factual & not slanted (according to accusations of bias) - please advise

On 9 June 2015, Goldsmith announced his interest in running for the mayoralty of London after encouragement both from members of his own party and others (notably the Greens). Goldsmith seeked his Richmond Park constituents' consent by a postal ballot (at his own expense) before formally declaring. Richmond Park voters backed Goldsmith's candidature for the 2016 mayoral election by a ratio of 4:1 following which, on 23 June 2015, he formally put his name forward and, on 2 October, Goldsmith was selected as the Conservative candidate for the London mayoral election, 2016.

Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Trappedinburnley (talk) 22:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I think "fuck off wanker" is deemed not blockable, but it's still kind of a shitty comment. Making more of those edits can, in the end, add up to a block, so I suggest you tone it down some. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you too for the advice User:Drmies Govindaharihari (talk) 02:51, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Please accept ...
Many thanks User:Ssscienccce Govindaharihari (talk) 11:13, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hayden Christensen
Hi, I saw you accepted revision 688920845 on Hayden Christensen. However, it's about a future film, and no sources have been given. Also, a quick Google search showed his appearence in Star Wars VIII are only rumours. Therefore, I've reverted the edit, and I'd like to ask you to please do a bit of research on things like this. Thank you! Rchard2scout (talk) 21:41, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi User:Rchard2scout Richard, no problem with your removal. I do a fair share of research into pending edits, in this case I looked at the article and saw he had previously played the role, assumed he would be continuing in the role and as there was clearly no vandalism, and so I accepted it, it wasn't imo contentious, you are more experienced in the topic and have quickly removed it, that is cool, thanks, I see on deeper checking that is is rumored and not confirmed, anyways, reviewer conditions completed and no harm done. Govindaharihari (talk) 21:52, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Action Bronson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page JTA. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:24, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Bigg Boss
Information on the page Bigg Boss has been altered to make Subject A look like Subject B and Subject B look like Subject C. I perused the page history and it seems like these edits have been made here by User:2601:240:C700:A0B3:4087:EC31:E0F9:28B4. I don't know how these changes were accepted and why weren't they reverted. Please have a look.--WeirdWaffle (talk) 22:12, 12 November 2015 (UT

done thanks User:WeirdWaffle Govindaharihari (talk) 23:01, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Cool. Would you mind looking at the diff I've posted in my post above. The correct information needs to be added back to the page.--WeirdWaffle (talk) 23:21, 12 November 2015 (UTC)