User talk:Hornplease

dear Hornplease
I think I'm close to leaving Wikipedia, as I indicated in the famous ArbCom case we know. I'm on the verge of finishing a few things in the french pages, then I will sign off. I just wanted to say you good bye, and to thank you for your interventions, both in the case and also about Koenraad Elst, which is the topic I mainly contributed to in the English Wikipedia. I guess that, like me, you've got not so much good time with all the events that happened around, but I wanted to tell you that I appreciated your interventions and the intellectual honesty you still try to achieve in the Koenraad Elst article.

I see that you are still following the discussion in the talk page there. I give up but I think that all that Zydenbos has said about Elst is perfectly trustable and correct, and, anyway, the link appears in the "link section" of the article. If one day Zydenbos writes the same in a more "official" publication, I will mention it in the article directly.

In fact, what I can tell without a doubt is that Koenraad Elst is an extremely suspect writer, and not only for the political reasons explained in the Zydenbos page, but mainly for all his intellectual approach to Hinduism and India's history. The links given by Bondego about some criticisms placed at Elst (and Elst's counter responses) are in fact irrelevant, just as irrelevant as can be S. Devi w.r.t. Hinduism. If you have some time, I hope you'll find some interest to Rene Guenon's Introduction to the study of Hindu Doctrines (and also to other books by that author) which place you on the right intellectual setting for understanding metaphysics. It is worth reading.

That's it. I would like to thank you again, and to wish good time in Wikipedia and in your life for the years to come.

With warm regards,

TwoHorned 20:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Frontline (magazine)
The Edit war has resumed. A new user, "Liberal Democrat" refuses to acknowledge primary sources and reverts to a libelous edit version, which is pure "bile". Request intervention. Vrsrini 09:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

The user, "Lib Democrat" obviously doesn't want to live upto her/his name. I recommend a block. I leave it to your discretion. 202.177.251.166 09:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Introduction
Hello User:Hornplease, just want to introduce myself. I've seen that you seem to do some really good work on wiki. I'm also interested in some of your areas, especially South Asian topics and wanted to help promote a fairer more unbiased work on these different articles. I was hoping you wouldn't mind me coming to you with some questions sometimes as I am not as familiar with all of wiki. Have a good day and keep up the good work--Kathanar 21:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello User:Hornplease, thank you for the welcome, I might need your advice soon. I am observing I think vandalism over at Indian American politics section. I'll be back in touch.--Kathanar 17:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello User:Hornplease, could you look at this [] and give me your opinion or help on this matter. There is a move to delete a category I created for religious supremacists. Thanks --Kathanar 22:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

My comment
A book on Hindutva forces misrepresenting history isn't the best book to show to a person who already has the impression that Indians are stealing Pakistan's history, it will push the two parties involved (Indians and Pakistanis) a lot further apart. I stand by my comments, it wasn't prudent for fowler to show him extracts from that book.  Noble eagle  [TALK] [C] 23:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, bad faith was a bit of a heavy statement to use. By the way, my new signature isn't working, could you take a look at User:Nobleeagle/Sig and try and see the problem: Signing gets me this:

 &lt;font color=&quot;#000080&quot;&gt;N&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;#12098A&quot;&gt;O&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;#120ABA&quot;&gt;B&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;#2015E3&quot;&gt;L&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;#1364EA&quot;&gt;E&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;#2BA4EC&quot;&gt;E&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;#1364EA&quot;&gt;A&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;#2015E3&quot;&gt;G&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;#120ABA&quot;&gt;L&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;#12098A&quot;&gt;E&lt;/font&gt; &lt;sup&gt;&lt;font color=#2015E3 size=&quot;0.2&quot; face=&quot;Arial Narrow&quot;&gt; &lt;nowiki&gt;[TALK]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=#2015E3 size=&quot;0.2&quot; face=&quot;Arial Narrow&quot;&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;nowiki&gt;[C]&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/sup&gt; 23:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

It is meant to be this:  —  N O B L E E A G L E   [TALK]  [C]


 * Don't worry, I fixed it.  —  N O B L E E A G L E   [TALK]  [C] 23:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Question
Hi. I was going to copyedit your recent and very informative addition here to match the other citations in form, but then realized you cited a page but no edition (which makes the citation unverifiable). Could you please either add the edition data (publisher, date) to the article or leave a note on my talk page indicating it? Thank you. Dahn 10:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. If I understood correctly, you wish to revisit that article and add more to it - I suppose this is from the same book. My main concern was to apply a single format to all references - since I edited the article, I stuck with the system of references I find most comfortable (book titles at the bottom, shortened citations as "author, page" in "Notes"), but we could just as well change it if you have any objection; however, I think that whatever format we use, we should be consistent throughout the article. That is to say, I will change the citation to the format currently used, and you are free to change it throughout the article or you can ask me to do it. Either way, yours was a very interesting addition.
 * I originally bumped into Nasi while editing on a related subject involving, of all places, Romania. I could provide citations for his activities in relation to Moldavia, but then noticed that the article was unreferenced (and my additions appeared over-detailed in comparison), so I just did some research into what was available on the net, and added some stuff. Overall, there is too little I know about about the man, so I would definitely encourage you to add more detail wherever in the article you see suited. Cheers, Dahn 12:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Squatting MOPs
I fully agree with you. That's why I moved the factoid to the "personal life" section as a matter-of-fact statement of where he lives. dab (𒁳) 15:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Indo-Aryan Migration
I'm sure he had a good reason, which was precisely why I asked. I know that there has been some conflict at that article - the reason I have it watchlisted is because of a particular user that had been creating POV redirects and other nonsense. That's actually why I was suprised that their wasn't further explanation in the edit summary or a direction to the talk page. To someone unfamiliar with the topic, like myself, it just looks like a sourced paragraph, since I'm not familiar with who's fringe in that particular field. Natalie 23:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Temp Page
The only way that this can work is if solid contributors like yourself help it work, Horn. You have seen how contentious the back and forth is in the Discussion area. Nothing is getting done and people are just getting mad at each other. By focusing the energies of the two groups interested in each area, we get twice as much done, instead of the tug of war we have now. I have asked Mar and Niko to put together a 2-sentence summary of the sections to be focused on in the Temp Page, so that somethin remains in the article until the Temp Page is reintegrated in a couple of weeks. Help me out, please.Arcayne 23:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, how to contact you?
Hi, Is there a way to contact you? I see that it wouldn't be reasonable to reveal your email address here, amidst the animosity prevalent. Can you please send an email message to {zalimjadir} at gmail.com (leaving out the braces)? Systemic rant 06:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

300 Article
You are going to find that being polite with me will garner you much more assistance than would my ire. Please endavor to be more civil.Arcayne 22:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You will note that in each of your references of my remarks, they were not directed at any one person. I commented because your were. And no, I don't expect the film to be as rosy as that of a bad children's flick, but I do expect people to roll up their sleeves and actually doa little research. We have wasted over a week arguing about two reviews - two. At Rotten Tomatoes, there are gathered at least two dozen articles. In order to avoid the POV nonsense that will cripple the article's ability to reach GA and FA status (as that is what we ar aiming for, after all), we need to start utilizing more than just the sentiments of a minority or reviewers. I ask you to try and accept that, for a majority of the English wiki, the concerns of the Iranian cultural brigade is not going to really matter. Not that we are insensitive to your concerns, but rather that they carry less weight here than they would in, say, the Iranian wiki (if there is such a thing). Arcayne 23:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, I am going to ask you to be a tad more civil than you are now. Suggestin that I don't know my way around Wikipedia is pretty insulting, and not really conducive to working politely together. Please, don't do it again.

As well, rather than remind me of RS, perhaps you might endeavor to actually quote in the article some of the sources you allude to. Instead, we keep hearing about the Slate interview. I am not saying that it doesn't bear mentioning. I'm not even suggesting that were we to find a great many sources that say otherwise that we should ignore ones that point solely to the cultural insensitivities, we should not mention it. I am suggesting that these other sources should be cited, so as to avoid the appearance of wearing blinders. Lastly, you misunderstood my point about the English-language wiki. We aren't supposed to focus solely on Iranian news sources, and yet we have. I am not going to dwell on that. Hopefully, this will correct itself. Please, do not ever accuse me of cultural bias ever again. You don't know me, and you quite clearly have no idea what sorts of bias I do or do not have. Let's not talk about this anymore. Arcayne 00:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you done now? Is it out of your system? I certainly hope so, as I considered the conversation closed after my response to your last email. I archived my talk page with that understanding. Had I simply blanked my page, that would have been rude. Instead I archived it, because even the most inane conversations wherein the other person repeats back to me word for word (as if I somehow cannot remember) what I said teaches me something. That you chose to respond afterward, to have some sort of last word on the subject, kinda teaches quite clearly that this ego-driven and relatively uncivil behavior isn't really something I care to engage with. Please do not respond to my Talk Page any more; you have nothing to say that I find necessary to hear. I certainly hope I am being clear this time. I wouldn't want you to misinterpret or misunderstand me yet again. Arcayne 09:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Karunanidhi Article
I appreciate your efforts to remove POV statements from Karunanidhi article in both Achievements and Controversies section. You have removed statements regarding Selling SUN TV stakes as Original Research.(Synthesis). These reports of comparing Karunanidhi selling price and actual share IPO price appeared in many Indian newspapers, columns etc. For sample you can see here. I can give many more citations if required. I am reinserting those statements. I suggest you can modify statements in line with encyclopedic standards if required instead of removing paragraph completely. --Indianstar 06:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Rosser
Isn't Yvette Rosser notable? Birdsmight 07:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Lemme elaborate. I'm sorry if we got off on the wrong foot. I'm just sayin' that Rosser and Bhatnagar are hardly "random people". Rosser is a notable academic in such areas (politics I guess) and Bhatnagar is a notable personality (as the chief editor of a important periodical). Dunno much abt this Sundaram chappie so a removal of his opinion might be in order. What do you think? Birdsmight 07:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Does "partisan" necessarily mean unreliable as far as Rosser is concerned? I don't see anything in BLP that bans her opinions from the Bidwal page, particularly given the fact that the material is a reproduction of documentation from the Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The University of Texas at Austin (and so has some academic standing). As far as the Michael Moore comparison and your "polemical==inadmissible claim", websites like http://www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com/ are, by construction, polemical. Yet it is referenced as a criticism of Moore.
 * Partisan groups are routinely quoted as criticisms of people, for instance,Bernard Goldberg's criticism of Michael Moore in Michael_Moore_controversies (Fox News would certainly count as "partisan" in that case).What about this ? Partisan? Perhaps. But certainly notable given that they are the one Bidwai targets for his attacks on Hindus. These are the best quotable criticisms of Bidwai, and some criticism obviously belongs in his page, given his inherently inflammatory remarks against Hindus. Birdsmight 08:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that the issue is a bit more complicated than literal adherence to wp policies. the issues here are as follows:


 * 1) Bidwai has made some heavily incendiary remarks against Hindus, targeted at Hindus in a broad sense, that have encouraged violence against Hindus and encouraged discrimination against Hindus. These remarks border on hate speech. That much is clear
 * 2) Those remarks have provoked a response from certain parties who have been bold enough not to be intimidated by Marxist threats and intimidation tactics
 * 3) For the sake of balance in the article, those responses need to be stated on the grounds of quotability and notability. Since Rosser has academic qualifications her criticism is certainly notable enough for mention.
 * 4) Rosser does not make ad-hominem attacks against Bidwai, so libel issues don't apply. She is not defaming him, merely criticizing his position.We can talk about Bhatnagar separately (he is, in fact,a prolific contributor to multiple periodicals, and heads io, which is more than an "online publication").Birdsmight 09:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) wrt your statement "If Bidwai can get published in RS, then surely his critics can". In an ersatz-democracy like India, that is not the case. Birdsmight 09:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) As far as Bhatnagar is concerned. He had a discussion with Bidwai "I accosted Praful Bidwai also who had implied that all the alleged social and economic disasters in India are because of Hindutva and Hindu BJP-led governments. He first tried to evade, run away and ignore but, when squarely confronted, admitted that he did not blame BJP for all the ills, the Congress party was also guilty." so that interaction makes it notable (it's certainly not inherently disparaging to the man so there is no libel here). Perhaps it needs to be reworded a bit, but certainly not removed.Birdsmight 09:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * BLP is not being violated here as there is no defamation of character. Birdsmight 09:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid then that we are at an impasse, since I maintain that Rosser does not violate BLP, although Sundaram and Bhatnagar might. There are two options. Noticeboard or mediation. Which do you want to do first? I do not think I am under any obligation to "make my case" to you as such, only to an accredited wikipedia committee, with whom I am prepared to argue my case.Birdsmight 10:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Unseemly template
Horn, The Communism in India template (an ugly-looking one) is really improper in most of the places. For example, see EMS. The template has several fringe organisations, highly irrelevant in the case of the article. Then the Naxalbari movement was something antagonistic to the party EMS led. In fact the Naxalite organisations formerly used to call CPI(M) a social fascist organisation. Such antagonistic elements whose views have nothing in common shouldn't be brought under an umbrella template. What do you think of it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vidhrohi (talk • contribs) 16:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

Anti-Hinduism
Thanks for working out imbalances and undue weight from that article. Your edits look good so you can probably expect my support when the inevitable disagreement arrives. The Behnam 19:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Is Narendra Modi an infallible figure
Have a look at the pace with legtimate criticism of Modi is being removed when it has been clearly pointed out in Indian media that the Gujarat government has acceded that there have been fake encounters of Muslims claiming they were headed to assasinate Modi and have a look here congratulating each other.

The fake encounter issue has been raked in Gujarat assembly and even some BJP members have asked for full scale enquiries into the doings of Narendra Das Manohardas Modi.

WP does not restrict edits by IPs so why [Sir_Nicholas_de_Mimsy-Porpington]] has run a tirade against unknown IP edits on Naranda Modi even though the POV is supported by newspapers and link on TOI provided 125.23.99.152 12:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

300
I beg to differ. An agnostic approach does not emphasise any historicity upon the film, it merely avoids the use of labels prone to personal interpretations, such as "fictional account of". In case you didn't notice, the alternative view to "fictional account" is to leave it blank, nobody suggests to coin it a "historical account" or anything like that. Don't you think that an agnostic approach is the most neutral strategy to follow? Miskin 01:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Gujral.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Gujral.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu badali (talk) 17:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Zoroastrianism and Hinduism
Hi, this article that you tagged recently was originally created by the banned Hindutvaadi troll User:Maleabroad, which explains the unverified claims scattered throughout the article. In one sense the topic is valid since the Avesta and the Vedas, the texts which modern Hinduism evolved from share many similarities. But I wonder whether the page will look much different from Proto-Indo-Iranian religion once it is cleaned up. What are your thoughts? GizzaChat  &#169; 22:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I thought I'd seen that article somewhere, and was planning to look for it. You're right, it might be the case that we have a good case for redirection here; perhaps DBachmann might want to weigh in, given that this is close to his area of expertise? I'll let him know. Hornplease 22:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Please see Request for Arbitration
Corrected direct link: I am informing you of this request for arbitration, initially filed by User talk:Notmyrealname, since you are an "interested party" who contributed comments in Talk:Lewis Libby (see archived talk pages) about these issues pertaining to Libby's "ethnicity" and his identification as "Jewish" and the category "Jewish American lawyers" in Talk:Lewis Libby (archived talk pages); I [had] modified the heading to focus on the articles in dispute as opposed to on a contributor and explained that there [but that was reverted by an administrator]. Please go to the link and indicate that you confirm having received this message. Thank you. --NYScholar 09:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC) --corrected link; updated. --NYScholar 19:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Tendentious editing
Thanks for the information, Hornplease. *scratching head, trying to remember where I've run into you, because I think we have too...* :) – Riana ऋ 14:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Setalvad changes:

 * Her group, Sabrang Communications, received funds from the Congress Party to run anti-BJP advertisements in national dailies for the 1999 Lok Sabha elections.

Um, you might have a grouse againt Varsha, but the above story is a fact. I dont see why you deleted it. You can read Javed Anand's interview on the 3rd link. Mikeslackenerny 09:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Your VB and AID edits
1. The Career Break part was authentic, and sourced from two places. Why did you remove it? 2. AID statements which you removed and replaced were sourced as well. Why are you removing these? You can add to them, or modify them, but removing sourced statements is a stretch. 3. PIPDPF .. don't know much about it. They have their own website I believe if you want to source information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikeslackenerny (talk • contribs) 02:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC).


 * Would yahoogroups messages be a newsgroup? And would not a message from Varsha herself on the group authenticate it? Re blog, I can still agree with it, however, the post is an independent corroboration. And there is a thing to be said about going by the letter, instead of the spirit of the law. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikeslackenerny (talk • contribs) 04:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

Protection
BLN: I've been cleaning up a few Sangh Parivar articles, and I see that you protected Hindutva. Any plans for unprotection? Let me know what you need to have cleared up first. Hornplease 21:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure really. Could you ask another admin in due time? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Koenraad Elst
Hi - I see you have taken to removing texts and references related to this particular historian - I hope this is not a spree inspired by the blocking of Bakasuprman. There is no ban on Elst's works being used as a reference, and each article needs to be examined carefuly about whether Elst's works actually qualify as "non-notable" and "fringe" as you claim. Please desist from removing these texts and sources without prior discussion. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 19:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Your arguments on Elst seem reasonable - I don't personally think he is a fringe scholar, but that's me. However, my point was that you should not remove text/sources as if you're reverting vandalism. You need to launch a discussion with other editors and undo only if there a consensus. Also, you can balance the amount of weightage given to Elst's works. If 1-2 paras are on Elst, that is not appropriate. However, there is no problem in having 1-2 sentences discussing his theories. For example, in the Maulana Azad article, Elst's theory can be summarized in a couple of sentences - no need to give him a whole para. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 22:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hornplease, if you suspect some intrinsic problem or something like "wikibombing" and corporate infiltration, you should raise it at ANI so we can effectively tackle it. It is true that I've never heard of Azad being criticized as a closet Islamist, so I'll check if any other credible source discusses the same possibility. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy)  23:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Re. Disruptive IP
Not yet. When an unregistered user vandalizes after their block expires, they must be warned and then reported to WP:AIV if they transgress a final warning.-- Hús  ö  nd  10:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well done! :-) Regards, Hús  ö  nd  11:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

your arbcom statement
Hi - just a clarification - when you talked about an administrator's conduct in your opening, did you mean me or Porpington? Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 14:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

P.N. Oak
Thanks for your recersion on the Oak page. I got fed up reverting Kkm5848's appalling edits. Despite listing RfCs, I got no support, so I'd appreciate some assistence to counter Kkm5848's unrelenting edit warring. Paul B 23:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

pomp...pomp...pomp..
Dear Hornplease, I gave verifiable link about Thelka link and Babubhai Khatria to proof that it's not POV but NOR. with love John Paul 10:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * On user's page:


 * Hornplease, Do you call contribution to wikipedia articles with verifiable information is combative attitude! Your recommendation to discuss point by point had been valid when I had objection with the contents of articles but I am contributing additional information reflecting other facts that are purposely ignored by pro authors. These articles are guarded like fort and none other than pro authors are allowed to add or edit and your reminding me WP policy.


 * "If its not about religions minorities, then why do mention below point in “Central Concept” of Hindutva article “emphasizing historical oppression of Hindus by invading forces like the Muslims (see Muslim conquest of the Indian subcontinent) and the Christians (see Goa Inquisition) and the call to "reverse" the influence resulting from these intrusions.
 * What is the need to mention “but came to prominence in Indian politics in the late 1980s after the events of Shah Banu Case and Babri Masjid”.


 * "The very reason Hindutva or Hindu Rastra exist are for above reasons and you say it’s not about the effect of on religions minorities! John Paul 10:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Replied . Hornplease

Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2
Hello,

An Arbitration case on which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 02:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Please also note the arbitrators' comments here regarding scheduling matters. Newyorkbrad 02:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Moose knuckle
Hi Hornplease. You recently deleted my s on the Moose knuckle and Mooseknuckle articles, as you said they were "sketchy". I am curious why you think so. I feel that mooseknuckles are deserving of their own article, should someone decide to create it. But a redirect to the cameltoe article, in my book, is akin to redirecting penis to vagina, which hardly seems appropriate. Gobonobo T C 08:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Theocracy
Template:Theocracy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Majoreditor 00:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

delsort India
Hi, could you add new entries to the top please. Also, it would be handy if you used the linked article title in the edit summary for additions so others can jump straight to the article &mdash; I like to see the article before I read others opinion to be sure I dont look at the article with a bias. It is also handy to have the article link in the edit summary for entries that are removed as well (even redlinks) so others can see which survived. Anyway, many thanks for doing the delsorting. John Vandenberg 09:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/NYScholar
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/NYScholar. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/NYScholar/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/NYScholar/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale &#124; Blast him / Follow his steps 00:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:India
 Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the India WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * Please participate in any of our descendant workgroups that might interest you.
 * The project has a bimonthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered in its entirety, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every India article in Wikipedia.
 * Can you code? The automation department uses automated and semi-automated methods to perform batch tasks that would be tedious to do manually.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! &mdash; Lost (talk) 14:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I saw that you have joined mainly for the newsletter. Looking forward to see you contributing to it. There is an edition due in May &mdash; Lost (talk) 14:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

email
My email is paul.barlow_at_unn.ac.uk. If you have time to forward the PDFs I'd be grateful. Paul B 23:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Teesta (again)

 * You are removing contecnt, including some that is not controversial. I dont understand why. And you are rewording things from a very particular angle. If she signed the letter (which she did) she herself calls herself leftist, and pro-leftist. If you have any problems, I would prefer that we request a moderator to examine this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikeslackenerny (talk • contribs) 08:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Fair enough. I apologise for the slant accusation. Have added a new primary source. Can we conclude that she is an anti-BJP/Hindutva activist from that? Have a look. Mikeslackenerny 08:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see talk page. Mikeslackenerny 09:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

70.112.77.235
Already blocked him yesterday. . - Aksi_great (talk) 11:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. Nice to see that someone else is on the lookout too. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Per your request
"of course anyone calling for divestment from Israel would be viewed as antisemitic by the sources in question" - POV, and OR to boot. "Jay is unlikely to be cautious about accusations" - POV and a personal attack, as well "these views are marginal in any rational analysis." there are many, many more, but this should suffice. Isarig 20:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. My assumption that there are those who believe that divestment from Israel is motivated by, and part of, the new anti-Semitism is actually based on things that I have read on Wikipedia. If you disagree with that assessment, perhaps you should edit that page. My statement was made in the light of the fact that the sources cited invariably used the fact of Sabeel's presence in that movement as indicative. Do you disagree? If so, you should have done so at the time.
 * And about my comments re Jay: he has accused me, and many others, of various things in the past. The simple truth is that he is a little quick to judge about these matters. Note that he accused me of stalking, someone else pointed out that that was a little silly, and I chose to laugh it off by saying that that's just how Jay does business here. Would you prefer that I took it seriously?
 * More to the point, where do you get off telling someone who hardly ever edits mid-east stuff, and came here in response to an RfC, that they have an obvious POV? I have no idea who you are, but I do know that you have no idea at all what my views are about any of this. I do, however, know that WP isn't the place for fringe views to be pushed as the mainstream, and some of this is happening here.

Don't be so quick to judgment, and attempt collegiality on article talkpages. WP is not a battleground, etc. Hornplease 20:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Spam filter
Yes. The spam filter must have prevented you from saving the article with the link in it. I had arranged for someone to run a bot and replace all references to the website with fact. But looks like there is a problem. Now I think I will have to manually go through the list. - Aksi_great (talk) 06:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Shakespeare
Just a note re the Kathman debate. Thanks for commenting, but you've got it the wrong way round in this case! Kathman isn't Kazanas, he's Witzel. Kathman represents the mainstream opinion. But because mainstream scholarship does not typically debate this issue within its journals, most of the published material is from conspiracy theorists (hence my analogy with The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail on the talk page). Kathman is one of the few maintream scholars who examines this in detail, but most of this work is on his website, not in "hard copy". Kathman is indisputably a real scholar who represents the mainstream. Smatprt is trying to delete all the arguments and information from Kathman's site while retaining all material published by non experts in non-scholarly, purely commercial presses. This is like accepting Ithias Patrika as a reliable source and rejecting the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies - simply because one is on paper and the other isn't. Paul B 10:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh. I thought I might have, which was why I was hedging my words around with a dozen modifier and caveats. Hornplease 19:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Edits to Jayalalitha article
I have removed NPOV inserted by you in Jayalalitha article due to following reasons.

1) No discussions in Talk page 2) I am not sure whether you are inserting NPOV for few points in achivements section or Achivements section/Criticisms section together. There are tonnes of materials written in criticisms section. Her achivements in Veeranam scheme, Veerappan issue etc are verifiable and there are dozens of verifiable sources which talks about these achivements. If required you can mark them as so that people can add citations. We can remove points if people cannot add verifiable citations. 3) I wish to ask peer review of Karunanidhi/Jayalalitha articles. I feel these articles are being edited by same individuals. Most of them add wild allegations in Jayalalitha article and un verifiable appreciations in Karunanidhi article. --Indianstar 01:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. Will add citations for some of the points. Do you sincerely believe Achivements in Karunanidhi article and criticisms in Jayalalitha article looks encyclopedic?. Does it look as properly sourced?. I mentioned Peer review to check neutrality.--Indianstar 01:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Lead section
Sorry, I misunderstood your edits. The word "its" is intended to refer to "the subject". Jayjg (talk) 01:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nehrudeath.jpg
Hello Hornplease, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Nehrudeath.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Hornplease/Nehru. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srikeit 05:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Mediation for MA article
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.--Pejman47 19:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation
This message delivered: 04:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC).

Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad mediation update
Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_mediation/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad -- Sef rin gle Talk 19:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Kiwi Camara re-nominated for deletion
The article Kiwi Camara has been renominated for deletion. You are being notified of this because of your participation in the first nomination process last year. Please visit the debate page to state your opinion and vote. Thanks. --  ßίζ ·  קּ‼  ( talk  |  contribs )  01:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Cool down
Hornplease, everybody is hootin' and hollerin' on that case but nobody is listening - not even ArbCom. I know it feels like denting one's pride to let the bitching slide, but just forget about it. I'm tryin' my best as well. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 13:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * As for the nuts you're engaging, they never listen and they never will. That's why they're in the mess they're in. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy)  13:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

HSS Article
Your points are not supported by the articles that you mentioned. One, because you don't provide direct reference to your argument. Second you sources (Outlook and The Economist) can't be verified since they are behind the paid wall. Please provide other sources or have the courtesy to revert your changes until you have the resources. I am sure, since you are a longtime WP contributor, you must have checked the discussion page before reverting my changes since I posted the exact same argument there too. Sjain 06:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

_________________________

Hi Hornplease! I'm a new member from India. You're work on India is great. Thank you for keeping up the fight against obfuscatory, fundamentalist forces. I promise to do my best to carry on your good work. Regards -- Amit 13:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

attacking hindu articles?
Why are you only deleting hindu cats? Your friend kathanar Special:Contributions/Kathanar seems to be adding uncited cats left and right yet no censure. I politely and kindly ask that you cease and desist in taking such iflammatory actions. It's better for the project. --D-Boy 21:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Please do not lie to me. It is not nice.  I implore to look over this statement you made on his talk page.   Why on earth did you lie to me?  I am deeply hurt by your previous statement.--D-Boy 21:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Please refrain from personal attacks. Your bias against Hindus gives you no right to call me such indecent names.  I will be unable to have a civil discussion with you if you keep up such personal attacks.--D-Boy 22:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I really didn't know that Biography of Living Persons applied to dead people. Arbcom has no rulings on BLP that concern wanton emptying of Hindu cats, though it has ruled that begging for blocks on users whose ideologies you disagree with is unacceptable. Baka man  21:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Sheila Chandra
Great point you made about need for the person to be self-identified with the religion in question. Cheers, Dogru144 20:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
Edit comments are not for discussion, talk pages are. IPSOS (talk) 21:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I disagree with you about talk page usage. By putting discussion in edit summaries, you are inviting reversion in order to reply to you in an edit comment. Think about it. IPSOS (talk) 02:27, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Reply
I'm truly sorry that you believe so. Please feel free to restore it if you believe it needs further discussion, even tho my own analysis led me to believe otherwise. Regards,  P h a e d r i e l  - 08:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Hi there. I appreciate your input regarding the current dispute. Keep it up! Suicup 09:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm beginning to get sick of editing these damned Israel/Palestine articles. Reams and reams of pointless arguments, POV admins, systemic bias and denial of the legitimacy of sources, just makes it too hard. If you are able to last much longer I commend you. Cheers Suicup 09:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I would also like to thank you for your input, actually. You seem to have some interesting ideas. I'm sure we will find a way to get through this in a way to answer everyone's legitimate concerns. thanks. --Sm8900 16:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

ANI -Bharatveer stalking Hornplease
You are also mentioned here.
 * Didn't you see this lynching spree? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.91.253.62 (talk • contribs) 10:46, 10 Jul 2007 (UTC)

Swami Ramdev edit
Looks like we're at an impasse. I'd like to submit issue to Mediation Cabal. Are you willing ?

Regards

wikipost

Jorditxei
Hi thank you for your useful contributions on the talk page of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Please, if it is not asking for too much, could you state whether you oppose or support my proposal in the way I have done here I think that will make it easier for any user to see whether it got support or it didn't. Thank you very much.--Jorditxei 10:30, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/NYScholar
The above named arbitration case has closed. All involved parties are granted an amnesty over the edit-warring that had been ongoing but has given the administrators the ability to sanction anyone who begins disruptive editing again.

You may view the full case decision at the case page.

For the Arbitration Committee,

- Penwhale &#124; Blast him / Follow his steps 11:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Israel-Palestine
I've been tied up doing other things today, but I'll try to take a look soon. Jayjg (talk) 22:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Swami Ramdev Request for Arbitration
Hello. I have submitted the Pranayam paragraph deletion issue for Arbitration. Kindly follow-up on the Arb page to provide your statement.

Regards,

Wikiposte

Hello. Are you interested in Sancho's offer in this matter ? If so please confirm on his Talk page. [] Wikipost 03:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Sir
Please see this stuff from HT that speaks about planning in Gujarat Riots .I believe planning has been reported by many media, Sir..Have a lovely Sunday Sir..Terminador 19:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Please comment
This is a message for all regulars at the “apartheid” AfD series. I believe there may have been a breakthrough. Please share your thoughts here. Thanks. --Targeman 03:02, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

V. T. Rajshekar (yawn)
Hi Hornplease. Our paths crossed on the User:Hkelkar issue. I wonder if you have an opinion on the sockpuppetiness or otherwise of User:Nahartasanhedrin who has suddenly made a great number of edits to the above, deeply depressing, WP:BLP article on a controversial activist. If you could bear to have any dealings with the above article and/or the related Dalit Voice, your sane approach would be much appreciated. Cheers. Itsmejudith 17:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

J K Rowling
Thanks for your comments on the Talk page. You might note that there is a strong sense of WP:OWN that is sometimes hard to overcome. Glad to see someone else shares my liberal view of NPOV. Libertycookies 16:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Saare Jahan Se Achcha
Hi Hornplease, Since you appear on the history of the page, could you please look at my post here on Ragib's talk page. Ragib is apparently taking a long wiki break. What is your opinion? Thanks. Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  14:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

A request from a new member
hi, how are you. I began recently to contribute in wikipedia. I did my best to clean up and to enrich the article Zionism and racism allegations, but I am still a new wikipedian and my English language is not as good as what it should be. I think I still need some help. I hope you will participate in developing that page.

Please be sure to see my edits in the article since I fear that they will be reverted quicly. --Aaronshavit 08:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
Hornplease, it appears that no one has informed you that you were blocked. This is being discussed at WP:ANI#User:Hornplease (was: Community's criminal negligence at revelation of personal information). You are now unblocked, and are welcome to participate in the discussion.Proabivouac 21:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have the retracted the block in your log after Dmcdevit kindly agreed to do the check required, which showed that you have been in NYC for a while and not on the Harvard IPs and commercial provider ranges which intersected with the ranges declared on your userpage which did the five reverts. Apologies.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 09:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Allegations of Chinese apartheid AfD
Following your recent participation in Articles for deletion/Allegations of French apartheid, you may be interested to know that a related article, Allegations of Chinese apartheid, is currently being discussed on AfD. Comments can be left at Articles for deletion/Allegations of Chinese apartheid. -- ChrisO 15:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

discussion from AN/I

 * Specialjane believes the advice is good advice. Specialjane also was afraid that no good dead goes unpunished.  It would be easy for an admin to say "blocked indefinitely, trolling" or "disruptive editing - blocked forever" and few admins seek out to unblock users blocked by mistake or blocked for too long a period.  So Specialjane decided to give what should be non-controversial, good advice using the Specialjane account, not the regular Jane account.  The names are similar on purpose. Believe me, I wish someone gave me such good advice.  Several months ago, regular Jane got blocked by a hot head and it took great pains to get unblocked.  (In fact, Hornplease, if you wanted to do a scientific study and got an admin to block you for 3 months with the made up explanation "trolling - block", I am certain you would find it extremely difficult to find an admin to unblock you.  So the bottom line is move on, continue editing, and be glad that your block was only temporary.  Good luck!Specialjane 04:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

BalanceRestored
I've replied you.BalanceRestored 10:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

they are showing their nigeerna things
Please see —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Upasthadharma (talk • contribs).

AfD nomination of List of United States Student Governments
List of United States Student Governments, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that List of United States Student Governments satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/List of United States Student Governments and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of List of United States Student Governments during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Realkyhick 06:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Karan Singh
Hi, he is from Kashmir Royal family, see the Royal family stub, he would have been actually the current Maharaja / Emperor of all Jammu and Kashmir if his father had not acceded to India. Wife is actually the princess of Nepal and children are princes and princesses of Kashmir to those who care for their royal family, no point removing all reference that this is the Royal family of disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir, also see Kashmir.

Thanks Atulsnischal 23:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Big problems at Battle of Jenin
The section you looked at in this article (ref CAMERA cites) is indeed one of the least objectionable, but even there good/fundamental information such as "*May 7 - The PA statement to the UN estimated that 375 Palestinians had been killed in the attacks on the West Bank. Amongst these would be the 80 Palestinians (and 4 Israeli soldiers) killed in Nablus in April." has been ruthlessly exised out. PalestineRemembered 14:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Alleged "Racial attack"
On DBachmann's talkpage, I already gave a clarification of your charge of "being racist" towards DBachmann. I hope you read it before he deleted all the contents of his talk page. In response, he later blabbered something about my parents and some such tangential, unrelated and obtuse stuff that never made sense. I hope that I have made myself clear. Indian_Air_Force (IAF) 15:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

You're kidding, right?
My edits are disruptive? I'm adding appropriate cleanup tags to appropriate articles. An article called "Brazilian women's basketball team" says that it's a women's basketball team in Brazil. Is that a quality article? No. Should it be deleted. Most certainly. I added the tag. I also stand by my other edits. Timneu22 01:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Reply Timneu22 01:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

alternative proposal
Hello, I suggested this, which is I think more neutral and accurate : What do you think about it ? Alithien 20:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:New.waves.rumours.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:New.waves.rumours.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 17:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Meh. I hate how quick bots are. Hornplease 18:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Question regarding RfC
Hi Hornplease,

I just have a question to help me understand the procedures of how RfC works, in regard to the John Howard article.

I wanted to know what the terms-of-reference are, that is, what issues you are (or were) looking at.

The RfC was started by User:Recurring Dreams. He mentioned FACT tags.

I then made a comment about FACT tags, and later I made another comment about deletion of content, that is, the practice of deleting content without following Wikiquette.

Someone else made a comment about editors with a conflict of interest.

Your comment and summary at the bottom of page seems to refer to the FACT tag issue.

So my question is, which of these issues does the RfC incorporate? Because the initial request made by Recurring Dreams was about FACT tags, is this where the RfC must stay? Were the other issues off-topic.

I ask for clarification, as I initially thought the other issues must be off-topic, as they weren't included in the RfC summary. That's why I then used the Wikiquette Alerts for assistance with the other issue, deletion of content. I received criticism for violating WP:MULTI.

Is the RfC over? Is there anything more to happen with that?

Thanks, Lester2 21:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Hornplease, for taking the time to explain the RfC process for me. It's much clearer now. Cheers, Lester2 13:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Note
Your recent edit strikes me as somewhat disruptive. Please refrain from proclaiming your righteousness on this wiki. Look at my edits, you will see that I am a fine wikipedian with a history of making pages better, reporting vandals, removing spam, adding cleanup tags, and adding credible and pertinent content. I am sorry you don't agree with my request to delete two pages, but your unnecessary comments on my talk page are becoming disruptive. Please refrain from these types of edits. Timneu22 23:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please note that no amount of energy can make up for patience and attention to policies and guidelines thrashed out by consensus. The English wikipedia, with which you are as yet unfamiliar, it seems, is the location for a great deal of disagreement, argument and careful consensus; and editors who make drastic edits in areas where they are inexpert, or are regularly incivil, are not generally looked on with favour, however energetic they may be at tagging articles. I strongly suggest you look at these things and acquire a little experience with our criteria for deletion and how we do things before announcing that I am trying to spam you. (I certainly don't see a successful RfA unless you do.) Thanks!
 * Hornplease 04:42, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * For the genesis of this discussion, see this diff, with edit comment "removing shit". Hornplease 04:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I've had enough of your insults. I am not unfamiliar with English wikipedia. Look at my track record. You're really annoying me with your constant messages. I'm sorry that you didn't think two pages shouldn't have been deleted. GET OVER IT. Oh, and you're not an English Wikipedia God. And if you are, you need other hobbies. Do not message me on this topic again. Timneu22 10:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if you felt insulted. I would certainly be interested to know what you thought was incivil, and will withdraw it. Please do note that my concern is not only the misapplication of CSD, but also the sort of incivility that leaves angry remarks in bold on my talkpage. Hornplease 11:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Urgent:India page
Hi Hornplease, In February 2007, we had an RfC on the Talk:India page (see here), and it was felt by a majority of the people commenting that stability of the article is important. Yesterday, out of the blue, Blnguyen, who has no history of editing on the India page, made a post on the page, that set all this off. Could you take a look at this section of the Talk:India page? In particular, User:Sarvagnya, for example, has returned to his scheme for de-constructing the India page. (By way of background: Nichalp, who usually watched over the article is busy this summer; Ragib, who was subbing for Nichalp is busy too. Blnguyen seems to think that the page is in bad shape and is about to be de-FA'd.  He feels that it needs many more citations (and their lack) is reason enough for it to fail an FAR.  Nichalp, when he was active, discouraged over-crowding the text with too many citations (especially when the text was composed in the summary-style, as India is).  I think Blnguyen has some valid points: the page needs more (and certainly better) citations and the prose (especially of some new sections that were created by other people) needs revamping, but I think you might be in a good position to assess Blnguyen's idea of expanding the article to twice its size.)  Regards,  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  12:34, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I've been following that and have already weighed in: . Hornplease 12:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Request advice re Deletion of content
Hi Hornplease,

I ask your advice on this, because you are a very experienced Wikipedian and you have been closely following the goings-on with the John Howard page. I'm not looking for you to take sides on any particular content issue. I just seek advice on procedure.

You might have noticed my Wikiquette Alert request failed: Wikiquette_alerts

It has been deemed good etiquette for an editor to delete content, as long as they leave a note in the edit window, even when there has been an active discussion taking place on the same subject that the deleting editor didn't wish to partake in.

To me, the discussion pages are turning into a farce if people choose not to use them.

In the hierarchy of the Wikipedia complaints system, is there anywhere else to take this issue? Lester2 23:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Your comment on my talkpage
Just wanted to let you know, that I've responded to your comment on my talkpage. Thanks! --SXT4$\color{Red} \oplus$ 02:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Bal Thackeray
Hi, I see that there is some disagreement over the Bal Thackeray page and the addition of some quotes to that article. While I don't have a particular stance on the issue, I've opened a little discussion at Talk:Bal Thackeray, so that we can form a consensus and so that, rather than having a revert war, all parties can voice their opinions and act accordingly. Please lay out your specific rationale for deleting the quotes there to help generate discussion. Please be very specific as to what your concerns are. Thanks!--Hnsampat 12:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Reminder left for Atulsnischal on talk page by Hornplease
Please read the definition of vandalism at WP:VAND. An accusation of vandalism when material has been removed with an explanation framed in terms of WP policy is a violation of WP:AGF. I suggest you do not do it again. Hornplease 18:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I think you are trying to censor information in this article on Hindu Temples - What Happened to Them as well as in Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent.

Atulsnischal 19:08, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Read WP:AGF. I do not wish to censor information, but we do not link to large numbers of fringe publications. Please read the Voice of India page for details; note that all these articles on VOI books were started by accounts with no purpose but starting those pages, probably paid by the press in question. Wikipedia is not the location for the promotion of fringe perspectives. The Muslim conquest is a vast topic, and these perspectives are those of a tiny minority of scholars. Thus they do not belong in that article. And as for the Goel book, there are links to other Goel book articles. There is no need for linking individually to several different articles on the VOI website: this has been done for purposes of search engine optimization of that website. Please do not reinstate the links. Hornplease 19:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * What you are infact doing as visible to me is that you are systematically censoring and removing mention from wikipedia of atrocities committed against Hindus by Muslims and providing all bogus reasons for doing so. I am sure it is evident by now to many editors of wikipedia and administrators. Kindly do not censor articles please, I dont want to argue with you anymore. Atulsnischal 19:25, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Discussion continues on user talkpage. User reminded of WP:MULTI. Hornplease 19:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

"Jangladesh"
Dear Hornplease: I notice you have made some comments on the Jat people talk page re. "Jangladesh" which seem very sensible to me. I wonder if you would also take a look at the page actually created for "Jangladesh" as well, please? I tried to tidy up the references a bit - but I really don't know what to do about it. Any suggestions you might have would be really welcome. Many thanks, John Hill 22:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC) PS I love your WP nickname!!!

Nehru
Hi Hornplease, I noticed you reverted the addition of the Indian National Army to the Jawaharlal Nehru article (by me). If you had a look at this this page (which is a Encyclopaedia Britannica article on Nehru) you will see that it does include Nehru's role in the INA trial. I hope you will see why I added it. If you still believe it is unjustified, could you please leave me a message if you revert. I do not wish to get engaged in a revert war? Cheers.Rueben lys 23:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Indian Constitution
Hi,

Since you have an interest in Indian Constitution, I'm wondering if you know any place where I could get the original Constitution, without any amendments. It seems that every edition out there isn't the original charter. Thanks! Evenfiel 03:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you happen to know where I could get it by paying a subscription? Evenfiel 12:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Reconsideration of Lyall Howard
Hi Hornplease. I read that you are in favour of deleting the Lyall Howard article. Just before the article was listed for deletion, someone had made changes to the intro which I feel reduced the subjects notability. The intro has since been rewritten. Can I ask you to read the article once more, with the new intro, for a second opinion? Thanks, Lester2 00:43, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Xerxes 'the Great'
Hi, In a recent edit to the above page you reverted my NPOV edit with the summary that there is no discussion of the question on the Talk page. This is not the case, or did you mean that because there wsa no *subsequent discussion, the NPOV was without merit? Either way, I have restored the NPOV tag as the article's use of "the Great" has no basis that I know of and is not neutral. Thanks, bigpad 18:45, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

P.N. Oak
Hi! Glad to be over the (first hump) in the Indus Valley page.

I noticed right now as I was editing the P. N. Oak page that you have had some difficulties there. I am doing a thorough edit of this page, trying ot bring out the clearly overblown nature of the theories he presents. I think it is clearly a scandal. Just to let you know, should you want to chip in. mukerjee (talk) 14:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Wheel of Time : Dharmic Religions
Hello

I'm fairly certain 'dharmic religions' is a legitimate term to encompass both hinduism, buddhism (and others). Could you explain your edit to Wheel of Time and why you feel 'religions of indian origin' is more appropriate? Thanks!

Zero sharp 19:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Huh! I had no idea the term was unattested.. 'Indian Origin' is certainly fine. Thanks! Zero sharp 03:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

DRV
I have initiated a deletion review of an AFD which you were involved in. You may wish to contribute to the discussion. Balancer 04:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Bernard Williams
Nice edits! The page is riddled with misundertandings, and inaccuracies. Thanks for taking on some of these. And, yes, I know I should too - but there is always so much to do! Anarchia 23:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hornplease you are systematically censoring articles about Hinduism and removing mention of atrocities committed by muslims against hindus
You have been systematically deleting mass text from related wikipedia articles

and additionally you have continuously taken to stalking me WP:STALKING, I have requested you to be warned against this at Wikipedia Administrator's Noticeboard for Complaints, for both above and specially censoring wikipedia with your biased and bogus policy arguments for doing so

Reported you here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents

Thanks Atulsnischal 03:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Ankush 135
Have reported my block for Arbitration —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.224.91.131 (talk) 19:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Guess should have added it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Involved_parties —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.224.101.109 (talk) 20:46, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

A logical man would have read the case before posting a response on the ArbCom page. Then he wouldn't have asked why was the case on ArbCom's page at first place? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.226.44.93 (talk) 20:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Gandhiji-avotary of sustainable living
Dear Mr. Hornplease,

I object to your removing an article about Gandhiji. This article came out of my interactions with large number of associates of Gandhiji. My father went to jail with Gandhiji and these associates were his friends. I am sure the Wiki readers will enjoy this aspect of Mahatma. So please read the article carefully before deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akraj (talk • contribs) 10:27, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Ramsetu
A tag has been placed on Ramsetu, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD g12.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Brianga 23:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Eurabia
I'm very sorry, I assumed that you were a vandal and undid your change! After going back through your reasons, I've reinstated it. Again, my apologies. Alexwoods 21:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Reverting George Fernandes page edit
I reverted your edit becos it didnt cite valid references as and when i saw them .....maybe u forgot to add the source....thats why i had to revert it. Now i see that u have added a source so no problem now.....As for the other reference ,i had to remove it becos it is a dead link.....if u can add other sources/references feel free to do so. Gprince007 15:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Another Hkelkar
User:Caskofamontillado. Last time I tried notifiying one of Hkelkar's I wasn't at first believed - I think you know your way around the system a bit better than me. Would be very grateful if you could either deal with it or give some advice on how I can. Thanks a lot. Itsmejudith 15:37, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Wise words, thanks. Itsmejudith 13:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits
In response to your recent enquiry, this edit removed material that is well sourced. Blanking such material without sufficient reason, is considered by many editors to be vandalism. Please don't do it again. Mr. Hicks The III 21:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you were able to see what I was "on about" so quickly. I did not call you a vandal, but have stated, twice now, that some less charitable editor might view it that way. This is especially true since you appear to be involved in an edit war with numerous editors on that page, and have come very close to a WP:3RR violation. Please stop that, too, as 3RR is not a license to revert exactly 3 times per day, and editors are commonly blocked for doing excatly what you are doing on that page. Mr. Hicks The III 21:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have explained my revert to you more than once. Your edit removed sourced material, which is a no-no. Don't do it again. In the last week, you have twice reverted exactly 3 times on that page, over the objections of numerous editors. If you think it will be fun to explore this at A/I, I suggest you keep doing it. I, for one, will have no compunction about reporting you for such obvious gaming of the system. Mr. Hicks The III 22:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Religious Freedom in Iran
I concede the point and appreciate your explanation, although I may take a stab at re-writing the mention of Iran's anti-Zionism. Thanks for being civil - I think you and I can probably come to agreement and avoid revert wars on all points if we both remember to take a step back every now and then. Also, I appreciate your interest in the discussion of Tibet, but watch out for the harassment policy. Alexwoods 15:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

References being removed from John Howard article
Hi Hornplease.

I'm writing you a message out of courtesy, as you were the administrator who presided over the RfC about referencing facts in the John Howard article.

As a result of that RfC, quite a few editors began the task for finding references for what was largely an unreferenced article.

As you're also aware, I did quite a lot of research for the Lyall Howard article, and sourced many articles and references for that one. Many of these references also had useful information about John Howard and his family life, so I carried some of these same references back to the John Howard article, and placed them alongside existing John Howard text that was unreferenced.

In recent times, User:Skyring(Pete) and User:Prester John have been removing these references, because some of those newspaper articles also mention Lyall Howard and his plantations. For example, the text that has the year that Lyall Howard died carried one of those references from the Lyall Howard article, as did the other line about Mona & John Howard being left in the house to fend for themselves after Lyall's death.

The Lyall articles were just a wealth of family facts that provided useful references for John Howard's early life. Other editors also used the same news stories to add references to John Howard. I'm pretty wild that the references are being deleted, and I wish to report it to the Administrators board.

As you were the one who presided over this issue recently, I thought you may be interested to know, before I take up the issue elsewhere.

Best wishes, --Lester2 02:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:NonAlignedMovement.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:NonAlignedMovement.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Hornplease, I need to use this pic: NonAlignedMovement.jpg in the Macedonian Wikipedia, in the articles about Cold War and the Non-Aligned. Can you grant a licence for this? Thanks, Cheers, Crnorizec (talk) 20:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Image on Subhas Bose page is probably not Rommel
Hi Hornplease, I noticed you edited the image on Subhas Bose page to say it is possibly Rommel. I remember reading a discussion somewhere (possibly the talk page) that it is not Rommel, going by the uniform and the Insignia. You might want to double check that. Cheers62.254.189.225 17:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks dude
Thanks for stepping in on the Abd-al-Aziz ibn Abd-Allah ibn Baaz article, it got quite heated and heavy due to a lot of arguing and also suspected sockpuppetry. If you're interested, I filed incident reports here and here, and am concerned it may be tired to this open case. Thanks again for your help because i'm not quite sure how to approach this. MezzoMezzo 20:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Chalukya Dynasty
It is a pity that User:Dineshkannambadi does not know the difference between 'Faculty' and 'student'. If Adluri is a faculty member he must have been a PhD. I wonder how Kamat's status would be more exalted than that of Adluri. If software engineers can contribute countless articles on history citing two books and two websites ad nauseum, how one can denigrate Adluri and his webpage? User:Hornplease got to look into this. Kumarrao 18:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

New NCERT books
Hi there, For your information   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  08:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

mourning


the sad Wikipedia demise of an excellent editor on politics and contemporary issues and an unflagging crusader against BLP violations.--a banned troll —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.91.254.48 (talk) 15:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Unnikrishnan
Another editor has added the "prod" template to the article Unnikrishnan, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the prod template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 02:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Indophobia
An article that you have been involved in editing, Indophobia, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Indophobia. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Muslim Separatism - Causes and Consequences
An editor has nominated Muslim Separatism - Causes and Consequences, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Political articles
Hi. I'd like to ask a question. It appears almost impossible to lift any article on Indian political parties to FA status. In articles such the ones on BJP, INC, CPI(M) and Shiv Sena, repeatedly get dragged down in quality as opponents of these parties use the wikiarticles as their own soapboxes. Would it be possible to work out a joint consensus on how to relate to inclusion/non-inclusion of allegations, that could be applied to articles on all major Indian parties? Perhaps drafting an essay? --Soman (talk) 21:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for Mediation: Howard family copra interests
A new Request for Mediation has been initiated for the John Howard article regarding the Howard family interests in Copra plantations in New Guinea. Initially, a small number of editors were listed as 'interested parties'. However, the Committee Chair has indicated that a wider group may now be invited to participate. An invitation will now be sent to everyone who has previously commented on the John Howard talk page regarding this subject. If you would like to participate, please place your name at: Requests for mediation/John Howard. There is also a discussion page regarding this RfM. Regards,  Lester  22:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

"Bangalore "vs "Bengaluru", again
The article on Bangalore has yet again been moved to "Bengaluru". That move was done hastily and in disregard of the long-running controversy about it and past lack of consensus for it. (It has also been made irreversible by ordinary editors.) If your opinion is still that the article belongs at "Bangalore", please say so on the article's talkpage. -- Lonewolf BC (talk) 16:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter Volume III, Issue no. 001 - June 2008
This newsletter is automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 06:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

PSTS Policy & Guidelines Proposal
Since you have been actively involved in past discussions regarding PSTS, please review, contribute, or comment on this proposed PSTS Policy & Guidelines.--SaraNoon (talk) 19:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Olympique Alès écusson ales fra.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Olympique Alès écusson ales fra.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Gujral(2).jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Gujral(2).jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:24, 3 November 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:24, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Condolence
I corresponded with you on a certain person a while ago. I share the grief. Truly yours. 70.21.118.58 (talk) 02:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter, Volume IV, Issue 1 – June 2009
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter is automatically delivered by --  Tinu  Cherian BOT  - 11:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter, Volume IV, Issue 2 – July 2009
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. Delivered automatically by --  Tinu  Cherian BOT  - 15:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:New.waves.rumours.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:New.waves.rumours.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.


 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 12:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter Volume V, Issue no. 1 - (June 2010)
This newsletter is automatically delivered by --  Tinu  Cherian BOT  - 18:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter Volume V, Issue no. 2 - November 2010
This newsletter is automatically delivered by User:Od Mishehu AWB, operated by עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Swearing in 1966.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Swearing in 1966.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sreejith K (talk) 05:18, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute
As a participant to previous discussions at the South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute talk page, you might be interested to participate to the following poll. Thanks, --Pseudois (talk) 04:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject India Tag & Assess 2012 Contest
Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.

As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.

If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.

You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.

& (Drive coordinators)

Delivered per [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bot_requests&oldid=481419438#Message_to_take_part_in_Assessment_Drive request] on Bot requests. 01:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC) The  Helpful  Bot  01:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

John Dayal
Since you have been involved in editing or discussing this article in the past, you may want to comment on the proposal at Talk:John Dayal. I have notified User:Pectore, User:Recordfreenow, User:Hornplease, User:Bakasuprman and User:Magicalsaumy. If you feel any other editors could contribute to this discuss, please invite them, Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 00:51, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Finance Secretary


The article Finance Secretary has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * May be a copyvio of the linked article (can't tell), but, when translated, seems to be a news article rather than an encyclopaedia article

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kateshortforbob talk 20:04, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Working President for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Working President is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Working President until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The Socialists listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Socialists. Since you had some involvement with the The Socialists redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. &thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 22:17, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Working President for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Working President is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Working President& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. §§<i style="color:#E0115F;">Dharmadhyaksha</i>§§ {Talk / Edits} 06:15, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Delhi University Students' Union


The article Delhi University Students' Union has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: The article sg=hould be deleted for following reason: 1. It has been a stub for 3 years since created as a stub. 2. The article does not have any contents at all, not even a good lead, comparing other student union page. 3. The student page should be written more of student union history and its occupation and work culture rather than who is leader and about them, but here its seems reverse of it. 4. If any one wants, one can create one in future another article with same name if have enough materials to atleast add (a) A good lead (b) history of the union (c) structure of the union (d) culture & occupation (e) major works and projects (f) notable former presidents

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dey subrata (talk) 23:33, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Irom Chanu Sharmila


A tag has been placed on Irom Chanu Sharmila requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.afternoonvoice.com/irom-sharmila-breaks-fast.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Wakowako (talk) 12:50, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Legislative Party


Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Legislative Party. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – :. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at :. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. SparklingSnail (talk) 04:08, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of National Knowledge Commission


The article National Knowledge Commission has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "non-notable per WP:NORG"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 13:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)