User talk:Human3015/Archive 2

Reference errors on 29 June
Dear Human 3015,

You reverted my edits without any proper reason and putting warning/ Threatning Language by showing vendalism you are going out of Mind. Where is the policy that a reference or reading can not be taken from Blog. I also explained you that there are other sources e.g Supreme Court of India, SCC ( sUPREME COURT CASES JOURNAL), SCC online , are also there. Every Case is unique and through putting text it can be easily varifiable through jusicial websites also. The blog which is used or from where the cases was cited is authentic and run by one of the very reputed online company scc online. For law cases printing/writing one have to take permission from local government and the blog owner do have that. You are requested to revert all edits which you moved in history. It is further requested that The way you are dealing with the editors are not even hurting but also its disgracefull. as you are not doing vandalism on wiki but also your sending gadget & Warning for those edits which is varifyable, easy to read, written in soft n good , law full language with intention to assist wiki readers. Please do not do fake / egoistic reverts without applying application of mind. There are several other complaints against you on your talk page by the users requesting you to behave properly on wikipedia.

Priyadarshivishal23 (talk) 07:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)priyadarshivishal23

Reference errors on 7 May
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:31, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Jack Daniel's page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=661303350 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F661303350%7CJack Daniel's%5D%5D Ask for help])

May 2015
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Marathwada. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges.

''

The issue of overcategorisation relating to Marathwada has been explained to you and yet still you persist. I realise that categories are a bit of a nightmare for new contributors but, really, you need to stop doing what you are doing.'' Sitush (talk) 10:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Advice
Hi I am Humna, apparently you did not even care reading the elaborations I posted on feminism and the references I attached for the Lahore Rickshaw service. You should have been polite enough to contact me before reverting it. I am a journalist and I do know what references and elaboration mean.

It saddens me to see that you are deleting pages mainly because you want to paint the unrealistic picture. Do you really think Hindus are not being persecuted in Pakistan? I can give article references but I am sure you don't care a damn. Please grow up! I am seriously pissed at your approach. Before your judge me, I am a Muslim and a Pakistani too. I think, I will face your moral policing everytime I post on wiki. Please own negativities like you own the good stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humna Mehwish (talk • contribs) 10:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh yeah here are some glittery mistakes for you to cherish in the article you reverted... "Now due to """a"""" heightened awareness among people", "However, the improvements are gradually being made, slowed down by political incompetence in Pakistan""";"""" (perfect use of semicolon) Lahore has inaugurated its first service of lady", "Since 1947, the APWA and Aurat Foundation– the influential feminist organizations— """has""" (perfect use, right!) played an influential role" I have so many more to pinpoint but hey... you like it that way. Let's insult Pakistan with grammatical and semantic errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humna Mehwish (talk • contribs) 10:26, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , I'm not saying that I don't make any mistake, but me too improving day by day. And those redirects of mine you are talking about have some history. I don't have any bad faith regarding any nation or else. If you are journalist then don't write things as if you are writing an article in your newspaper. You are new, you have to click on "new section" option on talk page and you should create new section for your message instead of messaging in old section. -- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 10:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

You need to stop looking at the contributions of those who've been in past dispute with you. It doesn't end up well as you tend to follow up on them. I didn't mind you editing Alpha Bravo Charlie after me even though it was quite apparent how you reached there through my contributions history. It resulted in a constructive contribution (thanks for reverting the vandal), but on other occasions (such as your reverts to on unrelated articles that poped up on my watchlist) it might result in more contention instead as following those in dispute with you with the intent to revert them elsewhere can be construed as WP:HOUNDING. It won't benefit you and it is just unnecessary. Wikipedia is not about Winning. With that said, I'll leave it at this and you can decide yourself how to go about this in future. -- lTopGunl (talk) 12:28, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , Thanks for your valuable advice, but I came to page Alpha Bravo Charlie via admins noticeboard for vandalism, because just two lines above you I was reported one other user for Vandalism. I never "followed" your "contributions". I see vandalisms reported on that page as I'm still in learning phase. You can see in edit history of that admins notice board that I reported one user just before you. And one can't really guide others which page he/she should edit and which don't. We want constructive editing without Harassing other users. Thank you. And my matter with is resolved, we are in self-imposed interaction ban, read my messages at his talk page. Even you and me can impose such interaction ban between us, because our "fightings" are getting worst day by day because of some misunderstandings on minor issues which is wasting our valuable time.  Human 3015  talk  • 15:10, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 * As per my comment above, I appreciate your vandalism revert and I have no standing disputes with you, I only told you what this could result in given multiple such instances. Good to know that your issue is resolved. As for me, I don't have any other problem with you so edit as you wish, I would not want you to self impose any iban. Cheers. -- lTopGunl (talk) 15:35, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 * There's really nothing wrong with checking the edits of other people, including people who you think routinely make undesirable edits, as long as it doesn't become harassment (see, e.g., WP:WIKIHOUNDING). Checking the edits of people who you think might be making bad edits should be generally encouraged. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:07, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Tarikh-i-Kashmir
Hello Human3015, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tarikh-i-Kashmir, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I wish to echo this. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , Its ok, you are very experienced editor, but the way that article is written is unexpectable. You should try to improve that article. It needs more sources. I will also try to improve that article. Cheers. -- Human 3015  talk • 11:18, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
Stefan2 (talk) 13:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Assessing
Hi Humanist, I noticed that you assessed an article here:. Everybody is welcome to assess articles, but please make sure you read and understand all the instructions for tagging and assessing. It is also considered polite to assess importance for only the projects you belong to. When you assess articles for WikiProject India, you are also encouraged to identify the subproject/task force that is in charge of the subject. In this case, it would be kashmir as well as history. So, I will add them in. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 13:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , Thank you, actually I'm part of many WikiProjects, some I mentioned on my user page. I will join other projects too. Anyway, please help to assess various articles given in this category. Category:Unassessed India articles.-- Human 3015  talk  • 14:12, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

WP Villages
Please stop adding WikiProject Villages templates. The WikiProject is apparently old, abandoned, and hardly more than a shell, and it is thus is of no use to anyone.-- ɱ    (talk  ·  vbm)  23:02, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks . My first Barnstar. It will inspire me. -- Human 3015  talk • 00:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Congratulations Humanist! Funny edit summary though: "→‎My Favorite Animals: adding barnstar" :-) - Kautilya3 (talk) 00:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

B. R. Ambedkar
You're at three now; next one is for me, or someone else, and a report for 3RR. Best regards,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   07:23, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Come on, guys. Be nice to newbies. Ahimsa on Wikipedia means opening a talk discussion instead of reverting. Worse, neither of you provided a proper justification for why this book shouldn't be included! - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , I provided link in my one edit summary that once one admin reverted it stating that "it has been rejected many times". So there must be previous discussion or consensus on it to reject that book. If that user want that book should be included then he/she should start discussion on talk page stating proper reasons for inclusion. Moreover, that book is most controversial book written on Ambedkar and controversial books do need consensus before adding. And it is a special article, on his birthday 14th April his article got nearly 2 million views on single day(because of doodle by google). Such article really needs consensus before adding anything controversial. -- Human 3015  talk • 14:17, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Heh, you beat me to it.
Thanks for patrolling the teahouse, haha, you beat me to a reply and had far more informative information. So thanks! KieranTribe (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks  Human 3015  Say Hey!!  • 11:23, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 17:40, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Butcher of Gujarat
Hello Human3015. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Butcher of Gujarat, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: See recent RfD and WP:RNEUTRAL. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:15, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


 * See my comment at Talk:Butcher of Gujarat. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Pakistan occupied Kashmir
It lkooks like you are not familiar with the history of the page. Articles for deletion/Pakistan occupied Kashmir. Not to say that your criteria for speedy are inapplicable. -M.Altenmann >t 07:06, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey Humanist, why do you want this deleted? There are zillions of sources for this term! - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * To maintain neutral fabric of Wikipedia, we should delete "Pakistan Occupied Kashmir" term. These terms are un-wikipedic terms, these terms are not neutral. We should simply use "Indian administered Kashmir" and "Pakistan administered Kashmir"-- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 09:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * You are misinterpreting wikipedia policies. There is no such thing as "neutral fabric of wikipedia"; thete is a policy "neutral point of view". If the topics are controversial, unpleasant, or inacceptable by some groups of people, we still cover them. This coverage is done in a neutral way, but this neutral way does not include complete censoring of wikipedia. -M.Altenmann >t 15:01, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, in response to your comment on my talk page on this same topic, i want to tell you that i m not a newbie here and not making test edits on semi locked page. I am writing the neutral point of view about Azad Kashmir. This area is disputed and it's also known as Pakistan administered kashmir by UN and third parties for which i have given enough sources there. You cannot and must not revert these good faith edits which are a fact just because you don't like this fact. Also as the term Pakistan administered kashmir redirects on Azad Kashmir the term must be mentioned in header and infobox. Hope u understand that wikipedia should be written with a neutral point of view. Shekhar 16:58, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of redirects
I have restored all of the redirects you nominated for deletion and declined a couple that did not get deleted. None of them met the criteria you nominated them with. If you feel the redirects should be deleted, you will need to nominate them at redirects for discussion. -- GB fan 15:54, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mumbai terror attack mastermind


Please do not make articles about a living person that are entirely negative in tone and unsourced. Wikipedia has a policy of verifiability and any negative information we use must be reliably sourced, and our articles must be balanced. Negative unreferenced biographies of living people are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 06:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pakistan propaganda politics


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Pakistan propaganda politics, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 06:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2015
Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 06:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , please read WP:RNEUTRAL. Also I don't expect such advice from you who himself created 500+ attack redirects. I have provided reliable sources on concerned article's talk pages to contest deletion. Thank you.-- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 08:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, nice to see you are defending United Nation's designated terrorist and Mumbai terror attack mastermind Hafiz Muhammad Saeed. Keep it up.-- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 08:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Humanist, please. All of us have biases. Nobody is perfect. But we shouldn't attack each other for that reason. Let us keep peace. This is Wikipedia, not a war zone. - Kautilya3 (talk) 08:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Some friendly advice
Hi Humanist, Anti-India, Anti-Pakistan, Anti-Hindu etc. are minefields. Please slow down, do small edits, and take guidance from the experienced editors. , etc. are really good. Please listen to them. Don't edit-war. Given your block history, the next block you get will be a lot more painful. Slow down please. - Kautilya3 (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , no where I involved in edit war currently. I am just maintaining neutrality of Wikipedia. I nominated both anti-Pakistan and Anti-India redirects for deletion, but both of them were got rejected. So we should maintain balance between existing Anti-India and Anti-Pakistan redirects. Thats all. -- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 08:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No, I don't agree with the idea of balance between the two articles. See WP:POINT. We just need to make sure that both the articles are properly sourced and are in accordance with the policies. Whether there is any "balance" between them or not is not relevant. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 08:42, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , yes, I'm agree with you. I came to Wikipedia to give positive contribution. If you see my 3000 edits, I have given mostly positive contribution. But I don't consider that my current redirects are useless. In every news media, Hafiz Saeed always mentioned as "Mumbai terror attack mastermind" before his name. It is so common name. If unproved Butcher of Gujarat redirect is acceptable regarding Prime Minister of country like India then why Mumbai terror attack mastermind is not acceptable which is most commonly used regarding designated terrorist who surely done that attack? -- Human 3015  Say Hey!!  • 08:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Humanist, this is not about redirects. Rather about the tit-for-editing on anti-Pakistan sentiment and anti-India sentiment. I think I saw you edit-warring with . Not nice. In general, I think you are inflaming passions too much, on talk pages etc. You might limit yourself to a fixed number of edits and posts per day, so that you have time to think as well as to write. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 08:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, I just made 2 reverts then I stopped myself and discussed it on talk. Even I left article without reverting again. I claim that I'm sensible. -- Human 3015  Say Hey!!  • 09:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No, I notice that you have been battling excipient0 on the anti-Pakistan page for several days. He is a new user. You haven't given him a welcome message or showed him how things work. And, the poor guy has already had a block! To be a genuine humanist, you need to treat both Indians and Pakistanis as humans. Don't you think? - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I respond many questions on Teahouse to help new users. But I never left welcome message for anyone yet, I will search for that welcome template. And I treat everyone as Humans. I can show you my positive contribution to WikiProject Pakistan. Still its going on. But I feel sad when I see some people are exclusively engaged in giving negative contribution to WikiProject India -- Human 3015  Say Hey!!  • 09:52, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 09:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Killings of Hindus in Pakistan


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Killings of Hindus in Pakistan, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
 * It is an "attack page", and appears to be primarily intended to disparage or threaten its subject. This includes biographies of living people that are unsourced and entirely negative in tone. (See section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks; attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. lTopGunl (talk) 14:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of ISI terror activities


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that ISI terror activities, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
 * It is an "attack page", and appears to be primarily intended to disparage or threaten its subject. This includes biographies of living people that are unsourced and entirely negative in tone. (See section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks; attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. lTopGunl (talk) 14:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

IP blocked
Let me know if you want the attack deleted from your page history. Abecedare (talk) 15:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * thank you. Yes, it will be better if it gets deleted from history. Thanks again.-- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 15:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. Abecedare (talk) 15:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Persecution of Hindus
Hi Humanist, Please check today's edit history on Persecution of Hindus, and keep a watch. You might have stirred a major beehive and now the bees are everywhere! - Kautilya3 (talk) 13:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , yes, it is on my watchlist. That account is created just today having specific intention to delete some matter from said page. Thanks for reverting it. But I don't think that it is related to any of my actions in last 2 days.-- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 13:17, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

TAFI week 22, 2015 update
Please note that Personality is also an article for improvement for week 22, 2015. Thank you. Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 01:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement weekly vote



 * Hello Human3015:


 * This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaboration has begun at Week 25 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 06:54, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Please do not add nonsense and remove correct stuff. You are free to make positive changes on articles related to Islam, but if you do controversial things, as you are an agnostic, then you should avoid to edit them. 78.149.204.76 (talk) 16:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Gootle Books citation tool
Hi Humanist, The raw Google Books url's look quite ugly and unprofessional. You should use the citation tool http://reftag.appspot.com/ to generate citations. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 17:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , actually as one user was keep on removing some matter, so I attached some book sources to it in emergency and it worked. It was very late night, I was feeling very sleepy so I did it raw. And I already said in talk page mentioning you to correct references. But anyway, next time I will take care. Thanks for app. Cheers.. -- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 17:58, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

TAFI
Hi Human3015, When voting at TAFI it's generally preferred to list your picks as:
 * Example, Example, Example

instead of:
 * 1) Example
 * 2) Example
 * 3) Example

as it tends to take up alot of space and new editors may start using your way which would then cause alot of confusion,

So I've amended your vote for you I hope you don't mind, Anyway thanks and Happy editing :), – Davey 2010 Talk 17:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

List_of_cities_and_towns_in_India_by_population
No need of ref, as all the lists depend on the same ref which is stated already.--Vin09 (talk) 07:56, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Republic of Balochistan listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Republic of Balochistan. Since you had some involvement with the Republic of Balochistan redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 19:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Page creator doesn't always vote keep

 * "Mar4d, you created this redirect so your "Keep" is already considered."

That's not true, because firstly people can change their minds; secondly the closing admin doesn't usually have the time to read the page history to figure out who the creator is. Deryck C. 21:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement weekly vote


Hello Human3015

The small changes I made to Karachi were not test. Would appreciate if you would put back the changes. Thx -Akahddlo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akahddlo (talk • contribs) 23:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello Human3015:


 * This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaboration has begun at Week 26 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 05:47, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Those users
You need to know how to use this to deal with those users.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/India-Pakistan Cosmic   Emperor  10:44, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Well, new uses take time to get used to how things work here. Both of you might need to learn how to give welcome messages (available via WP:TWINKLE). Tell them gently that what they are doing is not proper. If they understand and become productive, well and good. Otherwise, most of them will disappear in course of time. - Kautilya3 (talk) 11:19, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * , you can see my contributions I have given welcome messages to many users till now. And CE yes I will watch for it. I'm little bit busy these days. Currently I only do maintainance work of my Watchlist. -- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 11:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


 * First of all they are not always new users, some are socks. And my comment was not about new users in WP but POV pushers from our peaceful neighbour. People with preconceived bias against a country and religion can't be become open minded through Twinkle message. -- Cosmic   Emperor  11:41, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Well, I would leave them to their own devices. Our only concern is the integrity of Wikipedia, which is well-protected by our policies. So, let us just educate them about our policies and, if they don't follow, they will disappear one way or another. - Kautilya3 (talk) 11:44, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


 * You have a new friend. - Kautilya3 (talk) 08:36, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * , I have reported that nationalist commando and he has been blocked indefinitely.-- Human 3015  Call me maybe!! • 08:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Kindly create these pages.
Hello. I was following your debates and posts regarding the various synonyms that are used for Kashmir and as to whether those pages are legitimate. I do not have a regular account but am a kind of longtime lurker. I was wondering as to why not that we have pages with identically matching names as those for Kashmir (India's Kashmir i.e.). Could you create the following pages and redirect them to "Azad Kashmir"? Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir, Pakistani-Occupied Kashmir, Pak-Occupied-Kashmir.

Please also consider renaming "Azad Kashmir" to "Pakistan Occupied Kashmir". What I find is that there is NO SUCH NAME available on WIKI. I mean if anything most North-American and European and Asian countries as well as Australia are between "neutral" and leaning to India on Kashmir. Russia (and USSR before), Iraq (under Saddam Hussein), Iran and many other countries, regardless of their color and their religion, back(ed) India on Kashmir.

Eventually my only point is that we should have a reasonable and fair and one-one matching between such pages on both sides. Indian-O-K means Pakistani-O-K should be there. India-O-K == Pakistan-O-K.

I would request you to look into this kindly. Also we could put in material on pak-occupied-Kashmir from :- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2105531/Kashmiri-activists-seek-Indias-support-save-PoK-Chinas-increasing-strength.html; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3067713/We-silent-invasion-China-Rights-activist-Sering-claims-Gilgit-Baltistan-left-wolves.html. You could look at the Twitter of Senge Hasnan Sering - https://twitter.com/sengehsering - who visited India recently and said that PoK people regardless of religion would join India if there was a plebiscite today. He is of course a Kashmiri from PoK.

India never referred to that area much and the entire focus was on Indian Kashmir (as it is today). This misunderstanding/notion should be removed on WIKI. DM is at least a british daily. We also have references to "pakistan-occupied-Kashmir" once in a while in non-Indian sites. Though "Administered" is what they consistently use for both sides.

Eventually we all know its just semantics. But dirty-faced pakis will always try to push their agenda even in the smallest of ways eve on WIKI. Just wanted to see an equanimity and balance here. Good day. 117.194.250.196 (talk) 14:10, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * "Pakistan-occupied Kashmir" already redirects to Azad Kashmir. So that is not a problem. I agree, however, that there is not enough information about Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan on those pages. So please read some reliable sources and add text to those articles. I also agree that India has done precious little for those provinces despite claiming them to be officially Indian territory, a serious negligence on India's part. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 15:09, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Excuse my dynamic IP. I will edit later and try to improve those articles (will not be possible this week and the next but will do the week following). I think the 2008 UNHR report has been referenced in one of them and some stinky pakis typical of their class were trying to remove that I could see in the R.H. POK is there but you have to actually type out "pakistan occupied Kashmir" in the address-box at the appropriate place to access it. And in that event too we get "autoredirected" to the Azad Kashmir page. Two points - 1) There are several pages like "India Occupied Kashmir" and even "Kashmir Independence Movement" that are showing up in Google searches and leading to a "redirect" (not "autoredirect") to Jammu and Kashmir. BUT even the POK page (the page itself not meaning "Azad Kashmir") does not show up in Google searches and we have to type that out in the address-box. 2) There are like a dozen, maybe a score of links all of which are intrinsically anti-Indian in nature, leading to J&K. They show up in Google and they have "redirect" links to the article which we need to click on. Same does not hold for POK. Only one pages exists at all, it does not show up directly in Google searches due to "autoredirect", and that is just about the only page. Why not have pages like "Pakistan sponsored/backed terrorism" etc and a few more all meaning the same. They should show up in Google searches (I think the "autoredirect" should be removed I guess you get what I mean by "autoredirect"). And there should be multiple pages like that. I am aware of the likes of those pieces of excreta like mar4d and topgun. I have interacted with GB Fan a couple of times, he is American and a good guy but is not aware of the topic, he I believe was acting purely as an Admin when he restored those redirects. Please try to get somebody to do the needful. It felt great yesterday to hear of Indian Army operation that looked like straight out of a Hollywood action movie script. Regards 117.248.137.26 (talk) 07:20, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement weekly vote



 * Hello Human3015:


 * This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaborations has begun at Week 27 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 05:04, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement weekly vote



 * Hello Human3015:


 * This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaborations has begun at Week 28 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 20:47, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Friendly note
Hey random Wikipedian! Notice that our signatures use very similar colors? :) -- Amaryllis Gardener  talk 02:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Ya, its really same, nice to see you. Happy Wikipeding!! -- Human 3015  Call me maybe!!  • 09:46, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Disputed tag
Hey, please don't do this. You need to understand what the disputed tag is meant for. Nothing has been disputed. - Kautilya3 (talk) 19:56, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Instead of removing disputed content from lead and getting involved in edit warring I have added "disputed tag" and took part on talk page. I chose better way instead of edit wars. Now you don't involve in edit war just for that "disputed tag".-- Human 3015  Call me maybe!! • 19:59, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:33, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

ANI
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.72.10.168.89 (talk) 11:10, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You have mentioned the section heading as ANI, but the report is on WP:AN not WP:AN/I.-- Cosmic   Emperor  11:43, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

 * Barobar aahe Cosmic Bhau, thats why I'm not much active these days, I have no edits in last 2 days, I'm still busy. But both above two ANIs are senseless and I found that not even necessary to comment there. I have no comments on both ANIs. Its pure useless stunts by other users. -- Human 3015  Call me maybe!! • 09:20, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Today I found this page Gulf War has only one revert rule. One IP didn't know that and got blocked, as he had no friend to help him. I could have made the same mistake due to inexperience. There are lots of very clever bad faith editors who behave very nicely and politely to push POV. They don't edit war, they don't break the 3-revert rule or make personal attack. One has to be very careful to deal with them. -- Cosmic   Emperor  11:25, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement weekly vote



 * Hello Human3015:


 * This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaborations has begun at Week 29 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 00:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Please use this version on Siachen Glacier
Please use this version version for the Siachen Glacier. its suitable according to other Glaciers template--Koodfaand (talk) 20:48, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This version is also good but "antagonist" people would have "protested" more strongly after seeing "Indian flagicon" in infobox so I restored earlier version. -- Human 3015  Call me maybe!! • 20:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Those "antagonist" people should see other pages where flagicon has been used. Also this version of page is according to other Glacier templates like Baltoro Glacier and Brüggen Glacier--Koodfaand (talk) 20:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, but your given versions also don't show flagicon of that nation.-- Human 3015  Call me maybe!! • 21:09, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * , I have seen other pages like Beijing, Tokyo, etc, you can keep this version of page  by just removing flagicon --Koodfaand (talk) 21:14, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Page has been protected already, you should request to any admin to make your change, I'm not admin but I can help you for that request. Or you can wait for 7 days by then page will be unprotected automatically, till then you can discuss it on talk. -- Human 3015  Call me maybe!! • 21:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Your edit on Rahim Yar Khan
Hello. I saw your revert on the article and liked your edit summary, it was someone who was proud of his home town who had written it. I noticed the edit earlier but just couldn't revert it, even though I know that I should have, but it's nice to be reminded that we're dealing with human beings. Keep up the good work. /Tom Thomas.W talk 23:41, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, such things do happen, many times me too don't revert many unsourced "emotional" edits. Many times I think that "let the other users revert it, I will not revert it". Well, thanks for your appreciation. -- Human 3015  Call me maybe!! • 00:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Three cheers to Humanity! Nice going guys! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:34, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Cheers. Faizan (talk) 14:59, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Reason for IP block
If you click edit, you can see the full reason in the block log. In this case it was block evasion of which was in turn block evading. We've had a problem with these "Hackney library" IP's for a while. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 16:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, fine. I didn't know that. -- Human 3015  Call me maybe!! • 16:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * P.S. If you want me explain why a couple of your AIV reports resulted in no action, point them out and I will try to do so. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 16:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I will not specify any case, but I see various reports on AIV by other users too, some admins including you act very "mercifully" or you "forgive very easily" while some admins block those kind of vandals very quickly, there maybe some "admin bias of perception of problem". Thats why today I shocked when you blocked that IP who done only one edit, but thanks for your elaboration. But still for example I was reported this IP. -- Human 3015  Call me maybe!!  • 16:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * That IP edited once, got two warnings for it, and then stopped so they wouldn't have been blocked. And you're right, some admins are pretty quick to block. In cases of block evasion that's fine, but in other cases, blocks are supposed to be issued to prevent future disruption. So if someone adds "I love Becky" to an article a few times and then stops, it's unlikely they'll be blocked. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 17:14, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Friendly advice
I'm honored. Will try and find time to go through the procedure in the future. --BoogaLouie (talk) 22:33, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

On Reverting prior to Talk
Please refrain from injustified reverting of edit on the page Popular Front of India. Changges are welcome ofcourse, however reverting edits backed up by valid WP sources results in NPOV.I had thought that they would be atleast a "talk" before such reverts Huhshyeh (talk)Huhshyeh This is would be your 2nd NPOV on the same day. Urge you to read the reasons for edit and then act. Huhshyeh (talk)

Balochistan province kerfluffle
Hello Human,

Any advice on the correct/proper/best way to proceed on adding information to the article? Cyphoidbomb has notified some wikiprojects. Should we Wait for the RfC to close? Request formal mediation? Thanks in advance for any suggestions --BoogaLouie (talk) 16:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

CosmicEmperor
I didn't realize he got blocked. What did he do? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:31, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * He was firstly blocked for "harassing" and "abusing", I didn't search or don't know where he harassed someone or abused. Later another admin changed his block setting to "FOR using multiple accounts", where Cosmic claimed he use shared IP in hostel. But 3 accounts that one CheckUser mentioned on Cosmic's talk page as his "socks" or "another accounts" seem to be not related to Cosmic, if you see contributions of those mentioned users they are no where related to Cosmic's area of interest, maybe they used same IP.-- Human 3015  Call me maybe!! • 22:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * ,, , these are the 3 accounts, CheckUser mentioned it as "another accounts" of Cosmic. You can see contributions of these users, they may have used same PC or IP but these accounts are surely not related to Cosmic. These users never edit any India-Pakistan-Bangladesh dispute related article. At least these accounts are not used in edit warring or in RfC by Cosmic. -- Human 3015  Call me maybe!!  • 22:57, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. This is regarding your unsupported reverts, NPOVs and unwarranted self-dicredition of four alternate media sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huhshyeh (talk • contribs) 07:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement weekly vote



 * Hello Human3015:


 * This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaborations has begun at Week 30 of 2015. Thanks for participating!

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 02:24, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Kashmir conflict DRN
Hi Humanist, can you please stop trivialising the DRN issue? Kashmir conflict is definitely not something to be taken lightly, which is precisely why Steven Zhang is handling it personally. Also, please don't bring up issues of editing behviour at DRN, which is purely meant for resolving, or helping to resolve, content disputes. All you need to do is to state your position precisely, and wait for the moderator's guidance. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 09:24, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

South Glasgow University Hospital article
Hi there, I've edited the article based on your tags and wonder what your opinion/feedback is on the changed made over at South Glasgow University Hospital.

Thanks.
 * , thats fine, you can remove the tags. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. -- Human 3015  knock knock • 13:51, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Popular Front of India
Please be careful of WP:3RR. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 20:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know about it, but I have made just two reverts, all names there are staring with "Hu" thats why you may had confusion that I'm on 3RR. Still thanks for caution. -- Human 3015  knock knock • 21:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Caste system in India revert
Human3015, This revert is highly improper. You claim to be doing this as part of a "WP:Recent changes patrol". However, recent changes patrol is meant for looking out for "inappropriate edits." By no means was mine an inappropriate edit. You have really raised a deep content dispute, but without knowing practically anything about the subject, without reading the source, and without understanding the reason it has been removed. Your talk page discussion at Talk:Caste system in India is highly unsatisfactory. I am pinging so that he can advise you how to do "recent changes patrol" properly.

If you want to participate in the ongoing revamp of the Caste system in India, you are entirely welcome to do so. But you would need to raise and discuss the issues that are being debated, understand the issues with the article, the literature, and how a bunch of us are trying to hard to balance various viewpoints and represent them all fairly. has done a great clean-up job of one section today, and he left out a couple of issues (Beteille and Basham quotes) which were hard to deal with. I know that the Beteille quote wasn't necessary, so I removed it. And, I have raised the Basham quote issue on the talk page. But that is an ongoing discussion. You are welcome to participate. But, with your drive-by reverts, you are just being disruptive. So, please back off. There are enough of us who care deeply about the subject and we are working on it. We don't need your help in protecting anything.

Best regard, Kautilya3 (talk) 18:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * , we were discussing it on talk page so there was no issue to bring it to my talk page, still, you have no authority to decide wether I have knowledge of subject or not. If I say you don't have any knowledge regarding this subject then will you accept it?? And you are saying you don't need me on that page because you have enough nice editors for clean up on that article, I wonder how an editor like you can say that? every user of Wikipedia has same right over all articles of Wikipedia. You really can't restrict me from editing that article. Better you discuss this issue on talk page of the article. And your statement But, with your drive-by reverts, you are just being disruptive. is completely false, I just made one revert and you lost your tempo. And regarding my earlier adding of "dispute" tag ther, you just check edit history of article even admin added same dispute tag to article later which you reverted. Well I don't think I should give explanation to you.  -- Human 3015  knock knock  • 18:46, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't know whether you have knowledge of the subject or not. But I do know that you haven't been exhibited any such knowledge in the talk page discussion. Even on this revert, I asked two straight questions, which you haven't answered after 10 rounds of to-and-fro. This doesn't bode well. Regarding the "disputed" tag on which you edit-warred, let me remind you that I took it to ANI, you neglected to participate, and the other editor was asked to remove it by the admins. So, your edit-warring on the "disputed" was wrong, as per the decision of the admins. So, I am sorry, your participation is extremely superficial and disruptive. There is no other way to describe it. - Kautilya3 (talk) 18:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * really? Our dispute tag issue was of 19th June, you reverted my dispute tag, that page was deserving dispute tag, but you reverted it as probably you own some articles, but same dispute tag was added by admin on 25th June later long after ANI discussion was over, which proves that article was deserving that tag for that moment, but you reverted it. -- Human 3015  knock knock  • 19:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Once again, you are displaying your superficiality. The tag you added was . The tag added by the admin is  . You apparently have no idea what the difference is. But I took the issue to ANI here. Why didn't you participate if you believed that your behaviour was correct? - Kautilya3 (talk) 19:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't participate because you reported me in more like excitement, you made a non-issue into a big issue. Adding dispute tag was not a big deal which later added by admin. Both "dispute" and "pp-dispute" tags means content in article is disputed. Anyway, I didn't participate in ANI in which you reported me and I don't even got any notice from any admin regarding my addition "dispute" tag. I didn't participate because I knew another admin himself will add dispute tag to article, and he did. -- Human 3015  knock knock • 20:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I know that you are a humanist, but ancient sayings pack tons of wisdom. So here it goes: vidyA dadAti vinayaM, vinayAdyAti pAtratAM । pAtratvAddhanamApnoti, dhanAddharmaM tataH sukhaM ।। Knowledge gives you humility. Humility gives rise to competence. From competence you acquire wealth (or success). Through wealth, you practice dharma and that leads to happiness.

I don't know about the last bits, but the first two lines about knowledge, humility and competence are certainly true. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 10:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Help
Dear Human3015 Sir, Can u please tell me how many citations are necessary for Solapur city to get a good article status. Other editors have advised me but u r related to wikiproject maharashtra and are frequently active so asking u Dongar Kathorekar (talk) 09:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)


 * , its not about number of citations, even one reliable citation is enough for each written things. You can read guidelines on WikiProject Indian cities regarding which sections should be there and what to write in it. -- Human 3015  knock knock • 09:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * , Solapur also has many red links in it. There should not be any red link in good article, either you make articles on those red links or you remove link from it and keep it simple. I will help you on this issue. Rest of discussion if needed we will continue on talk page of Solapur. It will be a good article. -- Human 3015  knock knock • 09:41, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok Sir. We can initiate the discussion. We will sort out the keypoints of Solapur as a good article Dongar Kathorekar (talk) 12:25, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Indo-Pak articles
I think you should strongly consider contributing to articles that do not involve a convergence of India-Pakistan issues. Your name is appearing far too often in disputes that have distinct nationalist themes, which means that you are drawing a lot of attention to yourself in a manner that will not end well. You'll end up blocked or topic-banned and that isn't good for you or for the encyclopaedia. I'm guessing you have already been notified of the WP:ARBIPA sanctions, so you should be aware that you are skating on very thin ice.

Please can you try avoiding such articles for a while at least? I can't make you do that but I've been around long enough to know that some admin will enforce it soon unless you make the decision yourself. - Sitush (talk) 21:10, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I have not accused Human of socking just associating himself with banned users which makes me suspicious of his "Neutrality" claims. Indian-Karate-girl (talk) 21:12, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * As they say, behind/inside every sock, there's a 'Human' hand.This IKG doesnt seem legit, but it has a point, why is it that every sock that was banned during the past week had Human3015's support?? 'Neutrality' goes both way, does it.—  Trip Wire  talk 21:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * This section has nothing to do with you, I-k-g or TripWire, but for what it is worth, I doubt that many experienced contributors here think Human3015 is neutral: it's just that there are equally non-neutral people on the other "side" of these nationalist disputes. By the way, I think all of you should perhaps take a read of WP:SOCK. There is something odd going on and if any of you are in breach of that policy then you need to go back to using your original accounts now. I'm fed up of a lot of things related to Wikipedia at the moment but the duplicity of time-wasting sock- and meatpuppets is very high on my list. Such people don't do anyone any favours, regardless of their viewpoint regarding nationalist issues or indeed anything else. - Sitush (talk) 21:23, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Dear Sir, this section have everything to do with me. Would you be kind enough to search how often does Mr Human involve me in his discussion and get (unnecessarily) involved in my discussions? Latest example is this. Why would he bring me into someone I had no clue about?? —  Trip Wire  talk 21:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * (ec), thanks for your suggestion, but in my last 500 or 1000 edits show my one controversial or POV edit. And which users highlighting my name? only some IPs and new users (probable socks of banned or existing users) who keep on attacking my talk page, thats why my talk page was semi-protected for a week recently. And don't blame me for being a nationalist, see my contribution, I have been active on various wikiprojects, my edits are always sourced, I report vandals of "all sides". Those new users who are blaming me should give one evidence where I supported established socks. -- Human 3015  knock knock • 21:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * His comment to you was correct (if not technically legit for being a sock), to stop acting on the say of such banned editors or commenting in agreement (simply use common sense), something I advised you of before. But he's obviously a sock... I've reported IKG to SPI as a sock of Nangparbat. I hope you will now realize that I actually do report whatever blatant socks I come across (I just don't do witch hunts). -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 21:39, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Anti-Pakistan sentiment you were hell bent on adding Original Research on this article Human3015 your not so innocent as you pretend to be. Indian-Karate-girl (talk) 21:36, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Anyway, Indian Karate Girl. As far as "Anti Pakistan Sentiment" article is concerned, see deep edit history, it was not just me but many other "neutral" editors were restoring that version, originally that version was deleted by sock of Nangparbat(expient00), it was sourced version. -- Human 3015  knock knock • 21:45, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

TripWire and TopGun, you're both topic-banned, please discontinue this discussion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)