User talk:Nobleeagle/Archive6

Noakhali Genocide
Right, I got the book "Bloodbath in Bangladesh" by Prabodh Chandra (Adarsh Publications New Delhi 1971). The book mainly talks about the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities but discusses Noakhali to put the Bangla holocaust in the correct historical perspective:

P75:

Little did the Bangali Muslim know that while the Britisher was sowing seeds of division of India, in Bengal the seeds of the current genocide were also being sown simultaneously.In fact the seeds were of a single strain, giving ready crop instantly and more juicy harvest in the days to come.The seeds of communalism were sown by the Britisher in Bengal.The Muslim League as a political party was also founded in Bengal.The riots that followed DAD were also at their worst in Bengal.Noakhali will remain in the memory of mankind as one of the most horrible incidents of man's cruelty towards man.

Hope that should do it to classify Noakhali as a genocide.I can't keep this book for long as it was in storage and I have to return it in a couple of months. It has lots of info on 1971 and I can use it as a source to expand info there.Hkelkar 23:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Sati

 * Please watch that article closely. User:Fowler&fowler wants it put that the British exclusively abolished Sati whereas I contend (with refs supplied in the Talk Page) that Raja Ram Mohan Roy lobbied the British into doing it. The Bengal presidency ba prior to Roy is irrelevant as other bigger parts of India (like the Maratha Confederacy) had also banned Sati centuries ago.Hkelkar 07:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Email

 * If you don;t mind, could you please email me? I'd like your advice on some matters.Hkelkar 07:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:RFAr
I'm not sure whether you have already been made aware of this or whether you are acquainted with the religion-based edit wars that these users are part of. But I urge you to make a comment on WP:RFAr. Sockpuppetry, I believe, is not the main issue of this case and is instead a simple medium which BhaiSaab is using to get rid of Hkelkar and defame Bakasuprman in the process (some suggested Bakaman is Hkelkar's sock but that was soon rebutted).  Noble eagle  [TALK] [C] 04:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Rama's arrow and Sir Nick have told me to try and not have an "us vs them" thing, but that's exactly what this RFA is. Its a cheap trick by anti-Hindu users to get rid of users sympathetic to Hindutva. Certain opportunists (cough**cough** you know who) have jumped on the Hindu user-bashing bandwagon.Bakaman Bakatalk 05:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Our procedures and processes are not infallible and are susceptible to misuse too (sometimes). I have seen one of my friends charged and indefinitely blocked (after hardly 10 or 12 innocent and normal edits) as that administrator suspected that user to be a sockpuppet of a particular user already blocked: I learnt that some administrators are astrologers too! I have repeatedly told this incidence several times, and this proved to me a point: our system is subjective in many cases rather most of the cases. Had that user been not so blocked, he/she would have proved at least ten times more productive than users like me. Having experienced this and having said this, I should surely feel an attachment to wikipedia to be "fooling" around! Perhaps there are many amongst us who do not want wikipedia to emerge as the best encyclopedia as its emergence would threaten many established encyclopedias. Naturally, such elements amongst us shall always try to drive away the good and reliable editors, at least they shall try to annoy them to reduce their productivity. However, this should not be a cause for despondency and disappointment as I had found that good editors would survive in the long run. At the same time, you should also understand that the Indian nation has remained a subjugated nation for more than 1000 years, and any resurgence of Indian national pride attracts attention, mostly adverse, and people may try to defame this national pride by connoting various names to it like Hindu fundamentalism, Hindutva and so on. Some had even gone to the extent of comparing this resurgence with National Socialism to gain confidence of certain social groups! In case, I feel like giving any input in the said WP:RFAr, I would surely do - however, I am not sure of myself to be useful in such "serious affairs" of wikipedia as I am a simple editor to take part in serious business of wikipedia. I thank you for your message. Regards. --Bhadani 14:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 6th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar
Hello,

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

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 12:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Out of India Theory needs you
I share same goal as you related to Out of India theory page. Haven't seen you around for last few days. We are getting to the stage where non-relevent material can be removed and the theory presented as valid scholarly theory including scholarly criticism. Your expertise and contribution would be appreciated.Sbhushan 18:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I saw your comment on my page, not sure which place you will check, so I am postin same comment on your page. I think you have done a great job. My concern is the strong AMT bias and labeling OIT theory disapproved and page calling this a Hindu propaganda. I would like to have this presented as serious scholarly discussion. To remove AMT bias and accusations of Hindu propaganda, I would rather stay away from authors who create controversy, unless they make major contribution. Especially when a non-controversial author has made the same point in a reputed article. Elst and Kazanas have presented this position well. Talageri has a good contribution for depth of Vedic literature, but is controversial with Witzel. So let us provide reference to the discussion and let people decide. My personal view is T comes out much better. Frawley's book is acceptable, but he does not add much to position already expressed by E and K. His subsequent discussion with W makes it very controversial and creates accusation of Hindu propaganda. So I am suggesting we keep his as reference and only say that he reinforces E and K's position. Knapp again does not add too much to the existing presentation, but creates controversy. Some of the stuff on his website will attract Hindu propaganda label. I am new to WP and taking me some time learn in/out of the process.Sbhushan 15:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Good discussion
No matter what our differences - I respect people with an opinion and who stand by it.

So your comments of talk page of Bhadani.
I believe, Bhadani had suggested Oh Canada in relation to my appeal to give a fit reply to terry for his comments on Sati on talk page of Dmcdevit.

Anyway, I liked your comment on need of civility.

Sorry to jump in.

swadhyayee 09:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Bulgaria
Don't worry, I'll keep an eye on things. Sorry I haven't been around too much recently, the prosification has been left rather hanging in the air. By the end of the week I should be in a position to resume things.

Regards,  X damr  talk 11:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Historically-defined racial groups in India
Please put this article in your watchlist. It is full of junk pseudoscience lifted off of Pakistani Nationalist Websites and Dalitstan (of all places) and is a potential POV fork of Demographics of India (I removed the Dalitstan and Pakistani Nationalist crap but you know the revert-warriors).I think this article should be AfD'ed.Hkelkar 09:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, I nominated the article for deletion:

Articles_for_deletion/Historically-defined_racial_groups_in_India Hkelkar 07:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Hi Nobleeagle, I am very thankful to you for supporting and comments on my succesful RfA. Shyam ( T / C ) 06:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Your Edit on Islam
Sikhism may indeed be Dharmic but that doesn't negate the fact that Sufism has had an influence on the religion. BhaiSaab talk 04:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * "Main Tenets: The term Sikh is derived from the Sanskrit word for "disciple" or "learner." Sikhs are those who are disciples to the Guru. Sikhism originated in the Punjab region of northwest India, where it drew on elements from Bhakti Hinduism and Islamic Sufism to develop into a distinctive religious tradition in its own right." . BhaiSaab talk 04:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No reply? BhaiSaab talk 04:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Have replied on your talk page.  Noble eagle  [TALK] [C] 06:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The page does not suggest that. It says it has beliefs in common to varying degrees. Now I have even shown you a source that says it has been influenced by both Hinduism and Sufism. BhaiSaab talk 16:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
for your contributions to my rfA. I will be adding more on TerryJ-Ho shortly.Hkelkar 04:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Could you email me at ambrood_at_gmail.com... I'd like discuss a few things with you in private. अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 08:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 13th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey Bhadaniji
Hey, I found some evidence for Hkelkar's page but thought you would like to also know about how TerryJ-Ho has described Hinduism as a Culture of Hate. I feel offended by such remarks.  Noble eagle  [TALK] [C] 04:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I thank you for your message. Some people would always create a lot of noise on a number of issues. We should not care for such small things and keep into view the ultimate: to build the Project. --Bhadani 20:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Please do not get offended and please do not get disturbed for such acrobatic writings. I find them (the comments and writings indicated by you) to be highly funny and expression of ultimate frustration. I also think of jokers in a circus :) while reading such creative and imaginative stuff! I would request you to feel and think like me instead of getting stressed. --Bhadani 21:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Jats
I know you mean well, but I am reverting your last edit on the Jat page

The jats do not fit into the orthodox hindu system.

Terms like caste/Kshtriya etc do not apply

Best regards

Ravi Chaudhary 20:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

ICBM stuff
There is no Inter Continental Ballistic Missile stuff anywhere in the article. It was the IGMDP or the Integrated Guided Missile Development Program. I will add source for this part that I had created. Let me add some more of the Indian ICBM stuff its name is something like ..Surya. Chanakyathegreat 07:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

ArbComm
Could you look at this:

Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar/Workshop? Thanks.Hkelkar 01:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

If Hkelkar is a sockpuppet, then the August 21st block of Shiva's Trident was evaded. BhaiSaab talk 06:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Email

 * Could you please email me at desigeek111@yahoo.com?I need to discuss an important matter with you.Hkelkar 18:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * All right. I will do as you ask and not ask you about it anymore.Thanks.Hkelkar 07:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)