User talk:PatialaPeg

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:


 * Be Bold!
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off
 * Meet other new users
 * Learn from others
 * Play nicely with others
 * Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
 * Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here!

-- Lost(talk) 14:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked for 31 hours for violating the 3RR. Usually its 24 hours but I see that you went ahead and reported another user and then went and broke the rule yourself. Spartaz Humbug! 06:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Bhagat Singh
There is a difference between vandalism and a content dispute. What you and I have is a content dispute. I have also not violated the three-revert rule. I, instead, reverted your edits and then moved the discussion to the talk page. I have been acting in good faith. Please assume good faith on my part. Also, Google hits are not reliable sources of information that Singh's real name is "Bhagat Singh Sandhu". Remember, just because somebody said it doesn't mean that it's true. It has to be somebody reliable. Furthermore, a simple search for "Bhagat Singh Sandhu" would also bring hits for everybody who is named "Bhagat Singh Sandhu," not just the famous martyr Bhagat Singh (just like a Google search of "Michael Jackson" brings hits about the pop star and also everybody who happenes to be named "Michael Jackson"). If there is "ample" evidence to support your edits, then please provide it. If you'll note what I've written on Talk:Bhagat Singh, all I've done is ask for you to provide sources for your edits. You added the controversial material and so Wikipedia policy dictates that the burden of proof is on you, not me. Calling my reversion of your edits "failure to provide sources" is asking me to prove that his name isn't really "Bhagat Singh Sandhu," which is asking me to prove a negative, a logical impossiblity. Please assume good faith and try to work towards consensus rather than resorting to hostility as a first resort. Thanks!--Hnsampat 12:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your message on my talk page, where you stated: "That was his name dude. This is an encyclopedia; not your personal opinionated blog. You and your writing style belong on BlogSpot not here." I feel you are being unnecessarily hostile here, by accusing me of treating Wikipedia as if it is my own personal blog. I have been civil with you and have tried to be as cooperative and consensus-driven as possible. You, however, have for some reason decided to be hostile from the very beginning. I don't mind disagreement, since resolution of differences is the very force that helps Wikipedia improve. However, by being unnecessarily hostile and accusatory (i.e. by saying that I am treating Wikipedia like my blog, by calling me "stubborn", by referring to my edits as "vandalism," etc.), it is becoming difficult to try to work with you. Please remain civil and you may see that we are all on the same side (i.e. the side of making the Bhagat Singh article the best it can be). --Hnsampat 01:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Akhtar Hussain (musician)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Akhtar Hussain (musician), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * non notable biography

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Stormbay (talk) 16:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)