User talk:Sitush/Archive 6

Request
Hi Sitush (and talk page stalkers), I intend to start an AN thread to ask the community to place all articles dealing with indian castes under discretionary sanctions. You know better than I do what's wrong with the topic area, so I'll keep it simple, would you (or your talk page stalkers) be willing to help to gather a couple of diffs of general disruption (low-level incivility, POV-pushing, edit warring and the like) to convince the community we need those sanctions? Thanks. Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:23, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I could provide diffs galore, although I was really hoping that we could avoid this (you've seen my comment about it at User_talk:Pernoctator). Just the evidence from today and a link to past occasions when I have been dragged to ANI make the problems clear.
 * The real issue is how you define the subject area: the linkage with caste is extremely deep-rooted in Indian society and that is reflected in our articles. People will war over caste in biographies, in articles about farming, articles about political parties and, well, you name it. It pretty much underpins Indian life, despite numerous official (and often self-contradicting) pronouncements by post-independence governments etc. Just how insidious the thing is can be seen from the subtext of recent comments by an IP at Talk:James Tod, where the part-revealed intent is to undermine an article that is currently at FAC in order to re-establish Tod as a reliable source for articles relating to Rajputs. It is a subtext, rather than "in your face", but it is there nonetheless. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * (ec)That would be a beautiful thing. I'm just about to go to bed...but two things to help point this in the right direction: first, you'll need to narrow down the scope (besides just the castes, there's also the "clans", the "tribes", etc.)...but you can't go for a general "broadly construed" because that would then include most locations in India, and many many biographical articles, which would be two much; second: would serious disruption be better, or recent? i see sitush started to address some of this...but i must to bed go now. Qwyrxian (talk) 16:48, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * We did have quite a lengthy discussion at WT:IN regarding this.  Lynch 7  16:53, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Q: What does "keeping article under discretionary sanctions" mean? -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 16:56, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:Discretionary sanctions. - Sitush (talk) 16:58, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Typically, it would entail a "one-revert rule", rather than the standard WP:3RR. - Sitush (talk) 16:59, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks all for the much appreciated opinions! I (stupidly, to tell the truth) hadn't thought about how pervasive castes are in every aspect of everyday's life. I still think we need sanctions, however... Is there a way to circumscribe them so that they will be effective, in your opinion? Salvio  Let's talk about it! 17:00, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I cannot recall seeing the discussion at WT:INB to which MikeLynch refers - probably before my time. I think that initially it ought to be limited to articles that are specifically about social groups, be they castes/communities/tribes/clans/kootams/gotras etc. It won't stop all of the battling/disruption but it would go some way towards it. You might want to include caste associations and political parties in that mix (the latter are often caste-based). You could include articles such as Forward class and Backward class but I don't think that the disruption there is too great at the moment; similarly, articles concerning varna concepts can be a nuisance but the disruption tends to be intermittent. Templates for the communities etc would definitely need to be included.
 * NB: some of these issues transcend post-partition India: the net needs to catch Pakistan etc also. - Sitush (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * just saying why just pakistan.it should include the entire subcontinent nepal bangladesh sri lanka et all.there are castes like Govigama in sri lanka and newar in nepal.please note the nepalese royal family's caste is also under dispute.whether they are kshatriyas or not ?.Pernoctator (talk) 17:22, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I said "etc". Basically, the entire Indian subcontinent. I am not merely assuming that Salvio is an intelligent guy - he is! Do you need my Paypal details, S?  - Sitush (talk) 17:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sitush, I was referring to the discussion around a month back. Somewhat related to this. Yes, caste is a touchy topic, and it takes while for non-Indians to grasp the "touchiness" of the topic. It shouldn't be a big deal, but for reasons beyond our control, it is. Probably the Indian subcontinent could be included in this? We don't have as much editors editing Pakistani/Sri Lankan articles as much as Indian ones, so problems there could be going undetected.  Lynch 7  17:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, I understand now, ML. I saw that as more of a general BLP policy issue (ie: a long-winded, repetitive exercise in explaining something that is already explained!). - Sitush (talk) 17:48, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

lol i have never disputed anyone's intelligence.though mine has been and i am apparantely a worthless attention wh**** .Pernoctator (talk) 17:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, that's enough now.  Lynch 7  17:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅. It's here. Feel free to tweak my proposal. Cheers. Salvio  Let's talk about it! 17:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Should we Lock the Chauhan "Article"
Hi User:Sitush, I guess Chauhan article if made locked can be protected from intentional vandalism. Lets have discussion 1st for every point added there and based on the consensus those can be allowed to added. it seems some user are intentionally editing rather then adding more points there. Thanks.. 123.238.25.161 (talk) 20:24, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your last sentence but I do not think that the situation is quite as bad as it looks on the history page. There are a lot of IPs making a lot of poor edits but it isn't particularly disruptive - often, they appear simply not to be reading the article through before adding the point that they want to make, so it ends up being repetitive. Am I missing something? Is there an off-wiki thing going on at Orkut or something similar? - Sitush (talk) 20:35, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Kushwaha
I found an old citation for bee-keeping and added it, the IP moved it so it cites something else in the lead. Dougweller (talk) 16:35, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Ahem
see page 139-140. thurston makes a clear difference between devil dancer parava and the fishermen paravan.this is what he says about devil dancer parava 139-140.''The Tulu-speaking Paravas of South Canara are, like the Nalkes and Pombadas, devil-dancers, and are further employed in the manufacture of baskets and umbrellas. Socially, they occupy a higher position than the Nalkes, but rank below the Pombadas. The bhuthas (devils) whose disguise they assume are Koda- manitaya and the Baiderukalu, who may not be represented by Nalkes ; and they have no objection to putting on the disguise of other bhuthas. Paravas are engaged for all kinds of devil-dances when Nalkes are not available''.image is for the devil dancer parava which has been printed in the succedding page.there is also a photo before 139 if you see.Pernoctator (talk) 11:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

also see 143 there are three caste which answer to the name parava.Pernoctator (talk) 12:05, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Yep, well spotted. I've reverted myself. - Sitush (talk) 12:30, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Fanny Crosby & citations
Hi Sitush, I saw your edits on the Fanny Crosby page, and was wondering if you would take a look at Wesleyan University? I've been going back and forth with an IP editor for months regarding citation bloat... While I've cut at least 100 bad/irrelevant citations out, I could use some help (even with all those cuts, the article has *gained* 60 citations since September anyway!). Thoughts? Best, Markvs88 (talk) 15:27, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah, I have a vague memory that article may have been subject to a lot of controversy at one point, and possibly even socking. The citation bloat seems pretty clear at first glance but I'll take a more detailed look at it & at the talk page. - Sitush (talk) 15:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I appreciate any and all time you spend on it. Yeah, I recall that as well and the IP in question seems to be the same guy (at least in terms of verbage!). Best, Markvs88 (talk) 15:57, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

James Tod
Hey... few things on this. Why are the images outcasted & left on one side? Why is this Muhnot Nainsi given special attention at the end? Cant he be just mentioned somewhere in the article. One excitedly clicks on him hoping he is someone similar to Tod to actually read only two lines. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 15:13, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Muhnot Nainsi is listed in See also because they were also specifically a historian of Rajasthan. It is not necessary for me to expand that article also, although hopefully somebody will do so eventually. I am not sure what you mean by "outcasted"; well, not in this context anyway. - Sitush (talk) 15:16, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ofcourse not! But why not just hyperlink him somewhere in the article itself; where his book is mentioned. I meant why are they all right-aligned? -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 15:28, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Good call: I've moved it inline. Regarding the images, well, that's just the way I prefer them. There is no rule saying that they must be alternated left/right, or whatever. WP:MOSIMAGES just says that they can be dotted around except in the lead section. Only one person other than yourself has ever commented on their positioning ... and it was not even me who put them there, although I do approve! - Sitush (talk) 15:39, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Good! Well.... that images thing was just an opinion. When mixed, they look part of the article rather than they-are-related-hence-added (also my opinion). -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 17:35, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah. It might be also be connected to screen sizes etc, or maybe it is just that I really do not usually care much about images. I'm more of a words person, so tucking them to one side perhaps suits me better. I should find a psychologist and ask! - Sitush (talk) 17:38, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Washington quarter
Hi Sitush, as you can see on my talk page and Alarbus's, I asked him to work on Washington quarter. I got it through GA somehow and am thinking of improving it. Best,--Wehwalt (talk) 16:46, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah. Is that also the case with United States Bicentennial coinage? They've rather messed up at Death of Adolf Hitler and I was concerned to see no article talk page discussion on that or on Washington quarter. I don't care less what style is used, but there was a clear misunderstanding of how things work & so I was checking a few others. - Sitush (talk) 16:49, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, they've retarded the death of Hitler article. Good job abetting that. Alarbus (talk) 16:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm afraid I'm pretty much it on the coin articles these days since RHM22 retired. Thanks..--Wehwalt (talk) 18:20, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've got a silver dollar here, from the 1890s. It was given to my grandfather on the day of his father's funeral (poor sod broke his neck playing football - soccer, that is). I've no idea who gave it to my grandfather - we have no US connections as far as I can ascertain - but that death made him an orphan. Aside from that, my only experience of numismatics beyond day-to-day reality is a paragraph or so at James Tod. When you have sorted out the US stuff then perhaps you should start on the Bactrian ;) Best. - Sitush (talk) 18:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ya know, I looked at James Tod and thought it might be a good candidate for my kind of improvements (and I just about always flush out lurking problems), but I'm just not feeling like bothering. Alarbus (talk) 18:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC) — been peeking, and see an issue needing fixing, already. Alarbus (talk) 19:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Nothing wrong with "improving" things provided that there is consensus for it. Indeed, there is nothing wrong - in the WP sense - in making matters worse provided that ... etc! You can always be bold but you need to know when to back down gracefully if it turns out that your boldness was, well, too bold, If you think that something is not right at James Tod then you are free to take a stab at it. It is not my article or indeed any other person's. OTOH, it is at FAC and you have been complaining about people trolling you or something because of some issue(s) there, so if your intent is to make some sort of point to them then it may not a great idea. - Sitush (talk) 19:10, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Didn't you hear what Sue Gardner said? We have to start moving at greater than the speed of consensus. Alarbus (talk) 19:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No. (a) I am deaf and (b) Sue Gardner does not run the show. The latter is an awkward chicken/egg issue for her but given the problems that she has been connected with in the sphere of India-related articles, well, perhaps it is for the best. - Sitush (talk) 19:21, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * re (a), I didn't know and meant no offense. Sorry for that. Alarbus (talk) 19:26, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't worry yourself about it. I was born that way, a long time ago (!) It is almost impossible to offend me regarding the subject because you name it, I've already been called it etc. Mine was a tough, bullied upbringing but getting it out the way early on may not have been entirely a bad thing. The only people who offend me now re: deafness are webdesigners who insist that a valid phone number is entered in a field of online forms, and similar bureaucratic crassness. ;) - Sitush (talk) 19:31, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Kushwaha
Hello Sitush! I admire your contribution over wikipedia articles but request that articles, particularly about ethnic groups etc. be writted only by people knowledgeable about them or those belonging to them as there is not enough information about most of them on internet. I have rewritten the article and will continue to add to it as and when I find time. thanks. truthalwaystriumphs —Preceding undated comment added 17:08, 7 February 2012 (UTC).
 * Please self-revert now. You are removing valid, sourced content, you are edit warring and you are at the very least working in tandem with in a manner that is disruptive. Feel free to discuss your points at Talk:Kushwaha, where there has been a thread running for a few days now. Sources do not have to be on the internet but they do have to exist and they must be reliable.
 * The article has already been semi-protected because of IPs who were doing exactly the same disruptive edits. I should warn you that I had already filed a report for a sockpuppet investigation. Hopefully it will not reveal something that is untoward. - Sitush (talk) 17:14, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I hope that was not a joke. As you see, I have made just a few edits in less tha a month. There is no war. Request people with little knowledge about particular ethnic group to keep off. Little knowledge (particularly gained from Internet) is a dangerous thing. If you continue to write recklessly, I would have to report you. truthalwaystriumphs  —Preceding undated comment added 17:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC).
 * I am reverting you since you will not do so yourself. Now go ahead and report me. - Sitush (talk) 17:29, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * well man, take this as a last warning. If you dont revert back to correct information and continue to present a malafide information, sit pretty and risk being jailed for cybercrime. I have spoken enough. There is no rule in the world which allows you to present malacious information,(including wikipedia codes)O . enjoy the liberty till it lasts.. good luck.--Truth always triumphs 18:04, 7 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthalwaystriumphs (talk • contribs)
 * Please read our policy on legal threats. I know that your reading list is now quite long but there is not a lot that I can do about this, sorry. You claim to have read the rest, although it is not evident from your edits today. I suggest that you self-revert at the article sharp-ish, and retract your comment above. You are now facing investigations not only as a sockpuppet but also for breaching the three revert rule (see WP:3RRNB). Frankly, unless you do something quickly I suspect that you could be indefinitely blocked from contributing to English Wikipedia. - Sitush (talk) 18:14, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 04:12, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Vishwakarma
Go on u can edit it... all the sources I have cited furnish correct information.. morover I am not boased coz i dun belong to any of those communities :D Nijgoykar (talk) 11:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Your edits seem biased not tryin to get personal.... caste is a concept of bygone era... u cud use past tense to refer it... but dun simply edit articles as per ur knowledge.. its a request.Nijgoykar (talk) 11:22, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I am trying to resolve issues of original research, which I know has been a problem for you in the past. Unfortunately, without some sort of support for the statement that Vishwakarma and Panchals are the same community, just about everything that you have added in the last hour or so will have to go. - Sitush (talk) 11:27, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

''Panchal Brahmins: The Panchal or Vishva or Vishwakarma Brahmins form a distinct caste the members of which follow the occupations ... That is why sometimes they are known as Sonars, ie, goldsmiths and in Maharashtra as Deshastha Sonars.'' Source:Sociological bulletin, Volumes 11-12,Indian Sociological Society Nijgoykar (talk) 11:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks. Now, why do we have separate articles for the Sonars, Vishwakarmas and Panchals? Should they not all be in the same article? - Sitush (talk) 11:33, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I have not written those articles obviously.Why are there many articles about Brahmin sub-castes which are like uncountable in India..when all are basically Brahmins and when there already is one article Brahmin for all.. same logic apples here. Nijgoykar (talk) 11:36, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Not if the terms are synonymous. - Sitush (talk) 11:38, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

There are cases when the artisan castes are not Vishvakarmas.Nijgoykar (talk) 11:41, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I do not dispute that, but it does not answer my question. You have provided evidence above that, for example, Panchals and Sonars are Vishwakarmas, so either Vishwakarma is a sort of "umbrella" name or the terms are synonymous. And if it is an umbrella name then we need a source that says so because the one above says that they are a "distinct caste", which is contradictory in my eyes. - Sitush (talk) 11:44, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Si - Brothertoft
Have not been around much on Wiki recently as was still plodding along with my Brothertoft history. I have now made several visits to the Surrey History Centre with regard to Sir Charles Fredericks papers (wonderful to handle his old deeds indentures receipts and papers!) I have also spoken to a local historian who wrote a book about the village and have it here although it isnt online. 1) from my own research, the Sampson Gideon ownership is erronous. He did buy up vast tracts of lands but mostly in the Bedford Level. The Final Concord agreement at Surrey History Centre dated 1760 is between Duke of Newcastle Heirs, Lady Catherine Pelham (Widow of Henry) and Sir Charles Frederick, so it is clear he bought the manor directly from them. He died in 1785 and his son Thomas Lenox Frederick sells it to Cartwright who took ownership Lady Day 1789. He then sells it on to Henry Gee, father of Thomas Gee, and it is then briefly occupied by his widow Ann (Leman) and cousin William Gee until 1877. 2) The Hall - Quote "No one knows who built the Hall" - even those that live there today dont know, In 1774 Sir Charles Frederick leases it to John Chappell and it is a) the largest lease by far and b) described as "Manor Farm House previously known as Capital House Farm". It would appear that the Hall is partly ancient with later additions and at the very least sits on the same site as the previous manor houses. It was refurbished by Cartwright before he sold it (it was let 1805-13), and extended and modernised by Gee and by Frederick Curtois. 3)Thomas Saul/John Saul. Parish registers in Brothertoft and Boston relate their story, as well as an indenture of 1729 leasing part of the land in Low Fen Brothertoft/Boston West all from John Fossitt dikereeve of Boston West, to Thomas Saull, Robert Smith and John Fisher. A baptist book I found online recounts "Thomas Saull became rich out of hunting and fishing in Brothertoft, and laid the foundation stone of the Baptist chapel in Boston in 1763 just before he died" (paraphrased but thats the gist). His funeral took place in Boston St Botolphs and the burial register claims he died of smallpox and was buried at Brothertoft. The Brothertoft burial register verifies the burial and curiously claims "This was a good man it is a pity it should be forgotten". John Saul his son built the baptist chapel in Boston in memory of his father. He appears to die in 1779 as a burial for a John Saul is in Brothertoft register at that date. Both Brothertoft and Boston PRs are available on the Lincs to the Past site, and I could find the ref in that baptist book again easily enough. Id like to correct the Wiki Article in this way but request your help and advice as I am now very out of practice. A.


 * Hi Panderoona, I wondered where you had got to. The situation that you describe is one of those really, really frustrating ones. I've had a similar issue recently with John Horsefield. I think that you know the drill, ie: the issues that we have here regarding original research etc. Even the GRO records for births, marriages and deaths are suspect because we cannot be 100% sure that the "John Smith" recorded is the same "John Smith" that we are talkking about in whatever article it may be. Sure, it may be 99.9% definite and our heart tells us that it is 100% ... but that is not the way in which this project works. My suggestion for now would be that you record the info on the article talk page - someone, somewhere, sometime may be able to connect it to reliable sources and in the interval there will at least be a record of your investigations. Article talk pages are intended for discussion related to improvement of the article but I suspect that your info counts as such because you have clearly found primary sources that could well be documented by secondary sources that you have been unable to locate so far.
 * I realise that this is not ideal, and I realise that Brothertoft is a particular labour of love for you but if you want to take things further than WP policies etc allow then the only obvious solution would be to set up your own web page/site somewhere. On the other hand, I am concerned about some of the contradictions that you appear to have discovered and I will certainly take another look at the sources that you, myself and Carole dug up some time ago - if they have been misrepresented etc then obviously we need to remove the related statements. - Sitush (talk) 01:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks as ever Sitush, I do realise some things are going to be difficult to corrobrate, although there is always the Holland Fen and Brothertoft parish history booklet to fall back on (though thats not online) I will try and come up with something verifiable for claims and leave anything else on the Talk page. I do feel very "rusty" Wiki-wise as been away for a while now, so going to go off and have a good think about it for a couple of days. Will be in touch. Panderoona (talk) 10:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * A source does not have to be online, although whether a parish booklet is reliable might be a moot point. Is it big? Can it be scanned? I don't mind taking a look at it if you can email the thing to me. Glad to see you back! - Sitush (talk) 10:52, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Its a slim volume, the kind of thing you might expect for a small parish history - 82 pages with quite a few being local photos.I will be out most of today at my parents so will email you tonight/tomorrow with relevent points and page nos. The woman who wrote it has a degree in History.

One more thing, I would like to include a poem I found in the parish register, which can be linked to via the Lincs to the Past site. It was written by one Benjamin Leigh, lamenting his father (also Benjamin Leigh)s death.

"Old Frestling time that all things doth consume, And Mother Earth doth all mankind entomb, As waves on waves, so man doth man succeed, One rolling off, another comes with speed, Our Father gone, we haston soon, and thus, In a few years, our Heirs must follow us. Benj Leigh 1754." under his fathers burial is written: "One generation to the next gives place; Tis so with all mankind, oh Mortal Race!" I think its a lovely and touching poem, and since I have not been able to find it online anywhere, I presume Benjamin Leigh wrote it himself. It would be a shame if it were to be forgotten? What to do you think? Thanks again, Panderoona (talk) 10:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC) (NB forgot Wiki likes losing your formatting :S Panderoona (talk) 11:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

No further communication please!
I find your views very personal,and you need to broaden your perception.I am not an anthropologist to write those books and clear your doubts.Good luck! Nijgoykar (talk) 10:26, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Anointment

 * I am positively squawking with delight! - Sitush (talk) 16:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Sadads (talk) 17:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

reply
the additions have been done on siginificant data, I agree few do not have school name mentioned on page but, most of them have, I will still have a look, thanksWhileships savedhead (talk) 02:00, 10 February 2012 (UTC) kindly see See List of Old SanawariansWhileships savedhead (talk) 02:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You either provide a citation or the category should be removed. The burden is upon you to ascertain the verifiability of the statements that you make, particularly in cases where the subject of the article is still living. - Sitush (talk) 02:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

thanks for removing the work! do you have significant knowledge about the subject and school we are talking about? Please read articles you have removed the category from and added ciatation needed link! they are all written by users with good knowledge and if you will make some effort to search you will find significant reference about each. Whileships savedhead (talk) 02:12, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I am afraid that we do not work on the basis of personal knowledge here. Statements that are added to articles must be verifiable, and this is particularly important when the person involved is still living. It is as simple as that, I am afraid. - Sitush (talk) 02:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Advice taken about policy, will only add very reliable source like economic time or news papers.Whileships savedhead (talk) 02:40, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Request
Hello, Please look into the edit war in the Shramana article. I left a message on the user page of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ForestTeacher He contacted me back on my talk page. However, its obvious ForestTeacher is into an edit conflict. Am not working on the Shramana article anymore. Its kinda strange i have too report this to you. Hope you do the needful. Am hoping other admins take note (i still dunno how do i contact any admin).--&#61; No &#124;&#124;&#124; Illusion &#61; (talk) 05:46, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Mayasutra
 * I have added it to my watchlist. I can see some to-ing and fro-ing but at present it looks like you got the last word. I am not massively familiar with the topic area but would suggest that you open a thread on the article talk page that details any concerns which you may have. If nothing else, it would assist in the event that edit warring breaks out once more, and it might also help others to understand what the issues are. Relying on edit summaries often does not work, and taking the matter to the contributor's talk page tends to lose you input from other people. - Sitush (talk) 14:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Webcite
Hi Sitush, i see that you are online. Would you please check if you can access the following website through your web browser. I have been unable to access it for two days. Thanks. Joyson Prabhu  Holla at me!   09:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * http://www.webcitation.org/
 * I get a page telling me that there was an outage in September 2011, which looks a bit odd, but the menus etc appear to work ok. - Sitush (talk) 09:31, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * That's odd! None of my web browsers can access the website. I've tried Chrome, Internet Explorer, and Mozilla. The only other link archiving website is banned by Bahrain, so if this one doesn't work then i am screwed. I've got a lot of archiving to do in many articles. Joyson Prabhu   Holla at me!   10:07, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What do you see? A 404 error or something else? I am surprised that anyone blocks a site of this nature but I guess that there is no end to how governments censor. Also, what is it that you are wanting to do? Can you give me an example or two?- Sitush (talk) 14:13, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * A sign appears stating that my particular web browser cannot access webcitation.org. I know. The government has even blocked certain Wikipedia articles. For example, sex, cunnilingus, etc. I actually want to archive web links, as link rotting is a major concern. See this. Joyson Prabhu   Holla at me!   23:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your Macaulay quote on James Todd article concerning the whole native literature of India
In your edit of 27 July 2011 Sitush you introduced the following into the article on James Tod.

Tod relied heavily on existing Indian texts for his historical information, most of which are today considered to be unreliable. Indeed, Macaulay wrote in 1835 that "a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia."

While the meaning of Macaulay's quote is perfectly clear would appreciate to know why you would specifically include such a completely bigoted view on all Indian and Arabian literature, into a Wikipedia article ?

Thankyou Intothefire (talk) 15:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I have absolutely no idea why you are asking this here. Perhaps further evidence that your competence is questionable? The correct forum would be Talk:James Tod, but since you ask here, well ...
 * It is sourced and the context is clear: a long tradition acknowledging that Tod's chosen sources were not worth the parchment/whatever that they were written on. It is an opinion still held by modern scholars, with even the likes of Romila Thakur acknowledging the real problems that appertain to those ancient texts. - Sitush (talk) 16:40, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * But you have not responded to my specific question, which pertains to your inserting , Macaulay's ,following quote: a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia
 * Name the modern scholar who specifically endorses Macaulay's statement that you have inserted into the James Tod article
 * Intothefire (talk) 17:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * No. You are missing the point and I think that you are deliberately doing so, as you have done in so many past instances. This discussion is done. - Sitush (talk) 18:21, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem ... don't discuss ....relax.... and have a nice day :)
 * Intothefire (talk) 18:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Shramana
Is there any reason to include what I removed? Did you actually read the paragraph that had nothing to do with the article in any way, shape or form? I'm not concerned about the rest of the article, and I've only made two edits to it ever. Please fully understand what an editor has done before trying to act like the Wikipolice. Have you considered that after my edit I was working on a post on the talk page declaring my apathy to the rest of the content? Ian.thomson (talk) 19:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Read WP:BRD. You should have known better. Now please self-revert. - Sitush (talk) 19:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Bold, revert, discuss, not "bold, revert, restore without any explanation, discuss." I will not self-revert, and I stand by my actions.  A reason has been given for removal of the material, no reason has been given for its restoration.  YOU read WP:BRD. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:45, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * removed that content, I reinstated and started the discussion that should have been initiated some days ago. Those actions comprise all of "bold", "revert" and "discuss". We are still at "discuss", I have requested full protection of the page at WP:RFPP and you are encouraged to engage in a civil manner at the appropriate venue. - Sitush (talk) 19:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Mayasutra added it first, you're mixing up the order things have gone in. The stable version is without that off-topic addition, and again: it's bold (add, which Mayasutra did), revert (which others have done), and discuss.  I've discussed it.  You've provided no reason.  Quit being wikilawyering and give a reason to include that section or admit that it doesn't belong.  Ian.thomson (talk) 19:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I have already asked Mayasutra to discuss the matter, several hours ago (see thread above on this page). - Sitush (talk) 20:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Sitush, I just saw this warning message you left at User talk:Ian.thomson. Based on your conduct at the Shramana article, you are just as susceptible, if not more susceptible, as Ian to being blocked for edit warring. —C.Fred (talk) 20:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * How? Not that I have any intent on reverting him again, but how? Look at the history for that article. It is a complete mess and ian.thomson should surely have known better than to let it run on without a discussion, and then to continue removing after a discussion was opened. Sorry, but on this one I really do not see what it is that I am doing wrong. - Sitush (talk) 20:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I did look at the history. You have reverted—twice by my quick count—the good faith removal of text from the article. It wasn't vandalism cleanup, so it's edit-warring by definition. —C.Fred (talk) 20:12, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * How can an unexplained removal be good faith? My second revert was because the discussion was open and knew of it. Flabbergasted here, really. - Sitush (talk) 20:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * And appears among a group of contributors who have been doing this back-and-forth for days now - that is warring. - Sitush (talk) 20:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * As I stated on the talk page, I don't care about the rest of the article. I saw that off-topic bit and removed it.  Quit wikilawyering and either give a reason to include the section or admit that it doesn't belong. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * And you are one of the contributors who has been doing this back-and-forth for days now. Had you not re-added it, the discussion would still be ongoing—just without the passage in question in the article. You are no less in the wrong than Ian or any other editor who is involved. —C.Fred (talk) 20:25, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your assessment, but I really do have to go out. Since you now have your eyes on it, I'll leave the issues to you. Close the discussion, keep it open until Mayasutra turns up, throw a few blocks around, protect the article or whatever. This is the first time I've really felt hard done by: can't do right for doing wrong, it would seem. Amazaed, I really am. - Sitush (talk) 20:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Shramana
The content was recently added, and although sourced, has nothing to do with Shramana. SaibAbaVenkatesh (talk) 21:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I fully support Ian.thomson. SaibAbaVenkatesh (talk) 21:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks, AshLin! That brightens a rather frustrating last few days. - Sitush (talk) 16:03, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank u for that & regarding VK Singh, The "refused to intervene" is not a right usage in the legal sense. If so, What was Supreme Court doing in 2 days and that too 3 long hours of proceedings. I am afraid a good newspaper like Hindu really understood the legal terminology. ref: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Army-chief-V-K-Singh-loses-legal-battle-govt-hails-Supreme-Court-order/articleshow/11838737.cms and it is not a times of india vs The Hindu. for any one can understand VK Singh withdrew petition in the backdrop of Supreme Court earlier rejecting a PIL favouring VK Singh and later a not so favourable legal posturing. Jeevanjoseph1974 (talk) 20:52, 11 February 2012 (UTC)]]

Raju Kshatriya History:
Why are you undoing my changes, can we speak together and agree on the histories.

I can provide the proof of raju kshatriyas.

Actual hindu vedic kshatriya orign from saptha rishi gotra and who are twice born with upanayana.

Raju / Varma kshatriya are classified into Suryavamshi and Chandra Vamshi with Sapta Rishis gotras with upanayana.

Lord Rama is from Vashista Gotra,

please find the family tree of actual hindu vedic kshatriya with saptharishi gotra.

Lord rama, Lord krishna, budha also included.

Kshatriya with saptharishi gotra and twice born with upanayana are actual kshatriya.

Lord rama is from vashista gotra File:The_Genealogy_of_Bharata.png


 * The place to discuss a specific article is that article's talk page. I will address the issues with your source there.  JanetteDoe (talk) 23:42, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Saibaba Venkatesh
Saibaba Venkatesh deleted an entire section again, without a reason. Please see log - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shramana&action=history

Saibaba Venkatesh did this despite the ongoing discussions. Please see his messages and personal insult (idiot) on this page -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Shramana

Saibaba Venkates not only broke the three-revert rule within 24 hours, but also indulged in insulting. Please do the needful as an admin. I suspect he will continue to vandalise the article.--&#61; No &#124;&#124;&#124; Illusion &#61; (talk) 05:09, 11 February 2012 (UTC)Mayasutra
 * C.Fred has issued the editor a 3RR warning now (we don't block for 3RR until the person is warned, because the rule is fairly arbitrary and its not fair if people aren't aware of it); if the editor reverts again, you can request the person be blocked at WP:3RRNB (or just let a helpful admin like myself or C.Fred know and we can handle it faster since we're already apprised of the situation. I'll be off wiki soon, so if it comes today, try C.Fred or 3rrnb. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:33, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * However, one problem, Mayasutra: in an edit summary, you said, "e. Let admin decide on deletion / moving content." Admins never decide such things. In a content dispute, admins are exactly the same as other editors. Administrative abilities are related to editor behavior--so we can block people for edit warring and vandalism, protect pages from attacks, etc. Sometimes we are called on to judge consensus when there is a dispute (such as deletion discussions), but in that case, our job is merely to evaluate the consensus in light of our policies and guidelines. If you have a content disagreement with other editors, you need to use dispute resolution to resolve it. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks much Qwyrxian. Thanks for guiding me about wiki policies/usage/content dispute. I do not know how to give a barnstar, but please accept my appreciation for you and Sitush. Sorry i did not visit this page and read this earlier. Thanks again. --&#61; No &#124;&#124;&#124; Illusion &#61; (talk) 02:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)Mayasutra

You have new messages!
& AshLin (talk) 06:40, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I have reverted your recent edit at Ror and made a statement at Talk:Ror regarding that. There has recently been a change of policy regarding how Indian caste/community articles are handled here on en-Wikipedia and so I am inserting the standard template below so that you are aware of this. I am suggesting that you have engaged in "inappropriate conduct", because you are deleting material without providing another reference which refutes what is quoted from Tod. - Ror Is King (talk) 06:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Chagai-I tests
plz visit that page a Paki nationalists is simply refusing to accept what is true facts and constantly removing the sources as well as the facts, he has history of such nationalists acts such as indo-pak 1965 war and indo-pak 1971 war on all those pages he is indulge in edits to glorify pakistan. Plz look into the case his user name is Topgun122.161.31.230 (talk) 09:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * My action to this was in regard to IP hopping and unexplained removals, please don't respond to this canvassing, I'm reporting the IP. Thanks. -- lTopGunl (talk</b>) 09:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

your edits can be looked in the history section, the vandalizing edits you have made showed your deep bias against India , and further you are removing well sourced materials. Your edits in 1971 war is also a case where you were warned for your conduct.122.161.31.230 (talk) 09:13, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Sitush plz visit 1971 and 1965 war pages and go through the history, his request for you not to intervene is to save his image, ask any neutral user this guy is always invloved in pro-pakistani edits with the same mentality of pakistan is best. Plz visit all the Pages yourself and decide yourself dont rely on this troll, his lies and propaganda can be seen from his edits. I request you to visit this page as he is trying to persuade you not to visit these pages as this will expose this real intentions. Thnx122.161.31.230 (talk) 09:15, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

This guy has been blocked numerous times for his edits specially those when he make edits or undone edits by others which he found is against pakistan or specially muslims. Visit his talk page, reasons why he was blocked will make it clear that he is habitual offender, he never accept any source which shows pakistan in poor light gives no reason for removing well sourced contents all the scholars named in chagai-I page has also contested Indian Pokhran claims and their views have been put up in the Indian test pages but the same sources were deleted by this guy which contest the pakistani claims. Plz look into the issue as this guy is completely biased and will try to block me by the help of other pakistani users.122.161.31.230 (talk) 09:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TopGun/Punitive_Block he has history of such edit wars, where he delete the sourced contents as those contents are not in favor of pakistan, now this same guy is accusing me of an edit war, i have never entered an edit war my all edits are well sourced as can be seen from my contribution page. Thnx122.161.31.230 (talk) 09:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Visit my talk page, this guy is trying to implicate me in a hoax personal abuse, i have not abuse anyone. Sitush i urge you to have a look at this guy topgun activity as he along with other pakistani users will try to block me so that they can continue to vandalize other articles. He is coming up with fake warnings such as edit-war, personal abuse most probably to strengthen his case, you should ban him, he is again indulging in edit wars. He has been banned over a dozen times for the same attitude. 122.161.31.230 (talk) 10:03, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Idukki moves
I have replied to your message at User talk:JamesBWatson. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:15, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Just like that
Hey Sitush, I'm on a mini-wikibreak for a few days now; working on an outreach related matter. Will come back shortly and help you out with the articles! Cheers,  Lynch 7  17:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Contradiction in your addition and deletions of cited content
Since you are repeatedly deleting my contributions over various articles without discussion (see my contributions page) and talk page strewn with your messages. I find your selective actions contradictory.

We need to discuss the serious contradictions in your appropriating the privilege  to add or remove content with citations by other editors .There are instances galore but  I am going to discuss here only two such instances.

Lets take instance no 1 first regarding a dodgy book  Kshatriyas_and_would-be_Kshatriyas - which is currently citation no 18 on article Khatri. An article which you ostensibly started editing on 23rd September (and subsequently deleted various valid content and citations) and on which you have done considerable work deleting and adding citations  as well as conflicting with other editors trying to contribute content.

Is this book a valid citation for a Wikipedia article or not ? Because you have been instrumental in both creating this citation as well as condemning it. Since you have have stated yourself that you are not happy with this citation.
 * 17th September Matthew Vanitas creates an article Kshatriyas and would-be Kshatriyas
 * 17th September same day Sitush contributes to the article  and then improve the citation and article over next three edits starting with 25 October 2011 Sitush


 * 10 October 2011 Sun Quake introduces Kshatriyas And Would-Be Kshatriyas citation on article Khatri.
 * User contributions Sunquake only posting on article Khatri .Account created for Sun_Quake Single-purpose account


 * 14th October 2011 :Sitush states I have never added Kshatriyas and Would-be Kshatriyas as a source, nor am I brilliantly happy with it as such....


 * 17th October sensing something is odd here I ask Can a wikilink be a citaion : 17th October Page Talk:Khatri, See the section at the bottom of the page titled :Lets take the case of citation 4 and b


 * 17th October 2011 On article Talk:Kshatriyas and would-be Kshatriyas I ask Is this book a valid secondary source for a wikipedai article

Whereas you state you are not happy with the citation, and yet it stays on the article inspite of your minute involvement with the article regarding edit contributions by others.

Is this book a valid citation for a Wikipedia article or not ?

Next lets discuss the article Baid and the citations you have provided there that contradict your own statements to others regarding quality of sources and content.

Intothefire (talk) 13:59, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * The book is a reliable source for itself, ie: for use in the article concerning that book. - Sitush (talk) 14:04, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * But you have not responded to my specific question, which pertained to asking you if this book  fits wikipedia 's standards for a valid citation on Khatri article or any other article . Your answer is obfuscating ....you say its a reliable source for itself . Earlier you yourself state nor am I brilliantly happy with it as such.


 * Sitush this kind of answer reminds me of another similar answer you provided earlier when I requested you not to delete my comments from the Talk Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya page  from section Deletion of cited content.
 * Instead of answering you state I know that Bhattacharya is not necessarily liked by Khatris - one of your pet subject areas - but that is no reason to rant on a talk page.
 * Please provide cogent direct responses for your actions.

Intothefire (talk) 19:04, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You have had this discussion before, and it involved people other than myself. Unless you have anything to add to that discussion then this is a pointless repetition. And if you do have something to add then I rather think that the best place for it is at Talk:Kshatriyas_and_would-be_Kshatriyas or Talk:Khatri. However, please do note that repeating yourself is unlikely to achieve much as both and  adequately explained the situation. - Sitush (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * And he's copied the Jogendra comments here as well. JanetteDoe (talk) 17:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * That is what ITF and RIK do, time after time. It is tendentious, imo, but we'll just have to live with it for now. I do not expect to have to live with it for too much longer, however. - Sitush (talk) 17:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions
Hi Sitush, the proposal to impose discretionary sanctions was enacted; if you need a template to inform editors about them, I have created this one, basically coping Template:Uw-sanctions. Feel free to use it, if you wish. Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 23:46, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. My worry now is that I will inadvertently overstep the mark! Nonetheless, it is a positive move and I thank you for proposing something that has been suggested but not followed through on far too many occasions (I am one of those who can be tagged with that failure). - Sitush (talk) 01:08, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I looked at the template, and at the link to the sanctions page, and even after searching around on various policy pages was not sure that I clearly understood what specific behavioral guideline was imposed, nor what specific penalties were established. Scientology and Free Republic editing sanctions, for example, are pretty clear.  Caste is very vague.  What is your understanding, and can you point me to a link that explicitly defines expectations?  Thanks.  JanetteDoe (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that we all have to feel our way forward on this one. "Discretionary" appears to mean "discretionary". It is not an entirely satisfactory state of affairs but the reasoning behind it seems to be that any admin can take any form of appropriate action to combat, for example, obvious disruptive editing without the need to jump through quite so many hoops as are sometimes required. I expect that this will eventually turn into a 1RR rule but right now it does not. The key point to note is that contributor must be warned beforehand and the warning needs to address the specific actions that are deemed to be problematic. If those actions persist thereafter then the admin's discretion will come to the for. I rather suspect that the example of the 2.x contributor at Rajus does or would fall into that category in future. So perhaps would repeated insulting etc comments even though they might not usually meet the bar of WP:NPA. But, really, it is all very muddy waters at the moment. One thing seems sure to me: there will be a few complaints about alleged arbitrary/excessive admin actions at ANI before it all settles down. - Sitush (talk) 21:51, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Basically, it's these sanctions. The only difference is that admins have been permitted to impose them by the community and not by ArbCom. Salvio  Let's talk about it! 21:54, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but I read that a few days ago and it still seems as clear as mud <g> I rather suspect that JD has read that page also because that's what conscientious people do. I bet that if I watched sufficient articles re: Ireland etc (currently watched: 0) then I'd soon get the hang of it. It does, however, explain why some people see this move as favouring the regulars: if the likes of myself do not understand the proscriptions particularly well then what hope is there for a newbie. Nonetheless, I do think it is a good thing to do: there will just be some teething problems, IMO. - Sitush (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but I read that a few days ago and it still seems as clear as mud Oh... The basic point is that, usually, it is very difficult to block for low-level disruption: tendentious editing, I-didn't-hear-that type of behaviour, general incivility that does not rise to the level of personal attack, filibustering. In all these cases, it takes time and patience and blocks are issued only after considerable disruption has been caused. With these sanctions, hopefully, we'd be better equipped to handle them: first a warning, then, if the user doesn't mend his ways, we can start imposing sanctions (increasing blocks or topic/article bans). Discretionary sanctions basically lower the bar for the imposition of sanctions. Salvio  Let's talk about it! 11:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, I take it to essentially mean that an admin can act unilaterally in cases where community consensus would otherwise be needed. For example, an individual admin cannot usually impose a ban, but with this in place they can - the community has in effect pre-approved such actions -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Your Questionable citations about Baids and Hindus
I am seeking to make sense of contradictory stances and standards you adopt in different articles concerning validity of sources. Since the matter concerns several articles the best place to discuss is your talk page where a convergence is possible for a discussion spanning several different articles.

Sitush you have incessantly deleted my contributions without discussion, nay even deleted my discussion on various talk pages. Then posted messages on my page calling me incompetent because of sources I have used.

But the contradiction of your own usage of questionable sources and vilifying  citations  is self evident. Lets take one more example :of article Baid.

7 December 2011 -On this article which was about a community Sitush adds the following content : In the medical context, William Crooke, a folklorist and ethnologist of the British Raj, considered such people, who were Hindu, to be "incompetent" in their medical practices and that they "used materials collected by the jungle men, of the use of which [they are] generally ignorant. To take medicine from [them] is a sort of sacramental act. ...The Baid, in fact, is little better than the medicine-man of jungle tribes." He saw a distinction between the medicine of the Baid and that of the Muslim Hakim.
 * Since you quote William Crooke you do believe him to be a valid source for a Wikipedia citation, better than Tod who you often delete ? ........ (You have off course completely rewritten a non neutral article on Tod).
 * By which yardstick is Tod not a valid source if according to you  William Crooke is ?
 * By what measure is this quote by a William Crooke a sound contribution about the Baid people ?
 * How is the furtherance of  encyclopaedic information about the Baid community of ayurvedic doctors  achieved by quoting William Crooke statement which you added viz :such people, who were Hindu, to be "incompetent" in their medical practices ?


 * I started this article in 2007 and made three edits culminating in this edit where this is what the article read ... 2 lines about a community called the Baid
 * In the course of a discussion with Qwyrxian about this article Baid, where I post a polite response you parachute in with a patently rude remark on 7th December 2011] Actually, what is sad is that after 5000+ contributions you seem still not to have got the hang of the basics, such as verifiability, citing and, yet again, indenting....
 * and then you go on to add William Crooke quote, vilifying Ayurvedic doctors ,the Baid community and Hindus

Now whats wrong with Tod if you keep deleting him as a source even as you give yourself the prerogative to yourself use William Crooke ? Intothefire (talk) 18:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * All dealt with previously. I have no desire to go through all of this with you again. Your hounding of me is ridiculous. - Sitush (talk) 18:54, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * But Sitush thats not true see Talk baid Page its not discussed here ? perhaps you would like to tell me where it was discussed . Intothefire (talk) 19:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I would agree with you Intothefire that how can one use William Crooke and slam Tod at the same time. Ror Is King (talk) 06:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Pannu
I just took a hatchet to it. Considering the way it looked before the chop, I gather it's not on your watchlist. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:13, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Nope, not seen that one before. Some of those sources for the "notables" were, erm, bizarre. Nice job. Since it is also allegedly a common name in Finland, it adds to the general idea that associating people with a caste merely by dint of their last name simply does not work. I am sure that there are Indian people in Finland but scarcely sufficient in number to make it a common name! - Sitush (talk) 04:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, the Finland thing is sort of off topic too. Anyway, there was a ref or two for a couple of the people, but I zapped the lot until verified. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:17, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

3RR
Your recent editing history shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. You have reverted edits on James Tod twice already 1  ; 2. Please don't indulge in edit warring. Ror Is King (talk) 06:29, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I am nowhere near 3RR, nor will I be the first to reach it if you continue in this vein. You really need to spend a little time trying to understand how the policies work. - Sitush (talk) 06:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well your first revert called my edits "utter nonsense" and the second one became a good faith ! I must have done something awesome to deserve this :) Ror Is King (talk) 06:53, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I can count & I opened a discussion. At the time of my original revert you had omitted sources and added a completely unnecessary cite request.. Let's keep the discussion on the article talk page. You are just pursuing some sort of vendetta here, methinks, and I would rather that it happened in full view. - Sitush (talk) 06:56, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Skip the persecution complex. I still do not know what unsourced matter I added to Tod that you are chiming about. You are too trigger happy. We have seen that your assertion that I deleted Frietag was obviously a lie. Ror Is King (talk) 07:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

RFC/U
I have decided an RFC/U is on order for TG's shoddy sourcing and edit warring of uncited content into articles. As you expressed alarm over one aspect of his behaviour I am informing you in case you would like to endorse it. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I have not had sufficient involvement with the contributor, sorry. What I have seen is a mixed experience for me. & mostly weighed on the downside, but the scope is incredibly narrow. I think that you need to find people who have had a greater interaction. - Sitush (talk) 13:45, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Non free image
The image the IP user placed on Talk:Rajus and that actually has been placed on Saptarishi appears to be from this page:. This means that not only is it not a WP:RS, it is probably a copyright violation. I tried looking at both the relevant policy pages and Moonriddengirl's policy pages and was very confused as to where to start. If you would get out your wikimachete and cut through the confusion and tell me what needs to be done about this image and what steps I should take first, I'd really appreciate it. Alternately, I am fine if you just decided to do it yourself. JanetteDoe (talk) 06:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It does look dubious but it also looks messy. When I first saw it a few days ago I could also not make my mind up whether the stains etc were real or added for historical effect, with the colouring-in intended to emphasise the suggestoin that this is a derivative of an out-of-copyright work! I was as lost as you. I think that might be the best person to ask, with the expectation that it will likely end up at WP:PUF or its Commons equivalent. Do you want to ask them? I'll keep an eye on events. - Sitush (talk) 06:37, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I tried to list it at WP:PUF, but am having difficulty with labeling the image and notifying the uploader. Either I've done things incorrectly (possible) or the templates are misbehaving.  In any case, I left a "Help me!" message both on the WP:PUF noticeboard, and also on Moonriddengirl's talk page, as I've heard she is a guru of copyright.  Hopefully I can get it straightened out shortly.  In any case, it seems pretty clear that it is not RS, and will have to be removed from the several pages it is used on.  Weather forecast this week: very windy due to caste related wrangles, and intermittent sunny skies. JanetteDoe (talk) 17:53, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've just left a reply to you on MRG's page. I forecast a lot of hot air and dense overnight cloud cover that results in a dark night (of the soul). I am a bit dis-spirited by the current shenanigans, probably because I am feeling a bit too old at the mo! It happens occasionally, and I have come very close to jacking it all in before now. - Sitush (talk) 17:57, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Templeman
did u get the templeman booki sent u...Mayan302 (talk) 07:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't think so. Maybe it is in my spam folder - will check later. I am getting a bit swamped with contentious stuff again at the moment. - Sitush (talk) 07:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * ok.no im not talkin abt the entire book.the pages frm templeman relevant to the crrent discussion on the talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mayan302 (talk • contribs) 07:38, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I work for the Script!
Hi Sitush,

Thanks for your message. I do in fact work for The Script and I'm having real trouble getting info we need added to the page. Other users seem to revert my work even after I have referenced information correctly following guides on wiki.

My other issue is 'My Town' a band the boys previously were connected to but do not want to mentioned on their individual pages or the band wiki page.

Could you provide any advise or an official line on how we deal with this?

Many Thanks.

George James The Script HQ Digital PR / Social Media Essence Digital UK — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheScriptOfficial (talk • contribs) 10:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You have already asked other people about this. I can add nothing that you have not already been told. Eg: WP:RS, WP:SPS, WP:BLP, WP:COI and WP:CENSORED. Wikipedia does not exist to promote this or any other entity. - Sitush (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Join the Community!
Hi Sitush,

Belated welcome to WikiProject India. Thanks for joining our WikiProject community! As you already know, I'm a volunteer for the WikiProject and the first guy to approach if you need help! ;)

Do consider joining the WikiProject India Mailing List (https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-in-en) which provides communication for the community.

For other lists which may be of interest to you, see http://wiki.wikimedia.in/Mailing_Lists.

You may also like to add WP:INB to your watchlist.

AshLin (talk) 17:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Would the caste warning template be appropriate in this case?
There seems to be some drama on an individual's article page as described in this section. As the person is a political figure, and the warning template specifically mentions political parties, do you think it would be appropriate to place the template on that person's article's talk page? JanetteDoe (talk) 17:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not sure. is often around at this time of the day and is probably well placed to make a decision/advise. My gut feeling is "do it" and  certainly mentions the sanctions in their comment at the WP:RSN spin-off, but it would do no harm to get an opinion from the horse's mouth (so to speak - I am not suggesting that Salvio is an equine administrator etc, although if he is then he is more clever than I already thought!). - Sitush (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Interaction ban
Do not bother, I will not be responding to him again. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:45, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I will bother. It affects articles, article talk pages and the numerous dispute resolution forums that the pair of you have been using of late. It is ridiculous and it is disruptive. Proposing an interaction ban seems to be entirely reasonable since the pair of you have demonstrated a complete inability to disengage across a swathe of pages. Unless, of course, you are saying above that you will effectively be self-imposing that which WP:Interaction ban stipulates, rather than just referring to conversations on their own talk page? - Sitush (talk) 18:49, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Exactly according to that WP:Interaction ban. I already told TG on his talk I will no longer respond to him so, job done. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:34, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Haven Herefords
I was pleased to see return today, as I was afraid he was a one-off visitor and I wanted to know about his sources; so I poked him on his talk page and got this answer. Since WP:V says "Source material must have been published (made available to the public in some form); unpublished materials are not considered reliable", that's no good. I doubt if the article can be saved - would the sources you found support a basic stub? Is there enough to support a mention in Hereford (cattle), which might be better than a minimal stub if there was no prospect of expansion? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:51, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I have struggled with it. As I said on the article talk page, there do appear to be sources out there but I can only see snippet views for them and the one proxy that I found useful for GBooks - in order to see the greater content that is available to people resident in the US - has died. I'll take another look at it over the next couple of days but I do not hold much hope. The only other solution involves library trips and I simply cannot do that. - Sitush (talk) 21:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * eg: "The thought comes after visiting those marvellous Haven Hereford^ during the National Sheep Association's successful Spring Event. Present custodians of the oldest pedigree herd in the world, Messrs, E. Lewis and Son, have no doubts at ..." is a snippet from here. - Sitush (talk) 21:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Once upon a time when I was young, I was a farmer :o) I could probably get any information you need on these cows, what is it you need to know? Darkness Shines (talk) 21:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Anything, really. I've pretty much tagged every sentence in the article. I am going through GNews archives at the moment, which is turning up tiny bits but nothing of great note and nothing (so far) that ties in with existing statements. Eg: this. - Sitush (talk) 21:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Try the Glasgow Herald from 1965, they won a great many awards. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:59, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Found this Cite the magazine the guy uploaded the scan of perhaps? Image should be free to use as well. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep 'em coming! I am wading through a book at the moment - can't use search on it. - Sitush (talk) 23:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I just found this book from 1914 Loads of info in it. Darkness Shines (talk) 00:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I had seen that one but was hoping to find a better link - the text formatting is very poor. - Sitush (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe this one? Darkness Shines (talk) 00:31, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Kadia kshatriyas
RE: ''It is always a pleasure to deal with a new contributor in the India caste-related sphere and find them to be reasonable in their discussions! Thank you very much.''

I may not be as reasonable as you may think. I'm afraid the irony here is that it is probably my family's perceived varna status that has left me with such a moderate outlook on caste matters. I have always been taught that discussion of caste does not matter; as that kind of jostling for position in the social order is something to be left to the lower orders. However, thank you, I try to stay unbiased and frankly, the only reason I even noticed the article had been redirected and changed was because of research into my family history. I attempted to find a more reliable source than my family and wound up finding that anthropological study. Unfortunately, even after scouring UK journal databases via my university I can only find the smallest of fragments about my ancestors. I guess I'll have to concede, at least for now, that my only source for this information is my family, and the fact that I get mistaken for Punjabi wherever I go, despite my family being from Gujarat.--Splashley (talk) 12:43, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Staying neutral/unbiased here is pretty much synonymous with being "reasonable". It is also not something commonly experienced by me when dealing with caste articles. I wouldn't know a Punjabi or Gujarati from a Martian, I am afraid: people are just people to me, but presumably you are referring to assumptions being made due to your link with a particular community/caste. If so then, well, that is exactly the sort of thing that makes the caste concept so insidious, imo, but neither you nor I are going to change that. - Sitush (talk) 12:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, it isn't so much the name of a particular caste. In the Western/North-western states, you can often guess the caste, family, surname of those around you based purely on certain physical features. Of course these aren't always correct assumptions, but for the most part those of a certain community will have common features. I think this has something to do with the endogamy of certain communities. For example, the Kadia Kshatriya. Again, I'm not sure if this is absolutely the case everywhere. When it comes to diaspora, especially within the UK, this stereotyping happens more often with communities mixing a lot. I have been mistaken for Punjabi because of certain physical features, I don't 'look' like a Gujarati. As a family, we have been called 'white' due to our skin colour and Punjabi based on nose shape and body structure, people assume we are aggressive people. On the other hand, it lends credence to the idea that we may be of Rajasthani origin, but again [citation needed]. I find this fascinating because as I have paid more attention to it, it seems that people draw caste lines on mainly racial grounds. That however, is a can of worms that I DO NOT want to open.--Splashley (talk) 13:10, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Traditional endogamy and racial basis for distinction are very good points, although in the caste articles here the POV tends to be more about varna. At one point it seemed as if every community in India comprised warrior-kings and no-one brewed the tea, swept the streets or built houses etc - we are gradually weeding out that rubbish. Have you read the Herbert Hope Risley article (mostly written by me) or Scientific racism (I've barely contributed to that one). I would be interested in your opinion: these are thorny issues but they do need to be presented in an encyclopedia, with an appropriate amount of care regarding sourcing etc. - Sitush (talk) 13:23, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edit of Patna University
You are requested to visit Talk:Patna University to see the justification for my reverting your edit. Arunbandana (talk • contribs) 16:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Already replied there, prior to reinstating my edit. You probably should not have reverted me without allowing a chance for someone to respond to your opening comment, but don't worry about it. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

And on a lighter note...
Hi, Sitush. Thanks for the support here. I nevertheless think an immediate Community Ban is in order if I ever use "themself" in articlespace :-) --Shirt58 (talk) 11:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

You speed demon, you
I went to all of the effort to type of a 3RR report on User:Zazscholar, and when I went to look at the page to get a link to notify the user, I saw your report just above mine. For the future, report all administrative requests related to Official Cabal Activities via the Red Hotline, please. To all the stalkers--there is no cabal, I promise. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:03, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ha! Filling in those reports at 3RRNB is a pain but I can trump you - I was once edit conflicted by someone posting a report about a contributor for whom I was also submitting my spiel. They are a lot quicker to do if you have about 5 or 6 tabs open simultaneously, but the only thing I know of that is worse and in common usage is the process for merge discussions. - Sitush (talk) 15:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Re: Could do with some Tamil help, please
Hi Sitush, I can converse in Tamil, but cannot read and write that well. I suggest you reach out to User:Sundar. — Ganeshk  ( talk ) 18:17, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks for letting me know. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sundar has responded back here. — Ganeshk  ( talk ) 23:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Re: Regarding deletion of vettuva Gounder referances
COuld you please elobarate on why you deleted the referances i provided for you? i gave referance from books of samgam tamil books — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srinifromsalem (talk • contribs) 14:06, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * It appears to be little more than a translation of a purana. The puranas are primary sources and have very few uses here on Wikipedia. I have twice provided you with a link to our policy regarding primary sources. You may also want to read the more general article on what qualifies as being as reliable source. Thereafter, if you still do not understand then please could you try to explain what it is that you are struggling with - I'll try to help. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 14:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the one Sangam Book(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purananuru), i reffered has the direct link to all kinds of war, politics, wealth, as well as aspects of every-day living activities done in old tamil period. It is a direct source where poet sung about all activities done in that period. Please help me in adding these as referances.


 * You cannot add that as a reference for Vettuva Gounder, sorry. It is ok for it to be used as a reference in an article about the book itself but not in most other articles. - Sitush (talk) 14:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

could you please tell me what else can i provide as proof. any research books reference will hold good? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.79.40.119 (talk) 16:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:RS. If you want to suggest some that you have in mind then do so by all means & I'll take a look at them. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 16:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

YGM
Thanks very much for the email, I wasn't aware of the history. Will look to revert. Connolly15 (talk) 15:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Austereraj
He's requesting an unblock; I'm letting you know in case the reviewing admin wants to hear from you on the topic, since you warned him several times. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 17:06, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * That's ok, thanks. Well, it's ok if he is not unblocked. Or if he is unblocked and behaves himself. - Sitush (talk) 17:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

minor correction
a line in the northern nadars section says that the vellalars n maravars were just above the nadars.thats not right the maravars were just above the nadars.not the vellalars.u might want to change that.Mayan302 (talk) 05:21, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Awareness of changes in community sanctions policy
The community has recently added some pretty liberal sanction powers regarding Indian politics and caste articles. This may be of interest to you as they cover disruption, including evidenceable "I don't hear that" conduct. I thought you may like to know about this given that I believe you may have been experiencing IDHT behaviour from other editors that amounts to disruption in areas that you edit. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, thanks. If you look above on this talk page then you should see the discussion that lead to the emergence of the sanctions that were proposed and enacted at WP:AN. IDHT is certainly an issue that affects me in the India-related sphere etc but it has been so for roughly a year now. I sometimes feel drowned by the tendentiousness of it all and wander off to do other things, such as John Horsefield! Thankfully, there appear to be a few more admins who have taken an interest in the issues during that time, and I am grateful to them. It remains a very frustrating area but hopefully the sanctions will smooth things out a little. And, obviously, I am not always correct in what I say. BTW, I keep seeing a red reference problem when you post a message but I cannot for the life of me see anything wrong with your sig. Any ideas? - Sitush (talk) 00:35, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The red ref issue has gone away now that I have replied. I've seen this happen at RSN also - very odd. - Sitush (talk) 00:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Regarding references, there are a couple of quotes above where people have wrapped citations... In relation to IDHT behaviour, including denial of obvious consensus, well, I've been trying to improve RS/N to stop fringe warriors continuing such conduct (fringe warriors who of course listen to community consensus are welcome, it means, in fact, that they're not fringe warriors at all).  Sometimes, sometimes, editors need something a little stronger than a cup of tea when they don't hear what the community says.  I find it upsetting, because everybody should be allowed to be wrong, even repeatedly wrong on a point, as long as they retire from their claims when many people observe they are wrong. Fifelfoo (talk) 04:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

talkback

 * Do you see anything familiar about this pattern? JanetteDoe (talk) 18:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Not really. The IP geolocates to Oregon, USA. We have on-off trouble with IPs in New York (especially using the NY Public Library) who do that sort of thing, but so too do many people in India etc. If those sources seem ok to you then I would revert them. - Sitush (talk) 19:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Dasuya
I was forced to write to you as you edited something which resulted in wrong information on Dasuya. You have no information on India (read Punjab) I believe, hope you know that election results are still awaited (google it). Someone changed Sahi to Dogra and I removed it indicating vandalism. Once again just for some strange reason you changed it to Dogra who was not even elected in 2007. Please avoid editing article where you have no knowledge. If you are so desperate please google it to verify. You can earn stars for real edits by using google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 17:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I am sorry but I really do think that you have missed the point of my edit. You reinstated 4k of unsubstantiated information. If in reverting you that caused one word to be incorrect then I apologise for that but please do not try to make out that your edit was confined to that one word. If this article was sourced properly, as I said in my edit summaries, then these situations would not arise. I suggest that you practice what you preach in your message above. - Sitush (talk) 18:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Wiki has sent several messages to us to start or edit articles in our domain. Infact in every conference they are trying to encourage us to start new articles or contribute to existing articles. Somehow I feel some non-wiki staff members are not ready to allow it. I will certainly raise this issue that people who do not know what does MC stands for in Punjab admin has become editor in Punjab specific articles. Now If i write there is a railway station in Bangalore city or Silk is the famous in Mysore, do I need to provide citation! By this logic, the whole article on mythological stories like Ramayana or Mahabarata should be deleted (as they will not be able to provide citation for existance of Ayodhya or Rama or Ravana).  Sorry but you can delete all my contributions and get someone from Kerala to write about Dasuya or Amritsar. Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 18:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I have previously pointed out some of our core policies on your own talk page. Have you read those? Contributing here does not give you the right to do as you please, regardless of who it is that has invited you here. - Sitush (talk) 18:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Wonderful. According to your logic, a person sitting in Chennai (never visited Cambridge) should ask you to provide the proof that Kings college Chapel is next to the Kings college not Peterhouse. Information, provided was to list accurate and legitimate facts. I had no personal agenda or gain by contributing towards these few articles. Infact I got lots of photographs to provide proofs when I visited Dasuya in Jan but it I feel dealing with peer-reviewers is better than dealing with others. Wiki was arranging special seminar for us next week to make us aware about the 'core policies' but thanks to some smart people it will keep native people away! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 18:48, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what seminar it is that you are referring to but please do attend if you have the time. The core policies, including those that I have mentioned to you previously, are important here. If you cannot attend then there are plenty of people with experience who are willing to help you here, but it is important that you try to meet people halfway: do not assume that they are wrong or start ranting etc. Things must be verifiable using reliable sources. Some things are pretty much self-evident - eg: the sky is usually blue, the earth is not flat - but most stuff should be sourced. - Sitush (talk) 18:54, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * (ec)It is not "according to Sitush's logic", it is according to the rules of verifiability. Have you read them?  What any of us knows from our own personal knowledge is not relevant.  It has to be backed up by reliable sources.  The rules are not different for you than they are for anyone else.  So that you can get a head start for next week, please also read about assuming good faith on the part of other editors. JanetteDoe (talk) 19:01, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Janette I will accept someone who is familiar with the region to edit articles as they will not questions about the most logical facts or the basic information. Hope you people have experienced 'peer-review' system. Author is asked to provide facts before someone changes the whole story. If Wiki is an open source it should be edited in a good faith. If you feel some one is advertising about him/her self please go ahead and delete it but if it is a mere fact, it should not be touched or atleast give some time to provide proof. I went all the way to Dasuya, clicked photographs (as no information is available on net to provide citations) and came back to see everything is deleted again by the same person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 19:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I would have thought that Wikipedia is pretty much the ultimate in peer review systems. Am I misunderstanding you? - Sitush (talk) 19:12, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * If (you think) Wiki is the ultimate peer review system then I rest my case as I have never seen any Professor accepting citation/ reference from Wiki in Cambridge or Harvard or Caltech! Point to remember Sitush. If you have some friends doing research please ask and understand how peer review system works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 19:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You are mixing apples and oranges. BTW, we do have plenty of academics who contribute to this project, including professors etc. - Sitush (talk) 19:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I am aware of that as I have several students getting C grade for citing Wiki, infact If I see a citation from Wiki, I send the whole assignment back. This was the reason we decided to start improving Wikipedia by providing right information. Wiki is reverting back by arranging information for us. We know what a reliable information is and how valuable it is? In research you can get lots of citations from online resources but if you have ever been to countries like India or Pakistan, you have to struggle to get even a proof that you own a piece of land. This was the reason I went back to get photographic proof. I feel it is easy to publish a new gene for the cancer than writing about existing things in your local city on Wikipedia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 19:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What your students do is your problem and theirs. What you do here is your problem and the Wikipedia community's. Yes, there is systemic bias here with regard to sourcing, access to the internet, literacy and numerous other things. It is known and it is recognised. But it does not absolve you from following our policies and guidelines; similarly, if your students are plagiarising or otherwise misusing Wikipedia's content, well, you know that it goes on but it does not make it right. - Sitush (talk) 19:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Here is a small bit of what I removed from Dasuya "Dasuya is a very ancient town. It is believed that it was known as Virat Nagar in the Mahabharata and the Pandavas spent last one year of their exile in Virat Nagar in the service of its king. Dasuya is one of the key towns of Hoshiarpur. The per capita income of Dasuya is higher than rest of Punjab which in turn is leading within India. Dasuya is an agriculture-centered community. Apart from routine rice, wheat, maize and sugarcane, farmers also grow sunflower, pulses, potatoes, sesame, peaches, oranges, papaya, grapes, melons and mangoes. Dasuya is located in the Basmati belt of India which extends from Karnal to Jammu region."

Can you explain to me how you think that your photographs could resolve the sourcing of that content (except, perhaps, for photos of crops)? - Sitush (talk) 19:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hindu temple built by some Sankaracharya with an information board why this temple and pond are famous. It is written on the board that Dasuya was a Virat nagari (if we believe there was something called Mahabharta). Another board near old fort stating this is where Pandavas stayed during agyatvaas. Photographs (and scanned copies) of documents from the MC office giving facts about Dasuya. Think beyond photographs of crops! This one is govt. run site http://mcdasuya.com/ one small link from a newspaper tribune Punjab govt gazette — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 19:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add info using the websites that you mention. I have doubts regarding whether photos of the information signage would be acceptable but there are stalkers of this page who will probably jump in with comments if you give it a little time. Please note that if the information is not in English then you will need to provide a translation. - Sitush (talk) 20:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, by the way, if you are thinking of using the council website as a source for history then I would advise against it. Try to find something independent because it is not unknown for councils to embellish and censor the information that they show, in the interests of promoting their charge. - Sitush (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * In addition to the council website, I provided a link to the Punjab govt. gazette which provides a time line in terms of history too. Anyhow I have no interest in taking this matter any further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabi gladiator (talk • contribs) 20:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, I am trying to sort it out using the sources that you have found. One problem that I am having to address is that virtually all of the content remaining was a copyright violation of the council website. - Sitush (talk) 21:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

kushwaha
I respect your dalit activism. However Kushwaha are neither people of Maharastra nor what you portray them to be. You seem to have little knowledge of the matter. pls stop edit war by doing eight edits in such a short time. Revert the article immediately to its previous state immediately. Moriya (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I have got a clue what you are referring to when you say "dalit activism". For the rest, please use the article talk page as you were requested to do previously. - Sitush (talk) 14:21, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/Austereraj
I've looked at the editing history of User:Yadavrewari, and my sock-o-meter is screaming at the top of its lungs. The SPI is now open. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 00:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I've just spotted the SPI thread and have responded. I can revert if that would make life easier. However, as deaf as I am in real life, even I can hear this one quacking. - Sitush (talk) 00:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've also deleted a bunch of the edits he made to Smt. Shanti Devi School of Nursing; that kind of spam doesn't really need to remain in the edit history. I'll trawl through some of his other contributions and see if there's anything else that bad. The Blade of the Northern Lights  ( 話して下さい ) 01:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Woah, revdel. It seems to me to be justified. Good move. - Sitush (talk) 01:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Requested move
Could you spare a few minutes here for commenting? Thanks. <font face="Comic Sans MS"> X.One   SOS  14:05, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * If only I could! I am afraid that my experience of the cinema industry is minimal anywhere, and I do still get confused with regard to India-related mononyms. I've looked over the thread but, really, I doubt that anything which I might say would add to either side or even advance a solution. It is a complete mess, but it is the fault of no particular person that it is so. I apologise for this but, hey, even I know when my limits are being really stretched. - Sitush (talk) 02:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

University categories
Hi, Thanks for your note. I had merely put most of them into a more relevant category, like that of a university alumni, or faculty. Byomkesh Bakshi (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah, ok. The ones that I saw involved removal of categories even when a more specific alternative existed. I've also just created Category:University of Calicut faculty as a consequence of one of your removals. - Sitush (talk) 17:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for Heads Up
I looked at some of the material you referred me to re Yogesh. 3 years ago he was saying Dickens was a "white supremacist". Yes, CD was racist (a better term would be "xenophobic") and a supporter of colonialism, but "white supremacist??? However, on the Talk page I think I will continue to treat him as if he was a stranger. Thanks very much for the heads-up.--WickerGuy (talk) 01:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hindutva is probably the key word. You are just starting to see it at CD, with the references to India. Aside from having read all of the major works of Dickens by the the age of ca. 15 (and I still return, occasionally), the real issue here is related to a somewhat extreme and disruptive personality, in the WP sense. I have had no involvement in the Dickens article that I can recall because the guy is just someone that I read rather than someone that I know a great deal about. IMO, I could say the same of Gaskell or Thackeray, or even Disraeli. YK is clever with the policy obfuscation etc, but rarely anything other than fringe when it comes down to the nuts and bolts. And that is my experience viewed across a swathe of articles, regarding which I could not always be bothered to comment. But you can make your own mind up in what ever context it is that the pair of you meet.YK comes and goes - check the contribution history. - Sitush (talk) 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Caste topics
Thanks for that kind note, Sitush. I am working on the Caste article. All is well so far, but down the road, I may need some guidance. Cheers, ApostleVonColorado (talk) 12:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Tod FA
Congratulations! You hung in there and carried the issue. Binksternet (talk) 14:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Outstanding!!!! Congratulations! Well deserved--both you and the article.  Qwyrxian (talk) 14:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you, both. You form an important part of my general thanks below. - Sitush (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

List of Rajputs
@Sitush, i feel you should get your facts clear, Thakur Jugal Kishore Sinha and Ram Dulari Sinha are the most prominent Rajput Leaders of their time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prabhatmishra1985 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Congrats!
Congrats on getting the James Tod article promoted to FA status! :-) <FONT FACE="Haettenschweiler" COLOR="#ff0000">Joyson Prabhu</FONT>  <FONT FACE="Haettenschweiler" COLOR="#ff0000"> Holla at me!</FONT>   20:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, JP. It was a bit hairy for a moment! I appreciated your comments at FAC etc. - Sitush (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for encouraging me to attend the Manchester meetup, I really enjoyed it. It's the kind of thing that I would normally avoid like the plague, but everyone there seemed fairly normal. Except for you and me of course. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 21:32, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

A discussion you may be interested in
See WP:ANI. I know you've had issues with this user in the past, so I thought I'd let you know.


 * I have? It looks now to be resolved but the contributor rings no bells in my head. - Sitush (talk) 06:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

James Tod FA - my thanks to all who assisted
It seems that while I was engaged in Mancunian libations yesterday (still recovering!), James Tod was promoted to FA status. I must admit to some surprise as I had thought that the process would take a little longer, especially given recent events. Anyway, my thanks to all of those who helped with the article and otherwise encouraged me in writing the "opium-eater's tale". - Sitush (talk) 07:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Nice work :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Adding Surnames
My purpose in adding Naga Chaitanya's last name, Akkineni, is for viewers to know that he is the grandson of the famous 1900's actor Nageswara Rao Akkineni and the son of actor Nagarjuna Rao Akkineni.

Dav subrajathan.357 (talk) 19:44, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


 * See WP:COMMONNAME and note that other people have been reverting your original edits and you are reinstating them without discussion. - Sitush (talk) 19:46, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Please note
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ror Is King (talk • contribs) 08:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Noted. I see no need to get involved with that discussion right now. - Sitush (talk) 11:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Pernoctator (talk) 08:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

RfC
Hi there. Can you please point me to the RfC that resulted in this? If this is a general decision to remove local names that's maybe 300,000 articles to clean up, more or less :) --Muhandes (talk) 19:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not think that anyone is preparing to go around mass deleting the scripts - they'll just happen as we come across them. I did the one that you mention purely because I was correcting some spellings in articles that were attempting to link to it. Main discussion here and clarification here. - Sitush (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pointers. I see this applies only to Indic languages. I must say I am surprised by the consensus, as I always thought the scripts are used for identification, not for helping pronunciation, which seems to be what this means. Well, maybe for India subjects this is true. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 20:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The entire thing is a mess. It should have been notified to the Pakistan project etc because of the cross-over between the pre- and post-partition India regions. - Sitush (talk) 20:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I totally agree on this one, having different guidelines for the two projects is asking for troubles. --Muhandes (talk) 21:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It already is at Muslim Rajputs. - Sitush (talk) 21:03, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

A watchlist item for you
Dedhar. I'll clean it up tomorrow. (Just when you think you're out, they pull you back in!) :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Argh! Not more! Does it ever end? I'm back sorting out Indian villages at the moment - whoever pushed through the "inhabited places are inherently notable" idea wants shooting. - Sitush (talk) 14:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Ha ha ha. Poor Sitush! I'm sorry to say that a new policy just came out declaring "inherent notability for individual clouds". If it is mentioned in a blog, and was a cool shape that looked like something interesting for at least 30 seconds, it's considered article-worthy. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Can I not start an article about my street? Its 28 houses have a greater population than Bagar,_Pauri_Garhwal and at least there will be local newspaper reports or something lying around. Honestly, this sort of stuff is pathetic and we should not be hosting it. - Sitush (talk) 17:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Nor this one. Pathetic. - Sitush (talk) 18:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Still, it could be worse. Given the predilection to present population figures, it is surprising how many of this ilk also exist. Do we assume a population < 80? - Sitush (talk) 01:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Your street could possibly be notable--it's a case by case basis. The guiding essay/guideline/policy (it's debated as to how "official" these rules are) is WP:Common outcomes.  Officially recognized locations are always kept.  I don't know if India or its states or tehsils or whatever officially recognize villages. If it's not officially recognized (the equivalent in US/UK are named neighborhoods, suburbs, and unincorporated areas) may be kept if there is evidence in reliable sources that discuss the place.  For castes/tribes/etc....as far as I know we have no guideline or established practices, which to me means WP:GNG applies.  But is it worth the effort?  That is questionable. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I am a huge inclusionist, but these dinky little villages tend to become engulfed by other developing areas, have the land expropriated for development, etc. I know of villages around here that are now part of Haikou. I worry about the state of these village stubs after 20 year. I guess it's like "notable balloon animals that have since popped". (Sorry, sort of the same joke as the cloud thing. haha.) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Plz stop your half knowledge edits
Hello Sitush, Please analyse the fellow wiki author edits and then say that they are nonsense. It clearly seems you are senseless relating to Telugu communities and yourself have added non related stuff in Rajus page. Plase stop your senseless edits and discuss if u have any knowledge on those points. Indianprithvi (talk) 16:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Indianprithvi, please see the warning I have just posted to your Talk page, and desist from attacking other editors in this manner -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Rajput
Ha, we both spotted it at the same time, and you just beat me to the revert! It's clearly the same user been on that IP for at least several days, so I've blocked for 24 hours. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * This is good: that several people spotted it so quickly and without using fancy anti-vandalism tools etc is a demonstration that the "more eyes" approach is having some success. - Sitush (talk) 12:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep - and that one didn't even need the special sanctions -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:32, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

List of Rajputs
@ sitush. It seems your facts are not clear about the Rajput Community and as far as references are concerned about whether a person belongs to a particular community or not, these things are hardly published in India because these are known facts and i belong to the constituency of Ram Dulari Sinha and Thakur Jugal Kishore Sinha, therefore i am aware about their community/caste.

Can you please give the reference of people like Sushil Kumar Singh,Harikesh Bahadur, Nikhil Kumar, Shyama Singh, Uday Singh,Prabhunath Singh and many others.

You Should stop interfering with these articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prabhatmishra1985 (talk • contribs) 08:05, 1 March 2012‎


 * "i belong to the constituency of Ram Dulari Sinha and Thakur Jugal Kishore Sinha, therefore i am aware about their community/caste." is NOT a reliable source. Also, accusing others of "interfering" is a violation of WP:AGF. And DO NOT slap that caste warning on people who are not violating any Wikipedia policies - I have removed it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:27, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that, Boing! said Zebedee. I would note also this recent close. Yes, it relates principally to biographical articles but "lists of X caste" are effectively a mini-biography for each individual who is included in them. - Sitush (talk) 08:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Animesh Kulkarni's Talk Page
Just to tell you, I have posted a reply after in in Animesh Kulkarni's talk page--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 05:15, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Syed Modi
Hi! I have posted a new version of the section at Talk:Syed Modi/Temp, what's next...--Ekabhishektalk 05:48, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I don't know. Usually I fix this things as I find them and so I do not have much experience of the process. It just happened that I was trying to concentrate on something else - Sanjay Singh - when I came across the issue from 2009 yesterday. That is also why I left you a little note below the template: I was doing what the instructions said but was aware that you are unlikely to be a serial copyright violator etc! I'll try to take a look at it later today and see if I can be bold. - Sitush (talk) 14:12, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

tag on list of nadars article
there is a big tag stating that the article will be deleted what does it mean sitush?Mayan302 (talk) 14:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There is a drive going on at the moment to "tag and assess" India-related articles - see this thread. appears to have selected the "List of X caste" category as an area to concentrate upon while helping with the drive. I am unsure why they have nominated List of Nadars for deletion under the WP:PROD process when they have not done the same for similar lists that they have assessed today. Personally, I agree with their general sentiment that categories would suffice for all such lists but I know for a fact that when these issues have been raised previously at WP:AFD they have invariably not gained consensus.
 * You could always just remove the tag but would probably then just nominate the list at AfD. I am going to copy your query and this response to Talk:List of Nadars and solicit a reply from that contributor. - Sitush (talk) 14:20, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Replied on the talk page of the said article. Cheers, Around The Globe  सत्यमेव जयते 14:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I mean really?
I setup auto archiving and that was it, this leads you to say I need a topic ban? What did I do wrong today? Sheesh. Can I ask you to do something, look at the comment made here by an editor not even remotely involved in these articles. Now tell me if I am as " POV-y" as you think. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:16, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Flags
Hi. Thanks for your message. You are correct that MOS:FLAG does make an allowance for representing a country, but in this case (as with the others I've removed) the field being flagged is nationality, which is not the same thing, or necessarily the country represented by the boxer. If you look at other Boxers, you'll see they have a separate info box for their appearance in national teams, which usually does have the flag. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 01:25, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Demanding Citation =
I see that you keep asking for citation on "House of Tulsipur". There are 36 various references. You may know how to use citation in Wiki then go ahead and use the appropriate citation based on those references. Some folks don't know how to use the technology on exactly how to use html and cite. Please don't raise questions of doubt on historical materials that have been researched and referenced in last 200 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.49.14 (talk) 04:47, 3 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The "more footnotes" tag is not intended to reflect badly on anyone. It is a factual note that the referencing needs to be sorted out. I have since deleted some of the sources listed because things such as blogspot and James Tod are not reliable. Nor are we a genealogical website, and stuff that was sourced to Rootsweb and Royal Ark are potentially violations of our policies regarding biographies of living people. You also removed my copyedit tag when, in fact, the article is one of the most severe examples of something in need of copyediting that I have seen so far this year. I have therefore restored that tag. - Sitush (talk) 11:27, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

What?
Actually I am not interested in talking with you. But then you mentioned that 'You have done it again'. I would like to know what I have 'done it again', when I asked a specific question on why a particular article was deleted. I arrived there from a link in a external webpage.

As to the other acrimonious posts you find in my talk page, I can very well delete them. But the I maintain them as a record of such posts.

--Ved from Victoria Institutions (talk) 10:37, 3 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Replied on user's talk. - Sitush (talk) 11:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

So many persons have done similar writings on my user pages. Yet, when I explain to them, they do retract. I do not generally follow up these things. For example see this in my talk page:

Quote: Okay, I see. I didn't realize that the toddy tappers person was editing your posts, so I did remove your vandalised posts, but it was not my intention to delete your words. Sorry about that. I have the page watchlisted, and will revert any vandalism of anyone's talk page postings. You are free to do the same. Natalie 15:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I feel we will stop with this, as I do not have time for more debate. --Ved from Victoria Institutions (talk) 11:33, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Kaul - already updated ISBN
Hi Sitush, have already updated the ISBN numbers. The references provided are from reliable sources, including the autobiography of Jawaharlal Nehru, which is a reliable source. What are your concerns ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambar wiki (talk • contribs) 03:05, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Anticipating drama
Suddenly a bunch of "old friends" are reappearing out of the woodwork, all at the same time. JanetteDoe (talk) 19:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed, SNAFU. I am pretty sure that there is also some socking going on but I do not yet have enough material for SPI. They'll trip themselves up eventually. - Sitush (talk) 19:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I wouldn't be surprised. Unfortunately one of them doesn't seem to have learned much during his vacation, and the other currently on vacation, seems absolutely determined to make an old set of mistakes all over again.  JanetteDoe (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * AK seems determined to dig himself in as deep as possible. Frankly I wonder if he's even bothered to click on any of the policy links.  We don't seem to have a WP:MARTYR page, but maybe we should.  JanetteDoe (talk) 17:10, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hahahaha, sorry to add here tangentially but I have also come back after a long ban. I think the same - there has to be special pages for special people, such as WP:PARANOID for me being checking on all editors unnecessarily and trying to not waste time thinking nonsense so that I could be more WP:CIVIL. I got to be more productive on Wikipedia!<font color="#FF9933">इति इतिUAनॆति नॆति <font color="#FF9933"> Humour Thisthat2011 19:51, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

No intention for war
I am not engaged in edit war. I just disagree with Mr. Sitush who seems to have all "God Given" right to do whatever he pleases with other people's 30 year of research. I simply asked him to leave historical facts alone. Granted, if it is not to Wiki par technically speaking then he can help me do the appropriate citing since I don't know Wiki technology. But he need NOT try to erase history. I don't want any war, I simply want to help the world know history of a small place called "Tulsipur". I can gurantee you that I know more than Sithush about history of Tulsipur. Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjpsingh (talk • contribs) 22:25, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Citation Note
Since you are a Wiki expert. Why don't you cite my piece the way it should be. I have provided references. Things like WWI and WWII are historical facts. Go through it and help me cite it yourself. I think it will make you happy. Go for it, please please !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjpsingh (talk • contribs) 22:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Revert Note
Okay Sitush - let's talk about what "History" is. Would you like to have a "philisophical" discourse or modern version of definition discourse.

For example "Battle of Loos" was a historical fact. For example "King Commission Officers" was a historical fact. For example "Military Dispatches" were indeed printed in London Times. For example "World War I" is event that really really happened. You don't believe it happened, Sitush? For example "World War II" is event that really really happened. You don't believe it happened, Sitush?

And tell me Mr. Sitush...what kind of sane man asks for WWI and WWII citation? Its like asking citation for a statement when I say "we live in planet earth". I mean these are basic facts everyone knows....Comon On !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjpsingh (talk • contribs) 22:17, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced Citation
Dude - I am not here to argue with you since I can't win as you are Wiki police. But I must ask you to leave history alone. Help me understand of "why, what, how and where" when you say cite references. I have given enough references about World War I, World War II, Battle of Loos in France against the German Nazi Forces, King Commissioned Oficers and Military Dispatches that were daily published in London Times during WWI and WWII. What references do you need besides these? In addition, I have provided various links to other Wiki pages on these topic for validation and cross references !! Please leave my recent addition about people who are related to House of Tulsipur who fought in World War 1 and World War II alone. These people, unlike you and I who take freedom for granted, gave the ultimate sacrifice with their lives to free the world from the Nazis !!!!!!!!!

Please don't delte my comments. I am user rjpsingh on Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.49.14 (talk) 22:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)


 * General reply to all of the above points made by, which I have converted into subsections.


 * Rjpsingh, you have had numerous comments about House of Tulsipur ever since it was created and you seem to have ignored most of them. They were well-intentioned comments and, even after my recent run-through, the article remains a complete mess. The fact that people were offering to help you with both tips and actual edits is an indication that the subject of the article is just fine. The problem lies in the content and in the presentation.


 * WP:Citing sources is the starting point for how we present references here on Wikipedia. However, you need also to be aware of issues such as what constitute reliable sources and the requirement that all statements made are verifiable. Beyond that, there are issues regarding weight and neutrality, as well as notability. Believe me, I have many relatives who died or were very badly affected by the wars that you refer to, but none of them deserve a mention on Wikipedia. My grandfather had both of his legs blown off at The Somme, for example. No-one is asking you to provide a citation that WW1 or WW2 happened.


 * Wikipedia is not a genealogical website, and still less is it one intended to serve a hagiographic purpose. There are plenty of places where you can publish your research into genealogy etc, and plenty of outlets for content that - like it or not - are simply inappropriate here.


 * I am happy to help you understand how this place works but the very fact that you have ignored the offers of everyone else since creating the article makes me think that perhaps you simply do not want to accept that your contributions, however well intentioned, are in large part unsuitable. And throwing around accusations of "bias" and suggestions that someone's nationality is affecting their contributions (I am not Indian, as you seem to think) does not help matters. The article will never be deleted but it does need a lot of work. Feel free to let me know how you think that this can be resolved, although the best place to do so is probably at Talk:House of Tulsipur because you are more likely to get a range of opinions there. - Sitush (talk) 00:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Kshatriya Communities
Just in case you didn't spot it, we have someone from two IPs in the same range removing content from Template:Kshatriya Communities. Each time I've reverted solely because the removal was unsourced - should there be an actual content discussion at any time, I'll leave that to others. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:29, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I suppose we should prod it for deletion.there are hundreds if not thousands of claimants to Kshatriya status.the template is practically prone to mischief.<font color="#AA22CC">Linguistic '''<font color="#2B18BA">Geek 13:32, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I spotted the latest one - an addition of Gurhjars - a few minutes ago but was busy with something else. As LG says, most claims - including that of the Gurjars - are far more complex that can be classified using that template. As such, it is a POV/puffery magnet and there really is no easy way to control it. I would be inclined to support a delete request but I doubt that PROD will do the job because it is bound to be contentious. - Sitush (talk) 13:35, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I have sent it to TfD. My bet is that the nomination will fail but, really, we are in a situation whereby the thing is either removed entirely or fully protected. - Sitush (talk) 13:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Correct link is this. I note with interest the identity of the person who created it! Have had some fun and games with them before now. - Sitush (talk) 13:58, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think it's probably best gone too - it all seems too complex and unclear to state unequivocally in a template like this -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

some interesting edits
Hey - if you have the time, could you look at Local Resistance to Mysore Rule in Malabar and other edits by ? Some of them strike me as problematic, but this is more your area of expertise than mine. Kevin (kgorman-ucb) (talk) 09:30, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The entire article is problematic and seems mostly to be coat-racked. I've removed a couple of the more egregious bits and left a note on the talk page. I'll do some research of my own but, frankly, this looks like a deletion/redirect candidate unless the major contributors pull their fingers out. We have plenty of article about the Mysorean wars, Tipu Sultan etc. - Sitush (talk) 17:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That was about what I figured, but this set of stuff is not yet my area of expertise :) Kevin (kgorman-ucb) (talk) 19:26, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * They have done at least one other, of a similar nature and which I think you also moved. Stick with "this set of stuff"! The subject area is fascinating and it is desperately in need of people with clue regarding policies etc. Just drop me a note if you get stuck or are unsure. - Sitush (talk) 19:29, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Saini
Hi Sitush, We need a resolution on the Saini page. You added a sentence saying their Shoorsen links are disputed, but that's being reverted by other editors back and forth. Is it possible to put a stop to this?

Furthermore, there is more than enough evidence presented on the Saini/talk page to dispute their rajput status as well. What's the process for incorporating that? thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.239.45.4 (talk) 22:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello Sitush. Per this edit summary, it looks like people assume you are an administrator. If this bothers you, you can put User wikipedia/Non-Administrator at the head of your talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


 * IP, the Saini issue is a mess on a par with those that have happened at Yadav. I am trying to find some sort of energy to spend three or four days really hunting through all of the sources and figuring it out for myself but, right now, there are so many different people disputing it across various articles and lists that I think we should omit such claims purely on the grounds of "err on the side of caution". I promise that I will find that energy asap. - Sitush (talk) 23:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


 * EJ: Ooh, er. I have absolutely no idea where that idea has come from - the more usual situation is "Sitush and his admin friends" (a notorious non-existent cabal). It might be a one-off. I will have a word with that user and take a look at the template. It is usually something seen at RfA !votes - "I thought they were already an administrator" ! Thanks for pointing it out. - Sitush (talk) 23:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I have posted a note for the user who is referred to in the diff above. I am about to do the same for the other contributor, whom I have noticed has claimed the same thing in the same place. would probably say that I have been damned by faint praise! - Sitush (talk) 00:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Saini - request for dispute resolution filed
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Saini". Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajput666 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Welcoming you to the participants list on AfC!
Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Articles for creation! We are a group of editors who work together on the Articles for creation and Files for upload pages.

A few tips that you might find helpful:
 * Please take time to fully read the reviewers' instructions before reviewing submissions.
 * The project's discussion board is the best place to ask for help or advice. You might like to watchlist this page, and you are encouraged to take part in any discussion that comes up.

Once again, welcome to the project. Mediation4u (talk) 08:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC) I find the box above useful for AfC quick links. Hope this helps, Mediation4u (talk) 08:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC) editing is fun
 * Article submissions that need reviewing can be found in Category:Pending AfC submissions and there is also a useful list which is maintained by a bot.
 * You might wish to add AFC status to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. There is also a project userbox. If you haven't done so already, please consider adding your name to the list of participants.
 * Several of our members monitor the IRC channel, and you are welcome to join in to ask Wikipedia-related questions.
 * The IRC channel is used occasionally for internal discussion regarding the Articles for Creation process, and also serves as a recent changes feed, displaying all edits made in the Articles for Creation namespace.
 * The help desk is the place where new editors can ask questions about their submissions. You are welcome to help in answering their questions.

North London Self-Employed Lunch Club
Hi Sitush,

Thanks for looking at my submission for the North London Self-Employed Lunch Club (NLSELC). You say that my references are not independent as they link to the NLSELC's website; however, the articles that are cited are independent: one article appeared in the London Evening Standard, the other in the Islington Gazette. Unfortunately, neither of the articles are currently available online anywhere other than the NLSELC's site. Nevertheless, I don't see why the articles don't count as independent references just because the copies of the article I refer to are hosted on the club's website. My references also give full details of the newspaper publications as per MHRA referencing guidelines (I've added a page reference for the Islington Gazette, page ref not available for the Standard) - anybody who wanted to could go and locate these articles in a library newspaper archive.

Thanks again for taking the time to consider my article. I hope that we can resolve these issues.

Best, Chd27 (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, I could probably equally well have declined it as being primarily a promotional piece. You need to assert that the NLSELC has some importance, not merely that it has been mentioned in a local newspaper and a regional paper. Sources do not have to be available online, but in itself that does not resolve the issues here.For all I know, those could have been press releases and/or passing mentions, neither of which are suitable. I must admit to not actually looking at the club's website because I didn't think it necessary: it exists, sure, but we should not rely on self-published sources for very much at all. For that reason, I didn't realise that the newspaper articles had been transcribed on that site. Nonetheless, really, I think that you need to somehow improve the article so that it more certainly passed the bar for notability. Otherwise, we will end up with articles here for every branch of, say, the National Deaf Childrens' Society or the WI. If you cannot do that then I am unsure of the way forward, but let me know anyway and I will seek some further input. - Sitush (talk) 14:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Just to clarify the above. I have no greater authority to make a decision here than anyone else. You should not feel intimidated by me, although perhaps you do if you are a new contributor or (more likely) I have been a little bitey in my earlier response. If I was bitey then please accept my apolgies: it was not intended in that way. I am quite happy to seek a review. I can do one of two things to help you with that: (a) ask myself & let you know where that discussion is taking place, or (b) point you in the right direction and you can ask. - Sitush (talk) 01:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your contribution to Mokama Ghat. Arunbandana (talk • contribs) 14:36, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Kulin Kayastha
Hello Sitush

It is needless to mention that Kayasthas are one of the highest castes in the Indian caste system. As per Wikipedia's article on Kayastha, though their exact caste status is a subject matter of debate, they are consistently ranked between Kshatriyas and Brahmins. Obviously, the five families who came along with five Brahmins, were not arbitrarily accorded the status of Kayasthas by the King, and that too of Kulins i.e. highest among the Kayasthas. It is obvious from all historical citations that the five Brahmins came with five learned Kayastha disciples, who were therefore accorded the status of Kulins.

Moreover, as per your article on 'Kulin Kayastha', 'The Kayasthas are regarded in Bengal, along with the Brahmins, as being the highest Hindu castes that comprise the upper layer of Hindu society'. Again as per Wikipedia only, Kayasthas are one of the most forward castes, and definitely not 'Shudras'. For your information, as per www.vedah.net, which is one of the most authentic sites, Kayasthas are considered as another Brahmin community (http://www.vedah.net/manasanskriti/Brahmins.html). Though this may be a subject matter of debate, definitely Kayasthas are anything but Shudras. And this obviously applies to the Kulin Kayasthas, who were considered to be superior among them

Regards Pal Subhojit

Pal subhojit (talk) 17:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I have already explained to you where any discussion should take place. It is not here. - Sitush (talk) 18:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Unblock
Sitush, I thought I'd give you a heads-up: I'm about to unblock. Next time you see them getting combative, adding unverified and POV stuff, or whatever, drop me a line or place a note on ANI, and they'll be done forever. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:00, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Re:jatland.com
Hi, I guess there is always a possible solution around for any problem. And in the case of Salasar Balaji, if something was wrong, I expect you (as a more experienced editor than me) suggest me the appropriate corrections to be done rather than simple reverting the entire article. It took me my full 3 days to expand that article from that "last best version" and I guess it would've taken less than a minute for you to revert it. Moreover, I see that not everything was copied from Jatland and I have other resources too provided in the references section. Anyways now please say if this will be fine that I revert the content back, analyse and remove the only content taken from Jatland. For other content, I've got different resources and references. Does that makes sense and sounds good? --Msrag (talk) 05:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You do not need to revert it. The text is still there in the history. However, given that you simply copy/pasted the jatland stuff, I trust that you are not doing the same with any other sources. Sure, jatland is GFDL/CC-BY-SA etc, but it is still bad style. And if you intend to paraphrase their sourced bits then please do read the sources yourself first rather than just assume that jatland is correct. - Sitush (talk) 10:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries. Removed the content that solely belonged to Jatland and for all other stuff I added various other resources. And nope I just don't copy paste as it is. I do edit and change the style of content and grammar in my editing. Verified that Jatland itself does not provide RS or no resources at all. Hence removed. -Msrag (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Arbitrary heading - Meenas
Sitush..you are a wonderful cleaner..infact I appreciate your contributions in wiki so far..but we should atleast should not remove the True contents and history which are real and well known in India..and ancient kshatriya tribes have little recorded due to the indifference and discrimination during british..no doubt that historian Colonel James tod was biased towards rajputs but the historian was nota at all biased towards meenas. As you know the people who sacrifices thier live for country like meenas,bheels,gujjars didnt get recognition..Under the influence of their ally Rajput kingdoms, British were biased towards Minas, Jats and Bheels. Hence they do not wrote much about the legacy of their ancient empires. the British were very harsh in dealing with these people. Thus Russell and Hiralal 'views' regarding Minas being 'bandits' is biased and baseless....I hope you are understanding the truth regarding that article..so please add some previous paras which are cited,true and Authentic. AND atlast we are here to present the True history.I hope you will reinsert some paras which are Authentic.Thanks.Oldestkshatriyas (talk) 15:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The correct place for this discussion is Talk:Meenas, where there are several suitable threads already active. - Sitush (talk) 15:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Punjab education
Please see User talk:RHaworth. Intothefire says he don't need your approval but please watch user:Intothefire/sandbox anyway. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:33, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Noted, thanks. NB: this article was discussed at WT:INB or somewhere similar and was deemed to be an unnecessary fork. - Sitush (talk) 15:14, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Asansol
We have created a site for the Asansol community myasansol.in but whenever we add it to the wikipedia entry of asansol,its reverted by you.

You only have the AMC website there which provides no information about the site where as our site contains a lot of information about the city so i request you to please provide myasansol.in a place in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elecy (talk • contribs) 13:13, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think that it has been removed only by me. However, please take a read of WP:ELNO, and in particular the points regarding linkspam and the need for authority. - Sitush (talk) 15:16, 11 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I read the article and in now way the site violates them. I would like you to please and consider the site and get it a place in the article. I am not much used to wikipedia's style of editing. - Elecy (talk —Preceding undated comment added 09:43, 12 March 2012 (UTC).

Kamma (caste)
Sitush,I had been away from Wiki last three months. I noticed that you made several edits in Kamma (caste) article. While most of the edits were well-meant, some could be traced to lack of information. I shall try to incorporate as many citations as possible. Similarly, you deleted almost all the names of persons in List of Kammas which astounded me. Probably you are not aware that Kammas do not have a common title such as "Reddy" in the name. Personalities such as N. T. Ramarao, A. Nageswara Rao and Ramoji Rao were also deleted. I hope you did these deletions because you might not be aware of them. Can you please suggest a way I can restore the names?Kumarrao (talk) 15:07, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It has been explained to you previously that we have to comply with policies such as WP:V and WP:RS. We cannot just take your word for things. - Sitush (talk) 15:17, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

FYI
User talk:Intothefire -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks. They've had an awfully long length of rope in the past, and the poor behaviour continues. I that that their days may be numbered. - Sitush (talk) 15:19, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep your eye on Rajput too, if you wouldn't mind - there's someone repeatedly adding more entries to the lists despite the big notice saying not to do so. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:13, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I noticed but am roughly two days behind and finding myself having to revert all over the shop, starting with the oldest. I should hit Rajput within the next 30 minutes or so! Thanks for doing the necessary. - Sitush (talk) 16:17, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And this could do with a review, if you get bored ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:05, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Konguvellalar
Sitush, I found that you have deleted content on grounds of "good faith" edits and i have restored old poor content. If you read the article completely, I have restored only part of it which had valid references and the other content was newly added by me. So don't just go on and delete content simply before reading it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aswinjerry (talk • contribs) 17:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Too much was unsourced, too much was poorly sourced, and too much was badly cited (eg: we do not used "op. cit.") - see WP:Citing sources. A lot of the content had existed previously, as you appear to acknowledge and was removed for valid reasons. I think that you might benefit from reading WP:OR and WP:SYNTHESIS also, if you have not already done so. Please address any further discussion to the article talk page, where it is likely to obtain a wider audience. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 18:48, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Where did u find this Pondheepankar?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aswinjerry (talk • contribs) 21:02, 11 March 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. The Helpful  Bot  01:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
I may start that article, so will like to know your opinion. S M S  Talk 19:28, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

 * Indeed there were. You inferred that you were using "People of India: Haryana (Volume XXIII) edited by M.L Sharma and A.K Bhatia pages 475 to 479 Manohar Books" as the source for the material that you added. This is so because you inserted your contributions into paragraphs that were already using that as the source but did not choose to cite another source. (See WP:Citing sources for some background information). I do not have access to that particular volume of People of India but your content was a copy of information found in "People of India, A-G, Volume 4, p. 3345", as I noted in my edit summary, although you had adjusted the spellings of the various community names. I have no idea if Volume XXIII itself copied information previously published in Volume 4, although I do know that this is not uncommon. There are only very limited circumstances in which we are permitted to copy something word-for-word from a book, newspaper, website etc and those do not apply to this 41-volume anthropological survey published from the mid-1980s onwards, unless you clearly show it to be a quotation - WP:Copyrights is our guide. Even changing the odd word is unacceptable because it would be close paraphrasing. Furthermore, even in those situations when a source is legally in the public domain, it is generally preferred that a contributor uses their own words. I am aware that the People of India books themselves often use huge chunks of text originally written by people of the British Raj era, such as H. H. Risley and H. A. Rose, without clearly stating that they are doing so. I know also that some of the authors whom they use in that manner are now out of copyright. The poor sourcing by them is merely an indication of how poor that survey really was in general and has no real bearing on our own legal position: we are responsible for our own actions. As I understand it, the survey was split into two parts, with the earlier "national" survey being published by Oxford University Press and being considered ok, while the larger number of volumes in the second part - the "states" surveys - were published by the likes of Manohar/Popular Prakashan and are much less satisfactory. In any event, I'd suggest that you have a read of the various items that are linked in blue above in order to get a better understanding of how we operate here. Feel free to get back in touch if you have any queries thereafter. - Sitush (talk) 07:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Sitush, I was referring to the same source which is "People of India: Haryana (Volume XXIII) edited by M.L Sharma and A.K Bhatia pages 475 to 479 Manohar Books" and it was already cited so I did not cited it again. The information added previously from the source was not summarized completely. Yes, but I got you that it needs to be written in own words. I thought the source is cited so the information can be exactly copied from the source. I would try to take care of this while I am adding content. Thanks Aaryan1982 (talk) 17:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * That's fine. You've sourced it and it was also in the definitely reliable version published originally by OUP ... and now you understand the copyright issues. You were quite correct that there was no need to re-use the citation in this situation, since the same content appears in both volumes of the same work & one of those is already cited right down to the correct page numbers etc. Go enjoy :-) Sitush (talk) 17:43, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Sitush :-) Aaryan1982 (talk) 18:49, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Hello. I have vague memories but according to your log, you suffered a block or two and then were discovered to have been sockpuppeting. I had seem to have had little involvement in any of the discussions, but quite a few administrators (or people who have since become admins) were involved. I was not aware of you being banned and cannot spot that anywhere. - Sitush (talk) 16:53, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

deleted the barnstar as i have changed my mind now.  <font color=#8B0000>Boolyme बूलीमी  <font color=#000080>Chat बोलो!! 20:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * i am so sorry you are still such a loser. Now don't come crying on my talkpage.  <font color=#8B0000>Boolyme बूलीमी  <font color=#000080>Chat बोलो!! 20:22, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Message from Hasanko
Sorry for what happened last day. I have completed the work of providing citation along with a few additions by myself. Thanks. (HasanKO (talk) 07:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC))

Talkback
Lovy Singhal (talk) 08:28, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Found the book at my Uni's library. Will be able to get it but not til end of month. Let me know which pages you need. JanetteDoe (talk) 18:52, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

RfC & Citation on Jessica Lal
I know that I'm not an experienced editor like you and not aware of all the policies, so thanks for the leaving a message. First of all, I didn't not know about the RfC thing, so I was adding Hindi Words and if its a general policy, then there are thousands or may be lakhs of articles which have the same issue. As far as citation on Murder of Jessica Lal is concerned, if you notice carefully the existing BBC reference didn't prove date of death i.e. 29 April, 1999 and it was mentioned on the one that I added, so please check. --Piyush Aggarwal 15:35, 15 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piyush.Aggarwal (talk • contribs)
 * No probs. No-one is rushing round deleting scripts from 100,000+ articles but by the same token we should not be adding them. Since the date of the murder is sourced, her date of death is sourced, eg: by the current third second citation (Rediff). - Sitush (talk) 15:39, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, then I'll also remove them whenever I come across any article. Also, IMHO its good if citation is provided with the first occurrence of the date i.e. in introduction then in later sections. - Piyush.Aggarwal (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC).
 * The consensus is that leads etc should not have citations unless absolutely necessary. They, and the infoboxes, are intended to summarise the article and thus are not the best place. As for the scripts: just be careful that you do not delete them from, say, an article that falls under the WikiProject Pakistan banner. - Sitush (talk) 15:59, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Help on Cheema citations
Hi there, I tried to clear some of the article up and tried to add some citations but it seems on or two of my citations did not comply with wiki-policy, however can I kindly suggest you help me in cleaning up the article rather then keep re-reverting it when I am clearly working on it?

Kindest Regards, Rohan Mahali — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.107.133.46 (talk) 16:02, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I explained some of the problems on your talk page a few minutes ago, prior to your message above. You might also want to read about what constitute reliable sources. - Sitush (talk) 16:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


 * It is OK my friend, I give up and stop editing. Was only trying to help. I will not edit any more articles on wiki. Seems like there are alot of religious people, i.e. Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs who want to get into historical revisionism, it is quite clear you also have your own biases and further proliferate this behavior via your token authoritative position. No wonder in reputable universities wiki articles are not regarded as scholarly, and work submitted using wiki as a ref is completely rejected. I think I'll personally refrain from wasting my time trying to fix such a futile project, wiki is already on is last legs looking for donations, but donations are not coming fourth because of individuals like yourself who think that wiki is your personal webpage. Enjoy your little game, oh and please don't call yourself an Indian your giving the rest of us a bad-reputation.

Kindest Regards, Rohan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.107.133.46 (talk) 16:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Ezhava
Sir,

Thank you for noticing sanctions. No content is deleted or excess data is added in the article. You were also supposed to discuss your last reinstation of old content before reverting them. Pls make a talk before reverting.

Ἀλέξανδρος ὁ Μέγας (talk) 17:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No, Ἀλέξανδρος ὁ Μέγας, *you* are supposed to discuss the changes that you made but which were contested and reverted *before* reinstating them -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:53, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

HindiUSA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/HindiUSA Have a look before I submitB.vikram.b 10:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by B.vikram.b (talk • contribs)
 * I am sorry but that is still a long way off from being acceptable. It relies very heavily on self-published sources, it has far too many unsourced statements and it has a fair amount of tangential information. There are other issues - including still having the appearance of being intended as a recruitment advertisement - but, really, you have got to nail the notability aspect. Try to find some books etc that discuss the organisation or some independent newspaper articles etc that do more than just report on an event etc. - Sitush (talk) 12:19, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I understand but this is mostly a volunteer org and not many media or web published articles. I am just an admirer of what thye have done in USA teaching Hindi to kids 36 schools. Not sure how to cover the outside reference aspect. Any suggestions.B.vikram.b 14:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by B.vikram.b (talk • contribs)


 * Ah, well in that case we may have a problem which is not capable of being resolved right now. There are many worthy organisations etc out there (not all of them voluntary) that simply fail to meet the notability requirements for an entry on Wikipedia, which at their most basic require that there a multiple references in independent, reliable sources. It is not an uncommon problem but we have to draw a line somewhere. If we did not then practically anything would be eligible for inclusion here even if the information were supported only by their own opinion of themselves - which has the potential to become completely anarchic. Perhaps a better alternative would be for you to take a look at the Hindi language article that already exists and perhaps have a word on the talk page for that article to see if it would be appropriate to make a mention of the organisation within that wider, notable topic. I really would suggest that you discuss it first and you will probably end up with no more than a sentence or two, but it would be better than nothing and, who knows, if the organisation becomes more notable in time then it could be forked into a standalone article. Your thoughts might carry more weight in discussion if you were aware of other national bodies of this nature that might also received a brief mention. - Sitush (talk) 14:43, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Plz look at the reverts
Dear Sitush,

Please review the reverts at [] by Mr. Kumarrao. I have given ample time almost one and half year for providing reliable sources, but it was not the case, Mr Kumarrao always considers a Caste book as authenic History book :p. again a week back gave proper sources to clarify that its false claim. I have clarified the author that non english sources are not reliable. Request your help in calrifying the wiki policies. Indianprithvi (talk) 05:18, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Sources are not unreliable just because they are not in English, but such sources do need some extra work - see WP:NOENG. However, WP:CITEKILL applies in this instance, not to mention an element of WP:PRIMARY. - Sitush (talk) 11:48, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Sitush-uation normal, all fouled up
Hi Sitush. There's all kinds of badmashery going on at 2010 Deganga riots. I've tried ToI and The Hindu refs... Could you possibly have a look at the article and <S58 code-switches> do the needful? --Shirt58 (talk) 11:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I will try to take a look but it is not a subject with which I am familiar. Quite a few of the sources that are currently used are non-English, which is also not good news for me. Those probably need either to be translated or replaced with English sources, per WP:NOENG. - Sitush (talk) 11:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It is now pretty much done. I'll try to add a bit of gloss some time in the next 12 - 18 hours + see if we can wrap up the Aftermath section. - Sitush (talk) 06:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Brilliant work, and very much appreciated. Thank you! --Shirt58 (talk) 10:43, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Whenaxis  talk &middot; &#32;contribs &#124; <font color="#d67f0f">DR goes to Wikimania! 21:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Updated the Kaul Article in Sandbox
Hi Sitush, have made a draft of the Kaul article in my Sandbox. Can you have a look and provide feedback. Have sourced from mostly recent publications. The article flow and language can be further improved, however am planning to start with minimal & sourced content that is readily accessible. Let me have your comments ... Ambar 16:39, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Will do. Did you find yourself a mentor? I think that you were asking if they would be willing? - Sitush (talk) 16:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * For mentorship, I asked Wehwalt and also posted an open request. No update or reply yet. In case you have any recommendations, pls suggest as the list of adoptees is not categorised of classified & it takes a long time to read each ones preference. (Perhaps someone can categories the page based on 'primary areas of interest', just a suggestion) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambar wiki (talk • contribs) 16:52, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I noticed that problem with the list. It may be by design but that seems unlikely. I will have a think regarding possible mentors. Alas, it is not a good idea for me to mentor you because of recent events - we are too involved and it is likely to cause problems. I will stress again, though, that I do consider you to be potentially a good contributor to Wikipedia. One very simple starting point would be to ensure that you sign your messages on talk pages. This can be done by typing ~ at the end of your submission. I tend to use - ~ so that it spaces things a bit, but the precise formatting is entirely up to you. - Sitush (talk) 17:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * We could start with you as a mentor (i am good with it). I personally don't see any issues with the way things have gone in our initial discussions. Its just improved my focus and understanding of wikipedia. I could take some time accomodating new ideas though. Upto you ... -Ambar 17:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambar wiki (talk • contribs)

No problems ... but I think I am hurting
Sitush, I want you to have a clear picture of what looks to you like a bad situation. I began a DRN in a perfectly acceptable way, but apparently some people are not pleased with my original wording. Well, the editors in question are showing up and sticking in posts like pins in a cushion. We all know you post at the bottom of a thread. New posts beneath earlier ones. I politely went to each ed's pages and asked them politely to stop doing that. One accused me of wikihounding and trying to "frighten" him and God knows what ... the other simply acted confused. So that's it. There we are. Do you feel better now? Look, I am glad and appreciative that you came to the talk page, but you know ... unfair is unfair, and I occasionally feel some unfairness at WP. Even Floquenbeam acknowledged that he was being a little gruff sometimes. Just want you to know, I am being a good little boy and it seems if I speak up about something not quite right, I get spanked.— Djathink imacowboy  19:33, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * S., I'm a nosey beggar and couldn't help following W.'s posts. (From the talkback below.) I see you and I share similar views about DRNs. However, if you have seen the one I started, you'll see it disintegrated to the na-na-na-boo-boo stage mostly directed toward me. You'll also note the ineffectiveness of the 'clark', who seems to be a newbie to the board. No wonder I packed it in so fast. But now I don't feel quite so hurt.— Djathink imacowboy  20:51, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Sitush, it wasn't so bad and I am striking what I feel to be inappropriate language in my previous post. Sleddog is a good sort. Good luck to you.— Djathink imacowboy  21:23, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Whenaxis  talk &middot; &#32;contribs &#124; <font color="#d67f0f">DR goes to Wikimania! 20:33, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

 * I need some feathers. I've spat them all over the room ;) - Sitush (talk) 21:59, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll make sure to set some aside for you the next time I pluck a duck. --<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 22:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Given my area of interest, I can probably supply you with a donor bird within the next 24 hours. - Sitush (talk) 22:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

What?
What did I say? Did you think I meant malice when I said "I see that the fun in Wikipedia has eluded you. Best of luck to your endevaour, and once again I apologize for the DRN incident."? I can see eye-to-eye with you when you've gotten completely fed up with Wikipedia and just wanna give up, that's what I meant when I said, "I see that the fun in Wikipedia has eluded you." I've seen myself very upset with Wikipedia and I feel empathy for you. I just want to get disputes resolved and when someone's upset, it makes it worse when someone goes all in defensive mode, so I always apologize instead of escalating the situation by going defensive. I just wanted to make sure that everything was okay since you brought a complaint to my talk page. Conversations doesn't travel well over the Internet (a lot of it is in body language and tone of voice). I guess, I deserve the personal attack. Regards,  Whenaxis  talk &middot; &#32;contribs &#124; <font color="#d67f0f">DR goes to Wikimania! 22:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Sitush, hope you don't mind my chiming in here. Whenaxis, Sitush has spent a lot of time on India related topics and has been subject to every kind of PA, OUTING, and RS, OR imaginable.  He is very familiar with the rules and the various routes for DR.  Have you looked at his contribution history?  I understand you were well intentioned but your response was the equivalent of calling tech support and having to listen to the first level "calm the irate customer" script that lacks actual useful content.  Basically you templated a regular. JanetteDoe (talk) 22:36, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Mm, I see.. thanks for your response, JanetteDoe. I see where I screwed up. I don't want to make it seem like a sob story.. but I'm really fed up with Wikipedia right now (just as you, Sitush, are probably with DRN and me).. I've just been under a lot of stress lately at work and that has probably corresponded with my edits on Wikipedia. So, that's all I got to say.  Whenaxis  talk &middot; &#32;contribs &#124; <font color="#d67f0f">DR goes to Wikimania! 22:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * We were both at fault. Let's forget it and move on. - Sitush (talk) 23:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Petrean
If you don't mind sharing, what was your subject faculty while at Cambridge? -- Secondat of Orange (talk) 22:44, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * History. A bit of Greeks and Romans but mostly modern era: unification of Germany & Italy, invention of tradition wrt British monarchy, British and European political 1800s - 1900s, antebellum US attitudes to slavery, and that sort of stuff. But, being Cambridge, it is a liberal education & so there were whopping big doses of philosophy etc also. - Sitush (talk) 23:39, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Kashmiri Pandit Article reformatted
Have reformatted the Kashmiri Pandit article to create a better flow and improve content, trying to make it more neutral. Can you take a look at it in my Sandbox page and leave some comments in my talk page pls.Ambar 06:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambar wiki (talk • contribs)

Caste system in India
Hi Sitush - Check the Caste system in India article and its talk page. Your guidance is appreciated. Thanks, ApostleVonColorado (talk) 17:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Recent reverts @ Kaul
@ Sitush: Your comments "I have said it before: you are mixing up surnames and castes, which is wrong" & subsequent reverts ... would like to clarify that I have not linked caste to surname anywhere. I have clearly explained at the beginning of the article that the name Kaul is a surname and also a community (people who had Kaul as the surname of their ancestors) If there is any specific sentence or issue that is still against the wiki policy, please let me know & I will modify it.-Ambar 03:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC) How does your signature get linked to your talk page, it doesn't seem to be working for me.-Ambar 03:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambar wiki (talk • contribs)
 * I explained the signature thing above and you have had several messages on your own talk page that should have explained it - type four tildes, ie: ~ . Regarding Kaul, just changing the lead section around does not alter the fundamental problem in the slightest. We have been through all of this on the article talk page, which is the correct forum for such discussions. Mind you, adding the caste infobox made matters even worse than they were when originally discussed. I really do think that you should drop this whole idea or create a separate article - Kaul (surname) - that specifically deals with the use of the term as a surname in a global context and does not attempt to imply that it is purely caste-related. In particular, listing people with the Kaul surname cannot be linked to listing them as members of the Kaul caste/subcaste etc unless you have verification that they were of that caste or, if living, have self-identified. I really do not know how many more times I can repeat this and it is precisely why I cannot take on the role of mentoring you: for whatever the reason may be, I am quite obviously not capable of explaining this to you. A last point: you made your last edit to Kaul in defiance of warnings previously given to you. Do that again without first achieving consensus and you may well find yourself blocked from contributing to any article. - Sitush (talk) 03:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * In fact, I now see that you have already been blocked twice for doing exactly this thing. I think that you would benefit from a read of WP:IDHT because that last effort (the one that you made to Kaul a few hours ago) has really put you on the spot, especially since you have also been informed of the general sanctions that are in place. You could very easily find yourself indefinitely blocked from editing here. - Sitush (talk) 03:54, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

-- Reply --
 * I thought we had a consensus on the sandbox article. Anyways, will modify it further and get more consensus. Am going to remove the caste infobox & remove mention of caste from the article. Pls clarify if this is solving the matter ?

In defence, I only put up the article after I thought we had consensus.Ambar 06:08, 21 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambar wiki (talk • contribs)

Note for Sitush to help Ambar's signature issue: S., may I chime in and suggest Ambar wiki have a look at the html code that will have to be got, in order for the signature to link to the user and talk pages? Ambar is asking how to get the signature to link to user page, talk page and perhaps others such as Ambar's contributions. An html code will be needed for that.— Djathink imacowboy  13:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC) --Reply--
 * Hi DJA - where can I get this HTML code from ? Can you provide some links.'Ambar 01:31, 22 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambar wiki (talk • contribs)