User talk:Ugog Nizdast/Archive 3

October–January 2014

Talkback
 W.  D.   Graham  14:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Opting in to VisualEditor
As you may know, VisualEditor ("Edit beta") is currently available on the English Wikipedia only for registered editors who choose to enable it. Since you have made 50 or more edits with VisualEditor this year, I want to make sure that you know that you can enable VisualEditor (if you haven't already done so) by going to your preferences and choosing the item, " ". This will give you the option of using VisualEditor on articles and userpages when you want to, and give you the opportunity to spot changes in the interface and suggest improvements. We value your feedback, whether positive or negative, about using VisualEditor, at VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Removal of addition from "Kerala"
Hi, What if there' nothing available for citation? Lies should be allowed to perpetuate under the Wikipedia banner? What I added is a very plain fact. Any educated can testify to it, not just anyone from Kerala or India. Modern education is the product of Western culture and it was brought to India and Kerala by the Westerners - naturally by western missionaries. This is a well established plain fact and no sane person will deny it. If you think something cannot be included for lack of citation you are in effect promoting lies which has the support of cited lies.The page is full of errors and you keep it as they have the backing of citations of lies.It's a joke and mockery of facts. There's no other way modern education or English education was brought to India during the British rule in India. Talking about education without mentioning the introduction of it is non sense and the post miss it.May be purposely avoided it by some one with vested interests, The education mentioned by the previous author is not at all education in the modern sense.You cannot call it education in the modern sense as it was religious training given strictly for the upper class.

The assumption that all cited texts are facts is nonsense.Shame that you deny plain and well known facts — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monns12 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi and welcome, I'm glad that you have so much interest in improving the Kerala article. Sadly, even statements which you consider bare facts need citations (Read WP:CITE), exceptions are obviously undisputed ones. Ov≈erhere, we strictly reflect what the sources say and there is no original research. Excluding you're edit which seems sourceable, if it weren't for this guideline, what will stop people from putting their own opinion saying it's a basic fact?...there are numerous additions everyday.
 * Surely there must be some reliable sources available which echo what you've added? If you feel there's something factually wrong with the content anywhere, why don't you point it out here or the Kerala article talk page, so that we can do something about it? Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:38, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Hello, I'm Elizium23. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Iglesia ni Cristo seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 20:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Whoa..I was wondering why did I just get templated. It wasn't my intention but all I did was undo a new user's suspicious edit which anyone would have done at first glance while patrolling. But I apologise for not looking at the article history. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:58, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ugog- I think there's been a mistake. Your message to me ( User talk:162.78.70.162 ) about posting to Manganese and StudentRND was puzzling, as I didn't do any of that. (I had to look up both of those things to see what they were!) Sorry for the confusion, but whomever posted on those pages wasn't me--Have I been hacked? Aaronfaletto (talk) 14:54, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Sathya sai baba
Hi, Just dropped in to ask you a question regarding wikipedia policies. I had left a message on the talk page of sathya sai baba as well. The controversy section has been pushed so far down as if to imply it is of low importance. Will it be within wikipedia's policies to move it "up" ? Lookinhotbra (talk) 17:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey...Good thing you've asked before editing, I was planning to reply on the article talk page, since currently there is hardly any activity there and no one would likely answer you. Moreover, your question is more guideline-related than something to do with the topic, you're better off asking those type of questions to me, at the WP:Help desk, or any other experienced user.
 * It's all about our neutral point of view guideline here, moving a criticism section upwards on an article about an individual (no matter how bad...see Hitler) violates it and is definitely biased. Also, adding a "criticism/controversy" section is usually discouraged (See Criticism section), better to join such sections within the article and avoid harsh words. It should be in the most objective way possible. Of course, in the topic you're referring to, it cannot be helped...given the amount of controversies. I recently managed to re-work a criticism section in the Sagarika Ghose article (see my edit here); here the subject is a living person so we are even more strict, and anyone would agree she easily fails the criteria for being that controversial to have such a section.
 * I would advise you to exercise caution while working in such areas...wait till you learn more about basic editing and how we work here. As you've mentioned on your Userpage, why don't you try expanding G. R. Gopinath? Currently lacks sources, poor language and overall looks like it's in a bad condition. If not confident, you can edit in your sandbox and then copy the content into the article. Some pages you will need to read are: how to cite, reliable sources and no original research...I know there's a lot to read at first but I'm sure you'll get the hang of it soon...you already seem to know the basics. Additionally, you can refer to the good articles to see how to write better articles or read this essay. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 20:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, Thank you for the reply. I had also contacted a veteran user name Sean.hoyland re: the issue of structure of article. He also replied that there aren't many solid rules when it comes to internal structure of an article..According to him, WP:STRUCTURE and WP:DUE are important points. Oh ok, I understand what you did with the sagharika ghose article. You merged the criticism to the relevant sections like ravi shankar interview.Hmm i guess you are right..Wikipedia has so many rules, and i guess it will take some time for me learn the ropes before diving headlong and deleting entire articles..Thanks for the tips re: writing articles in wikipedia..I like the idea of using the sandbox to write up the article , instead of editing the original page..Thank you for the answers and tips, sincerely, Lookinhotbra (talk) 12:30, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Most welcome, if you need any more help you can always ask me. Have a nice day, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:20, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Ottoman Empire
Hi Ugog. Why did you revert my edit to the Ottoman Empire article just now?--eh bien mon prince (talk) 06:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Extremely sorry! I knew I had misclicked rollback but when I checked it first it didn't show up...so I thought everything was fine. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries! Stuff like that happens to the best of us.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 07:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the 25 october post
The statement that Carei was the la romanian city to be liberated by the soviet and roman armies is wrong. Carei was a Hungarian city and it was (occupied) not liberated just like the rest of the Erdely region — Preceding unsigned comment added by EnrikeKeXy (talk • contribs) 08:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi to this edit of yours, it's better to explain it on the article talk page first. If no one objects, you can surely remove it and I hope that you have a source for your reason for removal (See verifiability). Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:32, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello Ugog Nizdast. I wanted to drop a note of thanks for your help in dealing with the Burton-on-Trent vandal. He has been around at least three years so we will probably be dealing with him for some time to come. Your vigilance is appreciated. MarnetteD | Talk 16:33, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks MarnetteD. I must admit I'm quite baffled with this long-term mass disruption. As you may know, they're back after a two week block with a different IP address and I've reported this here to Bishonen again; this time, a one month block. I really won't be surprised if this happens again exactly after one month and wonder what's the motive behind all this pointless and silly disruption. Have a good day, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:51, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Just noticed that you have done the dirty work this time and reverted all the edits. Thanks a lot! Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. I am sure there are many and differing motivations for these long term problem editors but the simplest one may be that they do it because "they can" :-( It sure is nice to be able to go to Bishonen to get blocks handed out. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 17:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Mistake in User talk:162.78.70.162
Hi Ugog- I think there's been a mistake. Your message to me ( User talk:162.78.70.162 ) about posting to Manganese and StudentRND was puzzling, as I didn't do any of that. (I had to look up both of those things to see what they were!) Sorry for the confusion, but whomever posted on those pages wasn't me--Have I been hacked? Aaronfaletto (talk) 14:54, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Don't worry that wasn't you..the IP address User:162.78.70.162 is a dynamic and the vandalism was done by someone else who shares it you at that particular time. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:14, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks for the barn star! I was wondering are you aware of the consequences of violating talk page guidelines and the WP:3RR revert rule? A new user is constantly reverting edits on an article, is refusing to discuss things on the concerned article's talk page, therefore engaging in WP:WAR, violating talk page guidelines as well as removing references in the process. The user is also trying to glorify a particular article while constantly degrading other well cited articles. I could really use your help, thanks! - Animefreak234 06:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey, you're very welcome. Referring only to Ruqaiya Sultan Begum right? Just looked at it and this is bad, there has been pointless warring for almost a month. In more technical terms, the 3RR has not been violated (if I'm not wrong this case won't be considered in the WP:3RRN since the gap is +24 hours) but anyhow edit warring needs to be stopped. I've sent a personal invitation to the user (also curtly mentioned about civility, no personal attacks) and initiated the discussion on the article talk page.
 * Since this a new user we need to be lenient, but if the warring still continues (I hope you don't revert now EVEN if the user does it to you till the discussion is over) we can report this on the WP:ANI or WP:ANEW. I'm not so familiar with this topic and if discussing also remains fruitless, I'll try to contact some users who are good at articles related to this; other options include WP:Third opinion and WP:Dispute resolution. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:42, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * UPDATE Well, the discussion has gone off to a good start. There has been some logical issues raised and whose ever is supported in the end, remember that we can all learn something and benefit from this, as the content will only be improved. Awaiting your response there, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 20:05, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Note
Hi, Ugog Nizdast! As you can see, today and yesterday I reverted category spams, overcategorizations etc which Erim Turukku did on numerous articles. Despite your warnings, he continue doing exactly the same things as before - category spams, overcategorizations, Turkic/Turkish POV, edit warring, etc... Do what you think is the most appropriate in this case. As you may assume, I have other things to do here than to constantly follow around a category spammer, Turkic/Turkish POV nationalist or whatever he is and to revert his nonsense edits. --Sundostund 15:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, your efforts are deeply appreciated. I know exactly how it feels to see someone doing so many lame edits and to feel even more lamer going around undoing them. As you may well know, the user has got a 24-hour block (I expected this large scale disruption to attract the attention of the law by itself) and hopefully doesn't resume this. I guess it's my turn to do the dirty work and have cleaned up whatever was remaining, hope I didn't miss anything. Have a good day, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 20:37, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for cleaning up the rest of his nonsense edits. By the way, according to what Kansas Bear said on Erim Turukku's talk page, it may be possible that Turukku and User:EMr KnG are the same person. If that's the case, would it be a WP:SOCK? As you know, in most cases its illegal to have two accounts on WP. And, edits of both Turukku and EMr KnG  look really similar... --Sundostund 21:36, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, Turukku's 24h block expired and it seems he plans to continue as before. How he's reverting at the article Attila, which is as you know a subject to the 1RR limitation. --Sundostund 17:26, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm interesting...I'm not sure if just their area of edits and such similarity in their posts is enough to warrant an investigation. You, the other users and the admins involved will probably figure out if a WP:SPI is needed; I've no experience in this sort of detective work yet. Violated the 1RR rule eh? I hope someone has posted in the WP:AN3RR or on admin Dougweller's page. Looks like the user can't edit here as per WP:COMPETENCE. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:40, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I just informed Dougweller. As for WP:SPI, I myself don't have much experience about things like that too... --Sundostund 19:13, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * After some looking into how to do it, I just opened an SPI on EMr KnG / Erim Turukku, you can see it at Sockpuppet investigations/EMr KnG. If you have something to add, etc feel free to do it. --Sundostund 19:36, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Savarkar
Take the issue to Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, I will. Thanks, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 05:41, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Comment
(Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.8.72 (talk) 16:23, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment posted by banned User:CharlieJS13. Remove comment per WP:BAN. Feel free to remove the section if you want. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 18:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

India
Thankx a lot for notice that one.Really,i wasn't aware of,pushed it while using mobile. ---zeeyanwiki discutez 20:25, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey no problem, it happened to me recently too (see this topic some places up in this page). I guess even the most experienced editors can make this mistake. Good day to you, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 20:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Looking For Your Response Related To Asaram Bapu Page Edits
Hello,

I'm glad that I got a change to share my thoughts with you. This message in context of Asaram Bapu page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asaram_Bapu which was just lately modified by you.

As you said "POV-pushing, mass replacement of much-discussed" :- Your comment is not justified, you reverting the whole text matter. May I know what do you mean by "mass replacement of much-discussed" the truth remains truth even if it is written 10 months ago or a year ago, I and couple of other fellow members contributed to this page and made it accurate based on our research and deep knowledge about this topic.

You used a phrase in your comment "much-discussed" none of the matter was discussed, eventually it was removed by one after another user and replaced by fake matter which was none other than accuses to a noble person without any grounds.

Have you noticed one by one few users deleted the original text matter which was representing the accurate data and that was added by me and other members by the passage of time (In last couple of weeks and months I was not able to contribute to Wikipedia) and eventually the text matter was getting deleted and replaced by irrelevant material by some users who just tried to experiment.

I do respect of everyone's opinion but first of one must know the facts before posting and they are most welcome to contribute but rather than knowing the facts and figures few users just started using insulting language and alleging to a person who does social service merely to help people. Was there any ground of saying all that, no. All the ref links are unreliable sources and this is considered as vandalism.

As you said "sourced content with poorly cited". :- May I know what made you feel it was poorly cited. I always write on the basis of facts and I provided well documented matter with bunch of media reports, videos etc.... in order to support each statement. We're here to add value to Wikipedia not to promote what personally we like. This is true that one should be aware of Hindi language in order to understand all the facts and media reports which were provided, it might possible that Hindi is not your native language so I can understand that but unless you understand something completely you should not modify or remove anything on Wikipedia page which is contributed by other members. I also noticed that in past, approx. 3 times you removed the data from this page by mentioning you did fixes, formatting etc... I appreciate whatever formatting you did but removing data without any grounds is not acceptable unless someone has solid grounds for it (it's not a matter of personal choice).

I can see that you are a member of "WikiProject India" so might be you can understand Hindi language, if it's so then I encourage you to go through all the facts which I provided and also watch the videos which will give you insight what made me write each phrase and sentence in the page.

If anyone go through the text matter which was added then they can say it well documented so question doesn't arise.

Thanks Devoutly (talk) 17:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, I appreciate you taking up this matter with me and your civility. But you still seem to be name-calling people who don't agree with you in other areas, please stop that. I'm sure every editor must have told you this by now, wherever you've posted your query. Since you have been away for months over here, you have missed the drama which unfolded on his article because of his coverage in the media. Long story short: like all Indian articles his was of poor quality and his controversies in the media spiked a sudden interest in editing (where many disruptive new users were blocked), within no time quite a significant part of the community (even Jimbo Wales, see this link) got involved and resulted to how the article is currently...more or less. It was stripped down to only its relevant content, many users continue to watch it in case disruption occurs again (when he again makes the headlines)
 * I really don't understand your question about my edits though. I always try to leave an apt (sometimes even silly) edit summary, just look at my recent contributions. What edit are you referring to? this is pretty self-explanatory, here I said "slight fixes" since all I did was fix typos, some minor copy editing by removing some redundant wording as part of it (no meaning of any statements were even changed in this process). It is true though there have been many disruptive editors attacking this page, see I reverted one recently with this edit.
 * Look, there is so much anyone experienced here can say about your version of this article. It does not follow the manner of style, loaded with WP:PEACOCK words, non-neutral, poor language; in short, it is not written like an encyclopaedic article, more like something which belongs to his website. All your references in fact are from there or only the postive media coverage from there. His website (and other such) are not considered as reliable sources. The main view of the media is removed and there is strong defence/support for him. Since you're not an experience editor here, look at any of our featured articles or good articles, then you'll get an idea how quality articles should look like.
 * You did replace well-sourced content which was put there with the WP:CONSENSUS of the community. If I didn't revert you, someone else would have. True, there have been disruptive editors and a few vandals who try to sabotage this article but they have been take care off, you needn't hold the everyone responsible. I can understand you urge to improve it further, since it is focusing only on his controversies as that has plenty of available references and it is covered well by the media; whether it's your personal view or not, there is not much you can change in that section. We write what the majority of the sources say, not the WP:truth. I do understand a bit of it and Hindi language sources can be used (English is preferred as this is English Wikipedia) but cherry picking them in order to change the main view won't be allowed. If you still feel otherwise, post this on the article talk page and more experienced users will address your issues. I think I've answered most of them here though, there's no need for asking every member of the community the same thing, it's bit a waste of time.
 * My advice for you regarding improving the article is: After you've seen how quality article should look like, try to expand his "Life" and other sections. In that way, we can get rid of neutrality tag which is placed there. I see that you have good intentions and since you're so interested in this topic, surely you can try this. If you're edits get reverted, they obviously need to be improved and find out what that is. Feel free to ask anything else. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 20:28, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Yale World Fellows Program page
Dear Ugog Nizdast,

I'm working on improving/re-writing the Yale World Fellows Program page you've been involved with editing lately. I've got a new draft in my sandbox that I'll be editing more over the next week or so, and I was wondering whether you'd like to take a look at it and give your feedback before I make any changes to the actual page. Here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RagnarFsks/sandbox

Thanks, RagnarFsks (talk) 21:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Of course, as you may know previously User:Umerama asked me the very same thing over here and I told the user to make a draft too. Not heard anything since so I assume the user is inactive and you know about this person right? Anyway, I'll check it out when I get time and will reply in your talk page when I'm done. Good day to you, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 08:17, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Email
--     L o g     X    18:52, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Babri Mosque
There is clear evidence in the 2003 ASI report that there is evidence of temple there. Please review the report — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.241.12 (talk) 05:55, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. Really? could you provide some links to prominent news reports? I could help you then, otherwise if I get time I'll search for it myself. Thanks for pointing this out, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:20, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Blocking an IP address
The 180.151.20.56 IP editor is resorting continuous vandalism of Mariam uz-Zamani. The most recent being yesterday. This latest edit, like the previous ones ( edit 1 and edit 2 ), doesn't comment on why the content was removed though a source had been cited for the information by me and can be very easily verified. I have provided the links to two of the many edits made by the IP editor on the article. Can this user be blocked? Am I within my wiki rights to that? The IP editor has been disregarding sources. Is this enough to be reported as vandalism? Please advice. Ananya 2012 (talk) 04:36, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi again, those edits seem disruptive but are not exactly vandalism. From WP:Vandalism, "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting obvious nonsense into a page." So these edits are probably made by someone who is not experienced in editing and is not aware of their mistakes. We need to be careful dealing with new users who are simply confused about all the policies, guidelines and technical aspects of editing, be sure not to bite them.
 * I think it's time you enable WP:TWINKLE on your account, with that you can automatically warn offending new users in a nice way before taking any drastic step against them. This is how we usually tackle vandalism or good-faith unconstructive edits (see User_talk:195.215.130.197, where we warned this IP using twinkle after reverting vandalism). There are different levels of warnings, after usually three-four, and if the disruption continues, we can report them.
 * Regular users (like us) can get additional rights (See WP:user rights) but blocking can only be done by administrators. There are various noticeboards where the offenders can be reported for the admins to take necessary action against them. For example, a IP who continues to vandalise after multiple warnings can be reported at Noticeboard for administrators intervention against vandalism.
 * In your case, once you enable twinkle, when the IP repeats this, send him a level one warning for adding unsourced content. This usually gets them to start communicating with you if they mean well. No response, and if it still continues, increase the level of warnings and if at all it doesn't stop even after the final warning, you'll have to report the IP at the Admin noticeboard/ Incidents. IP addresses are shared by multiple people and constantly change but since this one has a long history of making the same edits, it's probably just a single person. Most likely you won't need to take the final step but if it does and you not sure how to proceed or have questions about using twinkle, you can ask me any time. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the hearty reply. But how does Twinkle exactly work? I would like the message or warning sent to only a particular IP editor or user who tries to remove information and replace it with unverified content. Not to every person who tries to edit the page. So what should i enable for the article? Would CSD do the job or should I just RPP for the page? This is confusing. The video tutorial on the WP:TWINKLE is also ineligible. Ananya 2012 (talk) 10:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Most welcome, wait...you've simply confused yourself, all that is unnecessary. Just go to preferences and enable Twinkle (that's what is written on its page right?) and then you'll get a 'TW' option at the top right corner of any page you visit (Next to the 'View history' and watchlist icon). Video tutorial? I didn't even know there was one, really it's not that complicated...just enable it and experiment (you can always undo an edit). For example, for warning an IP, go to that IPs userpage and click on the 'TW' option. Let me know if you're having trouble getting it to work. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:51, 25 November 2013 (UTC)


 * When I click on the Twinkle option on the IP's page there is an option of TB and ARV. Since the reporting to adminstrators is done at a later stage, what should i do with TB option? It doesn't seem like it would warn me if any edits are made. It is just something to link different talk pages. Help! Ananya 2012 (talk) 19:24, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Oops, looks like you've accidentally used WP:Talkback on the IP's page and another editor added the deletion tag to it after that. I think I know what you did wrong, you must have viewed the contributions page not the user page. So try it again on the IP user page/talk page (this one: User talk:180.151.20.56) and along with 'ARV', 'TB' there will also be a 'warn' option. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 19:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! I have posted warning 1 on the IP editor's page. I have to subsequently increase the level of warnings if the editor doesn't respond positively, right? Your instructions really helped. Really grateful. Ananya 2012 (talk) 15:09, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. I think you should have put a warning for adding unsourced content in this case rather than vandalism level 1 (there are many other warnings, have a look at them). Anyway now you got the hang of it. Have a nice day, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:32, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Why reverted the edits to Shoma Chaudhury page.
I would like to know why the edits were reverted despite the fact that references were provided more than what counts as sufficient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.178.212.176 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 22 November 2013‎(UTC)


 * Hi, Please read BLPN. Remember it's not always like that...having enough references doesn't mean that makes the content automatically fit for the article. Appreciate you discussing this here, I said in my edit summary that it was a WP:BLP issue when I reverted your edit. I'll try to improve the article after some time. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 18:50, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi : The relevance of the content is subjective opinion. I believe the recent controversies and Shoma's reaction are very much relevant to this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.109.34.102 (Talk) (talk • contribs) 04:36, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I've replied down, where your post is. User talk:Ugog Nizdast -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 04:56, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Reg Tehlka
Why the details about the recent sex scandal have been removed from Tehlka page. It had impacted the organization as much and the organization has been facing criticism of covering up the complaint and not following proper laws laid down by Indian Govt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.109.34.102 (talk) 04:33, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, the case has been covered in short, clear and concise way, I don't see anything wrong with it. I think the main guidelines of Wikipedia which you need to read are our biographies of living persons policy, Wikipedia is not a news site and recent events. After you've read those three links which I've provided and still feel you're have queries feel free to ask me it. There is a reason why those pages were protected. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 04:56, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

regarding edit..
Hi. Glad to give you clarification. I edited the page on 29 november 2013, while i was logged in.as i do always... Now, i have given the reason for that. Thanx for contacting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ab hg (talk • contribs) 13:57, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I've replied on you talk page. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:07, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

ohk..!!!...now i got ur question.....
fine... i got ur question now....!!!..finally... :)

Let me tell in detail... I edited the page on 29th.. I had LOGGED IN, while editing as i do always... Now, today saw your question.. It was not me, but my grandmom, who replied there...(without logging in, as she does not have a account.!!)... Now, i found that she had not logged in.!!!. So, immediately i logged in to clarify, my point...And, yes she is a different user.

Hope, it's clear. I always edit while i am logged in. I respect wiki's policies. I understand, these problems occur when someone does edits without logging in. So, i think now i am clear..

Infact, initially i thought you are saying i made that edit(on 29th) without logging in.!!! Thanx for reverting.Hope i did not violate any policy of wiki. I am here to contribute and share correct info.
 * ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ab hg (talk • contribs) 14:28, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying, I've replied again on your talk page. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:43, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

3rd Opinion, Eva de Braose
Thanks for your advice. It is helpful to me. Doug (at Wiki) 22:29, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

On Pather Panchali
Would you like to have a look at the article Pather Panchali and comment in the peer review? Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 19:56, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Whoa, looks like you got the whole community to comment there. I'll see if I can find anything/make any constructive suggestions. Have a nice day, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * yeah, better to have as much input as possible in peer review.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:54, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: Your edit to Narendra Modi
Hi, I just saw your edit to the Modi page, and while I can see the need for cleanup in that section, I think the merger was not justified. The 2002 riots and the Babri masjid demolition are distinct events, so shouldn't they deserve seperate sections? And if you feel the controversies section is too cluttered, wouldn't it then be best to just dump the Liberhan commission part (which has peripheral relevance at best) and just expand the riots section a bit? and would you mind self-reverting while we discuss this? Cheers, Vanamonde93 (talk) 11:05, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh you mean my edit on BJP...damn after I had just reverted the IP who blanked the section, I tried to quickly fix those sections which were being constantly removed and put back...wasn't really paying attention to what I was doing. I've fixed it on now...this was what I actually wanted to do, thanks for taking the trouble to point this out. Next if I make such a big blunder, don't hesitate to revert me. Have a nice day, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:39, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Haha no prob, totally done the same thing before. Cheers, Vanamonde93 (talk) 13:49, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Human evolution (diff)
it is a theory is it not — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.202.95.179 (talk) 11:16, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit on Mariam-uz-Zamani
Hi. Sorry for disturbing you again, but again we have a vandal on Mariam-uz-Zamani article. Have a look at this editing. The user adds information and cites a personal blog as a source. The blog entry has no mention of any reliable sources. Repeated pleas for engaging in a discussion ( talk1 and talk2 ) have been evaded by this user. I have exhausted all the civil options. I don't think posting a warning will help either. Ananya 2012 (talk) 18:10, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. Added to my watchlist, looks like several editors are reverted those additions besides you. If this continues, we may have to report this user at the WP:ANI per WP:COMPETENCE. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:09, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

RE: A barnstar for you
→Enock 4 seth (talk) 19:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Graduation

 * Haha, of course I'll keep this safely. I thought I had already did complete it since I didn't need to ask you for help that often, and you said your process was informal. Thank you very much for all your help...I learned a lot by observing how you did things and you were a good role model. Best wishes, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Mango
Hi,

I gave inline references and published citations too. May I know for some references how the whole post is invaluable and got deleted ? Arul (talk) 07:29, 4 January 2014 (UTC) Arulraja


 * Hi and sorry if I seemed a bit abrupt. These two references: tamilnation.co.in and geotamil.com are self published sources (See WP:SELFPUB) and the third one was a blog (again, not a reliable source) . I not sure about the reliability of these two:1, 2. If they seem fine then the other issue is the content.


 * The statement about its history would be a good addition but I really don't think an entire non-English script about a song is really relevant to the article. In any case, it is still poorly sourced and if there are good scholarly sources mentioning this then it needs to be provided first. Also, why add another History section focusing just on this country specific background when it could be merged with the "Cultivation" or "Etymology" section, which also mention its global perspective. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 08:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, thank you for your reply, do you mean something that is non-english is not authentic or not scholarly ? And the song is from the ancient literature that was already an existing article in wiki, isn't that a strong reference. So what is wrong in quoting it ? I can merge it with other section. Also can you help me how to report vandalism. Arul (talk) 02:02, 7 January 2014 (UTC) Arulraja
 * Don't get me wrong, I never said they were a problem because they were non-English. I've underlined my previous post to show what was exactly wrong with them, take a look. One cannot simply use Wikipedia itself as a source, if it's there in another article and has just the same references there are two possibilities: 1) It should be removed like this on the grounds of being poorly sourced 2) It could be relevant to that particular article but still needs better sourcing. In anycase, most of the our Indian articles here are in poor shape, so there's not much point in deleting such content if you can't add anything better...
 * I'd like to help you in tackling vandalism but I hope you first know the difference between it and a good-faith edit. As your homework, would you consider reading it at WP:VANDALISM (I know it's lengthy, no need to read the whole thing...just understand the difference, I'll help in the rest) and then reporting back to me? Or are you referring to just dealing with inexperienced editors not editing properly (good-faith edits)? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 03:26, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

User:67.247.54.159
Could you please block user:67.247.54.159 as he keeps vandalizing pages? Thanks! -- fdewaele, 7 January 2014.
 * Umm, I'm not an admin! Since the IP is grossly reverting and disrupting why don't you report him to the relevant noticeboard (WP:ANI or WP:ANEW) ? I could do this on your behalf, but you know more about the topics range and what the IP is upto, I think it's better if you do it. Would that work? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 18:40, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh! As you had placed the ban warning I thought you were. Mea Culpa! I've reprted him at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Perhaps you could support my complaint? -- Thanks! -- fdewaele, 7 January 2014.
 * Sure. That's just the normal final level warning template while reverting vandalism before reporting to the WP:AIV. Since this was not vandalism but disruptive editing, I've filed a report detailing this at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, providing few of the links to just some of the reverts that have taken place. Take a look/comment and watch it for any updates. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 19:23, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

A Tesla Roadster for you!
Wow, thanks a lot! -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:43, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks so much...I really appreciate this! Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:12, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Change to Captain Planet article
Hello, I received your message that you undid my change to Captain Planet. I removed a joke that someone added to the page: listing "has a mullet" as one of his abilities. Having a mullet is not one of his abilities--some people just seem to think this is funny because the mullet is no longer in fashion. Please redo my change or I will perform it again, and please try to more thoroughly evaluate edits before you undo them in the future. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.117.231.11 (talk) 20:50, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi extremely sorry for this! I was just getting used to using WP:STiki and I thought you added it not removed it. Once again I apologise (at least this is my first mistake so far among all my other such edits) and thanks for taking the time to bring this up. Also, it was good that you tried to remove the previous vandalism and don't hesitate to undo with an explanation next time when such a misunderstanding takes place. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 20:59, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem, and thanks for the quick correction! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.117.231.11 (talk) 21:23, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Could you help?
Hey, since you've helped me out before: do you know how to request an archive of a talk page? I've come across a bunch that could really do with cleanup. I'd do it myself, too, if I knew how... Thanks, Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:13, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Have a look at Help:Archiving a talk page and User:ClueBot III. Green Giant (talk) 21:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Green Giant for the reply. In case you're still not sure how to manually archive from the above links:- In short, all you need to do is copy the old discussions from the target page (Talk:Wikipedia) to create the new archive subpage (Talk:Wikipedia/Archive N, where N= 1,2,3...), after saving that you remove it from the target page.
 * I think I know some of the pages you're referring to, Talk:Bharatiya Janata Party and Talk:Indian National Congress? I agree they need archiving as well a cleanup of those rubbish meaningless posts. I've done it...you can take a look. I've also enabled it for automatic archival (done by a bot), since they are really active topics and it's pretty much needed. Now no need to worry about archiving those two pages. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I guess if I'd been diligent I could have discovered this for myself, but anyhow, that was much needed. Yes, those were some of the pages I was referring to; there are several others as well. Gracias, Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:07, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Most welcome, it's normal to be confused with all this in the start...I myself was and asked a lot of silly questions. Don't hesitate to post here (or anywhere else) when you need help with something. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 21:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey sorry to bother you again. I followed your instructions, which worked for the most part, except the archive doesn't appear in the archives box on the original talk page. The original page is Talk:L. K. Advani and the archive is Talk:L. K. Advani/Archive 1 which was the link supplied by the archive box on the original talk page. Anyhow, I messed up someplace, not clear where. Halp! before some doofus re-inserts fossilized content. Vanamonde93 (talk) 22:54, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I follow. You seem to have archived it properly and added the respective archive box template (Like this one on the right on my talk page). The only thing which was left to do was adding the archive template in Talk:L. K. Advani/Archive 1, but that's just a minor issue. I think the archive box you're referring to is the that I've just added to the original talk page. For most part, it's only used in pages that have a continuous level of activity and has a bigger box with a link to the archives. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 05:17, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, maybe you don't follow but you certainly fixed it, so thanks. The link to the archive was not appearing in the appropriate tp section. Thanks again, Vanamonde93 (talk) 07:19, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Asia Bibi blasphemy case
Hi, Ugog Nizdast. Thank you for reviewing and passing the Asia Bibi blasphemy case article for GA status. I noticed that the article doesn't seem to have the GA icon, though. Could you please add it? I'm a little cautious about doing it myself, since I nominated the article. Thanks, --1ST7 (talk) 04:01, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hmm someone has already added for us, I wonder why legobot didn't do it? I thought I did followed the correct procedure and this usually works. Have any clue what I did wrong? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:47, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * There might be an issue with the bot; it has stopped working for short periods of time before. --1ST7 (talk) 07:31, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Turns out, our entire review has been overlooked by the bot--I think this is mainly because of that page move which I did. I've asked Bluemoonset again (User talk:BlueMoonset)...let's see. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * I'm have happy to have completed this under your guidance! Thank you for everything, and I hope to start reviewing more regularly soon. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:43, 15 January 2014 (UTC)