User talk:Yogesh Khandke/Archive 1

An editor has been banned from certain topics, I was not a part of the discussion and came to know about it only after the ban was enforced and discussion closed. I consider that the ban is harsh and excessive. What can I do about it? Can I discuss it with other editors and the banned editor and other editors supporting the ban?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 17:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I know what RfC means, what do RfC/U and CU mean? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 06:32, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * CU=WP:CHECKUSER. WP:RfC/U=Request for comments on a user's conduct. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:47, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Got the point.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You can pretty much get information on any Wikipedia policy, essay, etc by starting to type "WP:RfC...." in the search box. The search prediction is pretty intuitive and you can learn about new essays you were not aware of. Zuggernaut (talk) 18:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I solicited votes from users of known views. What is the value of such votes? Please a quote of rules would be greatly obliged. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:23, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:CANVASS Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 14:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh! I know it is inappropriate, votestacking. But what is the value of the votes. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:34, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * "Value"? What do you mean? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 14:36, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Do the votes canvassed by me count or do they become invalid that is my question, please qoute rules. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Votes are generally not counted anyways. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 14:44, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Will you please share the specific rule. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTDEMOCRACY Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 15:02, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Please you are helping me, but I am sorry for disagreeing, wp:NOTDEMOCRACY states: Wikipedia is not a democracy. Wikipedia is not an experiment in democracy or any other political system. Its primary but not exclusive method of determining consensus is through editing and discussion, not voting. Although editors occasionally use straw polls in an attempt to test for consensus, polls or surveys sometimes impede rather than assist discussion. Straw votes should be used with caution, and are no more binding than any other consensus decision. Elections and votes are only endorsed for things that take place outside Wikipedia proper, such as when electing the Arbitration Committee. Not related to the present issue. Can you help me with the exact rule. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:17, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Alleged misuse of administrator's privileges by an administrator
I was blocked by an administrator, I wish to complain against him/her for misuse of administrator's privileges and wish to make a request for penalties against him for this misuse if it is found true. Can such a thing done.

(About the block which was for 2 weeks, I sat it out. It is finished now. ) Wrote to the administrator once but he did not respond. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:57, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Please see Dispute resolution for any concern about misuse of admin powers. However, I strongly suggest that you consider giving the admin time to respond because it appears yuo asked them for their feedback about 15 minutes after you posted this request here.   7  09:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I will go ahead with dispute resolution only after the concerned administrator has had his say, would 3 days be long enough. Of course I will send him reminders after that too, in case he doesnot respond thus far. I would like a few interested editors to have a look at the dispute, befor I go in for dispute resolution formally. No I won't rush, I am a patient man. How to go about this informal dispute resolution. Thanks for responding. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 09:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Alleged misuse of administrator's privileges by an administrator: Dispute resolution is about disputes between editors how alledged mis-administration?
How to complain against mis-use of administrative powers.

Yogesh Khandke (talk) 10:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You can report here, but what misuse are you referring to? &mdash; Tanvir &bull; 11:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Blocking on a whim, without "...warnings prior to, and notification messages following, his actions; not using accurate and descriptive edit and administrative action summaries; and not responding promptly and fully to all good-faith concerns raised about his administrative actions." A serious breach of administrative privilege.

Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Veer Savarkar
The section on the Gandhi murder case already mentions Digamabar Badge turned approver, the caption is already 5 lines long, removing repeated text only makes it easier to read. Anish7 (talk) 07:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Previous helpme requests
I hope there is no restriction on the use of this tag. There are a couple of citation templates for books, but these are for paper books. There are many ebooks, where the entire book is available on the net. (Also free) Is there any template specific to such books? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi there, there's certainly no restriction on the helpme tag! To answer your question, I think the template would be most appropriate for e-books as per the description there states that "This template is used to cite sources in Wikipedia. It is specifically for books. This template replaces the deprecated . When citing an article in a compilation or anthology,  works better.". Hope this helps,  The  Helpful  One  18:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Please but the site book tag one version which I am reproducing here is not appropriate for a book whose text is entirely available on the net.




 * Is there any tag which indicates that the text is available on line, at the www URL and xxx is the author, and YYY is the site hosting it, and the edition is this etc. I am aware of the tags as demonstrated in this article. Citation_templates. Thanks!
 * There's . The template is really quite versatile. You can use as many or as few of the options as you want. Does that help?&mdash;C45207 | Talk 05:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Yogesh Khandke (talk) 04:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I had started an article Caphekar brothers, the next day I found that the spelling Chapekar is found with greater frequency, so I started another article by the spelling Chapekar brothers, with a redirect to the original article. I however changed all the spellings to Chapekar instead of Caphekar at all places in the article.

I now feel that the title and usage in one article should agree, so I have shifted the entire matter to Chapekar brothers from Caphekar brothers and have directed Caphekar brothers to Chapekar brothers.

To summarise in one line earlier it was Chapekar --> Capekar, now it is Capekar --> Chapekar. My question is how do I shift matter on the discussion page. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:44, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * When you move a page, there is an option to move the talk page with it. Alternatively, you can just copy/paste all the material from one to the other.&mdash;C45207 | Talk 05:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, you can just move the old talk page to Talk:Chapekar brothers]].&mdash;C45207 | Talk 05:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

How do I go about suggesting an event in history to be carried on the Main Page under "Today in History", I wish to suggest an event for 22 June. Please see 22 June 1897.
 * WP:OTD, but I don't think that that event would count as being of universal importance. - Jarry1250 (t, c, rfa) 16:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Good! That's exactly the sort of thing you're going to have to argue when you propose it. Be prepared for criticism and be prepared to stand up for what you believe in. Go for it. - Jarry1250 (t, c, rfa) 09:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) Please suggest a external link template that confirms to WP:ELYES, for External Links to a parent organisation of a NGO. Please suggest a template, what I mean syntax, that goes like like you have one for tables, and many types for citing references, I do not wish that you give me the content, but syntax help on how it is displayed using templates. This question is how to present a link I have using good wikiformating? Please guide.
 * There isn't a template for most external links. Usually it'll just be Name Of Website . Cheers. // roux   16:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) Please suggest a external link template that confirms to WP:ELYES, for External Links to a parent organisation of a NGO.
 * It is not the help desk's responsibility to suggest external links. Please do the research yourself.  If you have a list of external links you would like to propose, you may do so on the article's talk page.  - Jameson L. Tai   talk  ♦  guestbook  ♦  contribs  08:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) What to do with the tag after it is attended? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The tags after we help you is left to leave a record that the Help Desk was contacted.  If you want to you may always remove or archive talk page entries as you wish.   - Jameson L. Tai   talk  ♦  guestbook  ♦  contribs  08:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here are a few more good links for to help you get started:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Bhadani 06:45, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

yezidi & Murugan
hello I noticed your (removed) sentences about a possible connection between yezidis and murugan-worship. During a recent visit to Goa i noticed several temples with peacock-statues very similar to published pictures of the yezidi Peacock Agnel, and speculated on a possible conection. --Vindheim (talk) 02:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


 * thanks for your message. No, I am not a Kurd, nor a Yezidi but I study religious matters and have visited  the Yezidi  shrine at Lalish. I believe your information was  edited away because people found  the source unreliable and the information unorthodox.--Vindheim (talk) 02:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

February 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information.  Ogress  smash!  18:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you misunderstand the nature of the above note. I am not a queen bee. The above notice is a routine and brief explanation of the objections to the changes you made to Yazidi: specifically, that they are original research and your source is fringe theory. The above notice includes links that elaborate on the nature of Wikipedia's standards regarding these issues. As you inquired of me directly why your edits were reverted, I responded with the note above with my reversion. Please note I originally included this information in my edit summary.


 * In short: the link you provided was not to research by the individual in question, but to a secondary site that contained fringe theory. I observe that in the original author's site (which is linked in the secondary article you cited), the author in question references his comments on the origin of the term "Dasni" with a comment on the Japhetic languages, which is not credible: as Wikipedia's article itself notes, it is "an obsolete pre-scientific term for the languages spoken by the descendants of Japheth, son of Noah, dating from before the discipline of historical linguistics developed."


 * The rest of the information you added was personal commentary: you saw Murugan in South India and thought, "Hey, it's where the Yazidis came from!" This is classed as original research and is unacceptable under Wikipedia's standards.


 * Please don't get so angry. This was not a personal attack, and it is impolite to attack other editors (and a breach of Wikipedia's rules...)  Ogress  smash!  20:11, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The website you link to belongs to Mark Amaru Pinkham, who fronts as the International Order of Gnostic Templars - United States. His work is not a reliable source under Wikipedia guidelines. "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." In fact, he is writing speculative, sketchy and fringe-y work with no citations and is entirely composed of free association on his own part. Therefore he cannot be considered a reliable source: he purports to be speaking for the Yezidis but in fact is using them as a sockpuppet, speaking on their behalf as a cultural appropriator and a "plastic shaman".  Ogress  smash!  20:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, Shaykh ‘Adī was a historically identifiable person. He was a Sufi who started an entire lineage, the ‘Adawiyyah (attested by non-Yezidi sources), so he was not an invented mythological figure but a flesh and blood actor: ‘Adī ibn Musāfir al-Umawī was born in the 1070s in the Beqaa Valley of present-day Lebanon, studied in Baghdad, then moved to what is now Kurdistan in a spiritual retreat.

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information.  Ogress  smash!  20:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 03:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Your edits continue to repeat the same problematic issue over and over again. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.  Ogress  smash!  03:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead and gag the truth, I am sure there is some kind of redress. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:31, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

This page can shamelessly continue to display the pejorative view that the Yezidi are devil worshippers, it seems that the Yezidi are not spared persecution even on the Internet. Their faith is continued to be denied. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not gagging the truth! For heaven's sake! I'm asking you discuss this issue before making wild claims on the page... As for your claims, Wikipedia is about consensus and verifiable content, not speculation, and so far that's all you are showing. In addition, no one is claiming the Yazidis are devil worshippers.  Ogress  smash!  03:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Um... you are completely misstating the entire interaction we have had. I have made no threats and have no power to threaten anyone. In addition, you are not responding to my carefully explained concerns about the reliability of your sources and the fact that your work contains significant levels of original research and original synthesis.  Ogress  smash!  04:50, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Yezidi
I have tried several times now to engage you on this issue of unreliable sources, independent synthesis of material and other problematic issues. No matter what you say, you just revert the page anyway. I am becoming quite frustrated because this entire exchange has started off with you writing angry things to me and that bad attitude has continued this entire time. This is not good behaviour for an editor and there is no way to come to a consensus when you refuse to listen to any other person.

The goal of consensus is to talk out an issue before reverting. Please let us have our discussion on the talk page before you resume dumping more and more junk on the page. You know this issue is contended, and yet you will not engage.  Ogress  smash!  06:56, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Since you do not respond, I have requested the pages be frozen so that we can engage in the kind of discussion Wikipedia is about.  Ogress  smash!  07:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: yezidi request for making necessary changes and stopping vandalism by Ogress
Apologies, but I'm unfamiliar with the subject and its associated articles, so I could hardly come to a conclusion about the dispute itself. If the talk page fails, WP:3O or WP:MEDCAB might help. Regards, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  14:50, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Please do not change other people's comments... I'm giving you a boilerplate warning.  Ogress  smash!  07:17, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Little context in Madia Gond
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Madia Gond, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Madia Gond is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Madia Gond, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 21:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Palm wine
Thank you for your reply. The correct way to force separation of sections is to use the template. And could you please explain why you felt the need to point out "I am not a vandal"? As far as I can tell, my post on your talk page was a polite request for clarification and a recommendation; I never accused you of vandalism. Gail (talk) 14:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem; the important thing is that, in the end, the article was improved thanks to your contributions :) Gail (talk) 15:04, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

conversion
These lists are for documenting important religious conversions of individuals. Wikipedians deem that if religious conversion is a major facet of someone's identity (George Harrison, Solomon Bandaranaike, etc), it should be documented and organized in category and list form.

As for Hinduism and syncretism, I fail to see how this dime a dozen "swami" is authority on the subject. For starters read Muttukumara Kavirajar's "Yesumataparikaram" or even the Bhagavad Gita chapter 9.23. Respecting Christ/Muhammad/Moses/etc. and accepting them as the sole way of truth (as being a Christian/Muslims/Jew would entail) are two entirely different things. So one cannot be a Hindu and a Christian.Pectoretalk 18:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * "I havent heard of them" != "unknown entities". Harrison is extremely famous, more famous than Tendulkar and Bachchan are in the world, with a large following even in India. Bandaranaike was the first leader of Sri Lanka, who converted to Buddhism to get elected, also someone who is well known in India.
 * I could care less how Hinduism survived, and I probably know far more about Hinduism than most "Hindus", whose religious practice is little more than animism at best. Hinduism at its core requires an acceptance of a supreme being and some sort of reverence for the Vedas. Therefore it is not as you say, anything under the sun. I would also disagree that Hinduism is "flourishing" anywhere in India, when it is the only major world religion with net loss of people, probably due to the "syncretist" attitude held by many Hindus which absolves them of any sort of actual religious identity or practice.
 * Back to the point though, Hinduism is a missionary religion that encourages religious conversion. Its just that the standards employed by Hindus are much stricter and require personal change, rather than just a rejection of identity.Pectoretalk 18:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Caste is a vague and amorphous concept that doesn't apply to large swathes of Hindus, in the idea of varna. Jati, however is merely mini-ethnic group, so obviously whatever jati or clan they are of now.
 * Dharmakirti is a Buddhist. Buddhism rejects the Vedas. I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to convince me of, considering I'm a Buddhist myself. He's certainly no expert on Hinduism.Pectoretalk 05:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The Shloka
Hi Yogesh! Nice to see the sholka you have written for Hinduism article. Any particular reason you have taken a picture instead of writing it in devnagri script (as in, typing it)? If it's not a historically important picture, can we convert this shloka to just devnagri typing? Nshuks7 (talk) 06:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * How is this? Some matraas had to be left out

वेद प्रामाण्य कस्य चित् कर्त्रवादः स्नाने धर्मेच्छा जातिवादाव लेपः| संतापारंभः पापहानाय चेति ध्वस्तप्रज्ञानाम पञ्च लिन्गानि जाड्ये|| Nshuks7 (talk) 10:05, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I do believe a rude editor has scrapped your section. Hence I am proposing the content to be placed on Atheism in India and on Atheism in Hinduism. I really liked your content : ) Nshuks7 (talk) 10:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Why don't you try it yourself :) ? Here's how I did it: http://www.google.co.in/transliterate/indic

I've added this shloka to Atheism in Hinduism, and marked the image for deletion:
 * वेद प्रामाण्यं कस्य चित् कर्तृवाद:
 * स्नाने धर्मेच्छा जातिवादाव लेपः |
 * संतापारंभः पापहानाय
 * चेति ध्वस्तप्रज्ञानां पञ्च लिङगानि जाऽये ||

utcursch | talk 12:34, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Badwa

 * Thank you for turning some of my research notes into a stub for a Badwa article.
 * Samvatsar and Diwanji (in the bibliography) speak of interviewing a 'Badwa'. I have seen other references to these priests/shamans by the same name.
 * I am not competent in the original languages to know if there is local variation in the generic name in ordinary usage. That seems quite likely and important to note.
 * I will search for "badwas" to see if this shows up as a variant (and maybe prefered term) in published literature.
 * I am greatly limited in what literature I can access and search efficiently--Sydney is not well known for Indology. Perhaps Macquarie University would have some information.
 * May I encourage you to be bold and to add any local or expert knowledge of your own, and/or comments and suggestions to the talk page. I will try to give this new article a little more attention at some point, I do recall finding some interesting information about "badwa"s, though it was somewhat controversial. According to what I read, there was a deliberate government program to limit their social influence, which some commentators claimed included various improprieties.
 * Best regards, Alastair Haines (talk) 00:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Cookie


Its the Cookie Monster (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

You were the Ninth person to respond to me. Ever. Here's some tea for doing it! <div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#000066; background-color:#DDEEFF; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Its the Cookie Monster (talk) has given you a cup of tea, for taking the time to weather a dispute. Thanks for staying calm and civil! Tea somehow promotes WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!

Spread the lovely, warm, refreshing goodness of tea by adding {{subst:WikiTea}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Well, I hoped you enjoyed your Biscut and tea. I feel... so European. That's scary. --Its the Cookie Monster (talk) 04:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Yazidi
You never replied to the posts on Yazidism. I even suggested how we could go about building consensus, but you didn't reply. I have left it since then since you did not reply. Check the final section of the page.  Ogress  <sub style="color:#BA55D3;">smash!  16:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Mediation
I have begun mediating, under "edit war," and am awaiting a summary of each side's position. Ogress has provided his side, and as far as I know, you are opposed to that side. There is a lot of discussion to look through, so I want a clear, concise explanation of where the parties stand. Tealwisp (talk) 06:12, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Do you still want me to mediate? You seem to be doing alright without my help now.  I would be more than happy to continue watching over the discussion.  Tealwisp (talk) 07:05, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
prashanthns (talk) 08:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Madia Gond
Thanks for the heads up. I actually simply changed the link to Indigenous peoples of the Americas. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 08:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll just reduce what I said to "thank you" then. :) --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 08:27, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Vithoba
replied LBP and Vithoba pg. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 15:52, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * New post at LBP, Vithoba. Also I read you needed help with a external link template: do you meant something like cite, for more such templates see Category:Citation templates.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes I need help, I feel, the appropriate citation template needs to be used, without the date retrieved tag. Yogesh Khandke (talk)
 * Please show a sample link, then I can suggest a suitable template. Replied to your message at Vithoba. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 13:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Some new proposals at the talk. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply to: "I could not put it up in Vithoba's article so am pasting it here, FG's article has given words to my thoughts. I am not alone who thinks in terms of Western bigoted scholars and those Indian's whose minds they have hijacked": FG and you are thinking on the same lines, is what is proved by this para, NOT that "Western bigoted scholars and those Indian's whose minds they have hijacked". There exist Westerns who use the Gita as a management tool, others who respect it as tool to enlightenment. They must someone in the scholar community (Indian or Western), who say what you say. Just because I say tomorrow that the sun is a planet, does not mean that the sun is a planet. Atleast one scholar/expert would back my arguments if I am right. If none of them, I must think: Am I really right in my arguments??? -- Redtigerxyz Talk 08:31, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Courtright's use of Freudian psychoanalysis" for his limb phallus explanation is contested, NOT the entire book. In fact, that theory is criticized here in the review, NOT the entire book. NOTE: the reviewer is a non-Hindu and a westerner. If things do not have enough proof, they are criticized. If anyone adds the limb phallus theory to FA Ganesha, then I will not present my own arguments, i will just present those book reviews (RS) to remove the content.-- Redtigerxyz  Talk 13:36, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Pls calm down, Yogesh Khandke, wikipedia is not a battle ground to hold personal arguments. If you see any problems in the Vithoba article, come up with a WP:RS and present them in the article. If you fear that somebody might add Courtright's claims, there are other equally powerful opposing POVs, and remember, WP:NPOV is also a very important guideline, anything cannot be added just because it is a WP:RS. Coming to the Ganesha's issue you raised, be assured that there are editors who are equally concerned like you, and Redtigerxyz is one of them. Did you know that the very editor you accuse of as "Indian cronies" had taken steps to address this? '''Will you mind reading realted discussion in the archives of the Ganesha article? Can you check who started this discussion in the first place??''' Refrain from personal attacks and pls be civil. ( BTW, FYI : Blogs, Sulkeha cannot be cited on wikipedia, You may read the book, Invading the Sacred or journal like this, if interested in the counter arguments.) Peace. Peace. Peace. --Nvineeth (talk) 15:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I have not accused anybody of anything, I have repeated verbatim what Rajiv Malhotra has written. The issue is not of Vithoba or Ganesha but of research papers and peer certification. That is what I am trying to get across, we should understand that the White Christian world view predominates each sphere of human life, the empires are gone but the minds are still slaves. There must be a cacus or a racket in which certain view points get easily peer reviewed and published, where as a Indian, Hindu perspective has difficulty getting a hearing. I hope you understand, when Malcom X refered to the Bandung Conference, he said,

In Bandung back in, I think, 1954, was the first unity meeting in centuries of black people. And once you study what happened at the Bandung conference, and the results of the Bandung conference, it actually serves as a model for the same procedure you and I can use to get our problems solved. At Bandung all the nations came together. Their were dark nations from Africa and Asia. Some of them were Buddhists. Some of them were Muslim. Some of them were Christians. Some of them were Confucianists; some were atheists. Despite their religious differences, they came together. Some were communists; some were socialists; some were capitalists. Despite their economic and political differences, they came together. All of them were black, brown, red, or yellow.

You would wonder whether India was present or not as there is no mention of the then 500 million Hindus, but you have even fringe minorities like atheist getting his notice. Bandung conference was where India took the initiative and the Pancha Sheel principle was put forth, Hindus and Indians have never been up to any good even in the eyes of a white baiter Malcom X as he also was a product of the White civilisation. So how can you expect the whites to be objective about Hindus and their religion? I have learned by now that wordpress, sulekha etc. are not wp:rs, no need to keep drumming. Myself and R were in a conversation, I just quoted Rajiv Malhotra on scholars to R, wonder what wp:rs has to do with that. I never accused Redtigerxyz of being a crony of anybody, the arguments were to demonstrate why it is easy for example to find wp:rs for something like "The Gita is shit", than one that refutes it, it is about the white scholars and their Indian cronys. For that too I have used a quotation. Please read carefully before commenting or calling names and waving red cards like battle ground or civil or personal attacks. Please read every line carefully, before jumping to conclusions etc.. May be I am not an adequate communicator, so if anything is not very clear please confirm what you have interpreted from me. I always try to do, one example is on talk:Vithoba, where I confirmed the meaning of a phrase that AH used. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 04:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Like this is your talk, that is my talk. Talk page guidelines allows me to remove comments from my talk. I can remove whatever I want. I usually remove content that does not fit in a section OR is not directly related to an article. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 12:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Happy new year to you too.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009
Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Knowzilla 14:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Know, you are right about the need to give a valid reason, it is there on the talk page now, so kindly revert your revert. It is easier to preach than to practise. See the history of your edits on this page, and you will know what I am talking about.

Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I have replied on the article's talk page. --Knowzilla 08:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Hibernating?
My mother was in surgery this week, so yes, I've been inattentive to vandals. I will read the article you posted.  Ogress  <sub style="color:#BA55D3;">smash!  11:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I do hope she will do well, she is still quite out of it as of this morning.


 * The article shows that there is criticism within the scholarly world and potential sites of scholarly work to be done. The article mentions, for example, Michael Witzel, with whom I have worked at Harvard and who both the author of the article and I respect deeply for his remarkable work. His criticisms of Döniger's work are Reliable sources.


 * I do find the article disingenuous in many ways, though. The author criticises the Orientalist problem and rejects Western authority, but it calls upon that same authority to prove its point. You can't say the scholars are all biased and then say, for example, Witzel's work criticises such authors... he's a Western scholar, too.


 * However, that being said, Wikipedia is isn't the place to create new scholarship. As editors, we use second-degree sources. If you want to fight the system, use reliable sources. You can challenge, say, Döniger as a reliable source quite easily; this does not mean we can just throw our own analyses in willy-nilly.  Ogress  <sub style="color:#BA55D3;">smash!  12:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Abecedare (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

New Material at Bottom
You probably know this already, but it is customary to place new material on talk pages, including user talk pages, in a new section at the bottom of the page. I noticed that a few questions were posted at the top of the page. You can also read all sorts of fun information about talk page formatting. &mdash;C45207 | Talk 05:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
&mdash;C45207 | Talk 05:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
&mdash;C45207 | Talk 13:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

ISO Date Format
Thank you for adding references to the articles you edit. I've noticed that you seem to be using the ISO date format, but the order is not quite correct. The ISO date format for dates is YYYY-MM-DD, not YYYY-DD-MM. Thanks.&mdash;C45207 | Talk 04:45, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will change correct the format. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Help re. election
I have received invitation to vote for trustees. I clicked on the Please vote link as is showm on the top of this page which led me to Wikimedia. Wikimedia it seems needs a seperate account, and voting needs a login. I am a little confused. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. I've moved your question down here; in future, please ask questions in a new section at the end of your talk page - it's much less confusing. Hopefully, someone will be along to answer you soon.  Chzz  ►  19:27, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * This link should work. Algebraist 19:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You can activate a unified login. Access my preferences above, and you should find a section, "Manage your Global Account".  It will ask you to confirm your password.  Once done, you will be able you to log in to (almost) any Wikimedia project using the same username/password as you have on Wikipedia.  ∙  AJCham   talk  19:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I've just checked here, and you've already activated Single Unified Login on the 17 May. Just follow the link again and log in with your existing account details. ∙  AJCham  talk  19:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I logged in to Wikimedia and tried to vote, but was disallowed as perhaps I do not meet the criteria. So I went back to Wikipedia, and clicked on Please vote, put in my choices and it worked. Thanks. I received a confirmation which I have saved to Notepad. Thanks again folks. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Plague and the Third Pandemic
I copied a relevant section from the Bubonic plague article and placed it in the Third Pandemic article, with an intro paragraph and a little editing. Feel free to change things if you don't approve. Certainly the political angle could be expanded, as this was a significant step toward Indian independence. A sentence or two of summary, in my opinion, would probably be adequate in the original plague article. Let me know what you think. WBardwin (talk) 05:07, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Help Request
I wish to start an article Instances of racism in English literature, how can I solicit for help from other editors? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:18, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Start the article and insert develop on the top.


 * I hope this gives you some idea of how things work. For more help, you can either;


 * Leave a message on my own talk page;
 * Use a - please create a new section at the end of your own talk page, put , and ask your question - remember to 'sign' your name by putting ~ at the end;
 * Talk to us live, with this or this.


 * Best wishes, -- Srin  ivas  07:54, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Support?
Hi -- I may be wrong, but from the content of your vote it appeared to me that you may have intended to leave it under the heading "Support" as the next numbered item here, rather than under the comments and questions section. Best--Epeefleche (talk) 09:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I am sorry but that is how I feel, y-m-d makes sense, see the page I am with the support oppose camp. (I meant I support the numerical y-m-d format.) Thanks. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh --- I wasn't challenging you. Just wanted to make sure that you put it in the right place!--Epeefleche (talk) 21:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * FYI, I tried to work some of your thinking regarding date formats and ambiguity into a re-work of the proposal that appears below the comment of supporter # 21.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Pahari Saheb
Do you live in Pakistan, if you do so where, what do you do, you seem to have a good sense of humour from what your page looks like. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 09:54, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello, just seen your message - I try not take Wikipedia too seriously ;-) I work in IT. Pahari Sahib   11:46, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you live in Pakistan, what is your first language? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 04:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry been off wiki for a bit, now that's a secret :-) Pahari Sahib   13:13, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Article at AN/I
There is an article concerning you at WP:AN/I --Iner22 (talk) 19:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * yogesh, why do you say on the dickens page that 'imperialism, slavery and semitism' are White Christian discoveries?. What does that mean? You know Jesus was born on the edge of the Roman Empire, so imperialism pre-dates Christianity, that slavery was commonplace in ancient times, the Spartans enslaved Athenians for example during the Peloponnesian War, slavery is not a white-Christian discovery, thats bonkers, What does the white Christians invented 'semitism' even mean?. Did you mean anti-semitism?. But then the Babylonians enslaved the Jews 500 years before Jesus, and the Egyptians etc etc.. You can't blame 'anglo-america' for all the evils in the world, its rank childishness, the problems of the world are rooted in human nature, empires come and go, and force will have its place in the life of humanity as long as people give themselves over to the hunger for power, regardless of their race. I am  a white Christian, or lapsed Christian, and I see the role that force plays in the lives of nations, but why don't you give a leader like Obama a chance, he wants nuclear weaons  eradicated in the long run, isn't it better to talk reasonably to men of reason than give yourself up to  propaganda that becomes an excuse for the next violent action, ? Sayerslle (talk) 13:07, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sharing a few random thoughts. I have used discovered in the sense of Columbus discovered America. Wasn't America there before Columbus? Of course slavery is as old as anything. But slavery in America was different all together, on one hand we have the Declaration of Independence and its emphasis on the equality of men, in the same vein we have slavery taken to dismal depths. We had refined men, indulging in this heinous crime. I wish you understand what I mean to say. The Holocaust was perpetrated by men who were PhDs and medical doctors and otherwise very well qualified. They were not dredges but the cream of white-Christian-(Western) civilisation. America is the only nation that has used the bomb. And it prances about carrying the stick of nuclear non-proliferation, but gives nuclear toys to Pakistan and Israel on the sly, (looks the other way at least). To me proselytising Christianity and the Christian empire have nothing to do with Jesus Christ or his principles. Goa in India was where the Inquisition was the most brutal. Animal Farm could be an allegory to Christianity just as it is to the Soviet Union. I have seen your user page and know that you declare yourself as a lapsed Catholic. You cannot (unless you are seriously aware about your Irish heritage) understand the hurt that imperialism causes. There are three times more Indians than Americans and almost half of humanity is Indian or Chinese, I hope the new world order reflects this sooner than later. Obama or Nobama. What did Europeans do with the advance of science and human knowledge, they got on ships and romped all over the world to subjugate other people, it was Renaissances that gave birth to European imperialism, is that not such a pity? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 04:33, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course it would be racist to say that only white-Christians are capable of racism, imperialism or any other dreadful thing, but statistics would confirm their record is the worst by far. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 04:45, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for explaining the way you used 'discovered'. Discussions like this could go for ever couldn't they.. I agree that imperialism is harmful, but then why do you look forward to a new world order which reflects that 'half of humanity is Indian or Chinese.' China under Mao was a prison camp, and now Han Chinese police walk the streets of Lhasa like Nazis and the Uyghur people are dominated - why is white Christian imperialism terrible, but Chinese imperialism to be looked forward to ? I don't get it. Look at the way they treated the students in Tiananmen Square in 1989. I can't look forward to a world where they have more power than America.  I think where you see a world that was o.k, then f****d up by the white Christians after the Renaissance, and then will be fine again when the evil white Christians rule is over, I see a world that has epochs of shifting centres of power, and the common thread is that power corrupts.  Personally I do regret that the North American Indian culture for example got so destroyed and it is a joke that those doing it were calling themselves Christian at the time - but now something similar is happening to Tibetan culture and thats not White Christians doing it - it's just the way of the world. Africa as a whole gets a terrible deal , but then when rulers get a chance to run the country, like Mugabe, too often they seem to give up on sharing power around and just look after their friends and build themselves palaces. Like Mobutu???was that his name? in Congo. It doesnt make it right though the way the West pays rubbish prices for cacao etc.. Its a fallen world. Thats orthodox Catholic doctrine, the world has been pretty lousy since The Fall! Sayerslle (talk) 11:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Why would European hegamony be replaced by Chinese or Indian imperialism. I am not an expert, but the Republic of South Africa is a success story, isn't it? India is the country which has granted asylum to the Dalai Lama and a large Tibetan refugee population. Tibetan culture is hurt as much by Han Chinese as by the disire of Americans with deep pockets to do business with China. Would China have been so brazen had it for example been told by the world community that either behave in Tibet or no Olympics. I wish you would not get too excited about the Uyghurs, they may morph into the next Taliban! Actually Vinoba Bhave had written a commentry on the new world order. He had written that it would not be possible to base it on the European imperialist model, when a few tens of million lived of the toil off about a billion. The earth he wrote could not support such exploitation. I will share it with you when I find it. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 16:39, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You think the Chinese would be pussycats with more power. Did you see how they treated the Tibetan monks in the run-up to the Beijing Games? If the Chinese aren't imperialists why dont they get out of Tibet, why dont they leave the Uyghurs? They play power politics as much as they can. I don't think its very moral to say 'Oh don't worry if the Uyghurs get stuffed, they're the kind that could morph into Taliban anyway.' Thats racist against them, like they're genetically doomed to be Taliban. I know India has granted asylum to the Dalai Lama and it does India credit. Of all the leaders around I think he is the one worthiest of admiration. And then, with reservations, Obama. Sayerslle (talk) 21:47, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ, Chinese imperialism would be China trying to exercise hegemony over say US or the Iberian peninsula, do you see that happening. Tibet happened because India sat twidling its thumbs, blinded by Panchsheel, led by a spineless, power hungry morons, but that is another story, the world is one village, if consumers in the US would vote with their wallets and decide on not buying Chinese goods unless it improves, it would make China fall in the line, more effectively than anything else. I have already written above, China did not deserve to host the Olympics. Does the US have the guts to bomb China the way it did to Iraq ostentatiously to promote democracy? I remember seeing a programme on television that showed body organs farmed off living prisoners in China? My dad had been to US and EU, three times in the past ten years, he told me that the super-markets there are full of Chinese goods, so who is propping Chinese brutality, over Tibetans and others. I am passing the Uyghur comment, my views would raise too many red flags. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 22:14, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Savarkar
Al Minar, please check Savarkar's views on the parition and power sharing between Hindus and Muslims and the paritition of India, as he is quoted by Ambedkar here, before making sweeping comments. Did he not say the same things that Jinnah did, Muslims and Hindus would be treated equally by the law. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:23, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Sayerslle
Sayerslle perhaps you are right and I am wrong. Of course I would not wish for a Indian-Chinese hegemony the way we had Euro-American hegemony, dropping nuclear bombs, shipping slaves, colonising etc. I meant more journal articles, prestigious universities, more contribution to science, arts, culture, etc. More Olympic medals. Hindi or Mandarin spoken on the streets of other world cities, remember India-China make almost half of humanity, do you feel that this number should not be represented in human endeavour?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:49, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I do think resources, influence etc should be more fairly distributed, between nations, and within nations too, I just am very wary of anti Euro-American rhetoric where it leads - look where its leading in Iran, look where it led in 1920s Japan. Of course its hypocritical of the 'West' to deny nations nuclear bombs when they are armed to the teeth - but do I want a powerful Iran? Also I am personally not excited by 'science' 'Olympic medals' etc..I think its a mark of high culture to not give a toss how many medals your nation wins at sporting contests. I do fancy Nicola Sanders though, so I will watch her if she competes in 2012. Hypocritical again.Sayerslle (talk) 13:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Iran is just the new bogeyman, invented by the Anglo-American defence-industrial vested interests. You are right more equitable distribution of resources between all living beings on this earth. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:30, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If its just a bogeyman, do you believe everything they say about their intentions? . I bet you wouldn't want to cross the path of the basij. Why is everyone charming, every nation perfectly reasonable and well intentioned except the evil anglo-american empire. Is n't it you who believes in bogeymen too. Two wrongs don't make a right. If an Iranian paramilitary policeman batons or shoots a protestor to death, why say 'oh, you're just inventing a bogeyman.' Sayerslle (talk) 13:54, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The Anglo-American axis has been propping bloody regimes all around the world, regimes that indulge in little more sinister mis-adventures than Iran ever has done inside and outside, whenever it suits its interests. Pakistan is one example, Saudi Arabia is another. Isn't Islamic terror a love child beget by Anglo-America and its keep Pakistan? See this sub-section and check the references. Pakistan itself was a cynical British ploy of divide and rule. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Check this American abetment of genocide
Between March 25 and December 16, estimated 3 million Bengalees were killed, 200000 women raped and 10 million were displaced. This was the worst genocide after Second World War. This was mass killing of innocent civilian, men, women and children too part of the country was spared. Killing field can be found in every town and village. Killing was particularly targeted towards youth, religious minorities and democratic forces. In the final days of liberation war, local fundamentalist collaborators of Pakistan Army named Al-badar and Al-shams took leading intellectuals including writers, journalists, doctors, lawyers and engineers blindfolded, killed them and dumped them in Dhaka city outskirts. In July 1999, construction work was in progress for expansion of a mosque at Mirpur, Dhaka. Construction workers, discovered skeletons while digging the land, which was later confirmed to be a killing field of 1971 martyrs. With assistance from Bangladesh Army, Liberation War Museum excavated the area and found 5 skeletons and 1766 bones, which are preserved in the museum. In November 1999, based on eyewitness accounts, Liberation War Museum excavated an abandoned pump house in Mirpur and found 70 skeletons and 5392 bones. Liberation War Museum preserves this historic site JALLAD KHANA to reflect upon heinous crimes perpetrated by Pakistan Army and their fundamentalist collaborators... Nixon administration never condemned mass killing and destruction, rather supported evil designs of Pakistani military rulers. Declassified White House and State Department papers strongly suggest that US administration's overtures toward Pakistani Military regime was primarily for global strategic interest to reward Pakistan for its support in developing new US-China axis. In final days of liberation war, US seventh fleet was moved towards shores of Bay of Bengal and in United Nation's Security Council US representatives moved repeated (resolutions)...
 * I'm not a fan of most of U.S foreign policy over most of the last 50 years myself, like in south-east asia in the 60's/70's - terrible, but I repeat two wrongs don't make a right. Did the bombing of Cambodia by the U.S. give Pol Pot an excuse to torture and kill his countrymen? The U.S didn't force WestPakistanis to kill East Pakistanis did it? I don't think there is no difference between Obama and 'Nobama'. If you can't see any difference between politicians, its all just anglo-america, well, I don't agree. We agree that things need to be made fairer anyhow.Sayerslle (talk) 16:00, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Two wrongs do not make a right, well that is undeniably true. That is why South - Africa, is perhaps the success that it is today. A pity US of America does not believe in this. If you don't like Obama-Nobama, let it be Tweedledum and Tweedledee. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 16:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


 * i read the Christopher Hitchens link, Yogesh. I dont know what to say about American policy with regard to Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia etc..I'm just saying Obama is better than Bush and that he is inheriting a right mess that I guess has its roots in the Cold War, and before that,. If I were a villager in Afghanistan I'd certainly be worried that if I took the side of the Anglo-Americans and they were leaving in a couple of years - what would happen to me then? Reprisals. Its a right mess. I distrust all power really. I'd like Britain to become an obedient, humble part of Europe and stop  its foreign interventionist adventures. But Hitchens supported the Iraq invasion, and why ally with India instead of Pakistan- why not deal equitably with all other nations? I saw a programme about Pakistan and it said that although outwardly it is very strict Muslim, in private , and in the main cities, its probably different in the rural conservative areas, in the cities, in private , you can pretty much think and act how you want.. Aren't India and Pakistan both nuclear powers? I dont know enough about policy to Pakistan - obviously the West want them to take on the Taliban and they are aren't they? The Taliban have been bombing civilians pretty badly so I think the leaders are serious about taking the Taliban on. Whats wrong with them? I saw a photo in Paris Match and they'd cut a young woman to death for listening to Western music. I hate fundamentalists really. Mindless. 00:48, 25 December 2009 (UTC)Sayerslle (talk)
 * Thanks. Happy Christmas and Happy New Year to you too. Best wishes. Sayerslle (talk) 22:54, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Just to say ""Hi"
Hi Yogesh, I just found your name while reviewing the article history for the article about Charvaka. Happy editing. Shivashree (talk) 04:28, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Yogesh for dropping by my talk page. If you might have noticed, I have not been engaged in any major project on Wikipedia over the last month. Trapped in a busy schedule.  If you are interested, please go ahead and start the article on Godavari Parulekar yourself. You can create it on your userpage as a start and then move it to mainspace as it is ready to go. Here are some references if you want to go ahead:


 * Encyclopaedic dictionary of Marathi literature‎ - Page 270
 * The Encyclopaedia Of Indian Literature (Volume Two) Page 1823
 * Encyclopaedia Of Political Parties
 * Mythos and logos of the Warlis: a tribal worldview


 * You can find many more with . Let me know if you are interested. I will be happy to assist you developing the article. Shivashree (talk) 03:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * It's okay. Shivashree (talk) 07:13, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Khandoba
I've asked Khandoba to be reassessed by the community for disputes relating to sensitive, caste/ethnicity based content (listed here ). Zuggernaut (talk) 18:02, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

FYI
nominated British Empire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Zuggernaut (talk) 01:19, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

British Empire
I think it's important to stay calm and not get emotional despite the obvious historical reasons. If the focus is on specific contents of the article and how it can be improved for accuracy, it will help the entire community. You will start appearing like a troll if you get too emotional. You've obviously been around much longer that I have so you pretty much know all these things better than me. Take it easy. Zuggernaut (talk) 03:54, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Your Block
I have read somewhere in the past that users are allowed to appeal thier block. You can check out the relevant essays/policies on this and then appeal. Also, take a look at this: Zuggernaut (talk) 17:19, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks I am contemplating and do not want to act in haste. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 02:43, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Could you explain your comments which seem to consider my statements as trolling and add that but POV cuts both ways, isn't by these standards the whole article BE troll?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 02:48, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That is my point the BE article is troll if my statements are troll? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 02:51, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I see where you are coming from but your argument will make sense only if the greater Wikipedia community accepts it. IMO, it's best to focus on the contested areas one by one until the article is improved to an acceptable level. The current FA review is helping in achieving that albeit just a little bit. Had you not been banned, one more potential editor would have scrutinized the article further.  Zuggernaut (talk) 16:29, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You remarked that my comments came across as trolling to you. Please if you share a few points with me, that would be of great help. I am not appealing the block which involves the blocking administrator ideally. That would be a waste of energy and would perhaps be stressful. Also real world issues, I am a contractor and pre-Diwali is always a busy time. I wonder whether you could give exact details of which and why a certain comment came across as trolling, and then perhaps that same logic could be applied elsewhere. Any way I will be out of action only for a few days, and then if you can I will need your help, but I will share what is on my mind only when I have my editing rights restored. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:07, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you can seek an extension of time for the the Review as one interested editor cannot contribute his viwes (me). Remember I was on your original list. Try. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:12, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * May be you can quote me, from this discussion. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It's best to stick to WP policies in spirit and letter - if they banned you, they don't want to hear from you for two weeks :-) so I won't quote you. Not too much to worry though because I think the 2 week period is going to end soon now, I think. Regarding the trolling allegation, it was borderline too but I think you should not have brought up the Charles Dickens topic (although it was surprising/alarming new knowledge for me) since it is not covered anywhere in that article. It's best to focus on what you think are the problems with the article in it's present state. No point venturing in to hypothetical scenarios. Zuggernaut (talk) 23:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Allegation of troll
Shocking eh? But it is there in the article, thanks to yours truly. That was my point, inspite of many good sources, this point was allowed in the article only after a huge debate and after an AN/I against me that got I got through. Please read the article again. Check this section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Dickens#Allegations_of_anti-Semitism_and_racism. Why was the statement trolling was it because most would like to believe that Dickens never said it. That is Wikipedia here for. That is my point, I grew up reading Dickens what he wrote about Indians, now it is there in Wikipedia, a student doing her home work assignment on Dickens would know. That is the beauty of Wikipedia those on the other side of this debate are trying to besmirch. My quoting Dickens was not troll. It was the other editors' lack of knowledge of the subject that made them assume that I was trolling. Dicken's son fought against the freedom fighters in 1857. He used his influence with a heiress to get him a commission. Dickens created quite a racket about India in Britain. Dicken's is symbolic of what Britain did in India, he is one of the most respected English writers but see what he has to write about Indians? That is why I compared this BE article with Dickens. Why would that be troll? If some one is trolling here it is Dickens. He is among those types who collected money for Dyer the butcher of Jalianwallahbag's pension. This BE article smells of Jalianwallahbag and Dickens. Please read the article on him and the sources quoted and also that he wrote that Franklin and his team members were eaten by Inuits when it was proved that they ate each other, he was a terminal racist, though he ran into trouble with the Jews, and had to create an anti-Fagin, to assuage their feelings. But Indian's were allowed no such luxury. I am a little busy, I think my block is gone after it is I need your help. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I know it feels like you have been wronged by the ban and that the desire to go in to WP:DRR is strong because of those hurt feelings. If I were in your situation, I would not go in to DRR against Yellowmonkey. DRR can be time consuming and will most likely take up all of your Wikipedia time, keeping you away from editing the areas you like. Using DRR against offending content (take the BE example) will be more productive and help in improving the article than when it is used against an admin. Also keep in mind that Yellowmonkey pointed out a serious flaw in the artcile. Let me know if I can help negotiate via talk pages between you and Yellowmonkey. 18:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Update: The colonial lobby is strong and they almost always inject their strong POV in many, many articles. There are numerous articles which you can edit and help. It's best to take on those articles directly rather than spend time on DRR. Zuggernaut (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Please comment on the Dickens explanation for which you felt that I was trolling. Thanks for your advice about DRR. You are right time is the most precious resource, but Yellowmonkey unless s/he proves me wrong will alwasy be considered by me as an undeserving administrator, and I will try my best to correct the situation. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Dickens wasn't mentioned in the article so bringing it up at BE seemed like indulging in a conversation just for the sake of an argument. I don't think it was trolling at that point in time but it could be viewed by some as trolling "in early stages". 19:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Dickens wasn't but 1857 was, and Dickens was an active rabblerouser over 1857. BE wrote, the mutiny was supressed, weren't those writing BE today sharing Dickens' perspective, which was totally inaccurate and onesided? Why was that troll? Or even the early stages of troll? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:15, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't care what perspective the editors who developed that article share or what their opinions are. My only concern is that a FA shouldn't have errors/omissions for the reasons I have stated in the FA review. There's a cabal operating there and I just wanted to alert you that you might be viewed by them as a troll. Zuggernaut (talk) 04:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

British Empire FARC
I just provided feedback on one of the topics you objected to about the article in question. It's about the causes of the 1857 event and can be found somewhere in this section Featured_article_review/British_Empire/archive1 (see my responses to User:Fainites) Zuggernaut (talk) 00:04, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

FYI
I've added the Savarkar source to the list. Zuggernaut (talk) 02:58, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

British Empire
Just wanted to say how delighted I am that your attempts to have British Empire delisted have failed. Bye. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 22:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC) You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Justin talk 14:41, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Warning: Soapboxing and tendentious editing on Talk:British Empire
Hi. Your edits on Talk:British Empire are violating WP:TE and WP:SOAP. Note, in particular, that you are repeating the same argument over and over again, without persuading people, a clear sign of a tendentious editor. This is now at the point where your edits on the talk page are disruptive. Please stop or you will be blocked. Regards. --RegentsPark (talk) 14:45, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Canvassin
Hello. It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on others' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  13:30, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I did not know that it was not wikilegal. Thanks for bringing it to my notice. I had taken care to put a neutral message, please contribute to the discussion, however even selective posting is frowned upon. I am stopping posting messages except one in which I would suggest a new (to the discussion) user to post his opinion at the right place. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 13:41, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Your RfC Wikipedia_talk:Article_titles
Your RfC at Wikipedia_talk:Article_titles is not a good idea since there is an outstanding move request, initiated by you, in process. If I may direct your attention to the note on forum shopping. --RegentsPark (talk) 16:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Strongly refute allegation of forum shopping,: It is essential that administrators are required to learn wikipedia well in that they learn to keep their biases at home, before being made so, or they tend to indulge in adversely affecting the quality of wikipedia. Forum shopping goes like this Forum shopping and spin-doctoring. Raising the same issue repeatedly on different pages or with different wording is confusing and disruptive. It doesn't help to seek out a forum where you get the answer you want, or to play with the wording to try and trick different editors into agreeing with you, since sooner or later someone will notice all of the different threads. You can obviously draw attention to the issue on noticeboards or other talk pages if you are careful to add links to keep all the ongoing discussions together, but best practice is to choose one appropriate forum for the consensus discussion, and give (as much as possible) a single neutral, clear, and objective statement of the issue. The spirit of this clause is hidden issue raising on various forums. Whereas this editor has clearly mentioned that there is a proposal for move, because of which there is urgency to understand why a certain exception has been made. No ball this time Administrator RegentsPark. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 04:21, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Ganga
Thanks a lot for bringing this topic up. Trans-Dniestr (talk) 22:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

It's interesting to watch. My quick count just now shows an exact tie vote, so it seems unlikely to move. Maybe over time Ganga will become more commonly known and ultimately accepted in the wider world (it was new to me). WikiProject Rivers has a detailed section on page names for rivers, but Ganges/Ganga is clearly an usual case beyond the advice given there. Whatever the result, it may be useful for improving that name advice section. I've certainly learned about more about the various applicable policies and guidelines! Pfly (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Yogesh, I appreciate what you're saying, I just don't agree. Regards, Jonchapple (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh never mind! Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:52, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Final warning
You've been editing very disruptively, badgering participants at the discussion on the Ganges to Ganga move, canvassing and now even going as far as to badger them on their talk pages. If you continue to do so, or indulge in any other tendentious and disruptive editing practices you will be blocked. You've been warned sufficiently and it looks like you have also been blocked for the same reason before. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  05:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Diff
If you're probably asking about the diff for when the Ganga vs. Ganges comment was added to the article titles guideline... I expanded the history list to 500 from the default of 50 and went back to a point where the edit wasn't there. Then I took kind of a "binary search" approach to narrowing down when it was posted. That doesn't guarantee it wasn't there at some previous time, but anecdotally from the binary search I didn't see it prior to September 1. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:27, 21 November 2010 (UTC) Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Please if and when you have the time explain this step by step, (1) I expanded the history list to 500 from the default of 50 and went back to a point where the edit wasn't there: How did you find out when the edit wasn't there? Read so many pages?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The number of entries per screen page is at the bottom of the history entries list. The default is 50. You can select several increments, the largest being 500. If there's a huge amount of history, it's more challenging. But this one, when expanded to 500, took me back over a year, and it wasn't there at that time, so I worked within that one screen page and found it within 5 minutes or so. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:44, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Step 1, understood. Step 2 please: How did you locate the exact entry in so many entries on the history page? The page summary isn't exactly helpful "National varieties of English: per WP:NCGN"Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The presence of that thing in the edit summaries influenced where I looked, but the basic approach is this: I know it was there on November 20, and not there at the bottom of the page. So I position about halfway up the page (about entry 250, although they are not numbered), and see if it's there. If it is, I go down to about entry 375 (3/4 down the page) and see if it's there; otherwise, I go up to about entry 125 (1/4 down the page) and see if it's there. And so on. Another way is to check the first entry in each month, or some other time interval. But the approach I just described is the "binary search", and unless the item has been repeatedly reverted (which you can probably tell by increasingly irritated edit summaries), then this will quickly lead to just a few entries. Then you start checking the "cur" on each one until you find it. Now, there may be some much easier approach to this, but I don't know. You'd have to ask at the help desk. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:20, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation. I get it clearly. It looks very labourous and time consuming, for a person like me, who works from a slow internet connection. Thanks a lot again for the trouble in explaining very clearly. it would have been great if one could put the string up and get results for its occurence.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:53, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm reasonably certain there's an easier ways to find it, but I don't know what it is. But although it can be time-consuming, I like this approach in general, as it can get me a little more familiar with the history of an article. Although if an article has had a lot of activity, it can get very tedious. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→
 * Oh yes!Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:16, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I should have said to use the "prev" item for the diff. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:23, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

There's also a tool called WikiBlame that automatically searches a page's history. You provide a bit of text and it tries to find the diff for when that text was added. It can be a bit slow, especially when you increase its default history search from 50 to something more useful (I just tried with 200). Let's see if this direct link works: WikiBlame example. Seems to have worked for me, if this diff is correct. Was faster than usual--less than a minute. Pfly (talk) 11:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Useful tool.! Yogesh Khandke (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If you're trying to deal with hundreds or thousands of entries over many, many pages, especially if you're trying to find a bit of text that you know disappeared at some undetermined point in the past, then you could start this and then watch Gone With the Wind or something, and hopefully it will be done when you get back. Especially if you're operating on a TRS-80 like I am. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Notice
An RfC/U has been opened on User:YellowMonkey's conduct. I'm notifying you because your name is mentioned there. If you have any input, please proceed to Requests for comment/YellowMonkey. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   00:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I apologise for my block of you, which was excessive. I should have had a discussion with you about my concerns and arguing style first and try to look for improvements instead.  YellowMonkey  ( new photo poll )  04:22, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's all right. Thanks for the suggestions, I will endeavour to follow wikirules in letter and spirit, and continue to learn about the project, so as to be a positive contributor. If one is not very good at a particular tool, or using a particular privilege, getting opinions would do wonders as against acting in haste and on hunches. These opinions should be from those proven to be competent in such situations. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:03, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If you consider appropriate, I wish you to address this as well., it marks me out as a history-sheeter.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:17, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't redact your block log (ArbCom would have my bit for it), but hopefully the entry I just made in that same log will clear up any ambiguity. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   00:49, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Harry, that request was addressed to [user:YellowMonkey|YellowMonkey], I left a talkback at his page too, in case he is not watching my page.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 13:46, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Harry for all the trouble you have taken.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

IST
Hello Yogesh. I believe this is the first time we are interracting. Yes, I know that the userbox is giving me a time lag, but I don't know what to do with it. Any kind of permutation and combination doesnot give the exact time. :( — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 09:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you can try the help call from your talk page.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 09:27, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

 * So you could realize I have replied on my talk to your comment. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 09:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If you notice the time and date, it was before your reply. Version when talkback was added. Anyway, no problem. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 09:13, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I missed it, perhaps my software is faulty. :-)Yogesh Khandke (talk) 09:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Ganga v. Ganges
You are obviously watching the Ganges talk page but once you let me know that we are OK to close the debate, I will initiate a discussion at the project mentioned in Talk:Ganges. Are you OK to close the debate at the talk page of Ganges? Zuggernaut (talk) 18:31, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Please explain, and there are others also who have spent a lot of time on it, Jayen for instance. You need to check with him too, by explain I want to know what I am to do, withdraw the move proposal? And what is this that you are planning.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 04:01, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I presented the table in a matter-of-fact manner. There's nothing personal about any editors. Take a look at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias. What I meant is that discussing this over and over again at the talk pages might be like banging you head against the wall and that we should call off the effort and take it to other places like the link I've provided. Another place we can try is one of the village pumps. We will not achieve any different results given that the gap was 2:1 if we try again. Zuggernaut (talk) 08:12, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * What about wp:NOTDEMOCRACY, what about Jayen's suggestion?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * There are people who will never abandon their opinion can can eventually use the same WP:Democracy if the numbers flip. I am not very optimistic about the success of the move but persistence might pay off, if you have the time to persist. I will of course support the move whenever a decisive moment arises. Zuggernaut (talk) 17:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Ganga, British Empire, Famine in India
Zuggernaut (talk) 17:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I've responded to your query by e-mail.


 * You were mentioned in an ANI report.

New project
As you know, there is a serious POV problem with several India related Wikipedia articles as documented in the NPOV policy and the WP:Countering systemic bias essay. I am thinking of setting up a separate project to overcome this bias if there is enough support. Would you be willing to support the creation of such a project? Zuggernaut (talk) 03:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Human rights in India
Hi. Could you take a look at this article, particularly at the edits of User: Profitoftruth85, which seem to be deliberately inserting bias (with misleading edit summaries) to an otherwise very stable and well-written lead? Particularly problematic are his violations of WP:POINT and WP:RECENTISM in this case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Extraroundtable (talk • contribs) 20:32, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi. I will not be editing that article since the user in question, User: Profitoftruth85, is a paid agent of the banned terrorist group Babbar Khalsa, knows me personally, and BK has sent death threats to my family in the US in the past (they are extremely well-funded from there). Please do what you can.
 * He is also inserting Sikh extremist Indophobic propaganda in the highly viewed article Genocides in history.Extraroundtable (talk) 11:39, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Ganges
The different approach/strategy I am talking about is to approach WikiProject:Countering Systemic Bias as a first step. Not much is likely to happen there but who knows. Another avenue is to take it up on the talk page of the respective policy and make a request for an exception. If that doesn't work either there are still other avenues before it could be taken to Jimmy's talk page. Zuggernaut (talk) 16:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Zuggernaut
You raised some concerns on IRC about this topic ban, and you asked me to repeat or summarise my suggestions here.

First, the community obviously feels that there are serious problems with Zuggernaut's editing in the topic area. Discussing that with Zuggernaut on-wikipedia would be difficult because he is currently banned from discussing the topic area itself - an exception could be arranged for the purposes of discussion, but that is probably not useful at this particular time. I do suggest that you email Zuggernaut (you can do this from his talk page) so that you can discuss his editing and how it might be altered.

I also suggest contacting the admin who closed the discussion, User:ErrantX and ask his opinions about what you are aiming to do.

And finally I think it would be seen as perfectly acceptable to contact two of the editors who supported the topic ban, and ask them politely about their reasoning, if their reasoning seems unclear after you have reviewed the discussion. You could also, perhaps, ask them what undertakings they think Zuggernaut should make in order to get the topic ban removed. (You may wish to check in advance whether such undertakings were given by him before.)

This is just my personal opinion, but I'm putting it here so that you can refer to it, as requested. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I thank you for your time and help.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 20:45, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Please confirm that I did not discuss the merits or other wise of the proposal, I merely repeated the question I have put above under the helpme tag above. An editor has been banned from certain topics, I was not a part of the discussion and came to know about it only after the ban was enforced and discussion closed. I consider that the ban is harsh and excessive. What can I do about it? Can I discuss it with other editors and the banned editor and other editors supporting the ban? I had to go to IRC as my question was not responded to for a long time, unlike my previous experienceYogesh Khandke (talk) 20:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, you said several things more than that, but in summary, you were mainly asking questions about the topic ban. Anyway there are no rules (or even conventions) against discussing any aspects of such matters on IRC. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:05, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Zuggernaut (talk) 15:59, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Mumbai IX
As per your request to be notified of WikiMeet-ups in Mumbai, Mumbai IX has been announced and will take place on Saturday 23 April 2011 at 10.30am. Railway station nearest to venue is CST Railway Station or Churchgate. Cheers, Around The Globe  सत्यमेव जयते 08:44, 12 April 2011 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wiki_Guides/Allow_socializing&diff=prev&oldid=420205133

What is the easiest way to find a diff, what I wish to know is there is an edit on a page, we need to quote its diff some times, how to find its diff, what I do is look up user contribution and then if I am lucky the edit summary is good, the problem that the time stamp of the diff and what appears on the talk page isn't the same.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 13:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * To find a diff, look at the page history and identify the edit you are interested in. At the left hand end of that line, where it says "(cur|prev)", right-click on the word "prev", and on the menu that appears left-click on "Copy link location." Now you have in your clip-board a URL to the diff, and you can paste that where you want it. See Help:Diff for more detail. JohnCD (talk) 14:24, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually my problem is about finding diffs of edits on talk pages, for example (1)I find something written on a talkpage which I wish to quote. (2)From its time stamp, I try to locate the diff from the user contribution list of the editor, however I find no entry that has the same timestamp as that on the talk page why?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:33, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * (If you don't mind my butting in!) Yogesh, you should see the same time in the diff as you see in user contributions, history, or on the talk page item itself. The only time you would see a different time (assuming that the editor hasn't modified the time) is in the edit window. In the edit window, the time shown is UTC time because that's what is actually stored by the system. Everywhere else the time you actually see is determined by what you have in the 'Date and time' section of your preferences. Hope this helps. --rgpk (comment) 14:58, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That is not what I see RegentsPark, I look at the time of the edit, and try to relate it with the diff as seen on user contributions there is a time difference, is it because my system clock is malfunctioning?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:05, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It can't be because of your system clock since wikipedia doesn't use it. Does this happen with all diffs or just one or two? The time is modifiable on the talk page (but not on user contributions). Would it be possible to give an example and I can see if I get the same difference?--rgpk (comment) 15:10, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The time I see here and perhaps you too is 15:10, 14 April 2011 (UTC), at your contributions it is 20:41, 14 April 2011. Is that your local time?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:14, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No. I see 11:11 am which is correct for my time zone (EDT). 20:41 is the correct local time in India though so it does look like user contributions is correct for you. You should be seeing 20:41 (or 20:40 since the talk page time and user contribution time appears to be a minute off) on your talk page as well. What time do you see for your own edits? IST or EDT? BTW, when I check as a logged off user, all times revert to UTC. --rgpk (comment) 15:19, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

od:For me time here is UTC, and time at user contributions is IST.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:24, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't explain this. You should be seeing the same time in both places. CarTick is the technical expert I always consult so perhaps a question on his page will solve this mystery. --rgpk (comment) 15:31, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Looking at my preferences, it appears I was wrong. Talk page comments show up in UTC unless you use the gadget "Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures, to be relative to local time." So, if you're not using that gadget, you should see talk page comments in UTC but history and contributions in whatever time zone you've set in your user preferences. --rgpk (comment) 15:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks that explains everything.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a pilot study
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only '''5 minutes’’’. cooldenny (talk) 17:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Appeal
You might want to check your idiom usage—no one wants to open a can of worms. Secondly, it's an indefinite ban—which means it can be reopened and appealed at any time, but myself and I believe most of my fellow arbs see no reason to as there's no evidence the user is planning on changing their behavior. You cannot fight "blow for blow" and expect to be congratulated or rewarded for it. I re-read the ANI discussion and agree with the process outcome, I read the appeal and so no reason to modify it as it's clear there would be no change except for a return to the status quo. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 18:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * (1)You are right, I should have written please clean the Augean Stables. (2)You are quoting only half of what I wrote, I wrote Zuggernaut's sin was that he returned blow for blow, my views are clear, he is wrong, but it was a brawl, and you have canned only one side, whereas the other side is scot free to provocate and create more Zuggernauts, Fowler&fowler, called Sue a whosie whatsie, when he found her comments disagreeable.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The purpose and scope of the requested case is to review the Zuggernaut ban. We are declining that request.  If there are other user conduct problems within this topical area, they should go through dispute resolution processes, coming to ArbCom if the community cant resolve them. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks John. For the moment, I feel that it is for Zuggernaut, to pursue the matter, my interest has started to look suspicious already.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:14, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I hadn't the foggiest who Sue Gardner was when I wrote that comment! The "whosie whatsie" was general, and certainly not her!  Amazing what conspiracy theorists will dream up.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  06:56, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That is the problem, Fowler, there is no doubt about your expertise, but you refuse to read, you have an opinion which you prefer to reliable sources, if I were you, I would have checked the quote, checked who Sue was, etc..., your editing behaviour isn't helping to make this place conducive for constructive work, why do you think fellow editors believe that you are a plotter with superhuman power and cunning? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:14, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * :) I guess that's a compliment (at least in my book it is). So, thank you.  But, but, ...  if I read everything, how would I get any work done?   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  17:35, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

just saw that
i think User:Sue Gardner was referring to you and Zuggernaut. you must feel vindicated? --CarTick (talk) 18:20, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No I don't think it is Zuggernaut, he has only 28 edits. Most of his arguments dont stick, please see her talk page I have posted a correction there I think it is Jayen466, with 168 edits along with my 241, Jayen is a European. Thanks though, I was going to write on your talk page about it. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * she might not want to get involved about something she commented outside wikipedia. i wouldnt bother her and put her in an uncomfortable situation. --CarTick (talk) 18:48, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It's okay CarTick, I don't mind; I'm interested. Thanks for being thoughtful about it, though :-) Sue Gardner (talk) 20:29, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * i knew this will get controversial, but you, not unexpectedly, are handling it well. regards. :) --CarTick (talk) 04:30, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment on my talk page about the Ganges article
Yogesh Khandke, thanks for your comment on my talk page about the Ganges article -- I appreciate you setting the record straight. I do tell the story of the Ganges article name sometimes, because I think it's really interesting. So, if you, or anyone else reading this page would like to write me something on your perception of the discussion about the title of the article, I would love to read it. My understanding --which may be faulty-- is basically this: Indian editors are in the minority on enWP; the majority of enWP editors are probably used to the river being called Ganges where they live; Wikipedia policy I believe says --roughly-- that Wikipedia should use official names, with redirects from unofficial names, and that isn't what's happening on the Ganges article. I'm interested to know if that's roughly accurate.

(To be clear: I'm not personally aiming to get involved in the controversy over the article title, and again, my understanding of what's happening in the discussion might be incorrect. I also don't have any particular expertise or understanding regarding the issue at play here (origin of the river's name, what it's called where and by whom). I'm interested in this particular issue primarily insofar as it might tell me something useful about systemic bias on Wikipedia, limitations of our consensus process, and how we might expect the encyclopedia to evolve as more editors join us from India and other non-Western parts of the world.) Thanks again for your comment. Sue Gardner (talk) 20:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, I happened to see this and thought I'd add a comment or two (though you probably already know these things, Yogesh). Wikipedia policy isn't to use official names but rather common names. WP:COMMONNAME is an actual policy page. There's a bunch of related guideline and essay pages like WP:OFFICIALNAMES (essay), WP:NCGN (guidelines), and WP:SEVEN (a silly "humorous" page on the general topic). There are many examples of official names not being used for page names. The first that comes to mind is Queen Charlotte Islands (officially "Haida Gwaii", the page has been moved from one to the other for a few years now). Someday I think Haida Gwaii will likely to more common, but that day may be years away, at least. Anyway, just thought I'd point this out--that Wikipedia policy is not "...should use official names". How this all relates to Ganges/Ganga is another topic, one which I'm still more or less neutral about. Pfly (talk) 04:07, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is a tertiary source. It is ultimately beholden to the consensus in other tertiary sources.  These (of the last 30 years) prefer |++intitle:encyclopaedia&tbs=,cdr:1,cd_min:Jan%201_2%201980&num=10 "Ganges" to |++intitle:encyclopaedia&tbs=,cdr:1,cd_min:Jan%201_2%201980&num=10 "Ganga" by 2 to 1.  As long as that ratio doesn't change substantially, I don't see anything changing on Wikipedia.  Also, India is not the only country that the Ganges flows through; it also flows through Bangladesh, where it is successively called Padma River and Meghna River.  Why are we only worrying about the name in the English language media in India?    Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  07:25, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * If Wikipedia policy is for Padma or Meghna let it be so.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:29, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * While looking at other tertiary sources is a good idea, and should help shape decision making, thirty years is a long time in publishing. One of Wikipedia's strengths is to be able to respond to changes more quickly than printed tertiary sources. At the time we analyzed this; Ganga appeared to predominate both in international scholarly discourse over the past ten years, and in current news sources. Ganga is the most common name in such sources today. -- JN 466  12:41, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * All searches books, scholarly articles now reduced to 10 years with no appreciable change in the overall result. See Talk:Ganga.  :)   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  17:38, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
By the way, thanks for starting to work on the Ganges page itself. While I know you feel strongly about the page name I personally find improving the page itself much more important. So, thanks for working on it. It is getting better. Will take a lot of work and patience to get to FA quality! Pfly (talk) 19:22, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I will have a look at Columbia first.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:28, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The Columbia River? Or a different Columbia? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:34, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Columbia River--I suggested taking a look because it is the only FA quality page about a major river, last I checked. It's also an unusual case of a page reaching FA quality through teamwork between a group of editors. Most FA pages are largely the work of individual editors, I think. Achieving high quality via collaboration can be very hard. I pitched in a bit myself in the process, and it was one of the most enjoyable things I've experienced on Wikipedia. The other editors who worked on the FAC process are wonderful, friendly, and fun. Some of Wikipedia's best, I think. Pfly (talk) 19:42, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Pfly please check the issues that I have raised on RegentsPark's page, though most are bilateral one is about Fowler's inappropriate search terms, for which a new editor has called him untrustworthy, you immediately corrected the new editor's statistics but were silent on Fowler's inappropriate modus operandi. All this since you talk about FA and team work. Even though you slightly leaned towards Ganges, I assumed good faith and had wished you arbitrate on Ganga x Ganges, we need to trust each other and trust has to be earned.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I see what you mean and apologize. I don't mean to support one side of the page name issue and not the other. In fact, at this point, after so much has been said about it, I don't care very much about the page name and am finding the many long posts about it tiresome. I probably replied to Heloworld mostly in irritation at seeing yet more about the page name. I should have just kept out of it. In any case, I'm not good at dealing with disputes between editors and largely ignore them. That said, and if I can be frank for a moment, I do find Fowler's style a bit harsh/combative, but then again, your style also seems a bit harsh and combative to me. I hesitate to say so...and say it only in the friendliest way. Pfly (talk) 20:08, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I will endeavour to be (cant think of antonyms) non-combative and kind. Will you give me a particular example of what I wrote and what I should have written?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 20:16, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not especially specific because this is very informal and I've possibly spent too much time as it is looking into this. Please see what I have said on my talk. I touched on Fowler's concern about you. I primarily addressed Fowler seeing it was your concern which sparked the request for me to take a look, but you both need to try again (and if things don't work out, consider an approach which will not cause the other party to escalate unnecessarily). That is, I don't want to see useful contributions being lost from the area(s) unnecessarily. Ncmvocalist (talk) 22:29, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Unequivocal apology
Dear Yogesh Khandke, I apologize unequivocally for all words, phrases, or figures of speech that you consider to be insulting or uncharitable. I will now be taking a short leave of absence from editing both the Ganges and Talk:Ganges pages and will, consequently, be out of your hair. You, I hope, will return the favor by not appearing with dispatch on the page I edit next, especially if you have no history of hitherto editing that page. Happy editing. Very best regards, Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  11:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * unequivocal acceptance no hard feelings please.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 20:06, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

inter wiki link
you can do it in both places. please show me the English and the Swedsh language articles you want linked? --CarTick (talk) 20:56, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Want this link to work, Claude Poussin, the article I wish to connect it is here.Yogesh Khandke  (talk) 21:09, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * sv:Claude Poussin. here it is. sorry i didnt understand your question first. may be i still havent. --CarTick (talk) 21:17, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Neat! Thanks!Yogesh Khandke (talk) 21:20, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * u r welcome. but, i am not sure if it is a norm to provide links to non-English language articles internally. we could have a Swedish editor create the article for us in English instead. here is a group of wikipedians who could help. Category:Swedish Wikipedians. --CarTick (talk) 21:26, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, we can do it ourselves, that article has only a few lines. Till then please tolerate, or revert.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 21:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about this, but take a look at Help:Interlanguage links, which seems to suggest not to inline link without extra clarification. Pfly (talk) 21:35, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Compliant? ThanksYogesh Khandke (talk)
 * that sums it up. i like the red link and the foreign language article in paranthesis idea. it is a matter of choice i guess. noticed you have already done it. --CarTick (talk) 21:48, 21 April 2011 (UTC)