Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Patriotic Indian Wikipedian's Guild


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was speedy delete as partial recreation of hitherto deleted contents. Please follow the normal steps of dispute resolution, maitaining a "Users to Watch" list is not acceptable outside of channels mandated by policy or by the Arbitration Committee. This category page meets neither. El_C 02:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Category:Patriotic Indian Wikipedian's Guild
This page is inappropriate. It appears to be used to rally likeminded users with a certain POV to band together, and appears to be openly hostile to certain types of other demographic of wikipedians. Please start a WikiProject on the matter to police for NPOV, this is phrased too much like an us/them mentality.Blnguyen | rant-line 05:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong delete: per nom. --Ragib 05:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: Half of this page is a copy of User:AMbroodEY/Fundy Watch/Watch List, also under MFD Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:AMbroodEY/Fundy Watch. --Ragib 05:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete per nom --Srikeit (Talk 05:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - It seems this page was made as a result of User:AMbroodEY/Fundy Watch being put up for deletion. Bakuman also copied much of the list onto User:Bakasuprman/I. BhaiSaab talk 05:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - The User:Bakasuprman/I is simply a list of articles. nothing wrondg with that, he could simply watchlist them, for example.Blnguyen' | rant-line 05:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * 'Comment The vote of "strong delete" above me was made by a WikiStalker who enjoys harrassing Wikipedians of a certain religion.Bakaman%% 16:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have nothing against Bakaman keeping that list - he didn't copy the list of usernames. But his unfounded personal attack is uncalled for. I don't care about the religion of other Wikipedians, nor do I want to harass any members of a particular one. BhaiSaab talk 17:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Unfounded personal attack!?!? I commented on your actions (wikistalking, harrasssing me, D-boy, and Netaji). Its absolutely FINE and WikiLegal dfor me to comment on your ACTIONS. You go into my userpages (digging really deep) trying to find any dirt to pick up and accuse ME of personal attacks? Bakaman%% 17:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Take it to the Administator's noticeboard if you have so much evidence. BhaiSaab talk 17:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong delete. People who dispassionately mirror the outside consensus of mainstream scholarship are called dangerous extremists here. That doesn't make much sense. The editors of this category do not seem to understand WP:NOR and WP:NOT very well. If you don't want certain theories on Wikipedia, you need to first convince all the scholars of the world, or at least most of them, of your side. One cannot use WP as a battleground for debate. 07:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, I should mention the absurdity of the category's title in that it suggests that one cannot be a patriotic Indian unless one takes a very conservative Hindu position. So what are India's Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists, and atheists to this cat's editors, just simple traitors and scoundrels? CRCulver 08:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Deletenot only this page but all mirror pages. Holy | Warrior 09:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually we (Hindus) like Buddhists and Sikhs. In case you didn't know its the "secular" congress that hates the Sikhs (1984).Bakaman%% 15:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete This is embarrassing for us non-POV pushing Indians/Hindus :) GizzaChat  &#169; 09:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * speedy delete, of course, or move to BJAODN :) dab (&#5839;) 09:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's needed to know who's POV loyalties are where. Bakaman%% 15:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - Wikipedia doesn't need such things. The attacks on respected users like Siddiqui, AE and Dbachman (and others) is quite disturbing to say the least. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 16:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Rename it as Indian Wikipedian's Guild --Cardreader 17:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete' This doesn't even merit a vote. The entire purpose of this page is to violate WP:NOT (battleground), WP:NPOV, WP:Civil, and WP:AGF...This does not belong on Wikipedia namespace and should be deleted immediately. The editors who created it should be strongly cautioned. His Excellency... 21:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete with fire in any and all locations. If user subpages are substantial recreations, nuke them as well. This has no place here. -- nae'blis 21:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Any bunch of nationalist editors so clueless as to votestack here, where their actions can be proven to ArbCom, should be encouraged to do so. Septentrionalis 22:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a battleground. --Zoz (t) 23:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, Dab, Zoz, et al... Joe 23:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Now that the first attempt to unify patriotic Indians has expectedly been killed by you-know-who, it is pertinent to consider the history of the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AMbroodEY/Fundy_Watch for a while. It sure reveals an interesting pattern of some 'usual suspects' already being in the watchlist of some people.
 * Some history behind this idea and an offer to compromise

For all those who were not privy to the background of this debate, here is a brief reconstruction of events leading up to this Miscellany for deletion vote


 * For more than three months, this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AMbroodEY/Fundy_Watch was lying dormant. There was not a single edit on this page from the end of April 2006 till the start of August 2006.


 * July 26, 2006. I first express my intent on User:WIN 's personal talk page about organizing a common interest group to better express patriotic Indian’s views in wikipedia. At this point I am unaware of such a forum already existing in wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AWIN&diff=65896932&oldid=64526900


 * On 4th of August, User:Subhash_bose expresses his support for our initiative, and also points out that a past such initiative is still hanging around in wikipedia. Again, the discussion is confined in the domain of personal talk pages. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASisodia&diff=67601087&oldid=67242360


 * Right on cue, on the 6th of August, the page first comes up for a debate on deletion, and all hell breaks lose. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:AMbroodEY/Fundy_Watch&oldid=67951351

Do we need any more proof regarding who is stalking whom?

I have already started this category with exactly the same objective as the deleted page. Unsurprisingly, it is now the next target for the hooligans baying for the blood of the patriotic Indians. I can assure you that this struggle will not end now. We are most definitely going to maintain a page somewhere in wikipedia where editors who sympathize with patriotic Indian’s aspirations can come and express their opinions without being censored by bigoted editors. We deserve a forum where all of us who battle alone the hate-mongers can come and share their knowledge of known bigots and frequently attacked page. '''We can compromise on the format. This idea can take the shape of a wikiproject or noticeboard or category or whatever'''. But something is definitely going to materialize, and going to stay put no matter what. This is an idea whose time has come.

Sisodia 00:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment - Well I reject the categorisation of myself as "hooligans baying for the blood of the patriotic Indians", but on the bright side that allows for a good counterweight at User:Blnguyen/Accusations as User:Anwar saadat had claimed that I was justifying fascist POV [Hindutva]. secondly, there is already WT:INWNB for Indian noticeboards and WikiProject Hinduism to notify others of problems arising from the editing of articles. To place a list of editors is bad as it can make people feel targeted. Personally, I don't need a written list to keep me reminded of which users I need to patrol for 3RR and NPA, it's all in my head. Blnguyen | rant-line 01:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: I hope you are reading the comments above, and also at Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:AMbroodEY/Fundy_Watch. Overwhelmingly, almost everyone denounced this type of watchlisting/blacklisting of users. While an anti-POV/pro-NPOV noticeboard isn't a bad idea, these two pages under MFD are definitely, as of the versions nominated for deletion, attack pages, ironically full of even more POV.
 * Your comment where you say "express their opinions without being censored by bigoted editors. We deserve a forum where who all who battle alone the hate-mongers can come and share their knowledge of known bigots and frequently attacked page." has serious problems, because who is to decide who is a bigot and who is not? Labelling other users as bigots, "bible thumper", and so on borders on libel and definitely is incivility, contrary to WP:NPA and WP:CIVILITY. There are ample ways to deal with edit disputes, WP:ANB, WP:ANB/I, WP:RFArb, WP:RFM to name a few. Wikipedia is not a battleground, nor a blog, rather a place to preserve knowledge. There's no room for hate. Thanks. --Ragib 00:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I am reading all the comments that are being posted in this debate all right. How about this. We make it a notice board called "Nationalist Indian wikipedian's noticeboard" (basically replace the word Patriotic with Nationalist), call the list of articles under watch as "Articles of interest for nationalist Indians", call the list of our opponents as "Editors potentially holding antagonistic views", and in general tone down the language. Will it be acceptable to you all? Can you promise that such an effort will not be pushed for deletion? If yes, we can make a deal. Sisodia 00:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Still doesn't work. There are Muslims, non-conservative Hindus, Christians, Buddhists, etc. who love their homeland, and yet do not agree with the conservative Hindu viewpoint of your guild. How about just naming your group "Conservative Hindu Wikipedians"?
 * FWIW, I still vote for deletion entirely, I'm just trying to point out the inappropriateness of the name. CRCulver 00:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.