Real shoaib (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
No edit summary |
||
Line 129: | Line 129: | ||
The [[WP:Feedback request service|feedback request service]] is asking for participation in [[Talk:Battle of Ia Drang#rfc_A1065FC|this request for comment on '''Talk:Battle of Ia Drang''']]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 49803 --> [[User:Legobot|Legobot]] ([[User talk:Legobot|talk]]) 04:24, 28 July 2016 (UTC) |
The [[WP:Feedback request service|feedback request service]] is asking for participation in [[Talk:Battle of Ia Drang#rfc_A1065FC|this request for comment on '''Talk:Battle of Ia Drang''']]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 49803 --> [[User:Legobot|Legobot]] ([[User talk:Legobot|talk]]) 04:24, 28 July 2016 (UTC) |
||
==Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction== |
|||
{{Ivmbox |
|||
|2=Commons-emblem-hand.svg |
|||
|imagesize=50px |
|||
|1=The following sanction now applies to you: |
|||
{{Talkquote|1=Any attempt to bring the purported or deduced or imagined ethnic or nationality identities of any users will lead to an immediate block. This includes an editor's own stated ethnic identity or nationality.}} |
|||
You have been sanctioned As a result of [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FEnforcement&type=revision&diff=732071021&oldid=732033220 this arbitration enforcement request]. |
|||
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Involved admins|uninvolved administrator]] under the authority of the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]]'s decision at [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Final decision]] and, if applicable, the procedure described at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions]]. This sanction has been recorded in the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/Log/2016|log of sanctions]]. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the [[Wikipedia:Banning policy|banning policy]] to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions. |
|||
You may appeal this sanction using the process described [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions#Appeals and modifications|here]]. I recommend that you use the [[Template:Arbitration enforcement appeal#Usage|arbitration enforcement appeals template]] if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you.<!-- Template:AE sanction.--> '''[[User:Lord Roem|Lord Roem]]''' ~ ([[User talk:Lord Roem|talk]]) 11:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC) |
|||
}} |
Revision as of 11:58, 29 July 2016
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
Suggestion & Request
Revolving around Akshant Kautilya Sharma, this story[1] is an alarm for the Indian nation's authorities to rise before two major problems, namely misoriented youth and the caste-based reservation system take India to the depths of darkness. I also request that an article about the same be written if you consider it fit. It is somewhat popular on Facebook with a cult following for itself on its Facebook page.[2]. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aks23121990 (talk • contribs)
Please comment on Talk:Order of Friars Minor
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Order of Friars Minor. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Kashmir Unrest 2016
May be this will help you editing better in future. [1] . Feel the emotion of a boy whose sister was cloth torn to nude by a brutal Indian security officer. Edit WP for humanity and neutrality not for nationalistic occupation biases. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.32.66.100 (talk) 14:19, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
This is not in response to a well-known long time sock, but for the sake of all my talk page watchers.
Things are pretty chaotic in Kashmir at present, and nothing is known with any clarity. But as far as the system is concerned, Law and Order is a state subject in the Indian constitution, and the Chief Minister of the state is ultimately responsible for it. Mehbooba Mufti is a first time Chief Minister, and the first woman chief minister of Kashmir. How much control she has over the state administrative apparatus is anybody's guess. Omar Abdullah, the former Chief Minister, came out very critically about the administration, going so far as to say that "nobody seems to be in charge in Srinagar."[1][2] The news blackout fiasco confirms this position, because we all know that there was a news blackout but the Chief Minister says that she ordered nothing of the sort.[3] So, what exactly she did order, and how much the Police have taken into their own hands is a big question.
India is a democracy, and Kashmir is a democracy. The state government of Kashmir is elected by the Kashmiris themselves. There is no central rule in Kashmir, and they are is no martial law either. It is sort of understandable if the Kashmiris conveniently blame India for everything that goes wrong in their lives, but we are going to play our responsible part by stating things as they are. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:40, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
References
- ^ Kashmir violence — Omar Abdullah interview: ‘It has been building up to this’, The Indian Express, 18 July 2016.
- ^ Mehbooba can't set Kashmir on fire and evade crisis: Omar Abdullah, Daily O, 19 July 2016.
- ^ No ban on newspapers in JK: Mehbooba tells Naidu, Greater Kashmir, 19 July 2016.
Input required
Your input is required at Talk:Burhan Muzaffar Wani#Indian and Pakistani reactions. Please comment on it. 117.214.245.178 (talk) 21:09, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Burhan Wani and 2016 Kashmir Unrest page edits
I appreciate your neutral stand. Also, I am not here just with a different point of view (I could have a blog of my own for that). It's about correct information (Wikipedia still provides that, I hope). Just explain, how is it neutral when you mention a State recognized terrorist and a terrorist organization as just a militant and separatist group respectively just because of political correctness (if I am not wrong). The govt. of India already declared him as a terrorist. Getting corresponding references won't be difficult. In the wiki page Hizbul Mujahideen itself, it is mentioned as a terrorist organization. So, it is necessary to call something what it really is. There is nothing neutral when it comes to information sharing, it is must always be correct to every bit.
Thanks - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bishupriyaparam (talk • contribs)
- @Bishupriyaparam: Please review WP:TERRORIST. Secondly, a state, any state, is not necessarily considered a reliable source for Wikipedia. Only if the state's view is endorsed by the majority of reliable sources, typically scholarly sources, would it be considered a reliable view. Hizbul Mujahideen is declared a terrorist organisation by multiple governments, and it is treated as such by scholarly sources. For Burhan Wani, we don't have that, and it is not our job to synthesize such information. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:14, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
If that's the case why did you revert the 2016 Kashmir unrest edits. Just asking, which scholarly source declares Wani as a poster boy? The link redirects to a Times of India article, I don't know how this is reliable and who synthesized the information before putting it on Wikipedia. Bishupriyaparam
Anti-India sentiment; NYT on the India's NSG membership
Hello, Thank you for your suggestions kautilya.
The issue of NY Times opposition to India's membership in the NSG is a fairly clear case of bias because it is odd that the New York Times would be in opposition to a democratic country's membership supported by all other major democracies in the world. This is not what western newspapers normally do, so that is worth highlighting.
However, as you say as per wikipedia policy the viewpoints need to come from third parties.
I will re-write the section to reflect the neutrality.
Best wishes, Ibankquant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibankquant (talk • contribs) 18:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- It is not uncommon for newspapers to take positions based on principle rather than realpolitik. The Economist and Guardian are also known to oppose the admission of India into nuclear clubs. In any case, it is not for us to argue about why they take these positions and make inferences from them. Thanks for your understanding. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:46, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:McCarthyism
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:McCarthyism. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Jammu and Kashmir
I can tell you are a neutral editor without any nationalism issues. I have added a very new report on the armed forces act and how amnesty international condemns it and added a quote could you please watch out if any vandals try and remove this third party reliable source? thanks lot. Asim Sahi (talk) 07:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi friend are you busy? you still not respond me Asim Sahi (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:30, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Asim Sahi: thanks for writing. I am always glad to debate issues, especially on difficult subjects like Kashmir. That is the best way to avoid conflicts.
- The content you added is more or less fine. However, it needs to go in the Insurgency subsection, where it is already being discussed.
- Please also make sure to add full citations, not plain URLs. Author, publisher and date should always be present, and page numbers when citing books.
- As you have mentioned on Talk:Azad Kashmir, quotations are pointy, and they should be used with care. Please see WP:QUOTEFARM.
- On Talk:Azad Kashmir, you have also tried to make comparisons between Azad Kashmir and Jammu and Kashmir. Please note that there are significant differences between the two situations. In the case of Azad Kashmir, the government is being criticised for lack of political freedom. However, political freedom is not an issue in Jammu and Kashmir. (For example, JKLF is banned from contesting elections in AJK, but it is allowed in J&K, even though it voluntarily boycotts elections.) On the other hand, we have an active insurgency in J&K and draconian counter-insurgency measures by the government. So, the two situations are quite different.
- On the other hand, a more direct parallel exists between the J&K situation and the Balochistan conflict. I would invite your participation in the latter.
- Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 10:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Personally I think the amnesty article is very relevant (its also update and not 10 years old like brad adams) to the government subpage because it only discusses the laws and its implications not other stuff to move it to insurgency section and blow it of as a response to insurgency is pov. I agree all quotes need assessment maybe we should reduce quotes on both sides as it will prevent users from justifying their edits on other pages? Asim Sahi (talk) 11:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Also I personally beleive adding these quotes on the main article page will always attract people because they are their to prove a point and people will retaliate if they think both regions should have equal coverage of quotes from human rights people it is things like these which mean the Indo-Pak pages are a cess pit of nationalist morons (except you and few other editors). Asim Sahi (talk) 11:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Personally I think the amnesty article is very relevant (its also update and not 10 years old like brad adams) to the government subpage because it only discusses the laws and its implications not other stuff to move it to insurgency section and blow it of as a response to insurgency is pov. I agree all quotes need assessment maybe we should reduce quotes on both sides as it will prevent users from justifying their edits on other pages? Asim Sahi (talk) 11:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
I am very upset on the deaths of Kashmiri peoples may Allah rest their souls in Peace and my question is why Indian army killing these peaceful peoples?????? Inshah Allah Kashmir will be a part of Pakistan shpk (talk) 10:21, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Marxist Historian
I was surprised at your deletion of the word Marxist which accurately describes Ramachandra Guha but it is okay as I do not feel strongly about it. The only thought which arose for a fleeting instant was that you are insecure about revealing the real affiliations as you are too embarrassed to admit it, but then I realized it is unimportant.
Your reaction caught me by surprise but I came here to ask about something I noticed on your user page. Before that, the sentence in question is itself a POV of a "historian" whose credentials are dubious ("historian" is in in quotes because writing about cricket matches is not the same as being a historian). So feel free to make an equivalent negative claim but use some other source such as India Today or something.
Anyway, the reason I am posting this is because I wanted to point out some unprovable claims in the description of yourself. In reality, NO ONE, absolutely NO ONE, knows anything about the history of Hinduism. Not Hindu nationalist historians, not Mrxists and not Romila Thapar or Wendy Doniger. Repeating their conjectures makes you look foolish and you come across as a person who will accept anything as long as a white skinned person utters it. Why not just admit that no one knows the history of Hinduism instead of claiming conjectures as facts?
BTW, you are probably shaking your head thinking Wendy Doniger is whiteskinned and therefore automatically intelligent and so her claim that Jesus had a conversation with "Saint" Thomas is an actual historical fact. Believe me, it is fiction. She is clearly a fool for claiming it is an actual event with actual dates. Believe me, it is pure fiction. and only low IQ people will claim it is an actual event. However, her stupidity is understandable because only low IQ people unfit for science or business end up in humanities and when she was admitted, there was a conscious push in the US to get more girls into college and so they expanded humanities because in the minds of the Democratic Party administration (many were part of KKK too) women were inferior and could not do science and humanities had to be expanded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.0.199.187 (talk) 03:13, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- Dear anonymous editor, I have reverted your edit labelling Ramachandra Guha a "Marxist historian," for the simple reason that you have provided no reliable source for it. Please make sure to familiarise yourself with the Wikipedia policies, whose links I posted on your talk page, especially the "Five pillars of Wikipedia." Any edits that violate these policies will be reverted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:02, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Assault rifle
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Assault rifle. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 25 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Balochistan page, your edit caused a cite error (help). ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Battle of Ia Drang
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Battle of Ia Drang. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction
The following sanction now applies to you:
Any attempt to bring the purported or deduced or imagined ethnic or nationality identities of any users will lead to an immediate block. This includes an editor's own stated ethnic identity or nationality.
You have been sanctioned As a result of this arbitration enforcement request.
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 11:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC)