→Fanny Schiller: wasting our pixels |
→Fanny Schiller: commented out the trout |
||
Line 351: | Line 351: | ||
::::I said when we started this I knew nothing about film. I don't. Whether a source is reliable or not, respect for other editors should be paramount. A simple did you know would have resulted in my attempting to find another source. I don't do edit wars and I do not like to be involved in projects where people cannot respect each other. I shall attempt to find the sourcing on Schiller and replace the sourcing on Blanch, but then I am going to go back to my corner of the world where people are polite. [[User:SusunW|SusunW]] ([[User talk:SusunW|talk]]) 17:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
::::I said when we started this I knew nothing about film. I don't. Whether a source is reliable or not, respect for other editors should be paramount. A simple did you know would have resulted in my attempting to find another source. I don't do edit wars and I do not like to be involved in projects where people cannot respect each other. I shall attempt to find the sourcing on Schiller and replace the sourcing on Blanch, but then I am going to go back to my corner of the world where people are polite. [[User:SusunW|SusunW]] ([[User talk:SusunW|talk]]) 17:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
||
:::It has little to do with being knowledgeable about film or not. For films you should be able to pick up hits in google books to solid sources by googling the title and name of the actor. The content is otherwise fine. I fell for Emereo the other day. It's easily done. I've added a paragraph on the Licensing and sourcing section of the project page for the sources to avoid anyway. ♦ [[User:Dr. Blofeld|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#aba67e">''Dr. Blofeld''</span>]] 17:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
:::It has little to do with being knowledgeable about film or not. For films you should be able to pick up hits in google books to solid sources by googling the title and name of the actor. The content is otherwise fine. I fell for Emereo the other day. It's easily done. I've added a paragraph on the Licensing and sourcing section of the project page for the sources to avoid anyway. ♦ [[User:Dr. Blofeld|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#aba67e">''Dr. Blofeld''</span>]] 17:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
||
{{trout}} |
<!--{{trout}}--> |
||
Trout slap to Blofeld (maybe?) and Sitush for [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fanny_Schiller&type=revision&diff=662026166&oldid=662026009 biting] a newbie dedicated to learning about wikipedia and sincerely trying to improve the encyclopedia! Unlike some other "new" editors we all know, SusunW is a very good and truly new editor who is working hard to learn how to edit. Let's support people like her! [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|<font color="purple">(talk)</font>]]</sup> 07:11, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
Trout slap to Blofeld (maybe?) and Sitush for [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fanny_Schiller&type=revision&diff=662026166&oldid=662026009 biting] a newbie dedicated to learning about wikipedia and sincerely trying to improve the encyclopedia! Unlike some other "new" editors we all know, SusunW is a very good and truly new editor who is working hard to learn how to edit. Let's support people like her! [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|<font color="purple">(talk)</font>]]</sup> 07:11, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
||
Line 361: | Line 361: | ||
:I fear we would be wasting our pixels. I've already explained this in conversations/edit summaries that Montanabw should have looked at before trouting, and the Emereo issue has been mentioned at RSN, here and on your talk page in very recent days. - [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush#top|talk]]) 10:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
:I fear we would be wasting our pixels. I've already explained this in conversations/edit summaries that Montanabw should have looked at before trouting, and the Emereo issue has been mentioned at RSN, here and on your talk page in very recent days. - [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush#top|talk]]) 10:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
||
::OK, I've done some digging around and it looks like all of this stuff from Montanabw may be an extension of her ongoing stalking and feud with Rationalobserver and Dr Blofeld. I'm commenting out the trout because the underlying motivation seems to be to irk others, with me as collateral damage. I do not want to be a party to it. - [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush#top|talk]]) 11:47, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
==Merge== |
==Merge== |
Revision as of 11:47, 13 May 2015
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Kunwar Prithvi Singh Chauhan
Hi Sitush
I see you did some edits to Kunwar Prithvi Singh Chauhan. I went there to 'un-thumb' the info box picture, and made a few other copy edits, here, removing un/poorly sourced BLP info, adding maintenanc
e templates etc. Some IPs have reverted me like here. Do you think my edits are fair? 220 of Borg 15:49, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks Sitush. Those were quite some edits! 220 of Borg 10:21, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
- The subject of the article is simply a 19 year old boy fully unknown to the business world and does not fulfil the notability criteria. Tagging for CSD.-- Mahensingha (Talk) "Thanx n Regards" 18:13, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Balija page edited with proper sources but had reverted back again
Hi Sitush,
U had reverted our page again, But we had given proper sources only but u had mentioned that as Unreliable one, whats wrong with my below proof.
By Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar. It mentions an inscription edited by Dr. Fleet, Vol XIII, p.185, in which Turagavedanga (Thiruvenkata ?) is mentioned as the "scion of Bali race" as Kishkinda-puravar-sevara and Bali-vamsa-odbhava. The publication "Genealogies of the Hindus, extracted from their sacred writings, pg. 48-49" mentions.The Epigraphia Indica, by Bhandarakar, Volume 42, p. 37. Yashoda Devi mentions in her book The History of Andhra Country, 1000 A.D.-1500 A.D.: Administration, literature and society.
The above one is a strong proof and how everytime u r reverting back and we are highly disappointed due to this ,see we are describing our Heritage and its true and not a fake one right.
Not necessary for us to do this and to to edit wrong information in wiki.
Kindly check once again and revert back
Karthick
iBan: You and Lightbreather
I've suggested on Lightbreather's talk that an iban is between you and her is probably needed to wrap up all the loose ends. At the moment this is just a heads up rather than a formal notification of a discussion starting up. Best is NOT to comment on her talk about it. Roger Davies talk 17:43, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I've already commented on your talk. I've no intention of commenting on hers. IBAN me and I am gone. - Sitush (talk) 17:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- ArbCom's habit of handing out blocks/bans as if they were sweeties is certainly a problem. You may not have noticed, but LB is continuing to badmouth you and me even today on her talk page. In one thread today I'm mentioned no less than 26 times would you believe! Yet all parties have to be equally punished, so we're going to be prohibited from doing something neither of us had any intention of doing anyway, while LB once again gets away with murder. I wouldn't take it personally though, it's pretty much what always happens in these situations; I'll simply be ignoring my iban anyway, as I have absolutely nothing to say to LB and would prefer to be as far away from her as possible. Eric Corbett 18:04, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Sitush, you said on Roger's page that you are not willing to bring a case against Lightbreather. Would you be willing to collaborate on creating one? I agree with you that her behavior is disruptive and has not changed despite numerous warnings, etc, and I am prepared to begin gathering evidence. I do not interact much with the articles/topics in which she edits and instead see more of what has happened in WP-space. Karanacs (talk) 18:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I can't do much otherwise she will get her way, ie: I will be IBANned even for helping you. I've added a few examples that come to mind immediately and may well add a few more as and when. Expect some opposition to that page per: WP:POLEMIC. Canvassing would probably be a fruitful line of enquiry, btw, especially if you include pings and emails to people she seems to perceive to be powerful supporters, eg: GorillaWarfare. (NB: GW has always denied been influenced by any such canvassing, and obviously this cannot be disputed). - Sitush (talk) 05:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- This doesn't violate WP:Polemic as it is being used to prepare a case and is intended to be used soon. If I choose not to bring the case within the next week or two, then I'll blank the page. I've already thought of the canvassing angle - thanks for the new links - as I've blocked LB for that before. Karanacs (talk) 13:47, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Karanacs: Sitush is too important for Wikipedia to be lost for these disputes. I would strongly advise him to stay out of it. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 14:08, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Sitush, We need you. May you come out of all this soon & focus on Happy Editing!. - Ninney (talk) 14:49, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Karanacs, I agree that it doesn't violate POLEMIC, but that won't stop LB and others from opposing on the grounds that it does, so you might find it at MfD. And there's a thought: I don't recall contributing to the Kaffeeklatsch MfD but I'd be surprised if there aren't some classic examples of problematic behaviour there.
- Sitush, We need you. May you come out of all this soon & focus on Happy Editing!. - Ninney (talk) 14:49, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Karanacs: Sitush is too important for Wikipedia to be lost for these disputes. I would strongly advise him to stay out of it. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 14:08, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- This doesn't violate WP:Polemic as it is being used to prepare a case and is intended to be used soon. If I choose not to bring the case within the next week or two, then I'll blank the page. I've already thought of the canvassing angle - thanks for the new links - as I've blocked LB for that before. Karanacs (talk) 13:47, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- ... and, sure enough, she has. It also wouldn't surprise me if over the next few weeks there is a lot of activity on the (private) systers-wikipedia mailing list regarding this case. No worries: I've got better things to do with my time and there is an element of double jeopardy in naming me this time round. - Sitush (talk) 05:58, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
- Well, think of this as a test of your self-control! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:34, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, but I'm not good at ignoring hypocrisy and things like that and, thinking about it, I doubt that ArbCom gives a stuff about double jeopardy: things seem to get raked over time and again, especially when (as will happen) discredited former admins get involved. BTW, I could also predict another arb whose opinion regarding me is pre-formed. - Sitush (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
- Well, think of this as a test of your self-control! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:34, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
- ... and, sure enough, she has. It also wouldn't surprise me if over the next few weeks there is a lot of activity on the (private) systers-wikipedia mailing list regarding this case. No worries: I've got better things to do with my time and there is an element of double jeopardy in naming me this time round. - Sitush (talk) 05:58, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 05:59, 29 April 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hell in a Bucket (talk) 05:59, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
A cup of coffee for you!
We need you, Sitush .... May you come out of the unnecessary iBan discussions & continue with Happy Editing sessions soon - Ninney (talk) 14:46, 29 April 2015 (UTC) |
Lightbreather
I have just imposed an interaction ban on Lightbreather, prohibiting her from any interaction with you. The ban is one-way because in the latest incident the misconduct seems to have been primarily hers, but that is not an endorsement of your conduct. I strongly advise you to keep the greatest possible distance from Lightbreather. If there were further conflict between the two of you, I would have no hesitation in making the interaction ban two-way. I think it is in the best interests of the project that you both find something to focus on that is not each other. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:49, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- See my comments at User talk:Roger Davies. - Sitush (talk) 19:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Have nominated {{Country data Mughal Empire}} for deletion. Informing you given our previous discussions and your input at article talk page. Abecedare (talk) 18:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Rabari Population in Punjab, Haryana
Please provide refrence indicating that the states of Haryana and Punjab have non-negligible population of Rabaris. ShamusHarper (talk) 00:22, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
- Not my problem. The burden is on the person that adds or deletes, not some passing contributor. I can't be expected to do everything here. - Sitush (talk) 06:01, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
I see that you've amended the page. Thanks for cooperating. ShamusHarper (talk) 18:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, this is the first edit I made to the Ajit Singh of Marwar article. "This would have also meant raising Ajit Singh as a Muslim, a plan that the Rathor family was not keen on.[1]" While this does lack an ISBN number, it does give the publisher. I do not recall if I had a physical copy of the book, or was using a version on google books, although I would guess the former. I do not have the book currently, so I can't say if the citations corresponded to the pages right or if they were in error or what.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:45, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Not sure of the history or locus of dispute (if there is one), but fwiw I checked the Richards book and the current content of the Ajit Singh of Marwar#Early years section does broadly match the source. Abecedare (talk) 05:20, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- There were a lot of discrepancies and the citation style + inconsistencies meant I was unsure whether Richards had written another book of similar title. I left a note on JPL's talk page and for some reason the reply appeared here. You'll see that I've basically rewritten what were the first two or three sections, although they are now merged. It could well be that the discrepancies were introduced after JPL's edits - I can't be bothered working it out because it doesn't really matter now. - Sitush (talk) 05:24, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
References
- ^ John F. Richards, Cambidge New History of India: The Mughal Empire (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993) p. 181
@Abecedare: I presume that you have access to Richards. Can you make sense of the bit at the bottom of p. 254? It says
Ajit Singh, the Rathor prince, had survived to become the acknowledged ruler of Marwar and holder of a 3,500/3,000 rank as a reluctant Mughal amir.
Acknowledged by whom? It seems unlikely that Aurangzeb did. And the rank makes no sense at all, almost as if it is a typo from some Indic script. - Sitush (talk) 08:31, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- I haven't figured out the system yet, but the 3,500/3,000 almost surely refers to the Zat rank in the Mansabdari system that Akbar introduced, which is discussed on pages 143-144 of the book. And that would also explain the "acknowledged" part; see page 21 for some discussion of what being a Rajput mansabdar entailed. Ajit Singh was presumably "ruling" under the same conditions. Richards seems to skip over the events in Ajit Singh's life between 1581 and 1607, so we may need to consult other sources if we wish to nail down the exact timeline, and flesh out the details. Abecedare (talk) 09:41, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey, since you have been reading up on the Mughals lately you may be able to mediate the recent disputes at Mughal–Maratha Wars. Haven't had time to look into the article content to even determine the central issues, but given the subject area wouldn't be surprised if the article needs a clean-up or even a overhaul. Abecedare (talk) 02:20, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- It is a long time since I read about the Mughals in any depth. Of late, I've mostly been recalling what was read and doing some basic GSearches. As I've said in a recent comment somewhere down below, if it involves the Marathas then it will be unpleasant stuff.
- I might be drifting away from India for a little while. User:Sitush/whitehead has been awaiting completion for ages, and I promised Dr Blofeld that I would gut Stephen Koss's > 1000-page book for an article specifically concerning The Manchester Guardian (as opposed to The Guardian). Nonetheless, I'll add the MMW article to my watchlist now and follow up later. - Sitush (talk) 02:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- "I might be drifting away from India for a little while." A good idea as long as it's for a little while. It is a pleasant change to be able to read a book cover-to-cover, and make bulk contributions instead of haggling over a sentence or two. Enjoy the "break". Abecedare (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- Btw, I was just glancing through Gordon and realized that the Mughal campaign against tha Marathas links up with the campiagn against Ajit Singh through Prince Akbar, who you'd recall was convinced by the Rajputs to rebel against Aurangzeb. Guess where he ran for asylum, once that didn't turn out so well? Abecedare (talk) 14:56, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- "I might be drifting away from India for a little while." A good idea as long as it's for a little while. It is a pleasant change to be able to read a book cover-to-cover, and make bulk contributions instead of haggling over a sentence or two. Enjoy the "break". Abecedare (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
About Devanga
Hi Sitush,
You are reverting our page again as we have given right sources with correct links pertaining to those sources. We just want to keep our page up to date. Devanga is community that originated from karnataka and now common to all the 4 south indian states and it does not pertain to Andhra Pradesh only.Related ethnic group can be multiple for our community and not only Thogataveera. We want to build our community wiki page with lot of contents and appreciate each and every person to share his content in the common devanga wiki page without reverting our changes.
Thanks, Arun — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.22.238.216 (talk) 06:29, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- It isn't your community's page. You are adding a lot of unacceptable material, using sources that we simply do not allow here. You are already well beyond our three revert rule. Please read WP:OWN, WP:SOAPBOX, WP:V and WP:RS, then remove all of the non-compliant material. A read of WP:MEAT would not go amiss either, although I do realise that I am throwing a lot of policies at you. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 06:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sitush, I was having trouble in regards to editing this article. I deleted a sentence that wasn't backed by sources yet explained why it should be deleted, nevertheless, there was a consensus conflict in regards to the article and tried to prove my point in the article's talk page and provided sources that are not WP:CIRCULAR that explain why the sentence should be removed but no one seems to have even read the sources [1]. I provided sources as asked even though for anyone who reads history knows the point I was trying to prove. I gave my reasons and sources but somehow no one seems to have read what I posted and dismissed me as s nuisance. I would appreciate your help greatly. (N0n3up (talk) 22:01, 3 May 2015 (UTC))
- You know that I have commented at the article talk page. Best to deal with things there. - Sitush (talk) 22:06, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Stop Edit Warring
Ur Activities in Palli/Vanniyar related articles very biased. i have been following you more than year. Karashima Noboru Clearly Mentioned that Kadavas Belonged to Palli the Modern Day Vanniyar, and also sambuvarayar, I also Provided the Inscription Evidence stating Kadavas and Sambuvarayas as Palli. So Do not Assume and Manipulate History with your Own Opinion. And Your not a Historian on such things you never provided any references or source for your reverts over Palli/Vanniyar related articles Premthanjavur (talk) 4 May 2015 (UTC)
- Read Sanskritisation ... and WP:SPA. - Sitush (talk) 07:22, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Please provide proper reference that Kadavas and Sambuvarayas are not Palli/ Vanniyar. I wont accept your own opinion which is biased. Premthanjavur (talk) 4 May 2015 (UTC)
- You rely on Noboru Karashima and on WP:SYNTHESIS. The problem is, Karashima does not say what you want him to say. I've already given an example on the relevant talk page. You are one edit away from being blocked, and given your past history I think it might be a lengthy block. Be careful, please. - Sitush (talk) 07:54, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Bengali Kayastha
I think merging the two pages makes sense, given that that the main Kayastha page has a lot of sourced information about Bengali Kayasthas - the current Bengali Kayastha page seems dangling and extraneous by comparison.
Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melotown (talk • contribs) 20:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
- Well, I've tried and failed to do that. It was basically me vs Ekdalian if I remember correctly. It probably needs a formal proposal rather than just a normal talk page discussion, unless Ekdalian has changed their mind in the interval. Either way, it is best dealt with at one or other of the article talk pages. - Sitush (talk) 21:30, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
- I agree with Melotown that the main Kayastha article has more sourced information regarding Bengali Kayasthas. Sitush, if aligning the Bengali Kayastha page with the main article is not acceptable to you (you had proposed a merger earlier which I had opposed), then I would support merging the two. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 07:37, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
- Good. That means the pair of you now agree with what I said many months ago. I simply do not see the point of basically duplicating 75% or whatever of an article when one seems to be a just a geographically limited variant of the whole. I still think that one of you needs to formally propose a merger, though. I realise that there are few active contributors to those articles but there may be other people watching the things who have an opinion. - Sitush (talk) 18:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
FYI
I mentioned your interactions with the user in an ANI thread I started on User:Eshwar.om. Link. Abecedare (talk) 04:15, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Pedantry
As if we don't have enough to do, we need to deal with this pedantry. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:39, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
- It is certainly odd and I have raised the issue because it potentially affects many other lists. See here. I'm not sure what central discussion forum would be best but I suspect somewhere at Village Pump. - Sitush (talk) 11:27, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Marathi People
So what's exactly wrong in synthesis. Entire Wikipedia is a kind of synthesis, isn't it? Except for Gyan source, everything else looks fine with my edit. Please explain why did you remove it. Further, the empire actually relied on Marathi people for its armed forces - back then India was not 'one single state'. It was indeed an ethnic Marathi empire. User:Amit20081980 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:38, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
- It was not an ethnic Marathi empire. In fact, it was the very size of the thing and the lack of ability to "control the natives" from the centre that contributed in large part to its downfall. It certainly started out as being mostly Marathi people but that is not where it ended up. Like most large empires, it became a victim of its own success. But this should all be discussed at the article talk where, doubtless, I will be shot down because the resident Marathis are a fearsome bunch, just as are encountered on pages relating to Rajputs. - Sitush (talk) 23:04, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Some friendly response once and a while, as an elixir against all the "fanmail" you receive. Best regards,
Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:02, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, JJ. Meant to reply earlier and forgot. You might gather from the timing of my edits over the last week or more that I'm not sleeping very well at the moment. - Sitush (talk) 08:33, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
You are my Go To Guy on all things India!
I have just found Category:India political party shortname templates which contains a whole slew of templates that are far longer in name than the outcome when they are transcluded. I wondered if you have any idea what these might be about? Fiddle Faddle 08:40, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- I've no idea. I've never noticed it before, either as a category or as a transcluded template. Obviously, there are short names (BJP, INC and so on) but quite where those things are being used (especially with "meta" in their path name) is beyond me. Someone at WT:INB might have an idea, or perhaps someone with template expertise.
- Did you notice I was playing around with Eastman's Royal Naval Academy the other day? I'd had a source sat here since around the time the pair of us worked on it and only now got round to using the thing. The "to do" list is horrendous :( - Sitush (talk) 08:45, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, very weird stuff. I know that the categorisation of the 2014 Indian election candidates seemed to give much pleasure to those who enjoy obsessively categorising and then recat'ing a few weeks later but the net result has been a complete mess; it wouldn't surprise me if this palaver has the same effect. Categories on Wikipedia are a joke and we probably wouldn't lose that much if we just abandoned the whole thing or, at least, deleted the lot and started again with a proper strategy. I still do not understand why we specifically note, for example, women authors but we do not specifically note authors who are men: it reinforces inequality, which ever way you want to look at it. - Sitush (talk) 20:34, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- In my opinion, the women categories are needed because they form a minority in various contexts, and so there is interest in subcategories devoted to men. But they should all be non-diffusing subcategories. I have now opened a discussion at WP:CATP#The male movement to figure out how to stop the contesting male subcategories. Please join me there. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 11:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
- I'm afraid you have just demonstrated why the entire system is a joke. Non-diffusing categories are completely arbitrary taxonomy, and male novelists (for example) should have equivalence with those of t'other gender. Highlighting one gender reinforces inequality, almost always making them stand out because of their gender rather than their notability. You don't get equality through exercise of inequality. - Sitush (talk) 11:56, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, no. I am not going to get drawn into gender politics. And, this issue has nothing to do with gender. I might have for instance British Asian journalists as a non-diffusing subcategory of British journalists. If somebody claims we need a category for British English journalists or some such nonsense in the name of "equality," it is laughable. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:03, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
- Why would it be laughable to have British English journalists but not laughable to have British Asian journalists? Again, it reinforces the notion that there is some sort of freakishness there. I'm all for equal pay, equal access, equal opportunity etc but putting the emphasis on the difference is not a means to achieve it. It's a branding exercise, in both the livestock and PR sense of the term. - Sitush (talk) 12:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, no. I am not going to get drawn into gender politics. And, this issue has nothing to do with gender. I might have for instance British Asian journalists as a non-diffusing subcategory of British journalists. If somebody claims we need a category for British English journalists or some such nonsense in the name of "equality," it is laughable. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:03, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
- I'm afraid you have just demonstrated why the entire system is a joke. Non-diffusing categories are completely arbitrary taxonomy, and male novelists (for example) should have equivalence with those of t'other gender. Highlighting one gender reinforces inequality, almost always making them stand out because of their gender rather than their notability. You don't get equality through exercise of inequality. - Sitush (talk) 11:56, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
- In my opinion, the women categories are needed because they form a minority in various contexts, and so there is interest in subcategories devoted to men. But they should all be non-diffusing subcategories. I have now opened a discussion at WP:CATP#The male movement to figure out how to stop the contesting male subcategories. Please join me there. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 11:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, very weird stuff. I know that the categorisation of the 2014 Indian election candidates seemed to give much pleasure to those who enjoy obsessively categorising and then recat'ing a few weeks later but the net result has been a complete mess; it wouldn't surprise me if this palaver has the same effect. Categories on Wikipedia are a joke and we probably wouldn't lose that much if we just abandoned the whole thing or, at least, deleted the lot and started again with a proper strategy. I still do not understand why we specifically note, for example, women authors but we do not specifically note authors who are men: it reinforces inequality, which ever way you want to look at it. - Sitush (talk) 20:34, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
There could be a number of reasons why the society cares about British Asianness among its writers. Being diaspora, they could be combining cultural influences. Being minorities, they could be facing discrimination, in which case those that defeated the discrimination would be notable. I don't know. The society makes those decisions. We don't. As a wise man once told me, "We are at least theoretically in a cocooned environment here and we should revel in that space." Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 09:38, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- I'm fairly sure that recent data for London showed that there were more non-British than British residents. Of course, the entire debate about what constitutes British-ness is messy, as it is for any ethno-soco-linguistic label. Basically, it's a waste of space and I think the decisions of international sports bodies pretty much verify that it is as much a flag of convenience as anything else. I'd rather we pigeon-holed people based on things they are notable for, not things that the gutter press like to emphasise. - Sitush (talk) 09:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Chandra Bhan Prasad
Dear Situs, Greetings. This is Chandra Bhan Prasad, and Mr Vipin Sodhi assists me in my Office in IT related stuff. My intro "Fond of English the Dalit Goddess........" is my Official intro and not 'Indian journalist". Please ensure that my official intro goes on the Wiki page, or else, remove my page. Warmly Chandra Bhan Prasad pioneercbp@yahoo.com cbhanp at Twitter.
Vipinsodhi87 (talk) 08:39, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, the list of problems here is endless, sorry. Please read WP:COI, WP:COPYRIGHT, WP:PUFFERY, WP:SPS ... and the list goes on. The article will not be deleted, nor are you going to be able to turn it into something that suits you: neutral and verifiable are the key things. Please raise any valid concerns at Talk:Chandra Bhan Prasad and, if necessary, they can be escalated to our noticeboard for biographies of living people. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 08:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello
Thanks for defending me on my talk page about my ANI reporting of a particular individual. At least I'm not the only one who realises. — Calvin999 19:14, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- I wasn't defending you as such. I was saying that it is best to just ignore Si Trew and go find something else to do, and I was trying to let Si Trew know that even someone like me, who is also gruff in manner, finds him to be so. - Sitush (talk) 02:47, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Book review and article and Mexico Wikimania
Could you see this one User_talk:Titodutta#Help_to_write_the_exact_review_of_an_article.? She contacted me on Twitter after facing some problems on Wikipedia. What she wants is— to improve the article, specially the "critical reception" section. She thinks the "critical reception" highlights only 1 bad review. After requesting a few times, she has now made a list of reliable refs. I have looking for a reliable person where I can send this lady to get help. See if you can help this user. --Tito Dutta (talk) 21:04, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
PS. I may go to Mexico Wikimania this year. More news will follow. --Tito Dutta (talk) 21:04, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not good on books, Tito. I struggle to tell the difference between a serious review and a PR blurb, and I'd much rather we didn't carry articles for newly-published books precisely so that we could attempt to limit the spamming that goes on. Still, I will try to take a look. - Sitush (talk) 02:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Help required on Vanniyar lead section
Sitush need your help on Lead section of vanniyar article. I have provided references but I am not sure how to add these in the article lead section. details provided on Talk page. Thanks Sangitha rani111 (talk) 02:42, 9 May 2015 (UTC)sangitharani
- Thanks for reminding me. I've received some additional information by email in the last few hours also. I will try to work on it over the weekend. - Sitush (talk) 02:43, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Twinkle undo
I fear I may have inadvertently undone your edit in a Twinkle rollback. Could you double-check. please? It was not intentional; it's just a busy page. Scr★pIronIV 05:10, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for checking. I have been following interesting pages and discussions - you seem to be one of the "good guys" in my humble estimation. No gender-specific statement intended, of course. I am hoping the latest round of drama does not cause you any inconvenience. Scr★pIronIV 05:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Message
you have one message on my talk page.thank youEshwar.omTalk tome 05:22, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Saw your work on Emereo Publishing and the thread at WP:RSN. It's good to know there are people out there cleaning up problems like that. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 15:57, 9 May 2015 (UTC) |
- This and this one. Emereo doesn't just copy content from wikipedia, but sometimes take efforts to hide their copying. A typical example I had quoted in the latter thread: "
a quorum of ten or more adult Jews
" in Shiva (Judaism) becomes "a minimum number of 10 either further grown up Jews
" in the Emereo book, Shiva 362 Success Secrets, which does not even mention wikipedia. Sneaky and incompetent. Abecedare (talk) 18:18, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
- This and this one. Emereo doesn't just copy content from wikipedia, but sometimes take efforts to hide their copying. A typical example I had quoted in the latter thread: "
Since you've edited this article, probably you have some content knowledge. There has been a dispute between User:Delibzr and User:Xtremedood on this article and a few other places. One report is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Delibzr reported by User:Xtremedood (Result: Both warned) and there is another at WP:AE#Xtremedood. Any idea who is more likely to be right? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:15, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- Generally I'd plump for Xtremedood. They seem to want to stick with reliable academic sources and to avoid the fluff etc, neither of which were anywhere near top of Delibzr's list of priorities (in fact, pro-Maratha fluff seemed to be their goal). That said, I've not looked at the context and will wander over to the AE discussion now. Knowing my luck, I'll be the one who ends up with a sanction. - Sitush (talk) 16:23, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for commenting there. EdJohnston (talk) 02:07, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Just sayin'
Removing impotent content is a service to the encyclopedia IMO.[3] Bishonen | talk 12:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC).
- I don't know about that. At least impotent content can't, um, fork. --regentspark (comment) 15:47, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, that came and went quickly. (So where is Eddie Waring, anyway?) -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
- XD Cut out the puns, guys, they're waring me down. Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
- They are spreading. Not quite sure how to square impotent with go forth and multiply :) More seriously, we probably should not make fun: ill-advised though they are, they intend(ed) no harm and they're way better with the English than I am with, say, Hindi. Sitush (talk) 16:09, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
- XD Cut out the puns, guys, they're waring me down. Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Playtime Is Over (mixtape) edits
Hey Sitush! You made some edits on the Playtime Is Over (mixtape) page that I reverted, and then you put back. I'm fairly new to editing, and I think I may have misunderstood the changes you made, which is why I undid them -- sorry about that. In particular, I don't quite understand what a mirror is. I did some googling but came up empty. Would you mind explaining that, and how that relates to the edits you made? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soyrice (talk • contribs) 17:32, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
- A mirror is a source that copies from Wikipedia, either word-for-word or extremely closely. Obviously, if the source is copying from us (even an old version of an article) then we cannot use it as a citation because we would be citing ourselves. This is called a circular reference. Sometimes material might be in a related article rather than the one that you are editing directly.
- You will find mirrors both on websites and, alas, in books. Some companies, such as Emereo and General Books LLC, seem to make their money by printing our articles in book form. They create a compendium of related articles and flog the things. That is what had happened in the case of the article to which you refer. Some known mirrors are listed at WP:MIRROR but there are many more out there and, of course, new ones could appear any day.
- Spotting the things can be tricky sometimes because we also have problems with copyright, where contributors copy things from books etc to our articles. They should not, of course (see WP:COPYRIGHT) but it does go on and the entire situation becomes very messy. Basically, we have to hunt through the history of an article to see which came first: us or them.
- In the specific case that you mention, even the format of the book's pages looks like the Wikipedia format (font, the infoboxes they use etc) and they actually state what they are doing in the first few pages of the book. They claim to donate some of the proceeds to the Wikimedia Foundation. Whether they do or not is moot and I asked that question of Jimbo Wales a few hours ago. He may not know himself, of course.
- Ah, okay. That makes sense. (Yeah, it's super obvious that Emereo uses Wikipedia content now that I'm looking for it.) And that helps a lot, thanks for explaining all that. I'll definitely avoid those kinds of sources and just be more cautious with citing in general.
- I also edited the Playtime Is Over page again and added in a better source for some of the content on the Composition section that was originally sourced with the Emereo book. Hopefully that's more appropriate.
Lightbreather arbitration case: special arangements
Because of the unusual number of potential participants with interaction bans in the Lightbreather case, the committee has made special arrangements to enable i-banned editors to post and respond evidence about each other. These are as follows:
1. All i-bans and associated restrictions are suspended for the purpose of participating on the /Evidence page. This suspension extends solely and exclusively to the /Evidence page but some tolerance will be given on the /Evidence talk page to link to material on the /Evidence page.
2. For simplicity, and for the purposes of this case only, one-way i-bans are regarded as two-way i-bans.
3. Threaded interactions of any description between participants are prohibited on both the /Evidence and the /Evidence talk pages.
4. Similar arrangements apply to /Workshop page and the /Workshop talk page.
The original announcement can be found here. For the Arbitration Committee, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- No idea why I've been sent this. I am not a party, I've offered no evidence and I've said nothing on the case talk pages, nor am I under an IBAN relating to Lightbreather. Does someone know something I do not? - Sitush (talk) 14:35, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- According to the case, Lightbreather is in a 1-way IBAN with you. I think that's why. This case is long since overdue. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:38, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
- Wow. Maybe there is some random name-picking algorithm. - Sitush (talk) 17:45, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- In my situation, It was likely sent to me, so that I wouldn't complain about the participation of i-banned editors -- even though it's irrelevant to me, as to who participates ;) I had opposed the opening of the case, so that's likely another reason why it was sent to me. Oh well, no big deal :) GoodDay (talk) 17:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- Wow. Maybe there is some random name-picking algorithm. - Sitush (talk) 17:45, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Found it!!
Wikipedia guidelines mentioning use of "local language" in lead of City names. read here] on Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian cities.--Human3015 talk • 04:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- Ah, that is not the thread I was referring to (I've never even seen that project). It might do the job, though: I'll have a read of it. Thanks for letting me know. - Sitush (talk) 17:15, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I am working on a translation project with @Dr. Blofeld:. Can you explain why you reverted my edits when it is clear I am working on the file without attempting to talk with me about it? If you have issues with one of the sources, fine, we can discuss it, but to completely discount every source is unreasonable. SusunW (talk) 17:09, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Emereo and imdb aren't RS and Network website is questionable but the expansion is good. Please restore and then sourcing can be replaced/improved.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:12, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- Restore whatever you want when reliable sources are available. I've no idea what Spanish Wikipedia's policies may be but they seem to be very much less strict than ours. - Sitush (talk) 17:14, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, the sourcing on Spanish wiki is usually poor, but the content usually accurate. It's important when translating to try to use the best sources to support it. For films there should be hits in google books. I'll leave a note about Emereo on the project talk page as that increasingly seems to be stumping people.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:20, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- I said when we started this I knew nothing about film. I don't. Whether a source is reliable or not, respect for other editors should be paramount. A simple did you know would have resulted in my attempting to find another source. I don't do edit wars and I do not like to be involved in projects where people cannot respect each other. I shall attempt to find the sourcing on Schiller and replace the sourcing on Blanch, but then I am going to go back to my corner of the world where people are polite. SusunW (talk) 17:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- It has little to do with being knowledgeable about film or not. For films you should be able to pick up hits in google books to solid sources by googling the title and name of the actor. The content is otherwise fine. I fell for Emereo the other day. It's easily done. I've added a paragraph on the Licensing and sourcing section of the project page for the sources to avoid anyway. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Trout slap to Blofeld (maybe?) and Sitush for biting a newbie dedicated to learning about wikipedia and sincerely trying to improve the encyclopedia! Unlike some other "new" editors we all know, SusunW is a very good and truly new editor who is working hard to learn how to edit. Let's support people like her! Montanabw(talk) 07:11, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- If I had known then I might have done things differently but I'm pissed off at the moment myself, courtesy of Sadads and a stupid ArbCom case that should never have gone that far. Also, I assumed that the source was carried over with the translation. Look above a couple of sections re: a mixtape article, or look at my last edit to a user talk page. - Sitush (talk) 07:28, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- Trout slap to Dr. Blofeld Montanabw??? Excuse me?? I am one of the strongest supporters of Susunw and have thanked her for a great deal of her work. In fact I was the one who started Mexican actresses as a topic specifically for Susun to tackle. I was the one who restored her content and resourced it. It was quite an issue with the sourcing needing fixing. So don't you dare turn up here and treat me as the negative party in this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:45, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps Sitush or a wiki page stalker here could kindly explain to Montanabw that Emereo publishing and sourcing like "Errol Flynn Handbook - Everything You Need to Know about Errol Flynn" which she readded are not reliable sources and mirror wikipedia? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:18, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- I fear we would be wasting our pixels. I've already explained this in conversations/edit summaries that Montanabw should have looked at before trouting, and the Emereo issue has been mentioned at RSN, here and on your talk page in very recent days. - Sitush (talk) 10:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- OK, I've done some digging around and it looks like all of this stuff from Montanabw may be an extension of her ongoing stalking and feud with Rationalobserver and Dr Blofeld. I'm commenting out the trout because the underlying motivation seems to be to irk others, with me as collateral damage. I do not want to be a party to it. - Sitush (talk) 11:47, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Merge
I've already revoked my request for merge in the source page, forgot to remove from Reddy page. Fine, thank you.--Vin09 (talk) 08:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, I thought it was just a clean-up job. No worries. There are all sorts of problems with caste-only lists of people, some of which I've listed at User:Sitush/Common#Castelists. That particular list is a classic because of Helen Reddy, who is highly unlikely to be a Reddy. - Sitush (talk) 08:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello Simon
greetings - perhaps you could update my page some time? (Michael Axworthy) 31.54.90.1 (talk) 09:19, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- Probably not a great idea, Michael, because I know you! I wonder if Dr. Blofeld might be prepared to take it on? We're not a promotional site, so you'll get a fair reading but not a slavish one. You are welcome to leave comments on the talk page of the article (see Talk:Michael Axworthy) but it wouldn't be a great idea to edit the thing yourself. - Sitush (talk) 09:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not sure, I'm prone to biting newbies... ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- ... but you might gain honorary membership of The Cocoa Tree Club, if MA is still involved. (Not one for the article and, thankfully, back in the days before digital photography ruined the concept of "what happens on tour, stays on tour". Happy days indeed.)
Michael, if you ever have the time then you'd probably be pretty useful as a contributor to Iranian articles etc. You've just got to get your head round the arcane policies of this place. - Sitush (talk) 09:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- ... but you might gain honorary membership of The Cocoa Tree Club, if MA is still involved. (Not one for the article and, thankfully, back in the days before digital photography ruined the concept of "what happens on tour, stays on tour". Happy days indeed.)