Open main menu

User talk:DiplomatTesterMan

Active discussions

need help creating and publishing the articleEdit

Sorry to bother you- just delete/ignore my requests to you.Itsibitsy (talk) 13:07, 10 December 2019 (UTC)itsibitsyItsibitsy (talk) 13:07, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Itsibitsy, please explain the request in one two lines. I have mentioned the same on your talk page. The message you put here was huge thats why i archived it! Keep it simple please. DTM (talk) 15:10, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
I need help creating and publishing the article about the author of the Book about Kashmir. I attached the entire article I started, so you could see it and determine its fate. Itsibitsy
(talk page watcher) Itsibitsy, Please click on WP:AFC and start the article if you feel the author passes the WP:NAUTHOR notability requirements. If it does not pass then there is no point in creating the article, since it will get deleted eventually for being non encyclopedic.--DBigXray 12:22, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
DTM, you can share your opinion on the notability as it seems Itsi, wanted your comment on if the article is notable. --DBigXray 12:23, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
I dont know if anyone else considers it notable..As you are India editors, and the book/author are connected to India, you would know better than I if this is notable. I wont proceed any further with it. Shukria... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsibitsy (talkcontribs) 23:01, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you (DBigXray) for commenting on my article...some may consider it a notable article. Others may not. I am going to ignore it and proceed no's not worth the effort to me... Thanks..itsibitsy.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsibitsy (talkcontribs) 22:58, 11 December 2019 (UTC) (message posted on DBigXray's talk page)
Itsibitsy it is quite easy to see why this author will fail WP:NAUTHOR. I did some quick searches and I dont find her notable. So it is a wise decision on your part to abandon the plans of working on her WP:BIO, as your efforts would have been wasted after the article got deleted. I am glad that you sought advice for your idea, before going ahead. --DBigXray 12:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Itsibitsy, give the Article for Creation (AFC) route a try if you haven't already. There is no harm in trying, (other than that you will spend time on it and an AFC checker will, but wouldn't worry too much about it). If the AFC route helps settle things for now and gives better closure than maybe that could be given go. Teahouse is also a really nice way to get comments just to reinforce the general perception of people towards the article. DTM (talk) 08:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
I disagree with DTM here, that AFC is a good idea now. No it is not and will only be a waste of time, which can be used for improving or creating other notable articles. I have already checked and found that the author fails WP:NAUTHOR. If Itsibitsy thinks she passes, then I would like to know why. --DBigXray 09:45, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
BigXray and DTM, I thought that author (Olsson) was notable- especially for an India audience, because she proposed a DNA test project at several Pakistan and Kashmir graves ...and worked with renowned India and Pakistan archaeologists like Dani and Hassnain......but now I am working on a new article for submission about the 'Kolbrin', a book saved from the Glastonbury fire centuries ago. I have abandoned that self-published author article. Thanks for all your input.Itsibitsy (talk) 04:01, 15 December 2019 (UTC)itsibitsyItsibitsy (talk) 04:01, 15 December 2019 (UTC)


Hi, are you able to verify this tweet with a RS ? If so, please consider adding it to the article. --DBigXray 13:30, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Tweet says "Claim: Citizenship Amendment Bill will help Persecuted Minorities of other countries". India Today supports this claim: "The bill has nothing to do with Indian Muslims. The bill only intends to provide protection to the persecuted minorities in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh," Amit Shah assured.
For the second part from the tweet "Fact: - Rohingyas of Myanmar - Shias & Ahmedias of Pak - Ahmedias of Bangldsh - Baloch of Pakistan & Afghan - Tamils of Srilanka... are the most persecuted minorties bt are nt included in the Bill."
The tweet is partly correct but misinterpreting the words of the Bill and larger Act which gives a simplistic misleading biased and wrong picture as far as I can tell from what I have read in the Bill, Act and media reports, everyone doesn't have to be named persay........ I need to read up a bit more about this.
Ok read it and update if you feel anything worth adding is there. --DBigXray 15:41, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Just waiting to see what happens in the Rajya Sabha tomorrow. DTM (talk) 15:08, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
RS has the NDA majority i think isnt it ? whatever happens, the SC should and would strike this nonsense as an attack on the ethos of constitution by discriminating on the religious grounds. --DBigXray 15:37, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
DBigXray, well, Shahs' CAB got the majority... There is so much misinformation and confusion in the air surrounding this Bill it is hard to make sense of it all... I hope more newspapers bring clarity into all this such as this article by Quint: CAB facing multi-faceted erroneous allegations. DTM (talk) 05:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I am afraid the constitutionality/unconstitutionality of the CAB is once again a gray area [1]. It might take several years for the Supreme Court to decide. The 2015 orders, which granted long-term visas rather than citizenship, were challenged in the Supreme Court, and they have not yet been heard, let alone decided. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:15, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I am also wondering if the debate is all about wording rather than substance. The Right wants to name the religions and the Left wants to make it religiously neutral. Those are issues of perceptions but somewhere they merge into realities too, which are hard to figure out. The Left claims they know exactly know what is going on (see NYT's scathing attack [2]) but the Right claims nothing is going on. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:19, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
The Hindu Cartoon sums it up nicely. The debate is about the substance. You have to look at it in the larger context of NPR (national Population register), it basically makes Muslims second class citizens, and thus achieves the goal of converting Indian into a Hindu Rashtra. see this article by ThePrint--DBigXray 12:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
I don't believe that is correct. Remember that the Bill was introduced in 2016 and long-term visas for the refugees claiming persecution were granted in 2015. The refugees are quite real. All the opponents of the Bill are pursuing a revisionist imaginary history, which I can't accept.
The perception issues are summed up nicely in this quote of Ramakrishnan [3]:

“Now, people say that the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill doesn’t affect Muslims who are already in India and are Indian citizens. But that’s not the point. The point is that it makes those 200 million Muslims feel as if somehow their religion is not as valid or as Indian as the others. That’s not a good recipe for harmony. India should not be competing with Pakistan or Afghanistan.”

We need to separate the perception issues from the realities. POV pushers are already beginning to gather at the page. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
It appears to me that you did not read The Print yet. This article clearly explains what was the need to bring in CAB. The NRC in Assam found more Illegal Hindus than Muslims, and BJP wouldn't want to hurt its votebank, hence it brought in CAB to fix this problem. But Assamese and People in NE are not happy about this. There is a strong reason why Assam is burning right now, with 2 already dead and army deployed there, and it is not just perception. --DBigXray 19:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Except that the CAB was brought in in 2016, long before the Assam NRC happened. And, it was passed by Lok Sabha in January this year, before the Assam NRC results came out. Minor inconvenient facts that your political commentator disingenuously ignores. You can't take every random political commentator at face value as if they are Christophe Jaffrelots.
Assam had good reason to burn for at least a couple of decades now. Why it didn't burn is a mystery, perhaps a bit of false hope that the Union government would play ball. With the CAB those hopes are completely dashed. By the way, it is not proper to call those people "illegal" until a tribunal determines so. Right now, they are just "excluded" (from the NRC). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
BJP only wants Muslims to be harassed so the CAB is brought so that this exclusion (and subsequent harassment) should not be subjected to the Hindus and others. You may disagree with the article I listed above, but tell me where did he got it wrong ? Any factual mistakes ? --DBigXray 09:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
The guy is a Guwahati lawyer and lawyers are trained POV pushers. They pick and choose selective facts to make their case, ignoring other inconvenient facts. I have no idea why we are even reading it and discussing it.
We do know that the BJP tends to regard the Muslim immigrants as "infiltrators" and the Hindu immigrants as "refugees". But we have no idea whether it can manage to pass off all the Hindu exclusees of the NRC as "refugees". The Intelligence Bureau has said that there are stringent conditions for claiming persecution. Shoaib Daniyal seems to think it is not possible.[1] The Assamese will be watching with eagle eyes, and so will the Indians at large. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:45, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Another excellent cartoon by Satish Acharya--DBigXray 16:18, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

NDTV found that most legal experts find it unconstitutional. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:16, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Param Vir Chakra Arun Khetarpal's family came to India from Pakistan after partition as refugees[1], and Khetarpal was born in India on 14 October 1950. So his parents are/were immigrants. CAB/CAA would cover them if they were alive? DTM (talk) 03:00, 15 December 2019 (UTC)


  1. ^ Reddy, Kittu (2007-01-01). Bravest of the Brave (Heroes of the Indian Army): Heroes of the Indian Army. Prabhat Prakashan. p. 52. ISBN 978-81-87100-00-3.

Manual ArchivingEdit

I see that you are regularly arching your page manually, I just wanted to let you know that you could get a more cleaner talk page, simply by reducing the archive duration in the archive script or by using Archive keywords. (read more at User:ClueBot_III/ArchiveThis#Optional_parameters). you can then use the time you save on improving the articles. cheers. --DBigXray 15:41, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Noted, I have to do this. (But the convenience of manual archiving sometimes is nice.) DTM (talk) 05:17, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Auto archive is more trusted to manual archiving. Manual stuff are rarely convenient than auto, but that is just me. I just wanted to let you know. Rest is upto you. DBigXray 07:31, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
DBigXray, You forgot to sign your reply so I manually signed it for you :D (Hope you get the sarcasm and humour of this :D I know the joke is a little lame but it isnt that bad) DTM (talk) 11:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Lol, May be you will eventually get bored of doing this menial job. My suggestions would come in handy then--DBigXray 12:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
You wrote: "Manual stuff are rarely convenient than auto" - I guess one rare situation would be where manual is more convenient - a Wikipedia being built by only machines and humans didn't have to do anything once the initial program was coded. Where is the fun in that? (Having talk page conversations with machines on Wikipedia?) Though yes I agree that you were just talking of a much smaller archiving example :D. DTM (talk) 08:00, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Another reason regarding trust that I did not elaborate above was, if people find that you are manually editing all our archives, they may think that you have removed, copy edited, modified the contents while moving it. The bot archiving has trust that it will not do such things. Although this is not written but this is how many in the community thinks soo..DBigXray 09:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Good point. Thanks. DTM (talk) 10:06, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "DiplomatTesterMan".