User talk:Sitush/Archive 2

Lakshmi School

Hello can u say which line in the Lakshmi School article is copyright material, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuttivignesh (talk • contribs) 08:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, you have added material since my last note to you, and most of it is now not copyrighted. Previously you had pasted content straight from the school's website. There are, however, other issues in your new content:

• Using words such as "much celebrated" is not appropriate, as they do not conform to the neutral point of view requirements of Wikipedia.
• Other phrases, which do come from the school's website, are also inappropriate, eg: "away from the dust and din of the city".
• The list of board members is inappropriate - they are not notable people in their own right and in any case it is trivia
• As you develop the article you need to be careful not to turn it into an advertisement, which is what looks like is going to happen because you are slavishly following the school's website even though you are not now copying more than occasional phrases. Wikipedia is not the place for adverts.

Hope this helps you. I'll keep an eye on things and, of course, feel free to ask any more questions. - Sitush (talk) 09:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Bears FC

Hi, Sitush. We have noticed the editing you have done to Bears FC. The current squad is accurate as well as the reserves. We have taken notice to some of your other edits and will fix them appropriately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.158.239.254 (talk) 12:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

It may be accurate but they are still not notable. Please do not add them again. - Sitush (talk) 14:46, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

If you revert my edits again then I may treat it as disruptive. You took the article right back to how it was prior to my edits, when it was breaching numerous policies and guidelines, as explained in my edit summaries. If you do not understand then please ask before editing the article. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sitush (talk • contribs)

(talk page stalker) I left a note on the article's talk page explaining the relevant policies in this instance. Hope it helps. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm going to take a short break, I think. I was a little terse in my message above, mainly due to being narked by someone else's reverts elsewhere. I was doing so well at explaining things and then the afternoon happened! - Sitush (talk) 15:09, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Is there a way that they can be made notable. Since the information is correct, I would like it to be posted on to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.78.218.90 (talk) 20:44, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. They either are or they are not. The notability article defines the situation but I would argue that in reality you would have to be able to create a separate article for each of them, and at that point (assuming the article met the notability criteria) then they would be ok to list. However, let me have a think - it isn't that you actually have to create those articles but rather that they are worthy of having such an article even if it does not exist. I am away for the next couple of days but Wikipedia is timeless, so no worries there. Articles about sports teams are always a bit awkward for this sort of stuff, unless they are a seriously well-known team (eg: Manchester United FC). Someone else has added some helpful advice for you on the article talk page, BTW. - Sitush (talk) 20:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I will try to create articles on the players at the club using the guidelines. Hopefully I can get the players back on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.78.218.90 (talk) 20:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't create separate articles just yet. It could be a somewhat dispiriting experience for you if they get deleted more or less on sight. Just give me a bit of time, please. Neither Wikipedia nor the club is going to disappear over the coming weekend (well, I hope not!) There are people who "stalk" my talk page and they may butt in with some useful advice in the interval. I am not perfect, by any means. - Sitush (talk) 21:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

(indent reset) The article talk page is a good place to discuss these kinds of changes to the article. I've already commented there on the issue of season schedule/results and roster.

As far as creating articles on players, be very sure they are notable athletes before creating the page. It may be better to start with a simple list of players on the squad who are members of their respective national teams. Provided that's traceable back to a source, that's a good place to start the roster. (Players with international caps meet the WP:ATHLETE notability requirements; it would at least be appropriate to list them, even if they don't have their own articles (yet).) —C.Fred (talk) 21:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to both Qwyrxian and C.Fred. I made a bit of a hash of this with my manner earlier on and am, as always, grateful for your input. As for the IP contributor(s) (whom I would encourage to sign up with a username), well, there are now two very experienced people involved with helping you, as well as my rather less experienced self. Honest, we do want to assist and we do not want to discourage, but this place has its policies and guidelines just like most other large projects. You'll get the hang of it and I'd like to think that you will stick around to contribute to other articles. It is great that we are now talking and I see that the focus has moved to the article talkpage. Good stuff, all round. - Sitush (talk) 23:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I have created a username now and hope to add information to football club teams. I would like stay and help contribute, however all of the edits made are reverted because of no source, or the page I wish to contribute to is protected. It is becoming frustrating that any article that I try to make is deleted due to guidelines and notability. I find it difficult to help add info to these pages with the guidelines. Clubs like Bears FC are able to be edited, unlike Manchester United or Real Madrid, so I choose to start there. I am not sure what I should do if I am not able to edit any articles. Jdst10 (talk) 01:32, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in responding - there is life beyond Wikipedia, sometimes <g> As far as the lack of sources is concerned, well, that is a clear-cut situation. Wikipedia requires that all contributions are sourced reliably and verifiably. Yes, there is loads of stuff here which in fact is not correctly sourced, but this does not mean that stuff should continue to exist and indeed there is an oft-quoted article on these lines - see other stuff exists. With such a large project, involving countless editors and 3.6 million (English language) articles, things are bound to slip through the net.

The "page protected" issue should not apply to you any more, at least in the vast majority of cases. Semi-protection is a more usual situation in my experience and the requirements for editing those articles is not unduly onerous. You'll soon hit the mark (if you have not already) using your new username. By the way, I thank you for registering: it does make life easier for everyone else. Remembering a bunch of numbers, such as an IP address, is difficult compared to recognising names, which is one of the reasons why on the web in general domain name servers etc do the job of translating IP addresses into website names/emial addresses and the like. Unless you are a mathematician or similar, numbers are a relatively difficult pattern to follow compared to alphabetic/alphanumeric strings of characters. Don't ask me why!

Notability is a big cornerstone. If the policy did not exist then anyone could write everything about anything. No encyclopedia would permit this because it is an endless rummage through knowledge and, ultimately, could represent what amounts to an extended version of a highly personalised Trivial Pursuit, at its most mundane. For example, someone could write an article about the penultimate dog owned by the midwife of their second cousin's stepsister. Who would care? Who could prove it? What useful information does it provide for the world? The general guideline is at notability but there are also more specific guidelines for certain subjects, such as academics or athletes.

I do appreciate that all of this may seem to be awkwardness. There is, however, a method to the (sometimes, apparent) madness. You are doing nothing wrong in asking, querying and, yes, even challenging. No-one should be derided for trying to improve their own understanding. So, feel free to keep asking and please do continue to try. It will all fall into place and Wikipedia works on consensus, so there is always a chance for anything, I guess. - Sitush (talk) 00:16, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll wedding dress

The only reason I made that page is because in the box with all the rest of the royal brides Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll was a proposed person in red. No one had made the page; so I made the page. There is not that much information to find on the Duchess and her wedding gown other than what was put in the article. I was just helping out because someone listed all of Queen Victoria's daughters and daughter-in-laws wedding dresses -- ie see box. If people don't want small articles on not "notable" subjects then don't put them in the Wedding Dresses Worn at British Royal Weddings box or Wikipedia at all; do we really need all these pages on wedding dresses? Perhaps they could be merged into the person's actual article?

-- Lady Meg (talk) 03:49, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I didn't even see the template box. I did see that you had created a similar article for Sophie Rhys-Jones. I thought that it was just possible that the latter might be notable but was less sure about Princess Louise. Just because other stuff exists doesn't mean that any one thing should exist.

In any event, don't worry or get upset about it. You and I both had a similar thought, ie: it might be relevant as a couple of paragraphs in the person's article. It was also a great piece of research.

Having said all of this, removing the CSD was wrong and you could have been warned for doing that. Let the reviewing administrator remove those things in future and confine yourself to a hangon tag + rationale on the talk page, as the CSD box explained. - Sitush (talk) 09:13, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Deaf ears

This is all falling on deaf ears. He is saying that he doesn't have time to fix up the village articles, yet he has time to keep creating these products. He is leaving a lot of work for others, producing articles that should have consensus first, is moving content out of articles unnecessarily, is asking for our help, while not accepting any guidance. My good faith is wearing thin. What should we do? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:31, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Agree. I opened a case at AN/I yesterday. I'd suggest that you comment there. - Sitush (talk) 11:33, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I commented. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

So did I and I'm at a loss as to what to do with all these school forks. We might be able to apply A10 since these are disruptive edits when you get right down to it. I for one would like to see them speedied. They're just useless and duplicate an existing and far more comprehensive article. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:53, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

A10 specifically says it cannot be used for splits, which have to go through PROD or AfD. However, would G6 be appropriate? - Sitush (talk) 17:59, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

If they're truly bad faith and disruptive, G3 would be the appropriate venue. Also, if they're forks, can they just be turned into a redirect back to the parent article and unsplit the content that way? —C.Fred (talk) 18:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that they are bad faith, just extremely misguided even in the face of advice to indicate this. There is an (almost) arrogance going on here but I think it is probably just a cultural difference. Redirecting back would work - a neat use of the technique. That's an example of an accountant using the rulebook to suit an unintended purpose! I never thought that they did this. <g> - Sitush (talk) 18:10, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Kindly guide me

List of high schools in Washington is an article for list of schools in a state of US, equivalent article for an Indian state can be List of schools in Gujarat. As you have deleted the article and have redirected it. Can you please explain.

• Why that article was not needed?
• If needed, why the content i had added, should not be included in that article.
• What steps do one need to take, to make that particular article. (These would be same, that i had taken)

Kindly revert your edits, and let those articles begin.

Thanks. Mahesh Kumar Yadav (talk) 18:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

You need consensus. This was explained to you but, despite acknowledging the point de facto by posting a comment on the main article's talk page, you then proceeded to continue with your splitting of that article. I am now trying to untangle the same mess with regard to Punjab and numerous other articles you have forked today without consensus. - Sitush (talk) 18:43, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for your informative note showing the reason for reverting my cite on the Carlos_Slim page. I have replaced it with more reliable sources. (hopefully) Rsquid (talk) 01:58, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, that is a better source. You may want to take a look at WP:CITE for guidance in future. Thanks for your contributions. - Sitush (talk) 12:37, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Djc wi's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mahesh's subpage

Sorry about that. He'd titled it as an article talk page instead of a subpage and I simply deleted it as an orphan. I've restored the page for him. If it had been titled as a subpage, I would never have deleted it. Thanks for weighing in.  :) PMDrive1061 (talk) 14:48, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

D'oh. I knew it was something obvious. Should have spotted the title issue myself. - Sitush (talk) 14:50, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

LOL! Well, as you know, "it" happens. Gotta run, but take care and thanks again. PMDrive1061 (talk) 14:56, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

AN/I notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Mahesh Kumar Yadav (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

On which topic, I just noticed your comment at AN/I about you not being an admin and I was more or less thought "really? Sitush isn't?" You would seem to me to be a qualified candidate. You should consider running. JoshuaZ (talk) 01:23, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Ha, I'm calling your bluff here! More seriously, I have nothing like sufficient experience and I am still relying quite heavily on admins for advice, most notably User:C.Fred (who has been very good to me). I suspect that unless I pull out of the vortex that is Indian/subcontinental articles then my chances at RfA will remain for ever extremely slim. Those articles just attract spats, and getting into spats is not A Good Thing^TM at RfA. I have good days and bad ones here, but I do feel that the bad ones are becoming much more rare. And I'm quite proud that a lady I helped to get started a few months back has gone from being initially rather flustered to being a really good contributor who has today achieved her first GA (and has done a lot of other great work besides). I'd like to think that some of what I helped her with may, if nothing else, have caused her to stay here in her dark, early days.

Right now I really need to get back to some content creation, though. I have several items sooooo near to where I know I can take them but keep getting sidetracked. Tom Jackling is definitely within earshot of being a GA Nom, for example, but I want to do a little more on it first. And then there is another Indian article where I seem to have been proposed as a mediator on sources. Which will mean more spats, I guess.

In principle, I'd be happy to run at some point and feel that I probably would have something to offer, but that point is quite a way off as right now I would be roasted, and rightly so. Thanks for the !vote of confidence, though ... assuming that you were not in fact bluffing <g> - Sitush (talk) 23:56, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not at all sure what the bluff in question would be about. But anyways, if you think you should wait, then by all means wait. You probably have a better idea of the situation than I do. JoshuaZ (talk) 16:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Anna Frodesiak's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Anna Frodesiak's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Olive Trees - now has GA status

Sitush, thanks so much for your suggestion to have an article reviewed for GA status. Olive Trees (series) was reviewed with several very good suggestions which have made the aritle more polished and now has GA status. And, there's a second article that someone suggested I nominate that I'm going to make similar kinds of changes and have reviewed for GA status as well. Great idea! And, you're right, I learned some things in the process!

I hope you're doing well!--CaroleHenson (talk) 12:31, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have been quietly watching the review process and think that both parties conducted the thing well. I am very pleased for you - onwards and upwards to a Featured Article on something within the next 6 months or so? Meanwhile, I've missed the suggested other GA nominee, so what is it please? - Sitush (talk) 12:34, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

BTW, you are clearly not my "baby" anymore. Full grown, walking, talking adult Wikiipedian. <g> - Sitush (talk) 12:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Langlois is the next nominee. Have had dreadful problems loading pages today but things seem to be improving. It seemed only to affect Wikipedia & so I must assume a server issue.

Honestly, this art stuff goes over my head, although I know a nice painting when I see one. Well, I know a nice painting if I think it is a nice painting! What is so nice about this GA is that (a) you have come here and really shown people that it is possible to develop as an individual and as a collaborator in a very short space of time and (b) you have developed this particular VG article to GA standard, and contributed massively to others on and around the same subject. Van Gogh is well-known even to a philistine like me and the fact that there is scope to get stuff about him to GA even now demonstrates both your enthusiasm and your abilities. Such articles could (should?) have been up there years ago ... but it took you to achieve it. I know that you had good advice and encouragement along the way, especially from Modernist, but bask in the "glory" for a little while. GA & FA are just about the only rewards people get here. FA being in the Featured Article sense, although the other version of FA is perhaps a more common award :)

Other matters:

1. I shall be visiting my brother in Talgarth some time fairly soon. It is not far from Abergavenny, so if you need anything just holler
2. Panderoona seems to be settling in nicely and is now attracting encouragement after her emotional beginnings - good to see.

Onwards and upwards! - Sitush (talk) 23:30, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your very kind words! It's nice to know I'm becoming a full-grown Wikipedian! It seemed rocky in the beginning days, and I appreciate your cool head and support! Oh, it's so funny, the Abergavenny articles, especially the one about Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam, were so touching to me. Just to hear a bit about what the countryside is now like there would be nice. I hope you have a lovely time with your brother. I'm glad to hear Panderoona is back and working her way through things! That's great news!--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:48, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Well done - I'm off

I see you are busy as a bee. I have to sleep. It's 2:20 am here. I'll pick up where you left off tomorrow. You are awesome! Let's expidited this ASAP and get on with our regular stuff. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

You have mail

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Active Banana's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Active Banana (^bananaphone 20:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Djc wi's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Silver sandbox

Just to let you know, To avoid edit conflicts, I'll stay away from the sandbox and let you do your thing. Your input there has been great. I don't know what I'd do without you. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:55, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Rangareddy district

Hello, at Talk:Rangareddy district I have proposed a rename to Ranga Reddy district, just not sure where to notify the discussion, so your help would be appreciated. Have a similar problem with village stubs being created in this district, but no need for to you to get involved on this one just yet as I think I will resolve this one satisfactorily shortly> Regards (Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:57, 13 May 2011 (UTC)).

I have been bold and just done it. Ranga Reddy District already existed as an article but was redirected to Rangareddy district some years ago. Basically, I have reversed the redirect. Since the former page already existed, I could not use the Page Move facility and had to do it manually. This entailed a copy/paste of the content (including an edit summary that notes where it came from, in order to preserve the page/licensing history etc), then inserting a redirect modifier. I did the same for the talk page. I've just left a note with someone who knows far more than me with regard to how to deal with any possible double redirects but think that I have to wait a while for things to catch up with what I have done.

I would usually agree with your thoughts regarding instigating a discussion but this particular renaming is so obvious that the chances of it being controversial are nil. He says, on Friday 13th.

There is nothing wrong with stubs, by the way. The problem I & several others have been dealing with was a case of 470-odd stubs being created very rapidly and without any citations, co-ordinates etc at all. They may as well be made up names, especially since

• none of us have been able to find any of the information which the stub creator omitted to include in the first place; and
• the creator has not responded to requests for an explanation of where he did get the info from.

If your situation is similar and continues then feel free to drop me a note. - Sitush (talk) 14:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

And the solution is all at User_talk:C.Fred#Double_redirects - a gent, is our Fred. - Sitush (talk) 15:45, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Time to act

I just posted this at ANI:

He just created List of villages in Mohali district over objections. He's made it clear that he intends on creating a new group of stubs. Please block this editor from creating articles. We can't keep up with the trail of debris this editor is leaving behind.

Where's the cavalry? This editor must be stopped. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

And I have just asked for a speedy/snow close. - Sitush (talk) 07:09, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Where did you ask? It might go unnoticed due to ANI. Do you want me to get an admin on the horn? I'd like to see him stopped before the Punjab articles happen. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:22, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Just below the proposal/above the Support subsection, with an edit summary of "can we close this now please". Feel free to shout up an admin. This is getting scary. And prepare for accusations of racism etc. - Sitush (talk) 07:23, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

here - Sitush (talk) 07:25, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry. I should have just looked at your contribs. I am yelling on IRC right now. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:43, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I always wondered what purpose IRC served :) - Sitush (talk) 07:47, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

IRC is awesome. I use it all the time for instant advice. Invaluable! Plus, I keep it open for the Ambassador program. Are you ever on? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:54, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Despite having built my first computer in 1973/1974 (& worked with them from 1982-ish, back in the days of the FIDO network), I have never got beyond the opening screens of IRC. I just logged in after your message and, aside from the list of currently logged in users, couldn't work out what the hell to do! I must be thick, but it is now a near-40 year thickness & so unlikely to change I guess. - Sitush (talk) 07:58, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

That's not your fault. Many are puzzled. There is a bar at the very bottom of the screen that only activates when you click on it. Then you can type. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

No, ah'm fick. I've never had a problem finding my way round programs without much need for RTFM, except with IRC. However, I will take another look, if only because it keeps getting mentioned on WP & so clearly still serves a useful purpose. - Sitush (talk) 08:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, if you ever get on, jut click my name. It'll make things flash, and I'll see you. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:36, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Sitush. Is it just me or has this issue with this user gotten to the point of ridiculousness? He's either completely and utterly incompetent even after five years or he's a troll. Either way, he's exhausted my patience. Thoughts? --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:11, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, I think that it is ridiculous but appear to be in a minority. I sure that he will run out of rope soon. Take a look at his talk page right now, and particularly my last two comments. His statements/queries upon which I commented are truly indicative of the person we are dealing with here. He seems to be self-centred, arrogant, unwilling to learn and impatient.

And if I get a block for writing that last sentence ^ above then so be it.- Sitush (talk) 17:16, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Your views are accurate. He is demonstrably incorrigible. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:22, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

And now he is having a go on the AN/I thread again - Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Indef_block - Sitush (talk) 17:24, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

By the way, bit of an off-topic statement, the IRC is indeed awesome. If you ever get on and need help (you're likely a much more experienced editor than me, but if you need a second set of eyes or anything), if I'm editing Wikipedia then I can be found on #wikipedia-en-help, and sometimes on #wikipedia-en. - SudoGhost (talk) 02:51, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks. That's two offers now ... both from people who are primarily active when I should be about halfway through my night's sleep <g> 0355 here. - Sitush (talk) 02:55, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Well I'm on the tail end of my 'editing day'. I'm a stay at home dad, so I'm on Wikipedia alot during the day. (it's 2326 here) - SudoGhost (talk) 03:25, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

The camel's back has just been broken...

Thanks for alerting me to that last bit of trolling by Mahesh. He is, in my opinion, finished and I am going to be the one to block him and nuke every last one of those village substubs. He's under the delusion that all of this nonsense is anti-India bias. This is all I am going to take from this guy. PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

PS: I am close to simply using a "nuke option" to delete these village nanostubs. He's also within a hair's width of either an indef block or community ban. No need to inform him on each of these since you'll be here for a month if you do.  :) Thanks for all your help. PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:22, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm just going through Anna's list, her & I having almost lived together through this saga. The sooner that list comprises mostly redlinks & redirects, the better. Although there are some worthwhile articles in there, and they are being noted as such as we progress. When the mop is used, just be careful not to delete the (few) good 'uns. He is getting notified simply cos I'm using Twinkle. - Sitush (talk) 02:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Good idea. Each and every one of the village articles I pulled up at random were just useless. I'll go through Anna's sandbox and blast whichever ones are either copyvios or without content. PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:41, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Forgive my absence

I work weekends, so will be largely off the case till Monday. Sorry. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

wills lifestyle debut results

(talk) Will Lifestyle Debut 2010 result please do not remove go through the link and add this in article http://www.willssport.com/Season21/wlsdebut/results.html

No. It has little or no context. This has been explained previously, as far back as March, to the user of your IP address and the other socks. - Sitush (talk) 05:20, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

please check this and do not delete any impotent in formation .

wills lifestyle debut results 2010

Name Registration No. Institute Name Aarzu Hasnain WLS-10-0008 Pearl Academy of Fashion, ND Damneet Kaur WLS-10-0012 NIFT, New Delhi Harpriya Kaur WLS-10-0014 NIFT, New Delhi Pooja Rajgariha WLS-10-0016 NIFT, New Delhi Pranita Mujgelwar WLS-10-0020 National Institute of Design, Ahd Shreyasi Srivastava WLS-10-0022 NIFT, New Delhi Sharath Prasad WLS-10-0027 National Institute of Design, Ahd Lovleen Dhillon WLS-10-0030 National Institute of Design, Ahd Deepika Ramani WLS-10-0031 Pearl Academy of Fashion, ND Amit Shrivastava WLS-10-0038 NIFT, Gandhi Nagar Aneesa Chishti WLS-10-0040 NIFT, New Delhi Darshana Tatibandwala WLS-10-0041 National Institute of Design, Ahd Richana Khumanthem WLS-10-0044 NIFT, New Delhi Ankit Mishra WLS-10-0045 NIFT, Kolkata Sonu Ranjan WLS-10-0046 NIFT, New Delhi Govind Kumar Singh WLS-10-0047 NIFT, Bangalore Esha Narayanan WLS-10-0060 NIFT, Mumbai Varun Arora WLS-10-0065 Pearl Academy of Fashion, ND Shagun Mehindro WLS-10-0069 Pearl Academy of Fashion, ND Akash Malhotra WLS-10-0071 Pearl Academy of Fashion, ND Rakhi Anand WLS-10-0073 National Institute of Design, Ahd Sanjit Rath WLS-10-0074 National Institute of Design, Ahd Aman Ahuja WLS-10-0078 Pearl Academy of Fashion, ND Vidya Panicker WLS-10-0086 Pearl Academy of Fashion, Jaipur Kriti Tula WLS-10-0090 Pearl Academy of Fashion, ND Ruchika Gurdita WLS-10-0096 Pearl Academy of Fashion, Jaipur Ipsita Priyadarsini WLS-10-0097 Pearl Academy of Fashion, Chennai Biplub Alok WLS-10-0103 NIFT, Kolkata Sumeet Kumar WLS-10-0109 NIFT, Mumbai Manuprasad Mathew WLS-10-0110 National Institute of Design, Ahd Fazal Mahmood WLS-10-0113 NIFT, New Delhi Misti Subhan WLS-10-0131 NIFT, Hyderabad Mansi Malhotra WLS-10-0134 NIFT, Hyderabad Akanksha Arora WLS-10-0135 NIFT, Hyderabad Vineeta Khanna WLS-10-0137 Pearl Academy of Fashion, ND Niharika Das WLS-10-0145 NIFT, Bangalore Anjan Singh WLS-10-0148 Pearl Academy of Fashion, ND Sanjya Jain WLS-10-0172 NIFT, New Delhi Niyati Amlani WLS-10-0188 NIFT, Mumbai Suraj Kumar WLS-10-0198 NIFT, New Delhi Nitin Pal WLS-10-0221 NIFT, Hyderabad Dhwani Sharma WLS-10-0259 NIFT, New Delhi Anmol Sachdev WLS-10-0269 NIFT, New Delhi Kundan Lal WLS-10-0282 NIFT, New Delhi Vinay Mishra WLS-10-0296 NIFT, New Delhi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.243.239.25 (talk) 16:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Govind Kumar Singh is from subalul , Bihar

(talk) please you have reverted this edit please check this link and do not deleted this , these are basic informations , if you will remove these article become useless for readers .http://in.news.yahoo.com/success-encourage-youth-bihar-designer-govind-singh-20110225-024558-216.html

That article states that he is currently from there, not that he was born there. - SudoGhost (talk) 05:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

hails from the flood-prone Supaul district

Read it carefully do not delete any useful information its written He hails form the flood prone supaul district . --60.243.239.25 (talk) 16:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)Patna, Feb 25 (IANS) Govind Kumar Singh, who is from Bihar, was voted the top upcoming Indian fashion designer 2011 by Cotton Council International (CCI), and he feels his success story will inspire youngster in his home state to join the fashion fraternity. Singh, who hails from the flood-prone Supaul district, told IANS over telephone Friday that it was a big moment for him as well as his home state. 'My hard work and creativity has finally been recognised,' said Singh adding that his 'success story will encourage youths in Bihar to make a difference in the field of fashion too'. Singh, who is in his early 20s, won the title at the Let's Design 3 fashion competition in Mumbai Feb 14.

Sigh. That does not mean he was born there. - Sitush (talk) 16:35, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

--60.243.239.25 (talk) 16:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC) read the article same thing is written there sings hails from sukhpur supaul .

"Hails from" does not mean "born in". Not in any version of English I know of. Now please stop commenting on my talk page. Take it to the proper place, which is the article's talk page. Or, better still, forget about it. - Sitush (talk) 16:47, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...

This Mahesh nonsense has taken up more of my time than I could have possibly imagined. I am about to weigh in on the ban proposal and see this ended once and for all. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:51, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Ha! I've lost most of my last Wikipedian week on the issue, which is unfortunate both on a personal level and also because there is another issue on which some people are rather hoping to get my input. I've said my piece, over and over - probably to the point where I could be accused of stalking or hounding, in fact, although neither would be correct.. I do think that it is an unfortunate situation but NortyNort has recently added a "support" that says it better than I ever could: the word "gaming" is one upon which, until now, I never really could put a decent definition. There are calmer heads than mine out there, however, and I remain open to persuasion. The one really big block to changing my mind is Anna: I sense that when she gets fed up with someone's antics then it really must be all over. However, I am not slavish/do have a brain of my own and if someone does put up a really good argument then I might flip. I just cannot see that anyone could do that right now. Time will tell. - Sitush (talk) 01:47, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Mentoring

So long as it's zero expenditure on our part, zero possibility of further damage, and some potential of useful contribs, I am in favour of Qwyrxian mentoring. It appears to be the only avenue for a possible repayment of lost hours.

Just to let you know, this hasn't changed my opinions about this editor at all. Not a whim, not a whit, not a morsel, not a bit. Talk is cheap. His deeds were expensive. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:31, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I have not made up my mind yet. I do not doubt Qwyrxian's capability as a mentor, nor his intentions, but right now I am not convinced that Maheshkumaryadav is actually going to do anything differently. We have all seen his past promises, and the breaches thereof. I note that Q has just requested clarification on M's talk page about his latest cri de coeur on AN/I. I'm not going to weigh in there but I'm sure that the wriggling will start again shortly. He simply does not get it and my concern is that there will in fact be collateral damage if the mentorship agreement is accepted. M has in the past had a peculiar interpretation of agreements, believing them to be basically what he thinks rather than what they say. Anyway, I'll continue to consider the options & see what responses emerge over the next few hours. I don't want this to end in tears for anyone, but think the likelihood of that being the case is pretty slim. - Sitush (talk) 14:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

My consideration for this deal is right on the edge of a big "no". My estimation of success is very low. But, if Q is the watcher, sets clearly defined conditions, and any breach means a swift ban, what do we have to lose? If he can insulate Wikipedia from collateral damage, fine. Maybe we can put ourselves in a win something/lose nothing scenario.

My only concern is that if/when a violation occurs, there will be paragraphs of dialogue over a ban, perhaps with Q excusing and defending M. That's a worry.

Even these very discussions that Q has initiated are adding to the cost. I'm not thrilled about that. We all have little tolerance for swapping more long paragraphs. Machiavellian pragmatism is essential here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:32, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Bishanpura deletion

Hi, Sitush. That nanostub was a perfect example of why they're nearly useless. Between its creation in August 2010 and today, the content did not expand at all. It had coordinates and category boxes added to it, but it was just as empty as when it was first created. It was also a perfect example of how his 472 nanostubs were likely never going to get beyond his opening declaratory sentence. This whole thing reminds me of a situation a few years ago when every little kid on the planet seemed to be adding "kiddie-wiki" articles about their elementary schools. The argument there was that "schools are inherently notable." Perhpas so, but none of these things had any content whatsoever and yet there were those who were defending them to the death. Typical "X is a school in Y. Their mascot is the Z" and so on. I for one would rather see a red link than a useless nanostub that took maybe 45 seconds to write. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:02, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, it did briefly gain some citations. It just happened that those cites were no fit for the purpose they were being deployed for. I would have actually used on of them to expand the article slightly, if only I could have made sense of the newspaper report: it was something about local taxes, as I recall. - Sitush (talk) 17:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Believe me, I'll restore it right now if you're willing to add some more content. In fact, I will. Glad I caught you online, but I have to go once I do restore it. Good luck.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm back

After working all weekend off-wiki, and visiting silver, I'm a bit lost. Can you bring me up to speed on how I can help now? Thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Work does get in the way of life.

• It is basically a case of "keep on carrying on" as far as Silver is concerned. Qwyrxian has looked at a fair few, and perhaps even all, of the entries there, although there is also a bit of wait and see involved because of some current AfDs. Elen of the Roads had a dabble also. There are some items there that only one person has commented on. There are also one or two where there is a difference of opinion, plus of course there is some clean up to be done regarding now-non-existent page links, redirects that appear in templates etc. I have tackled some of these, but suspect I have missed more than I hit.
• I managed to get Bishanpura restored from deletion & improved it when Mahesh (twice) made a mess of doing so. Still rubbish, but at least it is policy-compliant rubbish!
• I blew up at him for that and for what making what appeared to me to be an untruthful comment about how he was working on improving the tourist attractions in Chandigarh Capital Region prior to its deletion (my bad). Tried to introduce cite templates to him but didn't appear to make any substantive progress. I have tried to avoid stalking him but that has proved awkward because we now have so many pages in common.
• you have seen developments at AN/I. There have been some wise words there, and some that were less wise ("99% of my edits were compliant" being one of the latter).
• I think that perhaps the Jharkand police article needs to be restored. It was uncited but it should not be difficult to obtain a couple of citations from somewhere. Maybe this could be (yet another) attempt to engage MKY in doing something constructive. Surely it should give a warm glow to someone if they do something which causes the rescue from deletion of an article that they created? He could also go through silver himself, but I doubt that he will.
• I actually did a small amount of productive work of my own, unrelated to MYK issues. I needed a break as I was descending into a vortex of despair and pain. I steered clear of a major commitment on another India-related article for the same reason.
• my chicken curry was very tasty. How was your goat curry? - Sitush (talk) 06:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Replies to points:

• Will carry on. I tried to add some pink and bold to clarify for Q and M et al. Plus, I kept reading it over and over trying to figure out what's resolved.
• Bishanpura: good
• Don't worry about blowing up. I swore really, really loud at home a couple of times.
• Q is having second thoughts. He might be starting to feel that his defense was a bit hasty, and that he's bitten off more than he can chew. The "99%" has him worried. :) (Sorry Q. We luv ya.)
• Seen ANI. Looks like M might live to tell the tale.
• I thought all the police stubs survived.
• "...small amount..."? There's nothing small about the amount of anything you do. You saved the day. If you were not in this recovery equation, things would still be at stage 1.
• Glad you liked the curry. Mine was lovely. No yoghurt though. I want to visit some Muslim friends here to get some more culture. Either there, or the Xin Jiang restaurant Muslims will give me a glob for free.

Other

• I read a bit about the possible inappropriateness of the sandbox location and method of sorting things out. Thanks for your efforts in that regard. I deliberately posted the link at ANI and M's talk, and numerous PROD talk discussions for transparency. I think it will probably be okay. We are acting in good faith, in the interests of the project, and boldly, slightly, bending the rules, in order to do what 100% of sensible editors would approve of. Besides, it's dirty work. Nobody will likely object lest we agree, and dump the mess in their lap. :) :) Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:36, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
• Once an item is merge proposal, PROD, AFD, etc, it's no longer the concern of silver, right?
• When this is done, I won't speedy that page. I will dump it wherever an admin tells me to. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

My view is that AfD/PROD/merge could still do with checks for copyvio/lack of attribution in any copying from other articles. However, off the top of my head, I think we've actually done most of that stuff. I think that the merge proposals that have been instigated by Qwyrxian will be checked by him at the time of merging (& they all appear to be a positive consensus for that).We are not going to find/fix everything: the scale of the issues is too big for that. We can merely do our best, until we wilt. Which won't be long off in my case, I suspect. I'm quite a dogged character but there are limits. - Sitush (talk) 09:25, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I've only looked at some; I'll go back for more later. If you see a merge I proposed that sits for more than 2 weeks, feel free to let me know...I need to be better organized about things like that that don't auto-prompt themselves or have a time limit. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:15, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Not to worry

Hey, I screw up procedure at least once a week without even trying. Just did so, as a matter of fact. :P It looks as if the article is A-OK and like Anna said, you're in no pickle. I recommend getting a pickle inside you. A good kosher is as good as you're gonna get. Take care and thank you for all your good work. Regards, PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:13, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

List of surviving veterans of World War I

Don't worry, you're not going mad - someone had created a duplicate at List of surviving World War I era veterans (now deleted), so I suspect you just tagged the wrong one. Cheers -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:26, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Churchill Machine Tool Company

I just sat down with a nice cup of tea and listened to it (via text to voice software). Lovely. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Of course, some other people had input but I am quite pleased with it. It is very long, though. There was an awful lot of research involved to piece the story together, but my degrees are in history & so that is not an onerous thing for me to do. I'd like to take it to Featured Article status at some point, but it needs rejigging a little, I think. It was peer reviewed after the GA and that process produced a few more useful comments which I have not yet addressed in full, in part because it means a trip to the library & I'm not mobile enough for that at the moment. The peer review also produced the comment that it really needed reviewing by people with various specialist interests, but where they can be found is another matter.

I am quite pleased with Paravar also, which I stripped down to next to nothing because of the common Indian-article issues of copyvios and POV, and then rewrote. It is not GA quality, but it is not bad. Again, however, it is very long. Isaac Perrins is a more reasonable length, & I'll be taking Tom Johnson (bareknuckle boxer) to GA soon. I need to sort out the lede on that one, and ledes are not my strong suit. I have absolutely no interest in boxing what so ever, but the research side appeals. Plus, the more or less contemporary accounts for these fighters are very lively: you can smell the sweat! "And he caught him square in the ogle" etc.

What text-to-voice software do you use? I am profoundly deaf but wouldn't mind giving it a go: with the volume wound right up via some hi-fi (not PC) speakers, I might be able to hear something, on a good day, with the neighbours away from home. - Sitush (talk) 12:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

tamil kshatriya

sitush, thanks for starting the review process. if i have anything to say about one of your reviews or if i have a different opinion about one of the references, i will make a note in a separate sub-header. --CarTick (talk) 22:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with Ruth Glass

Thanks for your attempt to help with Ruth Glass even if nothing came of it. We will have to wait to see what those in charge decide. Best wishes anyway (Msrasnw (talk) 23:37, 19 May 2011 (UTC))

No problem, but all is not lost - see User_talk:Moonriddengirl. I am going to rewrite it. I am not happy with how this has been dealt with. There are too many new page patrollers using hair-triggers at the moment, Yes, the article was a close paraphrase, but the method of dealing with it was just silly. IMO. You had other sources there but no time to deploy them. Obviously, if you start these things off in userspace then you will not hit these issues (well, I hope not!), but even so I think that since a dialogue was in place then there should have been some leeway granted. Neither you nor I are exactly newbies to this place. - Sitush (talk) 23:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Dosa

1. I can say for certain those statements cannot be verified. Such statements were along the lines of "Cherry dosas are most popular in Tamil Nadu" and such statements would actually need a peer-reviewed article to verify, which would be very hard to find. Also, I can tell you such statements are easily refuted because immigrant communities would be very enthusiastic connoisseur of these foods.
2. I can tell you also that the food can only be verified for wholesomeness by a nutritionist. The statement was not footnoted.
3. I did not add any new entries to the list; it was a product of formatting according to wp:bullet.Curb Chain (talk) 08:51, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I understand your intent, honestly I do. However:

1. you cannot prove a negative and therefore cannot prove that the statements cannot be verified (!?! - sorry, I find it difficult to express this concept).
2. the fact that it was not footnoted does not give you the right to say "the editor is not a nutritionist" in your edition summary. I seriously doubt that you know what the relevant editor may do in their day job (if they have one), but there was a recent valid request for a citation tagged to the statement & that should suffice for now
3. it certainly looked like stuff had been added but, in any event, this needs moving into a separate article due to the size & potential for further expansion. As I explained on your talk page, I would support such a split in the article. WP:List should cover this, and it also contains the various possible styles for a list, of which bulletting is only one. - Sitush (talk) 09:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I have now copied the above conversation and that which I started on your talk page to the article's talk page. We'll get more feedback there. - Sitush (talk) 09:34, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

1. Unverifiable statements can be removed.
2. You are right, the edit summary was not well thought. But I disagree, because {{cn}} should not suffice and the statement should still be removed because, as I have explained, it will not be possible to verify this food for wholesomeness. Also, I do not think the sentence was tagged. Why have you reverted all the edits if you are debating this?
3. Well then, there is no dispute on this format.Curb Chain (talk) 09:35, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

If you can

Hi. :) If you get a chance, would you mind offering feedback on my last questions and actions at User talk:Moonriddengirl#Close paraphrasing allegation of Ruth Glass article? I think this is a common issue that we will be encountering more and more, how to talk about close paraphrasing issues, and I'd really like to pull together in addressing it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:21, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

No. It's not as if you have ever done anything for me. <g> Course I will. I did take a quick look yesterday but some of it seemed a little over my head + I was tired. I thought it best to let things settle a little. I'll comment asap. - Sitush (talk) 16:34, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

LOL! Thanks. :D A little over your head is not good! If you can point out what's unclear about it, please do. I want to make it as simple as possible. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:51, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

As it turns out, your bit was not a little over my head. For some reason, I thought you had rewritten the entire article. That reason was probably the tiredness previously referred to. I'm on new meds & have noticed that this sort of wall of tiredness kicks in fairly soon after. I may have to change my WP editing habits otherwise I could do something that I do not intend - like people who edit after drinking a barrel of beer or whatever.

FWIW, the entire article makes sense now. Obviously this is a variant on a song title: I can see clearly now the meds have gone. - Sitush (talk) 17:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

LOL! I know the feeling. :) I have some migraine meds that keep me well away from anything on Wikipedia requiring thought. Thanks. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:20, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I knew that there was a reason why the vague paraphrase of "I can see clearly now the rain has gone" had stuck in my head, bearing in mind that I cannot hear music etc due to my congenital deafness. I saw a spoof of the lyrics somewhere that was "sung" by guy who was seeing two girlfriends at the same time (two-timing): it started, "I can see Mary now Lorraine has gone" ... - Sitush (talk) 23:29, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

varna in nair article

there is a discussion i started about the varna of nairs here. i would appreciate inputs from you. thanks. --CarTick (talk) 12:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I have been watching the conversation for a few days now & have very nearly stepped in on a couple of occasions. However, I think that if we can get to some sort of resolution at Tamil Kshatriya then it may go some way towards resolving similar issues with other articles. For that reason, I'm going to keep out of the conversation for now unless something dramatic happens which I feel might merit intervention. I am in danger of spreading myself a little too thinly across these caste articles and do feel that since the problems appear often to be related then a full "fix" in one place can be re-used in others. I hope that this makes sense, but please do let me know if it doesn't or if I have misunderstood something. - Sitush (talk) 14:52, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

i understand and agree with your line of thinking. --CarTick (talk) 15:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Business history

Unfortunately it looks like Google Books has it on snippet view in the US as well. The good news is that I can get the full text of the 1960 issues of that journal from another source (EBSCO). What article do you want? GabrielF (talk) 14:36, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for getting back to me.

How odd this situation is. I can only presume that GBooks are digitising for future full release. And what the heck is EBSCO ?!

I cannot even see a contents page but the article appears to be "An early engineering firm: Peel Williams & Co of Manchester", which starts at page 8 and (probably) finishes at page 18. Certainly pages 8 & 18 contain info that I could use at W & J Galloway & Sons, an article which I hope eventually to get to GAN. However, the thing as a whole would be useful as I intend to start one on Peel Williams fairly soon - in my crazy attempt to document/improve the documentation of all the significant, defunct Mancunian engineering firms. Some people say that I should get a life instead! - Sitush (talk) 14:48, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I've put the article online here. EBSCO is a big academic database company in the US (apparently they also make fishing lures?!) They have a whole mess of different databases for different topics - this article came from Business Source Complete. Keep up with the Manchester stuff. Everyone has to have a hobby and yours is definitely an interesting one. That article about the origin of Manchester engineers looked fascinating and I keep meaning to read it myself.GabrielF (talk) 15:10, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I have grabbed it, thank you. I am going to try to find an index for Business History as I have a feeling that I've seen two or three useful things there in the past and simply gave up. I'm not that close to a suitable library and in any case am somewhat incapacitated,

You know, without people such as yourself going to this sort of trouble then I probably would have walked away from WP ages ago: I am a "sources" type of person and the frustration of not being able to access them even though I know they are there would have driven me potty. - Sitush (talk) 15:42, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Contributor copyright investigation regarding Maheshkumaryadav? (2)

Continuing from this thread in order to Anna an unnecessary and annoying yellow bar.

All a CCI is is a listing of major content contributions sorted by article and addition size. The (+xxx) links are the relevant diffs. One does not need to create an article to add a copyvio to Wikipedia. :) I'll let you know when I open the investigation. MER-C 12:52, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed one does not need to create in order to violate. That was always going to be an issue, but the copyvio situation actually arose out of another concern (and Anna's list was created with regard to the other concern). This has been a rather messy few days, I am afraid. I understand that CCI is overloaded, so adding another to the "to do" list is regretable but, of course, necessary. I'll take another look at the sample you posted because it intrigues me, but I must admit that my interest lies more in article development and usually I just remove copyvios on sight when I see them (occasionally, I rephrase them but often the offending content is far too much for me to handle). - Sitush (talk) 07:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Opened: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Maheshkumaryadav. MER-C 05:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Dona Bertrelli part 2

Dear Sitush,

Following your message, I would love to get more information for the English article (biography) of Dona Bertarelli.

I have modified these changes as requested and I will not to any more edits until this has been cleared with you: -Biography: additional references now available for verification. Content is factual. -Tone: Article was written in a formal & neutral tone with reliable sources. Text has been written in the same tone as Mr. Ernesto Bertarelli’s biography. If this text needs to change could you please let us know how? -Conflict of interest: Text has been written following what is already available on the web, with a neutral matter. What are my options? -Self-published sources: source have been adapted with external sources at 15:10 on 23.05.11. I would really love to have precised information about what needs to be done in order to be in adequation with the Wikipedia Guidelines.

Rabicat

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabicat (talk • contribs) 15:44, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 

Dona Bertrelli part 1

Dear Sitush,

Thank you very much for your email.

I have added the sources/references linked to Mrs. Dona Bertarelli’s biography.

I have read your Wikipedia page about living persons and I can confirm I have done the following: -Neutral point of view (NPOV): the tone of the text is neutral, like the sources available online. -Verifiability (V) : linked to the references -No original research (NOR) : linked to the references

Could you please let me know if this is ok for you? If not could you give me some tips? Regards Rabicat —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabicat (talk • contribs) 15:44, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Getting back in the game

Hi Sitush, I don't know if it seems so to you, but I'm firing with more synapses lately - and thought it might be helpful to integrate some of my consulting background to help out newbies here. You did an incredible job making me feel welcome from the start - and also "having my back" - that I want to run an idea by you.

Getting started here is so daunting and the references, while helpful, are also so intimidating and not really clear until one knows the ropes a bit better. I was thinking it might be helpful to have a "Getting Started" document that hits some of the highlights in conversational tone, with a reference section. I think this might be especially helpful for people come here and have their first attempt deleted (rightful, but possibly hard to understand why).

So, I'm thinking of two things: - the "Getting Started" document - some boilerplate text for people who's articles are terminated (which I ran by RHaworth‎).

I was hoping that this could be a tool for someone just coming aboard and get me back doing some of the things I most enjoyed professionally (consulted on communication, process improvement and related topics for several decades). What do you think? Do you know who I could run an outline by? Thanks again, you're support was what kept me here when the going was tough in the beginning!--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:38, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Have you read this ? It appears as a link in a lot of the standard "welcome" messages, although I have come across people who seem not to understand what links are for (a peculiar experience, given that they're sat in front of a computer surfing the web). Anyway, how would you see your proposal fitting in with that article? As an alternative to it? A supplement? A crib sheet? Extremely step-by-step "plain English"? - Sitush (talk) 19:47, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

What I'm thinking about is more in lines with the "Getting Started" link on that page, but to help someone get a perspective of how things work. Likely including a snapshot of a page showing key ways to navigate and where to find info. Would it help if I put together a short outline to help explain, it wouldn't take long.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:03, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Sure, do an outline. There are at least a couple of admins who watch this page (probably eager to see what mess I create next) & so one of them might make a comment at some point also. The boilerplate for deleted articles definitely sounds like a good 'un, by the way. - Sitush (talk) 20:07, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Sure, will do. Running out at the moment, but I'll work on it later. Thanks, Sitush!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:10, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

New resolution proposal

Hi. Just wanted to let you know that a new proposal has been made in a thread you contributed to at AN/I concerning the possibility of prohibiting a user from initiating actions at AN, AN/I, or WQA. Thanks,  – OhioStandard (talk) 07:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Boilerplate draft to respond to questions about why an article is deleted

I saw your response that it might be helpful to have some text about responding to questions about deleted articles. I set this up as a draft article in my sandbox: User:CaroleHenson/Responding to article deletion questions. Where should I go from here, do you think? (I'm going to do the same for the getting started concepts.) Thanks!!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look later, Carole. I did have a quick glance while it was still on here & it seemed ok, but I wanted to have a think before commenting. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Hope you do not mind but I made a couple of minor fixes to one of those. The first one is, I think, very useful. I am not quite sure about the other two; some people may think that they are a little too "preaching". You may want to take a look at how a initial comment (by me, as it happens) turned into quite a lengthy conversation thread which is causing some changes to the wording in some guidelines. The thread is here at User:Moonriddengirl. MRG is an admin and one of my favourites: not at all "preachy" but definitely "peachy"! (Brit slang, not sure if this translates into the same thing on your side on the pond). One of the things she links to is Wikipedia:WikiProject_user_warnings, and some of her own form letters are at User:Moonriddengirl/form_letters - nb: she concentrates on copyright issues, hence the swathe of copy/paste notices on that subject.

It might be worth inviting her to take a quick look at your drafts, as well as RHaworth. I'll drop you a talkback for this reply. Are you watching this page? If you are then I won't bother with the talkbacks in future as all they'll be doing is increasing my edit count. - Sitush (talk) 14:07, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Excellent point, I'd like to aim for "peachy" over "preachy" any day. (Here peachy generally means good, it can be used sarcastically, like "Isn't that just peachy!") Maybe the first couple sentences could be removed, just leaving an intro line and the bullets.

If I add something to your page, I put it in my watchlist while the conversation continues.

Sure, it sounds good to have them look it over. I ran the concept by RHaworth already, but not the actual text. I'm also working on User:CaroleHenson/Getting Started Concepts, I was wondering if it would be helpful to have Panderoona (sp?) look at it to see if something like that (albeit a work in progress) would be helpful and if she has any suggestions.--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, some input from Panderoona would not go amiss. I am pleased to see that she is still pottering about here from time to time. We share the same definition of peachy, but does anyone else give a fig? - Sitush (talk) 14:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Yep, and it seems the same use of fig! I made the changes to the article for deletion - and I'll touch base with Panderoona.--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:36, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

<waves> hello guys :) yes Im still pottering. Im working with smaller places for now till I get a bit more confident with what Im doing, but Im learning new things every day and really enjoying the whole wiki experience. Thanks for your time and patience back when I was struggling, it is appreciated. Panderoona (talk) 16:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations: Good Article status

Congratulations on achieving Good Article status for Tom Johnson (bareknuckle boxer). You're getting a nice list of Good Articles!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:02, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. There is another not far off going to GAN, I think. But I seem to be embroiled in several debates at the moment & so it may take longer than I originally expected. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Wow! You're on a roll!--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:36, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the caste-cruft "full fix"

Greetings, I note above that you posit a theoretical "full fix" for addressing caste/varna issues, which manifest in relatively similar ways across scores, if not hundreds, or articles. If you want to come to WikiProject India at whatever point and discuss a "full fix", I'd be very keen to participate in the discussion.

I've been working on fleshing out the Shudra/Kshatriya debate for a lot of Western Indian agricultural classes which currently claim Kshatriya status, and have added such with reputable cites to Kurmi, Kunbi, Lodhi, Maratha, Yadav, and other such articles. As you may well expect, it gets somewhat of a "red flag before a bull" reaction, so I'm still dealing with IPs and low-post editors coming in to swap the word "Kshatriya" wherever it says "Shudra" with no heed paid to any cites; I'll probably be requesting another round of Protection on a whole slew of such pages soon. I also just completed a major cleanup of most articles in Category:Maratha clans, which again were all highly self-serving, poorly copyedited and unfootnoted.

Out of curiosity, what region are you specialising in for castes? I've mainly drifted into Western India by accident; aside from the request for help at Nair I don't usually do Southern India since I understand the system is rather different. And I don't drift further north to deal with Rajput issues since I expact that will promote massive hostility, so best to establish a good burn of caste-cruft on one centralised area for me.

Just wanted to state some support for your cause, express interest in any larger anti-caste-cruft initiatives, and inquire as to what areas you specialise in. Thanks again for your good work, MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I, too, got involved by accident. There was some minor error at Paravar that caused the article to appear in a maintenance category. When I fixed the error I noticed an almost-certain copyvio, investigated & soon found that something like 70% of the article comprised copyvios. Of the other 30%, much of it was gobbledegook, POV, uncited, poorly sourced etc. So I pretty much stripped it right back and started again. With the inevitable fights, arguments and tears from people with more invested in how the caste was presented than I have. It sort of became a small snowball (a big snowflake?) after that, but I try not to deal with too many of these at one time because it is quite a strain just handling the insults, sheer stupidity/tunnel vision etc. The experience has actually put me off ever going to India because I am aware that as far as the caste stuff goes it is a prevalent mentality and not just limited to a few activists who happen to participate in Wikipedia.

Thus far, my efforts have all been concentrated in S. India and, as you note, the system there was very different. My notion of nailing this issue once and for all relates to the S India situation. I am currently in the process of reviewing a wide range of sources provided to me by people from both sides of the kshatriya/no kshatriya camp, with their agreement that I am neutral and pretty darn good at sifting and assessing. The plan is that once it is settled then the situation should be capable of being transposed to any other of the articles about S Indian castes. The Uni of Calif source that you found for Nair, btw, was not on the list but is going to be!

That is a plan, and if it actually works out then it will be something not far off a miracle. What I am expecting to happen is that I will put in all the hours etc, provide copious notes as to why a source appears to be good/bad/indifferent and then which ever group "loses out" will turn round and say that I'm talking absolute crap. Or, if I decide that both viewpoints are valid, both groups will turn round and say that! - Sitush (talk) 18:33, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I feel your pain. Fortunately, I'm taking less flack on the Kunbi/farmer caste articles than expected; more just unexplained reverts, or heartfelt pleas to "reconsider, and think how you're hurting the community" etc. A couple of the major Maratha POV-warriors have been suspiciously absent this month, so not sure if they're just busy in real life, waiting me out, conspiring, or what. I've done similar work on Indo-Pak Muslim issues, which included a knock-down-drag-out fight at Barelvi. The Barelvis apparently hate even being called Barelvi (though Indo-Pak and Brit media freely use the term, as do 90% of academics). It's not so much that the term is offensive (it refers to their founder being from Bareilly), but they resent any implication that their group is one of many Sunni Muslim groups, as opposed to "the one true correct Sunni group". I was doing similar work at Dawoodi Bohra, but they have one remarkably constant advocate there insisting on replicating the entire history of Shiism there with the slant that the entire destiny of Shiism was to form his sub-sect. Also he's heavy on removing any mention of a dissident Reformed Bohra movement which accuses the current hierarcy of corruption, hand-waving them away as "not pertinent to this article".

Maratha issues were 95% from one editor, who's laying low now. If you want a marked example of a IP/caste-advocate free-for-all, check out any pre-Aug'09 versions of Maratha clan system. The Marathas legendarily have 96 clans, but it's a total zoo as to who actually falls in the 96. So the article was getting nearly hourly IP edits to add a caste, remove a caste, add some last names, change what their declared mascot and favourite colour are, etc. I finally just deleted the whole dang thing and made the article about the theory of the system, vice a list. I'm still getting occasional hate-mail from Marathas about "ruining what was an amazing resource for the community", but the article seems to have stabilised.

Not to drone on at length, just wanted to give you a taste for how other parts of India are going. Again, very glad to hear you've got a lock on the South, as that's out of my quasi-specialty. If I can be of assistance in the future though on an ad-hoc basis, feel free to ping me. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:06, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

sorry to hear that you got discouraged from traveling to India. Till early 90s in Tamil Nadu especially in Madurai region where Thevars are majority caste, there used to be often caste "wars": several people got killed, and all kinds of disturbances to public life used to be commonplace. While caste consciousness hasnt disappeared at all and dalits are still treated bad in some parts of Tamil nadu, such clashes have become very rare. I would say this is because of about 90% literacy and massive economical developments that happened in the last couple of decades. though I left India long time ago, i follow the developments closely. i am sure wikipedians living from India can give you a more accurate and reliable picture. i wouldnt be discouraged from going to India because of a bunch of activists from wikipedia. i dont know if you have ever visited India before, but if you havent, there are other issues you might want to be worried about. people say, if you truly want to enjoy and appreciate what India is, you have to "let go". --CarTick (talk) 12:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Not been before and am unlikely to get there now due to health issues. As far as "letting go" is concerned, the abject poverty is the big one as I understand it. I could probably copy with that as I saw pretty dire stuff in China & also in Nepal, even though what we were allowed to see was probably a sanitised version of how most people in the former of those countries live. - Sitush (talk) 12:17, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

yes, poverty is a big issue, that depends on where you go. for westerners used to an orderly life, the unpredictability and a sense of chaos might be hard to getting used to. --CarTick (talk) 12:52, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

QUESTION

In the Nair talk page, you mentionned that i removed something from wiki talk page; what were talking about ?... And fyi, i don't know user shannon and he has neither put any comments on my talk page nor sent me any email.Rajkris (talk) 23:40, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

It was entirely my fault, confusing you with one of the other contributors. I have apologised there and do so here also. I have struck out the relevant comment. I simply got muddled in the recent heat & no offence was intended. Sorry. - Sitush (talk) 23:50, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok. No pb.Rajkris (talk) 15:58, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Fix for article List of gallantry and military service award winners from the Nair community?

This title is far too long (throws the whole page listing off at Category:Nair), and I don't think this is the standardised format (see Category:Lists_of_Medal_of_Honor_recipients for a parallel). Plus it's not anywhere under Category:Recipients of military awards and decorations. Not to drag you in, but I don't think it's so much a debate issue as a "how to file" issue. Perhaps retitle "List of Nair recipients of gallantry awards", in parallel with "List of Jewish Medal of Honor recipients"? Actually, I think there's something in MOS saying that the term "list of" isn't always needed when it's pretty clear that's the format. Thoughts? I've also been fixing and copyediting just the titles of some Nair articles, as on had no space before a parentheses, caps issues, etc. I also note in Category:Nair they don't seem to have a standard for disambiguating titles, and also their "Foo (Nair sub-caste)" and "Foo (title)" articles tend to run together. Just some "fresh eyes" observations. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:36, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I have never read the MOS regarding article titles. Shame on me. I'll have a read later today. However, the "military service" bit can be dropped as all of the awards listed are in fact gallantry awards if the section heads are to be believed. In any event, "military service award" is vague: campaign medals, duration of service, painting the most lumps of coal white etc ... absolutely meaningless. - Sitush (talk) 08:52, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Hm. There are other issues with this list, aside from the title. Eg: there seems to be no particular structure. such as listing by campaign, by year or by "ranking" of the award. The only structure is that there is a sort-of splitting between the various military units. More worryingly, there is no evidence to support that any of these people were Nairs. I know that the last names are often believed to give that away, but have never been entirely convinced by the argument and there certainly are people who have "caste surnames" who deny that they are of that caste. Basically, I am not even sure that the list should exist - it is a POV-vy type of thing. However, I'll see if I can find, for example, a list of members of the clan Maclean who have received military awards, or of people from the county of Lancashire: these would be approximate equivalents. - Sitush (talk) 09:23, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

MOS for stand-alone lists. "List of ..." applies. - Sitush (talk) 09:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Recent Edit

Of the neutral sources, atleast 5 supports it (Logan, Gough, Fuller, Panikkar & Thurston) and only one opposes it. And you still changed it to "Some" commentators. This is the exact quote: "Thus, we can begin by looking at the Kshatriyas and Samantans, the two castes to which the kings and chiefs claimed to belong; however, most unbiased observers (Dumont [1961:27] is an exception) have concluded that the Kshatriya and Samantan subdivisions should be treated merely as supereminent Nayar subdivisions" Robbie.Smit (talk) 14:40, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Copying to article talk page. I'm not having a fight here. - Sitush (talk) 14:45, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Maybe drop into WPINDIA to update them on your cleanup progress?

Greetings, to get more support for caste-cruft cleanup, and to keep the Board going, I've been going to the Talk page of WP:WikiProject India to update them on how it's going. Have you considered dropping in to update them on your Southern India caste cleanups, general method/theory, etc? Off I go again, I'm starting to tackle Shivaji, first with removing the constant lengthy honorifics, and then about to put a huge bullseye on myself by bringing in the (properly cited) fact that Shivaji was a Kunbi Shudra whose Kshatriya origin was "discovered" by Brahmins trying to save face at having to coronate him after he founded an empire. As a non-Indian, I think it's a pretty awesome underdog story, and again the self-delusion to stick to fictional claims about his heritage centuries after it matters is rather sad. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Progress implies starting at some point and moving to another; I am starting a some point and finding myself back at it a few weeks later! I'll take a look at the project but have tended to do my own thing in the past. If there is anyone there who thinks that they can cite the Puranas or Sangam literature as support for a statement in a caste article (other than one which starts "Ancient literature, now considered to be unreliable as a source, had it that ...") will not like me. So that will probably be 70% of those involved, then. Do I really want another running battle on my plate? - Sitush (talk) 19:38, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think anyone there is that bad, and I've gotten some pretty good gouge about cites on defalting spurious legends. Though in fairness some of those may be Caste X looking for a chance to deflate Caste Y. IRT the Puranas/Sangam/Vedas, I was banging my head last year on Barelvi when a group of editors insisted the direct Quranic quotations were not only the best authoritative source, but endorsed as such by WP. They even linked the WP:MOSISLAM, which of course specifically says that you can't quote the Quran except as context for a secondarys source's statement, or when directly discusing the Quran itself. That was when I was dealing with a fun pack of folks who'd explicitly stated their goal was to wipe out "Wahhabi" bias on Wikipedia, which of course meant removing anything that criticised the Barelvis, or even implied that there was such a sect as Barelvis, as opposed to "true Muslims" who just happen to be what everyone else identifies as the Barelvi sect of South Asia. It's been frustrating at times, but a lot of life lessons, and some entertainment value. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

We should extend the collaborative nature of Wikipedia and co-author a book on experiences in this sphere, perhaps titled Bold, Revert, Have A Blazing Argument ? :-) - Sitush (talk) 20:39, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

LOL! On the bright side, since WP keeps all drafts and archives, this stuff could someday be interesting for sociologistcs in 40 years. Speaking of archives, I took a glance at the archives of Nair; not all 12 pages mind you, just a perusal. They were arguing this Shudra thing back in 2006, same for polyandry, and folks were just as upset then. Dig an exemplary quote:

“ For all of you conributed to the above crap. Please leave the nairs to live in peace. As a Nair I don't give a damn what all these so called pudits say. I know my history and it is in my blood. All I know is that my community had an illustrious past and has given birth some of the very best in India in all fields of human endevourand is still capable and doing it. As in all communities, there may be exceptions that a woman might have resorted to polyandry or some one had called some one names like Sudra etc. In the age of even same sex marriages what relevance these has? The problems with Nairs is that they are a straight forward people either ignoring or not understanding the machinations of others trying hard using put downs and name calling etc. It is sheer desperation. ”

.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

In one sense the quote above is brilliant. In another, it is so disheartening. The Foundation have apparently being doing a big push in the subcontinent to get more people interested. As a matter of principle I am quite happy with that, but the practical realities will probably not be (are in fact not?) great. There are plenty of people outside that area who simply do not get the concept, the policies, the guidelines etc ... and then there is a promotional effort to encourage one of the world's largest populations to play a bigger part (albeit many of them will not be able to participate due to language, literacy and internet access issues). The theory is sound but, boy, the cleaning up effort will have to be intensified. Am I always right? Of course not. But I would like to think that I usually accept my failings when they are pointed out to me. Alas, certainly with the caste-based articles - and these spill over into all sorts of other subcontinent articles - it seems to my eyes to be a very long educational job. But there are gems in there, for which I am grateful and from whom I have learned much.

Someone recently pointed out that there are over 800,000 villages in India alone. Villages are de facto notable, even though a lot of them do not even appear on Google Maps etc & hence even co-ordinates are not available. That is 20% of current English Wikipedia articles, most of which if listed will forever be unreferenced stubs. Something will break, I feel sure of it. - Sitush (talk) 23:07, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

(jumping in) In a certain sense, the tiny sub-stub village articles aren't so much of a problem, because, basically, whatever. The problem is when those sub-stubs are re-written by the self-appointed Village internet/community relations expert, who adds (usually in writing lacking any semblance of standard punctuation or capitalization, much less grammar) details about who the most important people are and were in the village, the location of the 2 ATMs, the local temple which is well-known across the world as one of the most famous examples of something or other, and, sometimes, even claims about the "bad" people in the village/neighboring village who everyone should know about. Not to mention business interests promoting their latest construction project, often complete with addresses and phone numbers.

My one hope is that Wikipedia's active efforts to recruit new editors in India will bring in not just people trying to use WP for promotion/POV-pushing, but also people willing to monitor the articles and improve them to meet WP standards. And, ultimately, I expect/hope that WP standards themselves will change, too; how, I'm not sure, but in some way adapting to remedy the fact that, as currently designed, WP has a lot of policies/guidelines that either directly or indirectly promote a specific western worldview. There's something exceedingly arrogant to the Foundation saying "We want all of you to come join our project, but only if you do so entirely on our terms, your own culture be damned." I mean, it's of course "reasonable", but that, in fact, is its very problem. Qwyrxian (talk)

I agree with all of that, Q. The extreme of the "western worldview" problem is, as you have said elsewhere before, that the subcontinent relies far more intensely on oral history. That one seems to me to be, unfortunately, incapable of resolution unless the concept of verifiability is watered down to the point of not existing or some reputable body starts transcribing on a big scale. And then it becomes a free-for-all. I'd love to be able to square that particular circle but I honestly do not see how it can be done. Then again, there are far more capable minds than my own out there.

BTW, I seen some of your work with our friend. Obviously I'm keeping out of it, but you appear to be getting through to him. Good stuff. He'll feel a lot better if he can get something substantive, useful and reasonably bullet-proof out there in mainspace as and when. It looks like it might happen, too. - Sitush (talk) 01:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

IRT the "transcribing on a big scale", one of the worrisome trends I've been seeing is that as more Indian publications are being scanned (which is itself technically good), POV-pushers now have more legitimate-looking ammo to use. For proof that the Yadav are Kshatriya and descended from Krishna and whatnot, I was provided this reference: S. D. S. Yadava (1 January 2006). Followers of Krishna: Yadavas of India. Lancer Publishers. pp. 10–. ISBN 9788170622161. Retrieved 26 May 2011.. I'm a bit skeptical, given that it treats Krishna as a historical (but still immortal) figure, and the author's last name is the same as the ethnic group he's writing about.

Gyan Publishing is particularly bad too; they have a suspicious number of books that at first seem to have been copyvio'ed onto Wiki, but on closer inspection turn out to be taken from Wiki, with obvious copyediting errors, references to images/charts which appear on the WP page but not in the book itself, etc. And then folks of course try to go and cite said books, this one being a particular example: Vidya Prakash Tyagi (2009). Martial races of undivided India. Gyan Publishing House. ISBN 9788178357751. Retrieved 26 May 2011.

I'm not necessarily pessimistic overall, but I do recognise the ongoing issue which will only increase as literacy and internet access in India expand. And then we'll see the same thing in 10 or so years as internet access expands to the middle and working class in Sub-Saharran Africa. It's going to be interesting. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:44, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

The Tyagi book is notorious. Gyan is pretty much on the blacklist because of these issues: if you see anything from Gyan then your first port of call should be to see if there is an alternative of the book at archive.org or hathitrust etc. This covers the reprints. If there is nothing there then (even if it is a reprint) delete the cite and ask for another. If it is a noteworthy point then there will be another citation out there. - Sitush (talk) 13:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Is there any semi/official WP blacklist detailing how jacked up Tyagi and Gyan in general are? It's be good to have something I could direct folks to. Is Tyagi officially recognised as a WP ripoff, or is there some more complicated copyvio issue going on? How about Lancer? I seem to dimly recall doing cleanup on an article about Lance Ltd. itself, and even then IIRC it sounded like a partisan vanity press. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:48, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

There is a multi-page article here that lists a whole load of dubious sources, including Gyan. However, sometimes you have to take what is posted there with a pinch of salt. Basically, though, if I say it is a crap source then it is a crap source. <g> Delete per the above and refer them to me for a roasting; WP:RSN deals with this sort of stuff, of course, but the outcomes are often inconclusive in my experience. - Sitush (talk) 14:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

BTW, User:Moonriddengirl agreed with me that Gyan's stuff should go. That's good enough for me unless someone really presses for consensus on a specific Gyan source, in which case I'll debate it. I'm starstruck with Moonridden ... - Sitush (talk) 15:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

If you ever get bored...

...take a look at Jarral. Wow. Actually, better yet, take a look at it in this revision before I removed 10K bytes of unreferenced people. I'll work on it myself, because I can at least remove the extreme POV. But that citation list at the end is so awkward, I'll probably just have to cut almost all of the list and tell people they need to actually put in enough citations to make it clear what book they're referring to. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Take a chainsaw to it, I think. - Sitush (talk) 13:51, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Ezhavathy: from Brahmin to barbers

Oi Sitush, not to go tramping about your neighborhood unannounced, but I somehow ran across these cats: Ezhavathy. The article was unreferenced and smelled a little crufty; far too much insistence on "dude, they're totally indisputably Brahmin". So I spent five minutes on GoogleBooks, and lo and behold they're describe as a caste of barbers to Brahmins, who also happen to serve as priests to other working-class castes. So I made those changes; it's a low-traffic article, only a few hundred hits a month, so I don't expect much blowback, but the degree of cheek is impressive. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

No law of trespass here! I've seen this before somewhere, claiming to be a high rank when actually barbers to a high rank. Just like I was related to Princess Diana, erm, met her. Good catch. I've never even heard of that group. Another one to add to the to-do list, I guess. - Sitush (talk) 17:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I think I've got it basically cleaned up, by Watchlisting it couldn't hurt. I also followed two redlinks and created Nassuvan and Velakkathala Nayar, and with those three formed Category:Barber castes. No real work needed at the moment, but more Watchlisters never hurts. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:16, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Done. I'd heard of the Ezhvathas, btw. What you have done is open the floodgates for a stub on every alleged sub-caste in the country, many of which probably won't be referenced and will be subject to the usual pleasantries on their talk pages! Ho hum ;)

I've just set up a draft page for an article on Joan Mencher. She is a full Prof of anthropology and redlinked in Nair. There is enough out there to prove notability. It will not be a great piece but I guess I can bear the embarrassment of a semi-stub once in a while. - Sitush (talk) 18:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

RE: < User talk:Abstruce >

AFTERMATH:

My APOLOGY to You: Dear Sitush, I apologise to You about this incident. I admit that due to My lack of a good knowledge of Wikipedia policies or guidelines, I caused this issue here. Honestly speaking, I was interested in this topic about the connection with Yadu, and Lord Krishna, for quite a while, and was seriously looking to contribute to it in a good manner here; and I was very excited actually, when I located this reference < History of the Jats, Jaitly Painting (sic) Press, foreword, 1968 (Original from the University of Michigan) !!! But, I did breached an important guideline and caused this issue here. When I edited the respective section on the main article, I thought You guyz would be happy to see this, really this is what I was thinking! But, I never realised what I have done until it was noticed and explained on My user talk page by You, and when I did a scrutiny of it all, I realised that You was perfectly right! What I should have done to avoid breaching the guidelines has been suggested above by Qwyrxian on My user talk page, for which I am really grateful to him as well. Now, I will take care of the facts stated by You and Qwyrxian in future! I am the one who made an edit that I shouldn't have for which I am really sorry, and accusing You was wrong. I was thinking about this for the past few days, and I have learnt the lesson now, and I assure You guyz that I will be more careful in future while editing a page. Sitush, You been a gentleman throughout, and has also appreciated me after I edited pages following Your suggestions, and I am looking forward to follow them; and I do believe that I will evolve as a better user, hereafter! Thanks for being so polite and supportive towards me. Thanks! Abstruce (talk) 18:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

StormFerrari

You have new messages

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Chzz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{user:chzz/tb}} template.    File:Ico specie.png

 Chzz  ►  08:13, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

What to do about likely image copyvio?

Oi Sitush, I strongly doubt this is "own work", and if it is it's pure OR. Any idea where I should report this: File:Maha veeran Alagu muthu kone.jpg ? MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:24, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

It appears on a couple of websites, but on neither does there appear to be any relevant copyright notice:

• this one
• this one, which seems certain to post-date the 2009 upload to Commons

Originated at Commons, and is the only image uploaded there by the contributor. It has the appearance of being a crop from a movie poster or comic strip, but I cannot be sure. Usually I PROD or CSD at Commons but obviously you cannot really do this unless there is a reasonable proof. The actual licensing etc there seems ok, as in: there are no fields unfilled.

I would be inclined to seek the advice of User:Wknight94 on Commons. Has been very considerate to me in the past. Also, since the picture appears to be a very modern representation of an ancient freedom fighter, I might remove it from the relevant articles as being (effectively) uncited. It could be anyone & if it is in fact the work of the uploader then by definition it is clearly not a reliable source. - Sitush (talk) 09:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

pretty amazing

that users of the page managed to keep this notable, and relevant information out for so long and fought with anyone who tried to add it. --CarTick (talk) 11:55, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I think that it got forked to Nair ceremonies and customs, which I am currently stripping back as I find more and more copyvios in it. - Sitush (talk) 11:57, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

You wrote

"I have just reverted your revert at Miss Universe 2011. Please can you adjust the specific item that you are referring to rather than rolling back everything. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 16:45, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

And reverted again. You cannot use another Wikipedia article as a source - see WP:CIRCULAR. Let's get the darn things right in one place, because the edit warring about heights etc (before you and me, that is) is ridiculous. Find a cite with a height and use it in the article. A lot of the bio articles do not in fact have a citation for the height that they state. There is no point in causing the issue to propagate into other articles also. - Sitush (talk) 17:32, 29 May 2011 (UTC)"

Sources are already in their articles, at least for the ones you added a cn. Not WP:CIRCULAR, since Wikipedia articles weren't used as references. Feel free to add those sources in their bios to the Miss Universe article. Cheers. --John KB (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

You just removed sources for uruguay and usa in your reverts. --John KB (talk) 17:52, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

You are missing the point: some of the articles are wrong, and in any case this article has to stand alone. - Sitush (talk) 17:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

What point? That you don't know what WP:CIRCULAR is? How many are some articles? --John KB (talk) 18:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I understand CIRCULAR. You told me that the info was in the individual bio articles and inferred that they therefore did not need to be cited in this article. That would be circular by default, and that was why I reverted your original revert. So far, three bio articles have needed changing. I am really, really fed up that you keep refactoring your talk page. There is an admin looking into this and moving things around to this talk page will not get you away from scrutiny. Every WP article has to be capable of standing on its own merits and on the sources which it cites, not some sort of inference to the reader that if they look elsewhere then they will find the info. - Sitush (talk) 19:49, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to edit the article

there's a lot of height vandalism on a daily basis, and not many users watch/edit the article with sources.

Feel free to add more refereneces to the article, since Google News has sources for New Zealand and Tanzania's participation in the pageant (not necessarily their heights, though I haven't looked for those).

Also for those contestants who don't have a sourced height (Serbia, British Virgin Islands, etc.) should it be removed? Some of them are fabricated without a source (see Dominican Republic's: some blogs had her at 1.78, but she was shorter than the reigning Miss Universe Ximena Navarrete and outgoing Miss DR, Eva Arias)

Source for France's height was already in her article, feel free to add it to her article's infobox and Finland's and Thailand's dead links seem to work for me. Also source for Aruba's cn is in her article. Hopefully you stay on the page and watch/edit it often. --John KB (talk) 20:28, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I know about height vandalism but will not be spending ages fixing this article. I have far better things to do on WP & zero interest in this subject. The point from my position is, once a cite is there then it becomes easier to check when someone does change the height etc, rather than having to go off to another article. This article is effectively a BLP & needs to conform to BLP guidelines, not just general policy. I'm trying to make things better, but getting them right is another ballgame. The admin seems to agree but is going to have a think.

Doing what I have done (I will complete the list) has demonstrated my original thoughts: the things need citing here, not somewhere else. If you've found some sources then add them - it is not a problem.

Having said which, one of the problems is the weird citation method. It is simply asking for trouble, as has indeed happened. Eg: some contestants appeared to be cited in their name column but in fact the cite is a pre-seeded one and doesn't even mention them because the national contest had not happened at that point. Cites are intended to verify a statement, so these are clearly wrong. - Sitush (talk) 20:38, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

That's because not many people edit the article. As you say, most serious editors on WP "have better things to do", so mostly ips or regional superfans edit the article, and they want to make their candidate the tallest one, or the most beautiful. Would recommend you watch the page, but understand if you don't. Thanks for taking the time, though, at least for a while. --John KB (talk) 20:45, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be watching it & I'll fix any apparent vandalism. However, I'm spending a lot of time sourcing Indian caste articles (now they are battlegrounds) and mediating on sourcing disputes. I don't want to add another pile of sourcing issues to that long list if I can help it. - Sitush (talk) 20:47, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Great. Is it ok if I fix the things I mentioned above, (New Zealand, Finland, France, Thaialand, Aruba)? The other two you added as dead links, korea and indonesia, they removed the article, so no source now, but one from their bios can be added as replacement.

Need your take also on Serbia, British Virgin Islands, and Dominican Republic. Should their heights be removed? There's no way to verify them, and trust me, I've looked. The best one I found for DR was a gossipy blog, and the other two, nada. --John KB (talk) 20:54, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Get in there! As far as removing heights go, I would say do it because it appears not to be a trivial matter & so we cannot risk possibly offending one of the contestants etc. Better that there is no height than the wrong one. The deadlinks may be at Wayback, although my trigger for that didn't kick in & so perhaps not. Worth a look, though.

I am 6' 4". As a bloke, I do not look good in a bikini :P - Sitush (talk) 20:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

That's what I find sad at times, looking for sources that disappear eventually, no archive. And maybe you could win Mr. Universe, you certainly have the height. ;-) --John KB (talk) 21:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

(Preening, ahem). I vaguely recall that there is a means of "self-archiving" using WebCitation. You nominate a url to be archived and the engine does the rest automatically. However, I've never used it and if the method does exist then it probably requires a little forethought, given that Wayback does a more than half-decent job (unless the page is protected against web crawling bots). And if the page is protected then that is often retrospective, so you will not realise the need to use the Webcitation system until the prat-ish webmaster of the source site decides to implement the no bots directive. I guess that the lesson here would be to request that people use the Webcitation nomination system, but since most contributors in my current area of interest cannot even be bothered to cite ... - Sitush (talk) 23:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

It was a bit of hard work. Thanks. Will consider webcitation. Sleep well. --John KB (talk) 01:25, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Travancore

could you please verify the second reference (which you have access to) and see if it supports the sentence? thanks. --CarTick (talk) 01:52, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

It does not support it, for the simple reason that the Kshatriya etc were not Nairs. The whole thing is a myth & I will be expanding on this in the Nair article. The only proviso to this is that Fuller splits Travancore into different areas (Central, Northern) - but it makes no odds really because right on his first page (p. 283) he says: "This paper attempts to analyze the internal structure of the Nayar caste. It does not set out to analyze the Nayars' marriage system per se, although it does try to show how the famed cross-caste hypergamy of the high-ranking Nayars - involving Brahmans, Kshatriyas, and Samantans - was linked to the subdivision system within the Nayar caste." His full list of the subdivisions, which I am currently turning into a collapsible table, does not mention Kshatriya, Samanthan etc. - Sitush (talk) 08:42, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

See here for a draft of the table. Needs a little more work before moving into mainspace. - Sitush (talk) 10:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

fantastic. good idea. is it listed in the order of supposed ranking? it is all subjective anyway. additional information about the traditional profession (i know you have some concerns about this concept) of each subcaste will be useful — either in the table or somewhere else. regarding your first post, even Panikkar, with questionable neutrality and pro-Nair bias, whenever mentioning Kshatriyas in his article has always implied they were not the same as Nairs. --CarTick (talk) 11:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I have a lot of concerns with the concept. I simply cannot get my head round the idea. That may be a cultural thing but I find it hard to believe that, for example, 35,000 members of one subdivision relied on a few hundred of another for (paraphrasing) carrying water. Is there any decent explanation of this out there somewhere? I see it mentioned a lot but never with any real in-depth study. - Sitush (talk) 00:29, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Tamil Kshatriya

Just a friendly note, in case you weren't counting--you're at 3RR. At first I thought you crossed, but then I saw that one sequence was a self-revert. Note that your most recent sequence this one, while not just a revert, qualifies under 3RR. Manorathan appears to have crossed 3RR, but unless s/he was warned, it's not technically a violation yet. I'm going to go issue a warning if there isn't one there. But if they revert you, or add back in the unsourced stuff, do not revert them. I'll try to watch and do it myself. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I am? I thought I was adding/expanding, not taking away? I took one sentence out but only after improving the content with the previous edit. The improved version includes what was in the old sentence, therefore the old one was redundant. I knew M was over & did warn but wasn't going to pursue it further. Enough heat as it is. It is a mess, all because someone chose to ignore what I believe was a consensus. Anyway, thanks for letting me know. I presume that I can still add but not remove? That would mean some repetition until tomorrow but there is a serious close paraphrase in there and that is outside 3RR as I understand it. - Sitush (talk) 00:20, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Warning to M was here. - Sitush (talk) 00:24, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that warning, but it was a little subtle, and Manorathan ended up focused on the tangential issue. I'd rather have the warning be clear and unambiguous, so that the editor can't argue they weren't properly warned. As for your 3RR, the rule says, "Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert." I think 3RR is probably one of the least forgiving and most "technical" of rules WP has, since it's easier than having it up to interpretation. So, technically, taking out even one word of another author's work counts as reverting. The only edit that would not could is a revert is a pure "addition", although even that can count as edit warring. That's why Manorathan's very first addition of the content doesn't count towards 3RR. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

OK. Although I usually pull back by starting a discussion (and so "sort of" protecting my back a little). I think that this is the first time I've hit 3RR with no way out, or even 3RR at all. I'll have to leave the close paraphrase in for 36 hours or so. The source is not useless per se because the archaeological stuff has merit. The problem is that the arch. stuff does not seem to be used for the really important bit about Kshatriyas. My recent edits, which I really did not want to do because I'm best not editing the thing at all if I am to continue the review, were intended to set the tone/head off a dispute etc. I did try to get someone to tidy it up but clearly they just carried on arguing. Bugger! But thanks again. What the point of consensus is in these situations escapes me. there was you, me, CarTick, Rajkris and perhaps one or two others all agreeing on a way forward, then one person blows it up. Happen I was tending towards the middle ground, ie: present both sides of the coin & let the reader decide.

I do not expect you to comment on the above. Staying well away might be good advice. I should perhaps heed it myself. - Sitush (talk) 00:47, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, to clarify, you're technically allowed to keep editing right now, because a sequence of consecutive edits is considered one "revert" for 3RR purposes. But, the truth is, like you say, why push it. And walking away might even make you feel a little better. Manorathan is very much the one in the wrong here, but we have to be sure to keep our own behavior as appropriate as possible so that, should we need to "cast stones", we can do so with a clean conscience. I've actually done exactly the same thing you did here myself--tried to shut down an edit warrior editing against consensus, only to come right up against 3RR myself. I'll watch that one more carefully now. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

ANI

A discussion at WP:ANI has been raised in which you have been discussed. You can read it and respond if you wish at here. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:57, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Abusive use of warning

Could you point out where did I attacked you in Nair? Robbie.Smit (talk) 17:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

National Judicial Academy (India)

I see you have visited the article I wrote on National Judicial Academy (India). Thank you for the improvementsFreewheeler, ^MANORATHAN 18:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Paravar

No offence. The paravars still come under the SC group. I dont understand why you are using the tense 'had been'. Suit yourself. I just specified the term 'schedule caste.' Apparently there is no such thing called schedule group in India. Lindamd90 (talk) 15:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

It is explained on the talk page - there are various notices on government websites which give contradictory information and are mostly undated. The situation is very unclear and so the wording of the sentence had to be discussed. - Sitush (talk) 15:59, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

All the best. As far as I know the fishermen of Kaniyakumari still come under the SC group.Lindamd90 (talk) 16:04, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Possibly. If you ever find a decent citation then I would be interested to see it because the entire issue needs some clarification. - Sitush (talk) 16:06, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello Brother or Sister...whatever

or brother today we are 3 June, Miss Turkey was yesterday, hello improved information, the source is reliable also have brought more than one website has confimed. Hello ubicatex--Marleshy (talk) 16:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

You have not provided any proof that this woman won the thing, therefore citing her height is irrelevant. This is a biography of umpteen living people and requires reliable sources for all pertinent points. Please stop what you are doing. You have been warned about this in the past by people other than me. Go back and read WP:BLP, WP:CITE & WP:RS. If you are still unsure after that then I'll try to answer any questions that you may have. - Sitush (talk) 17:19, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: < User talk:Abstruce >

Hello Sitush,

It's OKAY! If You are so much focused to counter this one, then I can simply relax :)

I trust You with this one. I have already reverted my contribustion on the talk page. I was just looking forward to help the situation, just that much. Thanks! Sincerely: Abstruce (talk) 19:30, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I am not countering anything. I have no opinion on the disputed matter. My only concern is that what ever content is added to the article is (a) verifiable using reliable sources, and (b) not original research or synthesis. My suspicion is that the recent additions are in fact synthesis but if they turn out not to be then I am perfectly content to see the material in the article. That is why I asked the question that I did.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with an article presenting two contrary (even directly opposing) points of view if they are from reliable sources etc. Obviously, the wording of the initial contribution would still require amendment because it was phrased in somewhat unencyclopedic terms, but the view it was trying to express may nonetheless be a valid one in terms of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. - Sitush (talk) 19:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello Sitush,

In that case, I am really sorry about that! Actually, I never mean to use the word Vandalism about the content posted on the talk page, but now I realise my mistake; actually I used the word because the Gentleman is simply targetting the text on main page of the article about the ancestry of Jats, and he is regularly removing some information which is directly related with the section. I guess the section was created to discuss that why the user is doing so, again and again, so I thought that way... But now, I apologise for that, and I will take care about this in future. I will be very careful while using the word again. I have got Your point. Thanks! Sincerely: Abstruce (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

It is a common mistake for new users to make & I will make this point should anyone raise your use of the word. However, WP:VAND is extremely specific about what is not vandalism, Hopefully you have now read it, in which case you probably will not make the mistake again. Don't be too concerned about this beginner's error, as long as you learn from it.

As far as the other contributor is concerned, please do not feel that there is some sort of a war between him and you (or others). He has recently been blocked from editing for a while as a consequence of some unfortunate practices and after numerous warnings. He is now back and his first contributions clearly suggest that he has taken on board the causes of his block. Instead of removing cited content, and doing so without explanation. he has now added his own evidence in rebuttal of what is currently presented in the article. This is fine, even though his style of writing left a little to be desired. We are not all of us native English speakers, and even a lot of those who are simply cannot find the means to express suitably the point that they wish to make - it is no big deal because someone else can always fix the wording. We all learn, all of the time. Well, I like to think that is the case, at any rate!

I moved his addition out of the article and into the talk page simply because I feel that it needs some discussion regarding the nature of the sources cited and the conclusion that has been drawn from them. It is highly controversial and the sources are not immediately available. It may have been better if he had actually raised the issue on the article talk page in the first instance but, again, it is no big deal. A word of advice, though: just because you have seen me do this does not mean that it is a normal response to additions to articles. Please do not think that it gives you some sort of right to do the same with any content to which you may object. My action was in fact quite an extreme one. - Sitush (talk) 20:00, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sitush,

I feel sorry one more time. I shouldn't have used the word "counter". For hereafter, I will take care of the words I am using to express my views. I guess I was just over-excited to have such a nice response from You. Actually, I usually don't get good feedbacks for my contribustions, not in a habit to that; and You are well aware of the reason why is that so! Please don't take it in any-other-way around, please! I am sorry for that, really sorry. I do understand what You have stated above, got the point and my mistake here.

Furthurmore,

I have got the points made above, and I will try my best that You don't have to correct me this much frequently, I will. Thanks! Sincerely: Abstruce (talk) 20:17, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

2011

Thanks for asking for semi-protection. Haven't found any reliable sources on Guam and Curacao, will have to wait and see if any newspapers from the area publish information. --John KB (talk) 20:18, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Please show at least a bit of sensibility

I removed the Sadasivan quote from etymology because it called Nairs as dogs. (Since you don't know Malayalam, I doubt you will understand the real meaning). Sadasivan doesn't give any reference for this and it is not given in Jatinirnayam as he claims. But you reinserted those quotes. Don't stoop this low. Shannon1488 (talk) 12:41, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

The book is a reliable source as far as I can see. It also says that the story is legend, not that it is true. Furthermore, you cannot rely on the primary source (Jatininayam) as this is considered to be original research. You are breaching policy, I am afraid. - Sitush (talk) 12:43, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Do whatever you want. You are not only insulting me, but 4 million others. If the works by Sadasivan are reliable to you then, I see no point in talking to you. Sadasivan claims the quote is given in Jatinirnayam. But there is nothing even remotely related to this there. I am disgusted by your behavior. Shannon1488 (talk) 12:46, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I am not insulting anyone. I didn't even add the bit you are referring to. We are merely reporting what has been said in a reliable source. This book was written 10-11 years ago. If it is so massively wrong then there must have been a rebuttal in another reliable source, surely? Find that source, would be my advice. - Sitush (talk) 12:49, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Above was copied to the article talk page. No more here please. - Sitush (talk) 17:52, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

See this

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Caste_hatred_at_Nair Shannon1488 (talk) 12:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

A Barnstar for You

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For slogging through the muck, for spending hours and hours sorting things out, for suffering abuse and turning the other cheek, for your perseverance, for your patience, and for booting the baddie, I hereby award you this barnstar. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:52, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sweet. Thank you very much, Anna. I rather think that you did more of what you describe than I did, if you are referring to the MKY saga. Hopefully we can all get back to doing more productive stuff now. Attracting abuse appears, by the way, to be something of a specialism of mine - water off a duck's back now. - Sitush (talk) 01:46, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Chandigarh Capital Region

I thought I sent this to you with the others. I guess I didn't click save. Anyway, I see you've responded at Q's. Here it is anyway, for the record. :)

If we can decide the fate of Talk:Chandigarh Capital Region, then we can pretty much wrap up User:Anna Frodesiak/Silver sandbox. There remains one or two non-Chandigarh Capital Region-related items there, but if we can sort out the CCR ones, then we can paste silver into a collapsebox at M's talk, and move on from this tragedy. Best wishes to all.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

resource request

Hi, I've uploaded the scanned pages of the India book as requested. You can find the link at: Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. Best, GabrielF (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Bennett Coughlin

Hi Sitush, I noticed that you were reverting Bcoughlin10 (talk · contribs) and discussing with him at Bears FC. That user has been repeatedly adding mentions of himself and his friend (Scott Kasouf) at numerous soccer articles, with claims that they are professional soccer players in the Bahamas, Guatemala, for Manchester United, etc. They appear to be high school boys wanting to have some fun with Wikipedia. So, if you see either of them added to articles, it's a hoax. Bennett also edits from an IP. You can see more at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scott Kasouf. Just a heads-up, First Light (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Contacted mod about civility issue

Note here[1] I contacted the admin who did the PP yesterday, to let him know the discourse continues to be uncivil on much of one side. He's turning in for the night (as I expect our self-described foes are), but plans to contact them in the morning. The language has certainly been colourful, and I regret not keeping a running list of different communities I've been accusing of being on WP. I recall being called a "Wahhabi" or "Nadji" plenty of times on Islamic articles (for daring to imply that the Foo Sect was not the One True Religion And All Others Are Heresies). There are a couple other castes I've been accused of being that I had never even heard of: "Admit your agenda! You're a vile Foo shudra, and that is why you come here to defame my caste!" I believe I can chalk up Nair as accusations of my being a Nadar, so maybe I'll start the running list there. Do you have a similar list? We could start playing "baseless caste accusation bingo"! MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

LOL! I wonder if text-to-audio programs have a "bleep" function? I watched your thread at Boing's page develop - that page has been on my watchlist for quite some time now. As I've said before, he has always come across as being extremely fair and considered. That is exactly what is needed in this situation.

My dog is sat here at my side. He looks quite embarrassed that he is being associated with my mother in that way. - Sitush (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Nair pics, and neat milhist page

This page isn't authoritative, but it can lead us to some solid refs, and we may be able to scrounge up some history images: [2]. As a Portuguese speaker, I do want to dig around a bit and find if Nairos is the true Portuguese term. It'd at least be worth mentioning in the article under the Pt. period, and might be a keyword for digging up some Pt. refs.

Note also I added an already-WC pic of a serpent grove, a portrait of a (claimed, need to check her family's page) Nair aristrocrat showing attire, etc. If we can get someone local yet level-headed, I hope to get someone to take a photo of a Nair chow-spread from some festival or whatnot for the "cuisine" sub-section. If we're going to aim for GA or whatnot (which I think is looking more and more plausible), some good photos will help the cause. Plus they're pretty. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Gott mit uns, NSFW pic, first hit: [3]. Goshen, do I wish to add this to the article. What thinks? MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Woah! Which is as near as I can get to any non-English language <g> Images are not essential for GAs but they do break it up, if they're relevant and comply with the various policies. The Nairos point is an interesting one but you'll be on your own on that one (that is, I have barely managed to extend my linguistic capability beyond gibberish, so do not expect me to understand Portuguese sources etc). As for pictures of food, well, they make me hungry!

I am so pleased that you dipped your toe into this water. You have done a lot and it is appreciated. - Sitush (talk) 00:22, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries, no hurries. Just fielding an idea here, but I've been pondering it, and at this point I'm feeling a little less interested in trying to build up Deccan issues (now that I've pounded some of the POV out of them) as much as I'd be inclined to mess with some Karnatic issues. I speak Portuguese, and have some passing familiarity with using Dutch translation on Google (did a bunch of Indonesia topics), and that part of India just sounds a bit more interesting to me at the moment. I'd be willing to shift fire for a bit and stick with you on this Nair issue if you like, and if you have a next article down the road covering the Sweet Sunny South, I wouldn't mind joining in if you could use some backup. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The watercolours are 1928 (and painter died 1944), so unfortunately not in the PD yet. But I found some other good historical Nair images, if not as artsy. Oh, BTW, Shannon did indeed get upset about my mentioning Nair undergarments. I wasn't going out of my way to add them, it's just what I ran across first and what seemed like it would be harder to find later, and then I did a bunch on jewelry. I suggested that he try adding content on other garments to balance it out. Would be nice if he does. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Shame about the paintings. As for recent events, well, Shannon is not going to be adding anything for the next 48 hours and I do not have much faith that he will add anything constructive after that. But we will see. Why people bring this on themselves is beyond my comprehension.

As for where I will go next, I have no idea. There is at least another week on Nair, and then some housekeeping to do with the numerous related articles. There may be some argument on at least one of them - Malayala Kshatriya. Regardless, your involvement is always welcome, anywhere where I am & there will be further work on South India. As far as other subject interests go, what do you know about 18th century English bareknuckle boxers? I have a big-ish plan for them <cackle>. - Sitush (talk) 08:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Google books --> alternate source

Hi Sitush, I recently heard that it's best not to use Google Books for obtaining information for articles, what I'm understanding is one of the major issues is the way the info is scanned in which may result in different page numbers depending upon where someone pulled up the article (U.S. vs. UK, for instance). (I remember your earlier comments about not using snippets, which I stopped doing after your comments.)

I've tried a couple of sources but an thrashing about a bit - teaching an old dog new tricks issue very likely. Do you have a recommendation of which source to use as an alternative?--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I saw that comment a day or so ago, being the nosey person that I am. TK and myself appear to be on divergent paths regarding various things, all of which have cropped up on your talk page & nowhere else. I remain unconvinced that FACs must use the citation format TK appears to insist is necessary, and although there are indubitably issues regarding GBooks (I'll find you a very good link to an essay later), the insistence on hardcopy versions is - in my opinion - extreme. Remember WP:AGF? Let me have a think, and perhaps a chat with some other people who have got stuff through FAC, but my gut feeling is that you are being steamrollered here.

Personally, if a book is available at www.archive.org or hathitrust then I would use that rather than a reprint etc. But that is just me, it is unlikely to be of much use in your current situation, and it may have nearly as many issues regarding "view-ability" as GBooks has. I cannot really advise you what to do in this situation because staying involved will be an extremely good learning exercise for you in ways unconnected to the which version of sources/how to cite palaver ... but it appears to be coming at a cost that, to me, would make me inclined to walk away. And on that point I know that I got a reply from someone fairly recently on another talk page about just where the line should be drawn. The individual concerned is arguably one of the best reviewers of articles around but is having his own issues at the moment. Nonetheless, I would (do!) strongly take his advice to heart, as do others here including college profs etc. I'll try to expand when I have dug about a bit. - Sitush (talk) 23:49, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, Carole, I have just caught up on your talk page. Walk away, would be my decision. There is no honour lost etc and it is my own opinion that some people are easier to work with than others. If you are not gelling then it simply is not worth the heartache. It is possible for two people to hold different opinions and both be "right", in the sense of policy/guidelines ... even basic humanity. There are plenty of other people out there who have got articles through to FA etc, and you are not bound to work with anyone on such a project. You have demonstrated time and again your willingness to collaborate, so just treat this as you would in the real world: a personality clash, a blip. Go mix yourself a G&T/V&T/coffee & milk/whatever as long as it does not involve cyanide ... and relax. Let others be cranky if they so choose, not you.

Nonetheless, I will do as I promised in my msg above. It may be of use to you in the future. - Sitush (talk) 00:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the laugh, Sitush. For me it's a Seabreeze with vodka (hold the cyanide) - excellent idea!!! My take is that this is a culmination of a person's self-fulfilling prophecy - he's determined I'm a certain way and bound to prove it. And, I totally agree, life's way too short to be involved in a dynamic that is disruptive for all involved. You and I have both felt the pain. Off to seabreeze! (a new verb)--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have seen that person in a similar mode previously. Don't fret about it. It takes all sorts to make the world go round and, hey, always remember that we're improving this world, the Wikipedia world, one article at a time. It's good that you have can see beyond the personalities: you are supposed to enjoy doing this, not feel obliged to do so. Enjoy the drink. The nearest I get to a seabreeze is a stiff northwesterly on the beach near Abergele ... and it is not enjoyable for me, although the dog loves it. - Sitush (talk) 00:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Talking about things approving one article at a time: If you don't mind I'd love to run an idea\project by you that I've been asked to be a part of to get your take. After the Seabreeze that is, tonight. Email to you by your tomorrow.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:44, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

OK, speak tomorrow. Here's a (hopefully) useful conversation involving Malleus (an unbelievably good reviewer etc, but has his moments like the rest of us) and Drmies (who recently attained tenured professorship in the US using, in part, his work on WP for his application!). Malleus plays a very straight bat and that may have "cost" him an adminship (not that adminship is the be-all, end-all of life here), while Drmies has recently become an admin. Oh, I'm in there somewhere, being my usual dimwit self. The thread - Sitush (talk) 00:51, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

... and the essay - User:Uncle_G/On_common_Google_Books_mistakes - Sitush (talk) 01:01, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for both. What a nice collaborative thread you shared! The only thing I personally have been interested in pursuing is GA or FA status for Still life paintings by Vincent van Gogh (Paris) - and at the moment even that has soured a bit for me. Oh, and Langlois Bridge at Arles (Van Gogh series) is up for GA review now.

Regarding the Google books: It seems to me that through you I learned most everything in the Google essay - I especially remember the reprint dates issues when dealing with old historical books for the Welsh articles. The only thing that was new in concept for me was the pagination issue - which makes more sense now when I remember you saying you would have to check page numbers on references to ensure they were the same. Yep, I remember WP:AGF. I guess I was dumbstruck to hear about GoogleBooks being such a serious issue at this point and why didn't it come up like 30, 40, 60 articles ago. I guess in practice what to do about this is to find something in Google books (just love using it - searching is so easy), I could use another source to go and double-check page numbers, etc. And, I can always go to the main library and double-check books. I'll check out the two sources you mentioned above.--CaroleHenson (talk) 05:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, what fun I just checked out www.archive.org! I remember you used www.archive.org for some of the Welsh articles. Yes, I liked this, the pages are easy to read and navigate and I know how to use it: win-wins all around.--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:01, 7 June 2011 (UTC))

GBooks is not a problem per se. As long as you are aware of its limitations, as you are. The significant point in the Drmies/Malleus/Sitush conversation, in terms of this conversation, is where Malleus effectively say "do not be bullied by a reviewer: if you think that the style you have used is right then don't change the article just to suit the reviewer - seek consensus instead". Oh, and where he says that as far as he is aware (and he has much experience) no article has ever failed GA/FA purely because of WP:MOS issues. The format of citations falls in that category & this is what I have been saying to Modernist/TK etc for some time on your page. The policies specifically accept numerous different citation styles, so anything that those users say to the contrary is just plain wrong. I think that the link-through method to a bibliography is preferable to the non-linked version; it is fine if others disagree; it is not fine if they appear to be deluding you about the policy. The important thing is to be consistent throughout an article; being consistent from one article to the next is entirely up to you. I rather think that the first time I introduced citation templates to you I said that "this is how I do it", not "this is the way it must be done". - Sitush (talk) 08:42, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you said it like that or - "you might find this helpful". The discussion about the VvG was a really hurtful conversation and I realize now that as soon as I realized 1) what I typed was not being read (for which there was already some prior history), 2) that instinctually I felt like I wasn't wanted to be part of the group and 3) there were wild assumptions made without civilly bringing it forward - I should have stopped typing, kept my hurt to myself and moved on. That's my lesson from this.--CaroleHenson (talk) 13:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Ban discussion of Maheshkumaryadav on WP:AN

I have opened a discussion on WP:AN in which you are mentioned. It can be found at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive245#Community ban discussion for Maheshkumaryadav. Please feel free to comment there if you wish. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Temple Entry Proclamation photo ideas

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Talk:Temple_Entry_Proclamation#Photo_ideas.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:44, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Sadads's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Ilgrosso's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I don't know why my (1st) article was deleted, I was still working on it, I don't think it should have been removed, and I can't work out how to use this weird 'talk' system, so I hope you see this. I'd like to discuss the page with you. How do I do this and get the contents back?

Foodster — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foodster (talk • contribs) 14:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi. What article was that? The above message is the only contribution made using your Foodster account, so I presume you created the article as an unregistered user? Nothing wrong with that, by the way, but I cannot work out what you are referring to. Deleted pages can be retrieved by admins, so if you point me in the right direction then I'll see if I can find someone to assist you & I might be able to explain why it was deleted in the first place. - Sitush (talk) 15:10, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Strike the above. Found it now - Locations4Business. The article made no attempt to "prove" the importance of its subject, which is a necessity even for new articles. All articles need ultimately to prove notability of their subject using reliable sources. As I recall, your article had the appearance of being primarily an advertisement, which is also not permitted. I can probably arrange for an admin to retrieve it for you but it will not initially be placed in the mainspace of Wikipedia. It will be put in a "userspace" area where you could work on bringing it up to scratch, at which time it would then be transferred into the main area where everyone can see it. I am happy to advise you etc about how it could be improved but please do not that not everything is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. I have no idea if this subject is or is not until I see it again. - Sitush (talk) 15:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Book you removed from NAIR page

You have removed this book [4] as ref in the Nair page & I don't understand why because it seems rather interesting (please read pages 303 to 312; for instance this: "Nayar chiefs and Nayar soldiers are first mentioned in three copperplate inscriptions, tentatively dated late seventh, mid-eighth, and early ninth centuries.... All these districts were famous Nayar chiefdoms in the later periods and persisted until the eighteenth century. The plates suggest that Nayar chiefs with private armies had emerged as vassals of the Perumals at least by the ninth century. By the mid-thirteenth century, at the latest, the greater Nayar chiefs had become independant small kings,..." page 303). Thank you.Rajkris (talk) 22:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure if it was me that removed it but I'll take your word for that. The odd thing is, it has been sitting here for a few days on one of my Firefox tabs as something that I need to take note of! I had a slight panic attack earlier today when Firefox crashed with 17 tabs open, but thankfully it recovered ok.

I am struggling through Fuller, Moore, Panikkar etc on caste & marriage issues at the moment but, I promise you, the thing is there in the tab and I will look at it. Sorry if I have done something wrong here as it seems not to have been intentional. This is a real mess of a subject and I am well aware that there are still big discrepancies in the article. I'm hoping that it is getting a little closer to where it should be but I still have some major concerns about sourcing and, in particular, about relying on so few sources for big chunks of the info. It is going to take me a while to wade through it all. - Sitush (talk) 23:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

ACtually, if you can spot the diff where I removed it then I would be grateful for it. I rather think now that I did remove it but put an explanatory comment about how it might be useful for other stuff (which would be why I kept the tab open). I'll dig for this but you might have already found it. - Sitush (talk) 23:25, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Here [5].
Another interesting ref: "The Nayars as the ruling and military castes, formed the core of this aristocraty..."' page 298.Rajkris (talk) 23:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Not a great edit summary on my part then, although it appears to be correct on the point that Robbie.Smit raised. The source must have some sort of hook which attracted me, otherwise I would not have kept the tab open. I promise, I will return to it. Give me a nudge if I do not ... but give me time to sort out the ongoing stuff also! I'm both trying to do my own stuff & also keep an eye on CarTick's edits to the article at the same time. It is quite exhausting because I am well aware that people are likely to get upset quicker than I can sort things out. I'm happy to have a debate but I am not remotely connected to India and so am having to learn stuff from scratch. I hope that this makes sense. I am supposed to be doing stuff on English bareknuckle boxers and defunct engineering companies of Manchester, but these subcontinent things seem to be taking over much of my WP time. Plus side: I am learning a LOT from it. - Sitush (talk) 23:52, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok I will watch your page.Rajkris (talk) 00:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try to remember to include your username in the edit summary, so that you do not waste too much time. And remember that nudge: I am due in hospital soon for a heart repair job, so my mind is not always on the important things. - Sitush (talk) 00:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

All the best for this surgery.Rajkris (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your thought. It will be fine: bypass & valve replacement is, oh er, not too scary. But I am seeking a second opinion because I'd like to see 50. I shall amend my will and leave you something - all of my debts! ;) - Sitush (talk) 00:31, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

OMG, are you kidding? Do you think Wikipedia is some sort of volunteer project where you can just walk away for something trivial like surgery? Get your nose back in those books, good sir. </sarcasm> In all seriousness, good luck and good health. Don't worry--I'm sure that not only will the same subcontinent/caste-warring/reliable sourcing problems still be here when you get back, there will probably be dozens more, at least. So...something to look forward to? Qwyrxian (talk) 00:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Wish you successful surgery and speedy recovery.Shyamsunder (talk) 10:58, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Not kidding about the medical situation. Am kidding about leaving all my debts to Rajkris. I've actually left them to you <g> Seriously, the situation may change because my cousin (a cardiologist himself) has suggested a second opinion. He is of course tied down by medical ethics but feels that I should pursue all options. Which makes sense. - Sitush (talk) 00:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Finding a bunch of PD photo sites, interested?

Oi Sitush, I've stumbled across a few awesome archives of historical India images. Are you interested in raiding these as well? Here's just one of several: http://www.oldindianphotos.in/2010/10/photograph-of-two-men-and-two-women-of.html . MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:12, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

That looks like an excellent discovery. Images are not really my thing - I use them when I "have to", but when I do have to then I do the research as best I can. Having said which, I'll be delving into that site a lot. Fascinating. - Sitush (talk) 23:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:Articles for deletion/Burndennett Cricket Club

Thanks for leaving the note on WP:Articles for deletion/Burndennett Cricket Club, I was doing the same thing at the same time. I have also left a note on the other open Irish Cricket club AfD's. Mtking (talk) 23:32, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Something about "great minds", perhaps? It is a messy situation. I do understand the desire to perpetuate articles. I also understand that AfD can actually assist in articles surviving (I should do, since I took one from AfD to GA in a couple of months or so earlier this year). Indeed, the AfD for Burndennett has at least produced something extra beyond what was a single sentence.

What I am struggling with is "everything but the kitchen sink" being thrown in there in an attempt to assist GNG. I really, really do believe that reports of arson attacks etc at a minor cricket club etc are tangential to the article's subject. As someone at CRIC has pointed out, if they fail the CRIC guideline then from CRIC's POV the only basis for existence here is if they have some historic basis. Tbh, I can see every club article in that particular league being deleted under GNG criteria. But that is just me, and if I am found to be on the "wrong side" of consensus then so be it. - Sitush (talk) 00:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

All Saints' Academy, Cheltenham

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from All Saints' Academy, Cheltenham, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! TerriersFan (talk) 02:34, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

TIBCO Hawk

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from TIBCO Hawk, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! TerriersFan (talk) 16:48, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Why? I sort of understand the other one that you did, since it could be construed as controversial (my bad judgement, sorry). However, I do not understand this one - there was no attempt to assert notability. I can't recall the last time someone reverted two of my prods inside 24 hours, so I am curious. - Sitush (talk) 16:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Cancel that. It had been prod'ed before. - Sitush (talk) 16:55, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Links to references

Hi, do you mind sharing a link to an article that you worked on that has the link from the reference to the bibliography? I remember the concept but not the syntax for the two components (brackets + ref name in the source) and I cannot find the article that has an example you added. I'm trying to do that for User:CaroleHenson/List of Works by Frank Weston Benson, where there are links to similar reference information. Also, it's a little weird because the reference sources are web pages - but with info about a lot of paintings - so I'm treating the sources kind of like a bibliography. Thanks!!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 05:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)‎

Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam ? I am also using now at Nair, where I include the year of the publication in the Refs list - see, for eg, the 1st two citations. - Sitush (talk) 08:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I tried it an it works like magic!--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Nair revert

You beat me to the revert of that section. I noticed that the user created an account specifically to make that reversion. Do you want to check for sockpuppetry? Ryan Vesey (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I would, if I could work out the likely sock owner. It could be one of several, but most likely User:Robbie.Smit or User:Shannon1488. - Sitush (talk) 17:20, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I am also concerned about the username - RacistToddyTapper could be insulting - and the text on his/her talk page, which I cannot translate but is probably abusive. - Sitush (talk) 17:21, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Reported per username. Ryan Vesey (talk) 17:25, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

That was quick. I was still reading the instructions! There is a lot of flak flying around the Nair article and an admin has been keeping an eye on things. Thanks for your help. - Sitush (talk) 17:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I used Twinkle. I have a lot of respect for Boing! said Zebedee, that's why I took an interest. Ryan Vesey (talk) 17:32, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Me too, two. That is, respect for Boing and use Twinkle. I've never used TW for UAA before, though. Must look that one up. - Sitush (talk) 17:35, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sitush

Hi wanted to express my apology for what I was rude to you, that efinitivamente not my style, but you took me out of my boxes. I understand that your mission in this website is trying to provide the correct information. I admit I go, and I apologize a thousand ways. I hope to be friends and not have any problem from now on, I promise not to mess with you, let alone in failing in this regard. Good Night and Do u speack spanish?--Marleshy (talk) 01:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikify Nair

Presently, the Nair article has no logical sequence. It seems like a collection of scattered information. Many of the matters mentioned there are irrelevant to the article, and can be removed to make the article a more specific one. You are putting as much information as possible to give others an impression that you are 'improving' this article, I am afraid. --KondottySultan (talk) 11:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

You can think what you like about it, no problem, but you do not have consensus for some of the things you are doing. I realise that the talk page is very long but in there you will find agreement to extend and then split the article, and to formulate a lead section after the body has been sorted out. Even non-contributors to the page have recognised that there are considerable improvements.

I am not the only person who is aware that it is a bit "choppy" at the moment but your changes are (mostly) not improving anything. All they are doing is making it harder to hit a target. The plan is for this to become a Good Article, which is something I have experience of achieving. Have you? - Sitush (talk) 11:13, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. This article is now elaborately describes many things that are not related to Nairs. Eg: Origin of Caste system, supernatural beliefs, Serpant groves, kuttichathan theyyam, etc etc... If this is what you call achieving, then you can go on with your idea and later rename the article to something relevant like "Hinduism in Kerala" or "Communal history of Kerala" or so. --KondottySultan (talk) 11:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Copying to article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 11:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Edits made by Kondotty Sultan.

Hi, this is in relation to the edits being made by user KondottySultan, on the Nair Page. I have a strong hunch, given his username, and the nature of his edits, that he might have some religious propaganda - again just my feeling.

Regardless, seeing the spate of edits and the tone he adopted I had to revert back to, just before where he went off earlier today. Please feel free to add whatever you might have added in the midst of that fracas. I also feel we need to get some Admins or the likes to issue him a warning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SumerianPrince (talk • contribs) 13:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Your message

email You have emailed me. I cannot read Malayalam. - Sitush (talk) 08:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

The message which you have received on mail was an automatic alert sent by ml.wikipedia.org when a message appears on a "discussion page" . If you dont want to receive email from wikipedia, you can uncheck it from your preference setting. Feel free to contact.Thank you. -- Raghith 09:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Tamil Kshatriya

I need some more days to add my conclusion. I will do my best to add it before next sunday. I'm very busy that's the main pb... But fyi, I really don't think what i'm going to add will change your position on this article.Rajkris (talk) 00:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey, take a long as you need. Real life is important! It took me several weeks to do what I promised to do, and you'll get the same respect that you extended to me. I would like to think that despite our differences of opinion about some things we are, nonetheless, friends. I certainly value your input & have learned from it. . - Sitush (talk) 00:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey here is the ref you were looking for [6](regarding the paravars' quota). Hope you find it useful.Lindamd90 (talk) 12:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. We had looked at that one but it contradicts other information published by the TN government and which is dated. There is a discussion about this somewhere in the article talk page but it has probably got archived by now. - Sitush (talk) 14:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

kshatriya

i removed wronly mentioned community and put largest chandravanshi community.my edit is completely wright you need to do research before deleting and have some patience — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ancient indian historian (talk • contribs) 14:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

You need to discuss it on the article talk page first. You have been warned and blocked for doing this previously. - Sitush (talk) 14:34, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

AIH, you removed multiple published book citations and replaced them with "sishri.org" or whatnot. That's not a very convincing cite to replace multiple published books. If the theory you support is well-documented, you should have no problem finding references for it on GoogleBooks (and please cite them with RefTag instead of pasting bare URLs, or doubling footnotes). MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok i wll tyr next time with source but you are both supporting wrong information and spread corrupt knowledge from wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ancient indian historian (talk • contribs) 14:46, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

No, don't try with a source. Take it to the talk page & use your source there for now. Any further edits to Yadu, Yadav etc in the next 24 hours or so are likely to see you blocked anyway. Calm down and do things properly . - Sitush (talk) 14:49, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Somerby

Quick request Can you check out my write up on Somerby I am not sure if its okay to include ref to Vineyard. It does include ref to ancient finds - but is also a commercial site, Since theres not much else there, it seems reasonable-ish to include, However dont want to go wrong now and I dont mind losing it, I only included it to fluff the page out a bit. Also wish to disambig Old Somerby near Gainsborough and Somerby Leics, and don't know how. Since I wish to sort it sooner rather than later I am also posting this on Acabashi page so apologies if you go and look and its already done. Many thanks Panderoona (talk) 15:40, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Somerby is already disambiguated via this page, so I am unsure whether you have missed this or mean something different. I've tided things up a little, mostly fiddling with things (including the vineyard issue). Are you sure that GENUKI is a reliable source? I am not 100% sure that either the vineyard or GENUKI are great as sources for anything, but in the absence of better ones I guess that they will do. - Sitush (talk) 16:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

input greatly received. Some pages have a note at the top to say "not be be confused with xxxyyyxxx" I will try and think where I have seen an example of this, I know I have.

Personally, I only use GENUKI when all else fails. I consider it reasonable if nothing better can be found, but always try and back it up with better citations if I can find them. In this case its fairly well apparent from the Church memorials and the Monument that the Weston family did indeed live in the area. Since Somerby Hall is gone its not on British Listed Buildings. There are instances where someone has informed GENUKI of something such as a date for a church demolition where other sites like Lincs to the Past/British Listed Buildings/Pastscape can unfortunatly be either out of date or vague as to when this occurred. With lack of better citation I use it in instances like that. As an example see Little Carlton - where its obvious from the photograph that GENUKI is accurate in that the church has been demolished. Otherwise - with most of my little Lincolnshire Village edits, I use it as a starting point in my notes and then go and use other citations whereever I can. Panderoona (talk) 16:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

That's ok. I've added what is called a "hatnote" to the article for disambig purposes. There are numerous versions of such things, but the one I've used will suffice. - Sitush (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Excellent - thanks :) Panderoona (talk) 16:38, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

PS just noticed your disamb needed for Saint Margaret. Hmmm I wonder which St Margaret it is? It will have to stay for now as I dont know. :/ Panderoona (talk) 16:43, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

There were more than I was aware of - Somerby near Brigg (West Lindsey) Somerby near Gainsborough (also West Lindsey) Old Somerby near Grantham (Kesteven) Somersby by Spilsby (East Lindsey) Somerby Leics. Please see User:Acabashi Talk page re same subject Panderoona (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Going to work on the varied Somerbys tomorrow as I like to do things like that fresh when Im not tired to avoid confusing myself. I did make hand written notes on the many Carltons to be sure which one was which and will probably do the same again. Panderoona (talk) 18:33, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

That's ok. It is very confusing stuff. Old Somerby is mentioned in Domesday and, as you have discovered, there are at least two others + a Somersby. I can see this being a bit of a nightmare when it comes to extending the articles, and also a nightmare to police because someone else will come along in 12 months and add the wrong info in the belief that they are doing the right thing. I strongly suggest working on it in your userspace first. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Believe me I have no intention of a new article without being cast iron sure of what Im doing - I will make handwritten notes tomorrow and back those up with a draft (the kind I always do in my notepad) prior to creation of any article. I will be as sure as I can be info is in the right place, and then even though Ill be sure I will ask you and Acabashi to come along and double and triple check it. It may be worth leaving a note for further editors on the talk pages once we have finished, pointing out such pitfalls (although they may not take time to notice hopefully someone who patrols new edits will) That might well be worth doing on the many Carltons while I think about it - what do you think? Before I create a page on any other Somerby I will ask Keith D who works on Lincs articles for the right way to go about creating page names - we already have Somersby (the place associated with Alfred, Lord Tennyson - I have paddled in his babbling brook!) and since that page pre-exists I think we can concentrate on what we are doing with the three Somerbys. (I do not intend to worry abt the Leics one, at least at this moment in time), but great care must be taken with the Somerby near Gainsborough as they and the one near Brigg are both West Lindsey, and Old Somerby will hopefully distinguish itself by being in Kesteven. By the way feel free to double check the Carltons (North South Castle Great and Little all can be found on my User page). I have similar issues in the pipeline with the many Toyntons and Thorpes. Have a good night Panderoona (talk) 19:05, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

One way to assist with future issues would be to set up stubs for the other Somerbys . As long as there is some sort of reference - even a coordinate - then they will not be deleted. That way, the disambig page can reflect all of the variants. I'm not good on article naming conventions but it sounds like you know someone who may be, so it would make sense to suggest this as a part of the plan.

It is easy to do an article in your own userspace and then move it over when you are happy. There are a few benefits to it compared to using pen/paper but, most important, it means that potentially confusing stuff can be worked out and even reviewed before it goes live. Even the page names do not have to the same, so you can create drafts using any name you like and then re-name when you move them into mainspace. It is a neat, simple process. - Sitush (talk) 19:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Keith D works heavily on Lincs projects I dont know him that well but have asked his advice before and trust his advice. I could certainly set up stubs for the others. Know I should get "with it" and do everything online but I cant lose the habit of pen and paper. Be assured I will take yr advice but not tonight as am a bit too tired to be sure of getting things the way I want. Tomorrow - Carpe Diem. As long as I dont get sidelined by impending birth of grandson/results of daddys bone marrow aspiration. (as per email). Best wishes as always. Panderoona (talk) 19:32, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Real life is far more important than WP. Put that stuff first, always. - Sitush (talk) 19:44, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I have moved the Somerby page as per suggestion by Keith D who found it was called Somerby (Juxta Bigby), Lincolnshire, and created Somerby, West Lindsey for the one near Gainsborough.Panderoona (talk) 14:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

2011 Indian anti-corruption movement

Thanks for all the contributions! Since we cleaned up the article, I am removing the {{cleanup}} and {{pov}} tag. GaneshBhakt (talk) 17:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I have nominated the article for peer review. Please continue editing the article to make it look even better. GaneshBhakt (talk) 18:06, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I would de-nominate it for now, if I were you. It is better but it needs a lot more work. In particular, the standard of writing is quite poor in places and the organisation is chaotic. I am not even sure that using a timeline as it does is the right way to do things - it means that a lot of stuff gets repeated. - Sitush (talk) 18:09, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, peer review does not have to be solely pre-FAC phenomenon. Articles can be peer-reviewed to see if tyhey meet B-class criteria, for example. However, the peer-review quantity restrictions still apply. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, I was aware of that. Effectively, I am doing my own peer-review of the thing right now. It is a pretty poor article, despite the copious footnotes, and I am quite concerned about copyvios and close paraphrasing etc. It will take me a few days to sift through it all because there is a dreadful fight brewing again at Nair & two editors come off their blocks on Saturday! . - Sitush (talk) 18:25, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Alright. Point taken into consideration, since you are far more in experience. Tell me when you think that the article is ready, and we both can nominate it for peer review! GaneshBhakt (talk) 18:30, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Ganesh. I may not be as experienced as you - if you are basing it on number of edits, well, I may have just added and then taken away a comma from a single article 18,000 times! I haven't, but edit count is not everything. If you want to put it to peer review then that is your prerogative, although another issue with that is the reviewer might have a hard time hitting what is a moving target: it is difficult to review something that is changing frequently.

Have a think about the timeline/layout issue. Is there a "neater" way of doing it? I think that we need to ask on the article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 18:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Minimal things to do...

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long – consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.^[?]
• This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, then an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.^[?]
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • it has been
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: organize (A) (British: organise), organise (B) (American: organize), criticise (B) (American: criticize), ization (A) (British: isation).
• The script has spotted the following contractions: didn't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.

GaneshBhakt (talk) 19:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. One of those issues is something I raised on your talk page earlier, ie: short subsections. There are numerous minor problems relating to consistency of place names etc, numerous issues with WP:MOS generally, several POV issues, probable copyvios, too many sources, incomplete citations, overlinking ... Ultimately, these and more need to be addressed & asking a peer reviewer to spend their time checking it over when there are "better" articles waiting for such a review seems like a waste of resources. However, we will get there. It would actually help if the protests stopped, then the article would settle down! (Joking: I do understand that they have popular support). - Sitush (talk) 19:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

• Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Some help over Nair regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket.
Message added 11:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for spotting the mistake ! Mtking (talk) 11:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there a name for this argument/fallacy?

We've been seeing this a scattering of times now, the declarations that basically amount to: "I am very upset and you are totally wrong, but I am an extremely busy and important person and can't be bothered to gather evidence to support my very true claims of your very real stupidity, so I bid you good day, sir." Is there a particular term for this "argument"? Lacking any official term, and admitting that I don't know Latin and am using GoogleTranslate, maybe argumentum relinquendo ("argument by leaving") or argumentum omisso ("argument by giving up")?

I'm almost seriously thinking this is something I could take to some WP discussions to see if we already have a WP: internal article on this, and if not try to hash out the proper term and describe it for our reference. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:48, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

There probably is an essay somewhere, since many admins come across the issue. However, there may be a more simple approach. If we link the word "claim" and its synonyms to Wiktionary, and if Wiktionary has Tamil/Malayalam/Hindu etc variants then link to them also ...

The indignance expressed along with the use of words such as "sir" etc can be awkward to deal with. Indian English is quite different and seems not to have evolved much from Victorian/Edwardian times, although there are jarring uses of more modern words/constructions. I don't laugh because that would be wrong, but it does sometimes amuse. "You're the bastard son of a cur, sir" has a Holmesian ring to it. If you look at some Indian newspapers then you'll get the idea: "cops nabbed X and put him in the city clink", was one I seem to recall from The Hindu.

The problem we are facing of late is, fundamentally, that India is acknowledged to be an often chaotic place & this is reflected in many contributions. Plus, they have a very strong reliance on oral tradition above the written word. Remember, something like 80% of the country live in abject agrarian poverty and literacy rates are very low outside of the cities. (I have the figures for these, somewhere). Factor into that scenario the issue of English as a second language & a strong sense of honour, and we have the present situation. It is going to get worse, not better, because of the WMF "push" for more involvement from that country. - Sitush (talk) 18:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm less fascinated (in just this case) with the Indian English issue, and more of the cultural (face saving?) argument fallacy of "you're wrong but I'm too busy to explain why... moral victory!". I do sympathise (to a certain degree) at the frustration of not seeing oral tradition sufficiently analysed by the academic community, the reliance on earlier Brahmin/Imperial/Western/Christian sources largely due to their extensive writings, etc. That said, there are thousands of places on Wikipedia where, by the nature of the beast, collective wisdom and even common sense take a back-seat to whomever happened to write things down clearly, and happens to be scanned into gBooks. But for better or worse, here we are.

So far as the WMF push to India, it puts me in mind of the Simpsons line:

“ Lisa: You know, Dad, the Chinese have the same word for "crisis" and "opportunity".

Homer: Yes! "Crisitunity"!

”

While these sort of hassles are going to be unavoidable, and are going to unfortunately result in blocking smackdowns and heavy page-locks, getting more eyes-on should have some benefits. Further, if it stirs more folks to get more sources scanned into gBooks, Indian archival sources more available, etc. that'll be great. Further, there have to be a portion of educated Indians who are going to be more receptive to the Western-style mentality involved in verification, sourcing, NPOV, etc. Again, not to condescend, not saying that Indians can't be logical, but that the Wiki system originates in certain very acculturated (in the sense that editors in Stuttgart and San Diego probably have remarkable similarities) portions of Western society, and some cultural disjunct is feeding into this.

In the meantime, this is "interesting" and I'm learning a lot about India. There are probably warrants out for my username by now, but overall a constructive experience for me. Out of curiosity, now that we're getting some better high-level support, how are you feeling on timeline? Is the goal to put at least a pin in this in the next month or so, shift from expansion to maintenance and fine-tuning, bring in copyeditors and peer reviewers, etc. ? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the timeline. As far as GAs are concerned, the article has to be stable. This is going to be a problem even when we have exhausted the sources, unless all the warriors go away. The same pretty much applies to a peer review: if there is edit warring going on then it makes the reviewer's task one of hitting a moving target, which is never a good thing. So, there isn't really a timeline as such. We're just going to have to feel our way.

Regarding Indian issues generally. There are indeed some very good contributors from the country, many of whom are doubtless much better than me. What we are seeing, however, is the effects of the majority and, yes, a massive culture clash. Much of this is fuelled off-wiki on Orkut etc. Something will have to change, somewhere, but I do not have any answers. - Sitush (talk) 20:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

If you ever run across any good links (in English) to this Orkut canvassing, I'd be interested in seeing it, from an academic standpoint! Must be some interesting riling up of folks. Out of curiosity, is an article being locked to all but established editors a disqualification for GA? Do you have a guesstimate as to how high of a rating we can fairly get while still dealing with some whack-a-mole? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The orkut message boards usually get purged very quickly now. After the recent Tamil Kshatriya discussion, thing started up again, i went to find the old archives to see the old discussion where Nadar caste guys were being egged on toward wikipedia (CarTick and the upper cloth revolt article were the targets then) and discovered that most of them have been deleted!. I think google started playing safe after incidents like this--Sodabottle (talk) 22:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

And there ^ is one of those better editors than me. - Sitush (talk) 22:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Quick question: self-published?

Hi Sitush, Do you mind looking at this and letting me know if you think it's a self-published book?
{{cite book | title=From the grave: a roadside guide to Colorado's pioneer cemeteries | author=Wommack, Linda | publisher=Canton Press | location=Caldwell, Idaho | year=1998 | isbn=0-87004-390-0 | url=http://books.google.com/books?id=nB0dLs8N6OkC }}. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:23, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I have got the feeling that it may be. The typo right near the start (Foreward, rather than Foreword) is not a great sign. However, the author says that she has had input/advice/review from a History professor and there are footnotes for some bits. It does not appear to have been cited by scholars etc, in so far as GScholar covers the ground, but then again it is pretty niche stuff.

So, not a great source but I would be inclined to go along with it in the absence of anything more concrete ... or marble, or whatever headstones are made of over there. Just don't base an entire article on it. - Sitush (talk) 20:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I'll add a comment in the reference info that it's possibly self-published.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

Your actions in the Nair page has encouraged a number of anti-Nair fanatics. So congratulations. See this user: User:The Tiger's Tail Caught By The Dog. A corruption of popular saying "Pulivalu pidicha naayar" (The Nair who caught the tail of the tiger). This is the same user who came earlier in different names such as Kondotty and Chekon. So, congratulations, you have found your successors. 143.205.176.60 (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Oi Sittush, the IP raises a (one) valid point; those three usernames seem awfully close in behavior. Worth asking for an IP check for that user to check for socks? He's not always a bad contributor (if it's one person), but should be validated in mucking around with multiple accounts if indeed that is the case. MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:05, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I had already noticed similarities, just as I had noticed similarities among editors among the pro-Nair group. Since neither "side" are really getting their way and none of them stay for long, an SPI may not reveal anything. This is pretty much what Boing said a few days ago. - Sitush (talk) 11:02, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I have added a note on the pages for the user mentioned above and Chekon. Chekon is not happy with me. Of course, the IP who started this section is also known to us - unless there is a sudden concentration of interest in the Nair article from people in Austria ... - Sitush (talk) 12:51, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

reply

Dear , i have answered your query regarding debut in talk page. If you have any more questions directly ask me. As far as recent edits are concerned, al i can say is history wil prove that whatever i had added was very much right.Paglakahinka (talk) 15:35, 19 June 2011 (UTC) ahul raj

History is irrelevant to Wikipedia, I am afraid, unless it can be cited to reliable sources. Just making a statement that "X did Y, and that is true" is not sufficient. Many people have tried to explain this to you and I am not sure that I can add anything more to what they have said. If you really do not understand this then I am prepared to try but it would help to know what bit of the comments by others you are unable to grasp. - Sitush (talk) 15:57, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

reply

I have complete book of social history of kerela. Its(2 additions like kkannu rajan and rahul raj) also there recent sunday suplement from newspaper kerala kaumudi. rahul raj is son of cousin sister of actor Devan also listed in there

Just because someone appears in one book does not make them notable. Furthermore, you need to say what page they appear on in Sadasivan's book. - Sitush (talk) 19:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

there has been no census based on caste since independence. all we have is which is cited in the article which is referenced properly.Keralone (talk) 17:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Anna Frodesiak's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket.
Message added 00:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mtking (talk) 00:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket.
Message added 21:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mtking (talk) 21:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Kurmi going awfully well

Oi Sitush, if you want to see a caste article that's actually been holding steady, take a squint at Kurmi. I had some initial pushback on Talk, and the page got locked, but we've actually had some pretty decent and professional edit request which have helped the page. If you have any quick 10-second observation on the article in general, I'd be glad to hear it. Just wanted to show off some small successes in cleaning up some Deccan caste articles. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

You and the protecting admin etc seem to be getting there but my bet is that if the block comes off then it will be right back to how was a few days ago, if not in content then certainly in the style of editing. You are getting all the usual cruft and, to be honest, I can't see that many positive contributions to the talk page. Yes, refs are being produced but they are often shockingly poor, eg: the long list from which only two made the cut. These people, like so many, simply do not understand the guidelines.

Like elsewhere, you've just got to keep plugging on. If you only "convert" one editor to the niceties of policy etc then that is an improvement. And, slowly, I am sure that it will get to where it should be as an article. I am also sure that Tnxman is aware of this and that the protection will remain for the foreseeable. Sad that we have to do this but, yes, it does bring about stability and ultimately improvement. - Sitush (talk) 19:13, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Message

Hello. You have a new message at User_talk:Anna_Frodesiak#My_drawing's talk page. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:26, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Your drawing as promised

Woof!

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, apparently the trend transcends religions...

“ Tharu (Nepali: थारू, Thārū) are an ethnic group indigenous to the Terai -- the southern foothills of the Himalayas in Nepal and India.[5] They are considered to be the direct discendents of Lord Buddha (Gautama Buddha). ”

. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Ancient indian Historian

dear,why are you blocking me regularly? i put OBC in classification with source.whats wrong with you?you are regularly supporting shudra origin but there ample proof on chandravanshi origin of yadavs on discussion page from very early.so how can you support so eagerly only one point of view.thats not fair.you should have paitence to listen other point of view also so that a good article can evolve from regular editing not from blocking without reason.i have respond you on yadav discussion page you can put your comment there.thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.242.47.37 (talk) 04:30, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

S.L. Sadhu

Did some cleanup. It's all yours now. Drmies (talk) 12:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Ouch. Might be a slight notability issue and there was definitely a COI problem! I'll dig on the UNESCO bit, since that will remove doubt. - Sitush (talk) 12:52, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

That'd be great. You know, massive cleanup lessens the love one has for a subject, in my experience, so I appreciate your help. Drmies (talk) 13:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

VvG

Bold claims, but you know you have over 40 articles to work through. And Im not sure you understand why. Ceoil 01:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

What is bold about making a start? Beyond that, I am not sure what claim you believe me to have made. Making a start has to be better than passing the buck and will, indubitably, reduce the workload if/when that buck is passed. I really do not understand what your issue is but, believe me, I have no desire to fall out with anyone here.

I agree with TK that there are CP problems; you appear to agree with TK that there are CP problems; CH agrees the same now that it has been explained to her. If you had not made that silly comment about me on CH's talk page then we would probably not be here now but would instead be doing something a bit more productive, like fixing issues and educating people (including contributors!). Why on earth you felt the need to butt in on her talk page with a tangential attack on me is, frankly, beyond my comprehension. Like I said, your opinion of me is your concern and certainly doesn't bother me. You and CH will likely never get on, so just learn to live with that. There are plenty of other people you can work with here. You seem to get on ok with Malleus, for example.

If you want to assist then great. If you don't then that, too, is fine. But, either way, stop the needling, please. Best. - Sitush (talk) 01:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

The way I feel about this is that I took a huge hit tonight - enough to kick me off an article I'd like to work on, and quite frankly I have the skills for. This is Wikipedia's loss. I've taken enough of a hit to make me want to walk away - in fact am right at the edge of walking away and if I didn't have an article currently at FAC and a copyedit promise to someone, I'd be gone. I agree with Ceoil - I don't think you understand the extent of the issues. Maybe you followed my edits in my sandbox, maybe not. I've decided not to take this to CCI - I'm tired of fighting plagiarism on Wikipedia, and frankly if the academic world believes Wikipedia to be useless, at this point I couldn't agree more. To kick the messenger is unwarranted. I didn't go looking for this maliciously, I stumbled on it when another editor added a weblink to an edit I made. I read the webpage, and then clicked a link into a Wikipage and found myself reading the same thing. This is pure happenstance, and didn't really want to give examples to Carole because I was afraid I'd find more, which I did. In spades. I gave up trying to follow Carole's page since the refactoring created a mess, and have now unwatched all the van Gogh pages. I did come here to tell you that I don't think I needed to be made the scapegoat and found this. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:08, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Don't go on my account. You were right to raise the issue. Honestly, until Ceoil said what he did, the whole thing probably would not have blown up. You will note that I ignored that comment on CH's page. I haven't seen your sandbox & probably will not look at it now. I am a "start from scratch" sort of person when things get messy. I do not track anything that you, Ceoil or indeed CH do (aside from her talk page, and most of the time I ignore that also).

I don't see this as anyone taking a hit. I laid into CH when she first started and she was not happy about it. In retrospect, I was harder on her than perhaps I should have been, but hindsight is a wonderful thing and mistakes I made then are (hopefully!) not being made so often now. She learned from things I said, in the face of criticism she was receiving from a well-intentions but sometimes terse third party. She is still learning. I am still learning. I would like to think that you and Ceoil are still learning. Life goes on and if someone shows a desire to learn then I am prepared to try to teach them, to the best of my ability. Happen I cannot teach you or Ceoil a thing when it comes to WP policies etc, but I rather think I can teach you something about dealing with at least one person here. Just as you can do the same for me with other people. If you want to see real "fights" and real copyright/plagiarism etc issues then get involved with Indian caste articles etc. They make my eyes water! But, whatever you get involved with here, stay involved. Please. - Sitush (talk) 02:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

At this point whether I go or not has nothing to do with you and everything to do with the commitments I've made to other editors. But I am not happy by the way this was handled - there was no reason for you to become involved and no reason for it to blow up in the manner it did, and finally no reason to blame me. At all. If Ceoil defends a friend who's being wrongfully blamed that's a problem, but the person who broke policy is fine? There's something wrong with that scenario as far as I'm concerned, and it's exactly the sort of thing that makes me want to have nothing at all to do with this place anymore. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:47, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

At no point have I said that CH's breach of policy was "fine". My initial involvement was because she was clearly confused without examples. When those examples appeared, I agreed with you that there was a problem. I am not aware that I have blamed you for anything other than not taking the time (initially) to try to do other than say "read the policy". Some people just simply cannot get their heads round pages and pages of policy, with all of the concomitant blue links to further pages etc. Practical application works better for people like this. This is what I meant when I said that I rather think that I can teach you about dealing with one person, ie: CH.

The community is incredibly tolerant of contributors who are far, far more challenging than CH. For example, some people with autism issues. There is a method to my own madness, believe me. - Sitush (talk) 02:54, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Quite frankly I find your comments to be patronizing. You haven't a clue what I've done here or who I've interacted with, or who I've helped. Your telling me, again, what I've done wrong. Fine. But you're comments on Moonriddengirl's page quite clearly made me the scapegoat. I was trying to communicate with Carole and you rode to her defense which is also fine, but do not make me the bad guy here. Please, have more respect. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 03:00, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

That's fine. Take them however you want to take them. In this instance (CH), it was clearly the case that it was mishandled. And it is also the case that I am only saying that this one was mishandled. I haven't said that I can teach everyone better than you, for example. - Sitush (talk) 03:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I prefaced the post by saying there's not good way of doing it. There isn't and the best thing would have been to say nothing. But this is not the first time you've done this. So far, in your view, my sourcing methods are extreme, my interpretation of CV is extreme and now I'm not capable of "handling" people. Until recently, I've never interacted with you, and with the exception of the recent problems caused by a serial plagiarist, I've had very little drama here. I cannot say that's true of the past 3 or 4 weeks and honestly there's only so much a person can take. If in fact my sourcing methods are extreme I wouldn't have had 5 articles at FAC since April, if in fact my understanding of CV is extreme I wouldn't have salvaged a severely plagiarized FA & a number of GAs, and if in fact I'm incapable of getting along with people, I wouldn't have made friends here. Ceoil is my friend and as my friend he defends me. That's how it is between us, but more importantly I have enormous respect for the work he does. If that makes me a bad judge of character, so be it. I can live with that. You haven't a clue what I do in real life or what kind of people I might of might not work with, or what kind of work I might actually get paid to do, but the sense I get here is that I'm basically incompetent, pushy, without empathy and essentially going around mishandling things. Quite frankly I'm completely fed up with that and that's the reason I don't want to be here anymore. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 04:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

If it makes you feel better then blame all your troubles on me. - Sitush (talk) 06:21, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I've REALLY been trying to stay off the talk pages, but this is ridiculous. Can we give it a rest for 24 hours please? I'll say no more, but are you kidding me? Has the initial point (which is valid) been lost? Can we keep our eye on the ball?--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)