User talk:Sitush/Archive 28

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

→

Archive 33

Bhilala

Regarding my recent edit expanding Bhilala article with its history. You have undone my edits citing that Books released by Publication division, Min I&B is unreliable because it's infused by political consideration. I would like to say that this book concerns tribes of India their culture and history. It has been written by an author who is authority on topic. There is no political agenda in this book as this was published initially in 1990 and since many governments of numerous political affiliations have come and gone but book has remained as authoritative text. Moreover, it is a well known fact that in MP and Rajasthan Bhilalas are called Durbars, its not my original research. Also, the role of bhils in battle of haldighati and its effect on matrimonial ties between Bhil chiefs and Rajputs in no hidden fact or original research. The living proof of this is the significant place given to a Bhil warrior side by side a Rana of Mewar protecting shield of Mewar Fort in coat of arms of erstwhile state of Mewar which still adorns the Main entrance of City Palace, Udaipur. So, hitherto you have discarded colonial history (logic accepted) and documentary proof and obvious fact known to every commoner residing in these parts, a government publication mentioning a well know fact of history, Official website of Omkerashwar run by administration mentioning historical fact of bhilala history. May I please mention there are various articles throughout wikipedia which accept government sources as standards and there are numerous articles here in wikipedia which even do not have citation. if all those are removed giving logic of yours, wikipedia will be reduced to one-third of its original size. As far as other well known authors are concerned you will give same logic when they are cited. There leaves no scope of expanding these article and making them more informative as all the references (government or private, printed or digital) are one way or other unreliable as per you. Please kindly take sometime to go through these sources and study these topics with personal interest, dexterity and discussing them rather than just undoing edits with illogical reasons which stand no grounds except your prerogative as administrator.

the jain awadhiyas

dear sitush,

kindly do not misuse your position as administrator while editing the wiki articles. when we are providing live examples, you are just undoing the edits to satisfy your ego.

as already told to you earlier, awadhiyas are jains. hence they do not belong to obc community. much as i respect the obc community, i am a awadhiya myself and am not connected to bihar as your useless article editing suggests. and yes, i belong to general category. much as i would have loved to belong to obc and benefited from positive discrimination policy of the government in the form of reservation, alas, i cannot do so.

kindly try to refrain yourself from further baseless edits on the said article.

you seem to have ignored the vast number of awadhiyas who are jains and who are not in any way connected to bihar.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/uttarakhand/community/avalanches-result-of-rise-in-temperature-parrikar/230176.html

https://www.outlookindia.com/newswire/story/abide-by-constitution-ministers-will-come-and-go-prez/872361

http://mpsbb.info/MP_Plant_Biodiversity/Resume.pdf

https://in.linkedin.com/in/iitkian

this person is awadhiya and is a jain. he is from madhya pradesh. he belongs to general category.

there are many ias ips ifs officers in your country who are jains and use surname awadhiya.

awadhiya actually means "who belongs to awadh". just like surname "pilania" refers to 'who hails from pilani'. or jhunjhunwala refers to 'who belongs to jhunjhunu'.

awadhiya is not a caste. and majority of awadhiyas are jains who are neither connected to bihar, nor do belong to reservation category. they are very successful and powerful people in contemporary times.

i hope that this helps.

thanks and regards, s jain — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanskritijain (talk • contribs) 09:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

You appear to be evading your block. - Sitush (talk) 09:56, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello

Do you know more about kulals Justmangalore (talk) 12:29, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I would have to read up on them, assuming there are reliable sources. I have looked before but it is some time ago. - Sitush (talk) 13:31, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I have put ur article on kulal in wikipedia onto kulal caste forum.It has become an interesting point of discussion.May be whatever you have posted is considered seriously. Its going to be quite serious. don't write unwanted things about kulal without proper information. You are obviously hurting their feelings... Justmangalore (talk) 16:15, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Please familiarise yourself with WP:MEAT and with WP:CENSORED. If people start pouring into that article because of your actions, you will probably find that the thing will be protected in some way and you may also find yourself blocked from contributing. Pinging @Bishonen, RegentsPark, and Vanamonde93: in case they want to keep an eye on things. - Sitush (talk) 16:19, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

We need to have a bot that automatically adds Uw-castewarning to the talk page of any new editor that posts here. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:24, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Heh. Bish has said in the past that this page is (I paraphrase) something of a honeytrap. - Sitush (talk) 16:27, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

And now I see they have set up User:Justmangalore. I predict that this is not going to end well. - Sitush (talk) 16:33, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, NeilN, we need a Situshbot. (Remember when there was a dedicated Situshboard?) Do you know how to make bots, Neil? Bishonen | talk 16:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC).

@Bishonen: If I thought for a minute the bot wouldn't meet the same fate as the board, I would look into it. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:39, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

The board should be resurrected. "Roll up, roll up! For one month only, folks". I think the person who complained about it has probably long since moved on. - Sitush (talk) 16:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I came in for a few minutes and this page stood out on my watchlist. NeilN, I've been thinking of just getting a list of non ExtConf accounts that post at the various Talk:Caste pages and have Mass-delivery-messenger (or whatever that thing is called) send out the Uw-castewarning note. However, I never got to thinking the mechanics of it through. —SpacemanSpiff 16:37, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: A one time mail delivery wouldn't be that effective. But if you're thinking of an always active bot then this discussion might be of interest. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:46, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Not an always on bot but something more of where one can create a list of such accounts and then have that mass delivery thingy deliver the warning, so there's a bit of human oversight involved. I'm not on much now so I'm going to stay away from the meta discussion until I can respond better. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Abhinav Rao Dravid

It's a sock of Pv.abhinav, as obvious as it gets. I've blocked and done a mass rollback and deleted the only new creation, you may want to go through anything that hasn't been removed due to intervening edits. —SpacemanSpiff 10:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Ah, not again! I just can't seem to spot that guy, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 10:28, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Dhananjaya

Not my field, but it seems odd that Dhananjaya now redirects to Arjuna where the word isn't mentioned, and we also have Dhananjaya gotra as an article, and Dhananjaya Gotra (and Dhananjaya (gotra) redirecting to Raju, and then a few given names too. And Dhananjay (actor) seems to be also known as mononymic Dhananjaya. I'll leave it to you! PamD 13:00, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm afraid we have a lot of redirects that point to targets where the subject is not mentioned. I sent one to WP:RFD only yesterday. In this instance (Dhananjaya), the redirecthappened in 2009 and Hindu mythology etc is not my forte. I was simply reverting a prolific sock, which just happened to affect your edit made after that sock. I will take a look at the gotra articles, though - that is more my line. - Sitush (talk) 13:04, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	sitush do not revert utkala brahmin article Utkalbrahmin (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Buffalo Crime Family Sources

What is wrong with using Canadian Newspapers as sources.. Is Canada's National Post an inferior paper. If so why? Please explain! Is the Toronto Star an inferior paper. If so why? Please explain. Do you have something against Adrian Humphries as an author and a source... If so.. please explain. Do you have something against Edwards as an author and a source. If so please explain. Is the US Justice Department's own press release an inferior source. If so... please explain why. I have many questions... — Preceding unsigned comment added by BuffCity (talk • contribs) 20:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Try reading the article talk page and your own. At least three editors have been trying to explain issues regarding your sourcing, synthesis and BLP violations for some time now. Either we're all missing the point or you are. - Sitush (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Adrian Rogers of the National Post in Canada says the Todaro Crime family is the Buffalo Crime family. Look at his italicized quote. Its obvious.! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BuffCity (talk • contribs) 20:58, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

It is synthesis and this page is not the place to discuss it. - Sitush (talk) 20:59, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Adding the name of Popular wrestler in Haryana

Krishan Kumar Rathee from Bharproda, Haryana popularly known by Hind Kesari Krishan Phalawan. He was winner in Olympic Trials, he claimed the title of Bharat Kesari 1986, Rutam-e-Hind, Jawahar Kesari, 3 times National Champion, 3 Times Army Service Champion you can go to this link Krishan from Harayana is mentioned in the "Titles" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishal Rathi (talk • contribs) 17:18, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

References

Thank you, He is from the Rathi Jat family from Bhaproda, Haryana. He is from my Village. If this isn't sufficient then guide me what to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishal Rathi (talk • contribs) 17:32, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Vishal Rathi. I will reply again at your own talk page and if you want to comment further then you can do so there. It is much easier if conversation threads happen in the same place. Give me a few minutes to have a look round for sources. - Sitush (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Theyyam

Is there any discrimination on editing Theyyam? Why did you discard the photos I have added there?--Shagil Kannur (talk) 12:01, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't know whose photos I removed but the reason for doing so was that we have far too many in the article. There is a category at Commons where the interested viewer can investigate further, and it is linked in the article. For what it is worth, I still think there are too many in the article and I am also concerned that some of them may be copyright violations. - Sitush (talk) 17:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Sutiya kingdom

and stop randomly editing the page when you know nothing about the community.Stop misusing your place as a administrator

I am not an administrator, although it seems that I probably have a better grip of our policies and guidelines than you. It probably would be best if you concentrated on raising your concerns at the article talk pages rather than editing warring and bringing them here. - Sitush (talk) 17:31, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

nagarathar

i would like to talk with you. how can i talk about this article through voice. to understand your vision... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.65.45.255 (talk) 12:17, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Nagarathar and stop edit warring. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 12:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Comments also now at Talk:Nattukottai Nagarathar. There is nothing to be said on this talk page, so I suggest you take any queries to the article talk pages to which I have linked. I suspect you are also editing while logged out, giving the potentially misleading impression that there are two people disagreeing with me on these articles - if so, please do not. - Sitush (talk) 18:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Indic script question

Hi Sitush. Perhaps you can help me since you're a regular at WT:IN and active in editing articles about India. I trying to find out at WT:IN#Tamil and Kannada whether Tamil and Kannada are languages covered by WP:NOINDICSCRIPT. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:04, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Done. - Sitush (talk) 12:05, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look at this Sitush and thanks for the post on Sivagopalakrishnan's user talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:35, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Greyhound Data

This does not apply to track records which cannot be edited on the site. There are two references re-the track records and both are accurate.Racingmanager (talk) 15:38, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Racingmanager: so why are they appealing for help re: the information? Is this another site that you have had involvement with? If you know the info is accurate then presumably you have another source and there is no need to use this dodhy one? Or are you saying it is accurate because your own website says the same as theirs?

As was discussed in the ANI thread, there seem to be potential conflicts of interest and perpetuation of mis-statements because of your involvement off-wiki. I'm seriously thinking that we may need to go back there. - Sitush (talk) 16:05, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

If you want to check the validity of the site register with them so that you can see for yourself. Once again you base your presumptions on what goes on in your head, find out the facts instead of trolling other peoples work. P.S Don't contact me again because I am fed up with your ridiculous comments Racingmanager (talk) 16:14, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Racingmanager:: I am not trolling you but until you understand our policies, which it seems clear you do not, it is entirely appropriate for other people to take an interest in your edits. There's a distinct possibility of an on-off wiki walled garden being created using various websites that either you operate or contribute to. You need to declare any conflicts of interest. For example, are you one of the people specifically named on the About page of greyhound-data.com? - Sitush (talk) 16:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

It is an international site and you have to register to access the site. I have no conflict of interest with this site whatsoever, I don't even know who owns it, I think it is USA based. I can assure you I am not specifically named on the About page so I don't know where you got that from.Racingmanager (talk) 16:47, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

That's good, thanks. Now why is it reliable when it clearly allows anyone to register and alter information? And have you contributed anything to it? - Sitush (talk) 16:57, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Sutiya kingdom

Stocking not really as a person belonging to the community, i was before and now trying to improve the page. Has much more knowledge about the community than a random editor.Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by DalQ95 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

You can't just change things without consensus, nor can you rely solely on your own knowledge as that would be original research. There has been a recent discussion about spellings of Chutiya and the consensus was that spelling is indeed the most appropriate. So please do not change it.

There are other issues at play, one of which is a recently active sockfarm that was doing much the same thing as you are now doing. Another is your mistaken belief that any source is better than none - if a source is not reliable then it has no place in an article, and sources from and before the British Raj era are not considered to be reliable. - Sitush (talk) 17:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

@Sitush: I suspect DalQ95 is a sock puppet of Qwertywander (talk · contribs). Please look at this: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Qwertywander/Archive. Chaipau (talk) 21:54, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

DalQ95 is advocating a different spelling to that which the socks appeared to prefer. - Sitush (talk) 15:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Could you restore the Satya Nadella picture?

I see you've been editing the Satya Nadella article. Would you be so good as to restore File:Satya Nadella.jpg to the infobox? The picture was around since 2014, and just removed in this bit of obvious vandalism so I could probably restore it without WP:COI issues, but I'm asking an editor without COI just to cross the ts and dot the is. --GRuban (talk) 15:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Done. - Sitush (talk) 15:49, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you --GRuban (talk) 15:51, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Reply on undo my addition on Chishtian article

Bro i am nor a businessman neither business promotor. i just wanna add some information in chishtian article which my current city. as you know punjab is an agri-provimce and Here's Sugar Cane is a main crop. And Adam Sugar Mills is a one of the biggest sugar mill of pakistan. IamGhumman (talk) 16:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Do you have reliable sources for these claims? They should be independent of Adam Sugar Mills and you may have to explain why you want to mention that company but none of its competitors. It probably would help if the company had an article on Wikipedia. - Sitush (talk) 16:12, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Supporting Indian Wikipedia Program resource distribution

In 2017 - 2018, the Wikimedia Foundation and Google working in close coordination with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Wikimedia India chapter (WMIN) and user groups will pilot a program encouraging Wikipedia communities to create locally relevant and high-quality content in Indian languages. This program (Code name: Project Tiger) will:

(a) Support active and experienced Wikipedia editors through the donation of laptops and stipends for internet access and

(b) Sponsor a language-based contest that aims to address existing Wikipedia content gaps.

The objective of the program is to provide laptops and internet stipends for existing editors who need support to contribute more actively. 50 basic model Acer Chromebooks and Internet stipends for 100 contributors are available for distribution. Provided resources are the sole property of the beneficiaries and should be used for the betterment of the movement.

If you're an active Wikimedian, and interested to receive support from this project, please apply. It will take around 10 minutes of your time, and will ask descriptive questions about your contribution to Indic Wikimedia projects.

• Apply at: Supporting Indian Language Wikipedias Program#Apply for support
• Last date for submitting applications is 11th February 2018, 11:59 IST.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:XLinkBot/RevertList#Indian Caste related

 You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:XLinkBot/RevertList#Indian Caste related. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 10:38, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

BTW

If you haven't seen it: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#Sitush_reported_by_User:Mourinho01_(Result:_Page_protected) --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:26, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@NeilN: I hadn't. Thanks for letting me know. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

PAKHIGHWAY block review

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Yamla (talk) 13:01, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I had the feeling this would happen. - Sitush (talk) 13:11, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Sitush. I've seen you editing recently and you seem like an experienced Wikipedia editor. Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. —usernamekiran(talk) 01:26, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

RS

Hello. You recently removed census2011.co.in from an article stating it isnt reliable. Would you please tell me what source can be used/is RS regarding census? Regards, —usernamekiran(talk) 01:20, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

The official government census reports. There is an open discussion at WP:RSN right now regarding onefivenine.com, which links to previous discussions about umpteen other refspam sites. - Sitush (talk) 01:22, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Do you know how to access the official government census reports? I dont know. —usernamekiran(talk) 01:26, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

I am currently trawling through all the census villages in Solapur district, Maharashtra, using the information at ["Census of India 2011: Maharashtra Series 28, Part XII District Census Handbook Solapur Primary Census Abstract" (PDF). Directorate of Census Operations Maharashtra. p. 114.. The root of that domain should provide reports for everywhere else for 2011. The 2001 census used a very different official domain name - bear with me. - Sitush (talk) 01:29, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

As an example, "Census of India 2001: Data from the 2001 Census, including cities, villages and towns (Provisional)". Census Commission of India. Archived from the original on 2004-06-16. Retrieved 2008-11-01. gives an indication for 2001 but we really should not be using provisional figures. - Sitush (talk) 01:30, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

SBOA School & Junior College

What's your opinion of this article? — LeoFrank  ^Talk 16:28, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

I've pruned it, LeoFrank. It's a school so the usual suspects will turn up with the usual invalid arguments for keeping should it be sent to AfD. - Sitush (talk) 16:59, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Sitush. I always find articles with little references unnecessary to keep, but as you mentioned, people come up with loads of keeps.

On the same note, we always emphasize WP:NOTDIR when removing stuff, but I wonder how List of shopping malls in India has managed to survive that. What's your take on this? I think this needs to be AfD'd. — LeoFrank  ^Talk 09:43, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

@Anna Frodesiak: I think this is one where you have had involvement? A vague memory! - Sitush (talk) 10:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Leo, if you are attempting a take-down, start with List of shopping malls in the United States or expect a barrage of keep !votes accusing you to indirectly perpetuate systemic bias.Winged Blades^Godric 12:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello Sitush, dear old friend. It's been ages. :) I trust you are well.

I'm not sure how I can help here. Would you like me to delete and salt all articles with "shopping malls" in the title? :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Anna, I just seemed to recall you taking an interest in it in the past. I have zero interest. in fact, if it were possible I would have less than zero interest. As far as I am concerned, such lists are a complete waste of space but I understand that they must appeal to some readers and, well, space is cheap. - Sitush (talk) 21:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, I was mostly interested in getting the list of malls protected from COI editors. List of bridges I could see as being worthwhile. List of malls? Well, I guess that's what those Yelp sites are for. ("Yelp", as in 'If you have nothing better to do than go to a mall, you need Yelp.') Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:32, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that rings a bell with me now. Well remembered! - Sitush (talk) 21:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Agree with Sitush on this. Such lists are just a waste of space and violate WP:NOTDIR. But Winged Blades of Godric I wonder why users want to keep ranting on keeps on such articles which add no meaning to the encyclopedia. Probably an RfC for lists is required now? — LeoFrank  ^Talk 03:53, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for your help

Sureshkhole (talk) 05:32, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

About reverting the categorization for castes and caste studies

I don't see any logic behind reverting the categorization by me. As all brahmin castes are castes which means they can be put in category of caste and so studies as a caste studies. I expect you to offer any valid explanations before you do such things again. I wish you would revert your changes to make it as it is. Sureshkhole (talk) 10:59, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I've moved your comment to the bottom of this page, which is where new threads usually go. As for your question, please see WP:Overcategorization. For example, all Brahmin communities should be categorised as such in Category:Brahmins or some subcategory. You will note that category is already a part of Category:Indian castes and that category is already a part of Category:Castes. Basically, you were creating unnecessary clutter in a structure that, generally speaking, is supposed to operate as a hierarchical system. - Sitush (talk) 11:17, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I read the page you shared about overcategorizaiton, But neither I see any point in removing the categorization I had done nor I see anywhere the logic you are advocating is actually being followed. As none of the other pages are showing this so-called hierarchical structure of categorization. At the stage of articles where they are right now, Obviously at the advance stage of articles, Yes probably what you are saying is being followed. I am requesting you to enlighten me more about this, if any other way or example could help me to understand the reasons behind why those categories shouldn't be there. thanks. Sureshkhole (talk) 05:31, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think you are correct to say that no other articles follow the hierarchical structure. For example, Chitrapur Saraswat Brahmin is in Category:Brahmin communities of Karnataka, which is in Category:Brahmin communities, which is in Category:Brahmins, which is in Category:Indian castes, which is in Category:Castes. Yes, there are many problems with our categorisation system, but the solution is not to add to those problems (as I think you were doing, unintentionally) but rather to fix them.

I am not sure about the caste studies thing. Can you give me an example of an article where you would like to add that? We do not appear to have Category:Caste studies. - Sitush (talk) 09:41, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

DD Free Dish

I happen to remove the list of channels of this DTH and keeps adding it back. Could you weigh in here? I have a hesitation to report this user. Unfortunately a majority of articles related to India are of poor quality and we keep having editors like this one who are just let off who keep adding poor content. — LeoFrank  ^Talk 13:06, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

And here's another one with their POV on Bellary. — LeoFrank  ^Talk 13:08, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the TV thing, I am unsure how we deal with it. Eg: Freeview and Freeview (New Zealand) adopt different approaches. It might be worth talking to people involved with the television project.

I will sort out the Bellary issue, although ultimately it may need intervention from an administrator. - Sitush (talk) 13:59, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Bale railway station

I did some work on Bale railway station, which was created by another editor, YASH2004 (talk · contribs · count). Because of your interest in Solapur district, I thought that you might be able to improve the article and the other ones created by YASH2004. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:45, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

No real interest, sorry. I've just been trawling through a load of Indian village articles and Solapur district has figured in that. - Sitush (talk) 18:10, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

ANI regarding PAKHIGHWAY

Hi Sitush, I saw the ANI regarding PAKHIGHWAY you have initiated and had a few points to add. I think the user sometimes lets their emotions get in the way of editing and thus the POV edits. Here is one example, [1]. Another point which has not been raised at the ANI is the issue of aggressive canvassing. The user has resorted to this on two different articles in past few days. Once on Point 5353 here [2] and on Sindhi diaspora here [3]. I am not sure if this should be the part of the same ANI section you raised or should be dealt with separately. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 20:11, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Resolved, I think. - Sitush (talk) 18:10, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Sarmal Clan

New article with familiar-sounding descent from a legendary dynasty, maybe you could take a look? I noticed it because it was added as a "See also" to Sikh Rajputs — a little unexpectedly, since the new article doesn't mention Sikhs or Sikhism. I see it has been "See also"'d to many other articles also. Bishonen | talk 04:43, 29 January 2018 (UTC).

Recreated under a new name because you create-protected the previous one. See here. - Sitush (talk) 08:27, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

I forgot already? Boy. The thing is, they kind of look alike. I'd better create protect this one, too, and not least create protect Wikipedia:Sarmal Clan, which the clever fellow redirected to after you added the speedy template. Unbelievable. I've indeffed them for persistent disruptive editing. Bishonen | talk 12:42, 29 January 2018 (UTC).

I didn't see the redirect. It's years since I last saw someone do a cross-namespace move to dodge a bullet but either I missed it on my watchlist or that sort of thing does not appear on it. I think we may be playing whack-a-mole soon. - Sitush (talk) 13:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh yes. Bishonen | talk 13:36, 29 January 2018 (UTC).

Nominative determinism

Hugh Skidmore. - Sitush (talk) 04:27, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

More eyes at Jogi? IPs keep restoring copyvio content, and adding "warrior" pseudo-history without cite

Hello Sitush, would you mind adding Jogi to your watchlist? It gets about 200 views/day so it worth guarding.

I stumbled across it again for the first time in years, and it had become completely filled with cruft since. Had to go back through the History a long ways to find even a semi-decent version to revert to. Then I removed some further uncited material, and another editor caught that one large section was copyvio from some blog.

For the last two days, two IP addresses (not sure if same person) has been incessantly reverting, restoring copyvio material and inserting a bunch of uncited Kshatriya content. If you can watchlist it to, that would help, and we may need to seek partial page protection. Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Done, thanks. - Sitush (talk) 11:28, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the cleanup help too, but re the cats are you sure Jogi should be filed as a Brahmin caste? It takes a little sussing out on gBooks to separate mention of the Jogi as a community as opposed to simply "one who practices yoga", but these two sources look pretty interesting:

• They Sing the Wedding of God: An Ethnomusicological Study of the Mahadevji
• Rank and Rivalry: The Politics of Inequality in Rural West Bengal By Marvin Davis

MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:33, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I didn't check that, sorry. I've heard of them as a caste but will dig deeper. We do have Yogi, of course, and if they are not a caste-type community then a merge and redirect would probably apply. - Sitush (talk) 14:04, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh no, I agree there is a caste/community called Jogi (distinct from yogis), but I was curious about your changing all the categories to be specifically Brahmin, since that doesn't appear to be supported by the current article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I understand. In that case, we would need separate articles for those which are Brahmin and those which are not. - Sitush (talk) 14:23, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I think perhaps this issue is better dealt with at the article talk page. If there is any splitting or merging or whatever then it is going to have to happen there anyway. - Sitush (talk) 14:38, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Yoga walled gardens

• Shivanshis4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Kashyap13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Jadaun54 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 180.151.193.74 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) proxy
• Yogeshwar Mulakh Raj Bhagwan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Yogeshwar Ramlal Bhagwan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Yogeshwar DeviDayal Mahadev (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Swami Amit Dev (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Shivanshis4 is/was an undeclared paid editor and sockmaster. Also editing via proxy. Do you think their yoga articles were probably part of a paid enterprise? I'm deciding whether to tag UPE. Am asking you because of your interest/involvement here. Thanks. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) and (edit conflict). I've prodded Yogeshwar Mulakh Raj Bhagwan and Yogeshwar Ramlal Bhagwan, per your original post, Bri, for a complete lack of reliable sources. I see you have now added more... OK, I'll take a look at them too. Anyway, I'm not naive enough to expect the prods to stick, so expect to find them on AFD next. (edit conflict) again — could you hold off adding to your post for one minute? Bishonen | talk 17:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC).

• I've prodded the other two articles as well. I agree they have all the hallmarks of paid editing. Bishonen | talk 17:43, 24 January 2018 (UTC).

• Thanks, both of you. I think we have dozens and dozens of these walled gardens related to yoga, even if not related to this sockfarm etc. - Sitush (talk) 18:09, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

• Note to Bri: I hope I didn't sound impatient when I complained about the edit conflicts — I spoke hastily (in the hope of not being conflicted again), and it wasn't meant the way it came out. I do realise you had no way of knowing I was trying to post. Thanks for digging out those promo articles. Apparently, looking at the sockfarm's user talkpages, they have created many more, now deleted. Bishonen | talk 20:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC).

No worries. Thanks for the PRODs. I probably need to mention that I'm trying very hard to be respectful of Indian culture and traditions, which is why I didn't jump into marking these. It has happened before that I've assumed that media enthusiasts were paid for their contributions. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

No need to be overly respectful, though. Part of that culture emerges on Wikipedia as massive paid editing farms, puffery, copyright violations etc. This is not to tar everyone with the same brush of course but, on this project at least, there are a lot of contributors giving their country a bad name through deceit in one form or another. If it is an India- or Pakistan-related subject and an experienced contributor thinks it looks dodgy, it probably is. - Sitush (talk) 20:24, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Update: Yogeshwar DeviDayal Mahadev, Yogeshwar Mulakh Raj Bhagwan, and Swami Amit Dev have all been de-prodded by an IP. I'm only surprised it took so long — the seven days were nearly up. Well, now they're on AfD. Note he missed one. (Up to now, anyway.) Pinging @Bri: for information. Bishonen | talk 09:39, 31 January 2018 (UTC).

Demographics of Bihar

Hi @Sitush:, could you please take a look at Demographics of Bihar page. Thanks. Jakichandan (talk) 14:23, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I have done some cleaning up. It needs a lot more work because it is mixing up figures from all over the place. - Sitush (talk) 15:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

@Sitush: Thank you. Jakichandan (talk) 15:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Parduman Randhawa

Sir I can't understand ur rubbish editing on Parduman Randhawa page. I've seen many non-important articles on wikipedia but u found that article non-notable wow!!! I agree on Amrik Singh Randhawa that it is not so important but that doesn't mean it will be deleted. Dedha9 (talk) 17:41, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I have already explained the rationale on your own talk page. - Sitush (talk) 17:43, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

You are being rigidly without any reason Dedha9 (talk) 17:50, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

No. I have given my reasons. - Sitush (talk) 17:56, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

What should I do now Dedha9 (talk) 18:00, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

First, you should not keep removing the notice at the top of the article because it lets people know that a discussion is taking place. You can comment at the discussion, which is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parduman Randhawa, but there is no rush because it will not be deleted for at least seven days.

I think what you should do first is try to find reliable sources that discuss his film work and add them to the article. They need to do more than just mention him in passing as, for example, a name in a list. It really isn't relevant that he is a son of Dara Singh - see WP:NOTINHERITED. - Sitush (talk) 18:28, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

HLP

Hi Sitush, I need your help. a file was deleted in wiki commons c:File:Aurobindoandthemother.jpg and the reason was given as Reason: Cartier-Bresson dead 3 août 2004 - not PD , which is not true the picture was not an artistic work of Bresson it was commissioned by Mirra alfassa and he was paid for it. ( sources can be provided citing the same) and should be in public domain as it is atleast 70 year old ! . so cannot claim that bresson has the copyrights to the picture. little bit unaware of the process in commons , can you help to restore the pic ?

and have corrected the sources at Aurobindo page Shrikanthv (talk) 08:09, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I noticed that the file had been deleted but, with so many images on so many pages, I couldn't recall what it was. I am no image expert but it sounds like you have a good case if you can provide the sources. Are those sources online or would it involve you emailing OTRS with scans etc? - Sitush (talk) 12:05, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I have left a note for the deleting admin at Commons. - Sitush (talk) 12:10, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your effort Shrikanthv (talk) 14:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Shrikanthv, the source of c:File:Aurobindoandthemother.jpg claims that the author is Cartier-Bresson. You need to provide strong evidence that either this is not the case or that Cartier-Bresson made this photo for hire (not an easy claim). Materialscientist (talk) 00:54, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Materialscientist.

Shrikanthv, just to explain: I asked Materialscientist if they could comment here because I noticed that King of Hearts is not massively active at the moment on Commons and, like KoH, Materialscientist is an admin on both projects. I have dealt with KoH before and am sure that they will respond in due course but I suspect it all comes back to my first comment here: you need to have some way of proving it. - Sitush (talk) 01:13, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Agree with everything said above, please send documentation to OTRS. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:40, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

The Kshatriya bee in the bonnet

Ran across another caste partisan running about, here's an example diff: link.

It is impressive how consistently partisans make a big deal about the Kshatriya thing. Being an American (of a people of notoriously short memory) it's baffling to me that some guy working an IT job in a modern high-rise building is so deeply invested in alleged millennia-old history and mythic descent, but here we are. I take it for what it is, even if it's outside my kenning. These are the points where I seriously consider getting one of the codier Wikipedians to make me a bot that zeroes in on every new addition of the word "Kshatriya" and brings it to our attention so that 99% of the time we can just revert it as cruft. Ah well, this is still a healthier hobby than playing videogames for an equivalent number of hours, and more educational. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:43, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

It will never end. Unfortunately, even some of our experienced contributors regularly feed these situations and I find it necessary to check what they do when really it should not be so. - Sitush (talk) 15:26, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw you and our recent Yadav visitor; I thought it was cute that they changed "non-elite" to "brave elite". I believe over my decent body of work here, the single most removed-and-reverted sentence I have is at Sambhaji (son of Maratha king Shivaji). I noted (based on plenty of sources) that Shivaji locked his son up because he was "addicted to sensual pleasures", and boy-howdy does that set some Maratha partisans off. I avoid putting even worse allegations just because they're mostly from older sources, and Stewart Gordon's more modern and comprehensive work on the Marathas says that legends that Sambhaji was drunk and philandering up to th end and that's how he got captured are exaggerated. So I just stick with the less-contested claim that his father had to lock him up for a few years for being a pain. During which Sambhaji defected to the Mughals for a few years, which despite being pretty undebatable, Maratha partisans also hate hearing that.

The major cleanup I did at Shivaji is still one of my prouder accomplishments in a decade of Wikipedia. I'm toying with the idea of polishing it up just a bit further and putting it in for a GA submission, since it's really well-sourced these days, and 98% stable except for a constant slap-fight about honorifics and titles in the lede, which I hope is limited enough to not be disqualifying. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:11, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about the fight over honorifics. Yes, the criteria demands stability but as long as the gubbins are well-sourced, any half-decent reviewer knows that it is precisely the sort of thing that we're always gong to see the glorifiers/denigrators going for. I don't think James Tod was stable when I took it to GA because it dissed the reputation of someone whom the Rajputs consider to be a true and faithful friend. - Sitush (talk) 22:17, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Kashmir conflict. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 03:21, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Qwertywander

See Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Qwertywander. I believe that his focus is in your wheelhouse, I am happy to play whack-a-mole with any socks you uncover, just ping me on my talk page. Guy (Help!) 19:15, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Slightly outside the door to the wheelhouse but I did deal with some involved in a case that was recently archived. Will let you know. - Sitush (talk) 20:05, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Priya Prakash Varrier

I'm not sure how you've been able to keep that article under control as much as you have. You've been working tirelessly and with much grace, to ensure the information is cited and copyright isn't violated. I'm sincerely impressed and thankful for your efforts. --Yamla (talk) 12:05, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Yamla, but it isn't just me and I am struggling because the DHCP server in my router seems to be flaky, so I'm often not in possession of a connection. The article is going to be a problem even if it is deleted because it is almost certain that it would be recreated, yet salting or redirecting it also seem to be inappropriate. We could be in this for the long haul, I'm afraid. - Sitush (talk) 12:13, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

mind blowing job

(Redacted) Abhinav686 (talk) 10:39, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

• Abhinav686 please read WP:OR and WP:V. Please do not keep on adding unsourced content. --Titodutta (contact) 10:40, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

• Titodutta can you please block them for a few hours? It is becoming silly and they need to absorb what they are being told, not just by me. - Sitush (talk) 11:00, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

• He is adding unsourced content still, I have given him final notice, if we continues, we have to take some decision, unfortunately. --Titodutta (contact) 11:04, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

• He had already had a final warning and is over 3RR. - Sitush (talk) 11:06, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
• Thanks, Titoduta. - Sitush (talk) 11:18, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

fantastic

(Redacted) Abhinav686 (talk) 10:37, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

See my response to your earlier note above. We need cite-able sources. - Sitush (talk) 10:38, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

bhola Paswan Shastri

Stop your nonsense activity I'm his grandson I have my right. Abhinav686 (talk) 09:40, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

There are times when I get very fed up dealing with Wikipedia because of people not understanding how the project works. Whether or not you are his grandson, you are not exempted from Wikipedia's policies and those include the requirement that statements are verifiable, which almost always means you need to provide a reliable source. We cannot take your word for it because you could be anyone - we have no means of ascertaining either who you are nor what you claim. - Sitush (talk) 09:46, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

• If you are his grandson, you should read WP:COI first. --Titodutta (contact) 10:41, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Kulal

Roshani kulal (talk) 16:51, 20 February 2018 (UTC) how to familiarize myself using sock

Hi, I tried to explain this on your own talk page. If you do not understand it, and bearing in mind your ongoing discussions with NeilN then it may well be the case that you would be better contributing to another version of Wikipedia. There are versions in many languages - including Tamil, Hindi etc - and it looks to me as if English may not be your first language, which is why these misunderstandings etc are occurring. Apologies if I am wrong. - Sitush (talk) 17:02, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Priya Prakash Varrier

Hi..I would like to know on what basis are you adding or removing links from different sections of Pooja Varrier Page..I've added a link which I think is very much relevant to the topic and not spammy as well but removed..on the other hand a website was added in the top box part of the web page which indicates that the site mentioned there should be the official website of the person..but the website added there is clearly not the official website and clearly you can see that the owner of the site is advertising some banner of his(not even from adsense or any adnetwork)..waiting to hear from you..thanks

Jettlagg (talk) 09:47, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

The explanation would be in my edit summary. If you see spam then please remove it. - Sitush (talk) 10:41, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Indicscript

I used template which is specific for that purpose and also read Template:infobox film page. It allows use of other scripts in the same English article. Haven't you seen any Korean articles? They use massive Korean scipt in English articles? Why you get into everything? HARSH RATHOD (talk) 14:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

The India Project determined that they should not be used for Indic films etc. That's what WP:INDICSCRIPT is all about. - Sitush (talk) 14:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Propoganda on Padmaavat

Hi, the page Padmaavat contains a lot of opinions, most in the form of advertising. I tried to clean it up long back, but then it got protected. Can you help? 86.99.13.13 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Seems to be overloaded with trivia at the very best, eg: the long list of names for people who supported it. But it isn't really my topic area and I am having problems even keeping an internet connection at the moment. I may get back to it but please note there is nothing to stop you raising your concerns on the talk page even if the article is protected. - Sitush (talk) 16:50, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Kottabomman

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. Ripapart (talk) 12:08, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Ooh er, I am so scared. Why not try following WP:RS yourself? - Sitush (talk) 12:10, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.
Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Ripapart (talk) 12:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Edit summary

Edit summary note may contain some mistakes. Please don't revert edits on the basis of edit summeries.--Arun Sunil Kollam (talk) 11:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

No idea what you are referring to, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 11:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Why did you remove this Image ? What is the problem with an art work? Please don't forget that a photograph is also an artwork. We don't have her photograph in commons. So a pencil drawing can be used until we get one. Something is better than nothing.--Arun Sunil Kollam (talk) 11:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

No evidence of permission and it is original research anyway. Wikipedia is not the place to publicise your artwork etc, and it wasn't very good anyway. You were bold in adding it and I removed it, so you should now discuss at the article talk page. See WP:BRD. - Sitush (talk) 11:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

That is not my artwork. I don't want to waste my time in talk pages. So do as you wish. Wikipedia is not for one but for all. Good bye.--Arun Sunil Kollam (talk) 11:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Varrier

I have requested mediation at Dispute resolution noticeboard, thanks. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:38, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Waste of time. The article will be deleted anyway. I am not getting involved in mediation when you've not allowed sufficient time for people to respond to your latest proposal on the article talk page. You only made it an hour or so ago! - Sitush (talk) 15:13, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	As a token of appreciation... Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:52, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

• Thank you very much. - Sitush (talk) 15:54, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

..You are most welcome. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Away

I am offline now until my new hardware turns up. - Sitush (talk) 02:17, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I found it. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:25, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Ha! My first paid IT job was writing a program for use on a (slightly older) Osborne 1. A don/Fellow at Pembroke College, Cambridge had brought the thing back from San Fran so that he could maintain his wine list. Happy days. - Sitush (talk) 11:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

And, as it transpires, the guy in question is a classic example of why we should not use Prabook as a source. He's been dead nearly 18 years (heart attack, playing tennis) and there are umpteen errors in that bio, including locating both Pembroke and Peterhouse colleges in Cambridge, Mass., rather than Cambridge, UK. Great bloke but eccentric: he used to serve G&Ts in pint glasses at teaching supervisions, comprising almost entirely G with just a waft of fumes from the T. - Sitush (talk) 12:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

A pint of gin. Wow. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:47, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

We certainly need caste lists

Hi Sitush, I remember you mentioning to JonathanSammy that there were discussions going on about categorizing people by castes. Is there still a discussion going on on this? I think we absolutely need caste lists. It automatically balances the extra negativity or puffery in the caste articles themselves. Besides, caste lists are facts where as varna etc. on a community are opinions and subjective. So they seem more relevant to the contributions of the caste. They are no more harder to maintain than the normal caste pages. Besides, caste lists show the direct contributions by that caste to society. Of course, any unsourced claim should be deleted. Lastly, people will always find a way to get around caste lists. For example, they will mention the names in the caste article itself. This will result in unnecessary vandalism of caste articles that are relatively stable now. In short, I am strongly of the opinion that caste lists should stay. They also improve the usefulness of the Wikipedia caste article several times. Amongst Indians as well, castes are given a lot of importance and it is natural to search for caste lists. I myself find List of Deshastha Brahmins more interesting than the Deshastha Brahmin article, since there is not much new to learn in the article for someone familiar with its culture. Most people are interested in caste lists rather than the minutiae of the caste itself. When I read about some unknown north Indian or south Indian communities the first thing I look for is if I have heard of any member of that caste in real life(TV, news, history etc). That gives a better perspective than some mythological belief in the article. After the caste head section, the next important thing is the caste list, IMHO - sometimes more important than the head section itself for someone who already knows about the caste. Acharya63 (talk) 10:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

The issue has been raised from time to time. They will never be deleted etc because some people just love listing things, however crazy. I think we even have lists of lists. However, my own opinion is that they should not exist: they are a nightmare to maintain, full of WP:BLP violations and wild claims, usually of no relevance to the individual listed, etc. - Sitush (talk) 10:43, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

I am mostly focusing on marathi castes. Almost all marathi caste lists with the exception of List of Maratha people seem to be OK and properly sourced without WP:BLP violations. I think you are correct in that there is no point removing the list pages as people will insert them back one way or another. Personally, I find them very useful although I agree they are a headache to maintain. The "notable people" section like in Chitpavan (instead of a separate caste list page like List of Deshastha Brahmins) somehow seems to much more stable - probably because more people are watching it. Most of the WP:BLP violations seem to come from new editors. In general, I think we should have at least some protection(IP edit protection etc.) on all caste articles. Thanks -Acharya63 (talk) 20:09, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar

To be totally fair, I'll admit I had my heart set on 2 barnstars (the first I couldn't find/decide on):A Barnstar for perservence and Good faith, (likely the Diligence one, but I'm not sure) and the Good Humor one (for the ambox thing). Some editors don't like to have Barnstars because they are crowded with them. So I wanted to make sure the timing was right. I think you deserve this for helping me. Sincerely, User: Zanygenius(talk page) 15:34, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Zanygenius. - Sitush (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Kulala

Sitush i think you have to reconsider the kulala page.how to you know that kualal are potters.where is the valid source or proof for that.Please check this point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.186.74.130 (talk) 13:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

You will see that I put a note on the article talk page many hours ago. - Sitush (talk) 14:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hmm...Sitush, meats/socks?! See the last DRN thread.~ Winged Blades^Godric 08:32, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Sitush, your edits on Vinniyar

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The below is still an active conversation, quite alive and well. So well, it's getting miserably wrong, I'm formatting into a bit more readable format.

The Request, and getting it right The Request, and getting it right @Sitush: Greetings, and good afternoon. I don't know why I wasn't fazed by it at first, but I'm still unsure why my "sources" were bad. Could you help me to understand? Also, what's with the message on the top of the page and can I help? Thanks, Sincerely, User: Zanygenius(talk page) 22:12, 22 February 2018 (UTC) Vanniyar, I think you mean? Not SA cuisine. (a helpful little gnome who saw thread title, and thought maybe Sitush liked Pão de queijo too) --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC) @Floquenbeam:Yes, Sorry!. Totally meant Vanniyar. My memory has benn losing it's edge, so thanks for reminding me. I'll fixit right away. Do you have any thoughts on the situation? Sincerely, User: Zanygenius(talk page) 22:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC) Not thoughts that will be useful to you; I know almost nothing about India or caste-related topics, but I have enough experience to know that "Sitush is right about India and caste-related topics roughly 98% of the time" is a solid rule of thumb. I'm confident he's right about this, I just won't know why until he answers your question. Still, I'm completely useless in this area; if I hadn't seen the words "South American cuisine" I wouldn't have looked (or commented) at all. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:07, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Discussion of Vanniyar Hi Floq, not seen you lurking here for a while, which is an oxymoron but you'll know what I mean. And I dispute "roughly 98%" - it must be at least "roughly 98.1%". Zanygenius, the Joshua Project website that you cited has been deemed to be an unreliable source in discussion(s) open to the English Wikipedia community at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. I can try to find the specific discussion(s) if you want to pursue this but the important point at the outset is to understand what is said at the WP:CONSENSUS page, so perhaps read that first. As for your other source, well, I think Studies in Indian Politics would be reliable generally, given its publisher and its relationship to the ethics association mentioned in that article. However, your phrasing seemed all wrong to me, not merely because it is awkward to read but because it seems pretty unlikely based on my experience of the topic area. I don't have access to the article in question but I should be able to get it if I ask at the Resource Exchange, and I will certainly do that tomorrow. I apologise that my edit summary was somewhat misleading in only mentioning the reliability issue. The caste topic area is notoriously awkward to keep in good order - indeed, notoriously awkward to get into good order - and sometimes, despite my best efforts, I do not explain things very well. Anyway, I will try to get a copy of the paper you referenced and hopefully we can come to some agreement regarding it. Feel free to continue this discussion, especially if you don't see anything from me at the Vanniyar article in the next few days. - Sitush (talk) 01:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC) Oh, by the way, the message at the top of my page is a joke. People put genuine "tags" at the top of articles for all sorts of reasons that sometimes are justified and quite often are not. Common tags include {{Unreferenced}} and {{Refimprove}}, {{NPOV}}, etc. When people are just passing through an article and add those banner things at the top it is sometimes called "drive-by tagging". It can be justified but there is also another argument, best explained at WP:SOFIXIT. Thanks for your concern but the tag at the top of this page, which you will never see in an article (hopefully) is just one of those little things that we are allowed to get away with even though Wikipedia is not a social media website. It sort of expresses my cynicism with how some people approach the project ... but it is also just funny, if you understand the background to it. No big deal. - Sitush (talk) 01:10, 23 February 2018 (UTC) Thank you for your assistance @Sitush: (and also a sense of humor). Now to address each point.. First of all, my understanding is that the first source ("The Joshua Project" is unreliable because it was unfavorably designed and potential bias, and the second is because I didn't do it quite right. Please do correct me if I'm wrong on the above. Additionally, is citing sources based on MLA format, and if so, how accurate were they? Or is the actual text incorrect, as you may be suggesting? With that cleared, I am curious as to what kind of agreement you are interested in, would this be a compromise? (I'd be willing to make up more than my half). Finally, so this page won't crash on me? Well that's a sigh of relief. Now I usually try to be good humored. I just am a little too helpful. Ask the Technical Pump, they know what I'm talking about. Anyways, that's good. Well that really sums it up, I hope that after you visit Resource Exchange,we can find more appropriate resources :). To be honest that was too serious, so let's have tea. Either at the cafe, or my house. Sincerely, User: Zanygenius(talk page) 01:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC) Yes, there have been many discussions about Joshua Project and it has been deemed unreliable in every one I've ever bothered keeping track of. I am going to ask at WP:RX in a few minutes. When I said "agreement", I was thinking in terms of how to best paraphrase what the source says. I'm not disputing that the source does say something like what you wrote in the article but the phrasing just seemed a bit odd to me. It's nothing to panic about. As for how we cite things, well, I didn't even bother considering that but the guidance is at WP:CITEVAR, so it would be best to cite using the same style that already exists in the article. Easily fixed. - Sitush (talk) 13:06, 23 February 2018 (UTC) @Sitush: I'll definitely take in that adivce, though I don't really have much to say until after you consult WP:RX (which I'm really grateful that your doing this for me); So afterwards maybe we could start finding a good source to replace what I had there? I might actually come to the RX depending on my schedule, because we need to get these sources right. Sincerely, User: Zanygenius(talk page) 15:51, 23 February 2018 (UTC) {P.S. You have been awared a barnstar. For your (Diligence?) and your Good Humor. Now I couldn't quite figure it out. After rounds, I decided to give you a Special Barnstar} If perferred, this section is still open and thus Sitush can definitely reply here.

After RX @Sitush. It appears that we may have a solution in a message on the RX. He's asking for you to wiki-mail him though. What do you think? Sincerely, User: Zanygenius(talk page) 19:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC) That is how the system works. I will sort it out but the chances are quite high that I will not get to look at it until Sunday because I have a lot to do tomorrow. - Sitush (talk) 21:36, 23 February 2018 (UTC) @Sitush:(and maybe some legal experts?) I'm sorry to hear you are busy. →→→ In sense, that would leave no-one to do it for a while, and I'm not entirely sure whether it's best left alone or not. I must come to you with a proposal/question on, well, first, if I really should be meddling here, and second, if it would be of assistance that I could carry out the request. Of course, I would really like to make sure I have permission, because when I go rogue, it almost, always, goes quite miserable. Though it's left a sitting duck, and thus wonder what we should do. Of course, I'd always be willing to wait, I'm sort of busy myself, but I've a hold-ed some free time this evening and tomorrow if anything, absolutely anything must be done. Should I touch it? (Okay that didn't sound right). Should I try to carry on your task for you then report back? (That sounds about right). Sincerely, User: Zanygenius(talk page) 21:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Extra Question: How will everything work out if your "done" but not done"?  Pending approval Actually, @Sitush:, I must make a correction to my statement, as varying pertaining to your post on the WP:RX, in which you said it was already completed. Does this mean we won't have to worry about this? because know it's almost pseudo: It's done, but needs work. So, your opinion, and perhaps a little bit of clarification will do for my purposes this weekend. Assuming, when the conditions are matched o that it's completely done, I shall do nothing, right? Does this technically mean I'm no longe r obligated to this case, as everything is cleared, must I remember to check my sources over better? Or, as a secondary option that can be broken into a pair of sections- in which at least we are not quite yet done, and thus we figure an action plan, regarding whatever the outcome, on dependence of whether we use the resource provided at WP:RX, or we're done with it, in where we either look again, or continue our course with the information we already have? So, if we were to just take the guy's suggestion, we would likely try to work it in. If that is so the case... 1. We are to place and test our new source in the Vanniyar article, (where we would go over the article, potentially, and [potentially again], we would research, likely the most helpful, perhaps relevant sources in use with paragraph 1 in which I put the Joshua Project in , and wherever I inserted the other one, [I think paragraph 3], where I put in that Indian factbase which I thank you for asking about), pending on wether it works or not, but then shall we be done, is it both of us who have completed our mission(s), and thus the crisis resolved? It may just be me, laying back and et the more expierenced editor lay down the cones. That will help determine things, particularly just how much work is shared our way. Or what if we just keep looking? How much will we have to clean up then? At least something right? Answer: I feel that we would spend extra time trying to find a reference, though we would eventually decide on one, and yet the whole process would in fact start all over again, thus provoking thr above questions. Theoretically, I'd say it's a matter again of whether the inserted reference matches our WP:MOS pertaining to the correct reference (and for the love of God; making sure the source is verifiable this time), and thus testing it out as well. Now on to step 2: (or question 2 if you like) 2.- Frankly, quite frankly, (likely as an accident), I had answered this before this paragraph was ready. I'll go over it again quite fast; In literally the previous paragraph (stanza), I had mentioned our potential steps for finding a new resource, or new way to deal with it, mainly by research, then the old process in step 1 would repeat itself. So now, I must bring up the question that we in fact may not be done, null in the normal way, though in the fact that we still have research and fact-checking to do; A question in where I wonder if "Vanniyar is to be messed with, and thus how much I should be involved. As always, I don't want to dig to deep, wouldn't that cause a Sinkhole? Well, naturally occurring sink holes are one story, yeah, though I shall make note of how often the man-made happens, which is a lot, in Florida (According to "The Weather Channel USA"). Any bit of research will show that we need to be carefu; I think of my status on Wikipedia this way, so I don't want to blow it, so I highly recommend letting me know where you stand on this, so I know when to work on something else. (Of course, I would love to go all the way on this, this is huge for me). Beyond that I must say that there's always the potential that we'll have to work with the Vannniyar article, and we should take the best approach possible. We may want to research that for surely, I personally don't know. Or, do you have any fore-opinions, then we could build upon those, and fix the operation on Vinniyar? Conclusion: I now really should conclude my writing before I go to prison for making your head explode. Sorry, sorry. So now, could you explain whether we're done here, and what that could mean for this, and then what is my part in it? All questions I'm interested in. Now if I went too long, you can tell me. I could tell I was getting long winded, but I had no idea on how to fix it. May I propose that you could call out wait days, where you could catch up? You could call it using User:Zanygenius/Templates/Talk Page/Wait for me, and I won't chat 24 hrs from when this notice is posted, then we'll pick up afterwards. Also, we could have something to drink, (either at the teahouse downtown or at my place on Wikipedia Residency Street), and/or play a game of chess, then we could distract ourselves for a while from the chaos of life. Anyways, please clarify for me what you think. I really do thank you, and the next post I make won't be so lengthy. Sincerely, User: Zanygenius(talk page) 23:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC) -

Some Helpful Footnotes

|}

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Telugu Brahmins

Did I told you that I have no sources? Sasianeel (talk) 15:26, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Sasianeel: I have explained the issues on the article talk page - Talk:Telugu Brahmins#Sourcing. You keep reinstating your edit but you appear to be doing so in a manner that does not comply with our policies. - Sitush (talk) 15:48, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Hi Sasianeel. It is not enough to have sources, you need to include them in the article and make sure that they are reliable. --regentspark (comment) 16:54, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Rajapalayam and Tanjore Kshatriya Raju

Y u still keep deleting about information of Rajapalayam and Tanjore Kshatriya Raju.vast of kshatriya raju present in Rajapalayam, that's y it got name as "Raju palayam". Poosapati Kumaraswamy Raju and late poosapati ramaswamy Raju (founder of Ramco cement) are notable person from Rajapalayam. Notable number kshatriya raju present in trichy and Tanjore region. Poosapati Ramasubramanya Raju ( former chairman of Ramco industries) daughter married to ramalinga Raju's ( former satyam computer chairman) son.lot of marriage relation taking place from tirupathi and Andrea region to Rajapalayam and Tanjore Kshatriya Raju . What kind of proof u r expecting.?? Truth 4321 (talk) 18:29, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

• Truth 4321, this is an encyclopedia. You need reliable information from secondary sources. We have rules and guidelines, and here WP:RS applies. More over, we also have rules for such lists, and generally speaking you only list people who have articles on Wikipedia. Finally, please assume a slightly more formal register in conversing with people you've not met. "Y u" and "u r" is acceptable in teenagers' text messages, but we are writing an encyclopedia here. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:38, 25 February 2018 (UTC).

If you want proof, you can personally visit Rajapalayam town below madurai, or you can refer internet about poosapati family and chief minister of Tamil Nadu in government site.

No. You should provide a reliable source on Wikipedia. - Sitush (talk) 19:13, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

You can search about Rajapalayam in wiki itself.

See WP:CIRCULAR. - Sitush (talk) 19:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Good Faith Edits

Being a relatively new and inexperienced Wiki editor, I appreciate your assumption of good faith on my part re: Albert Aftalion. Evaluating sources is still a minefield that I have been unable to bypass. While I don't understand the precise reasons as to why my sources were deemed unreliable, I am grateful for your intervention. Perhaps I should stick to minor edits and death notices going forward. I apologize for my blunderings. 72.129.236.61 (talk) 10:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Don;t worry about it and be bold. There are far too many minutiae for anyone to know all of the ins and outs of policies, guidelines, community consensus and the like. I just happened to be on a spree of cleaning up Prabook citations and happened across the ones in that article. No-one would have expected you to be aware of the issue but now that you are, you most likely will not fall into that particular trap again. - Sitush (talk) 10:31, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Jayapala

I appologize for adding unsourced content before. After some research i found some references and added some information in the article. If you think these are acceptable let me know please. I am a student of history and i am sorry for some of my early edits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jayapala&oldid=828127644

Thankyou Saladin1987 18:44, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Pushpakabrahmins and Ambalavasis

I need your help in improving these articles. please explain how to add sources. whether sources in malayalam language are acceptable or not --Padmanabhanunnips (talk) 20:24, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, reliable non-English sources are as good as English language ones. The issue that tends to arise is ascertaining whether they are in fact reliable. For example, a lot of caste histories are written by caste members in their own language but those would not qualify as reliable sources.

As far as citing goes, yes, it can be daunting. I remember struggling when I started out here. I can certainly help you with that but it would be easier to give you a worked example as and when you find a source that you want to use. You will need some key information about the source, eg: title, author, publisher, date/year of publication, page number (if a book) and so on. Just give me an example and let me know which article you want to use it for and I will show you how to do it. - Sitush (talk) 22:11, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Why did you revert my changes without explanation

I have edited as per wiki article standards - by removing unnecessary texts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafiwiki (talk • contribs) 08:44, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

No, you attempted to sanitise things, perhaps to make her so-called notability appear less trivial than it is. I did explain on the talk page, presumably as you were writing your comment above. - Sitush (talk) 08:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello satush I have sources regarding my edits on, don't revert again any doubts just reply Sasianeel (talk) 15:50, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Could you please tell what's source do you have to edit as you like, yesterday itself I told you that I will provide the links with source within a week. Why are you getting involved in the matter which without any knowledge please revert the edits you done and I am here to provide the source Sasianeel (talk) 13:44, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Are you kannadiga? Sasianeel (talk) 15:39, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Waiting for a reply Sasianeel (talk) 16:14, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

oru adaar love

Hi, if you see this article .. at the start there is english and hindi meaning of the films title -->> Parichay (film).... why can't same be done for oru adaar love ?? Adamstraw99 (talk) 17:48, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

WP:INDICSCRIPT. I thought I had told you this previously? - Sitush (talk) 18:03, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

-- yes but my question is does WP:INDICSCRIPT not apply to these articles --->> Parichay (film) , Lekin... , Anubhav (1986 film) , Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge and many more...may be hundreds of indian films' articles where there is, in a bracket, english meanings are written by various editors?? why don't you apply this WP:INDICSCRIPT in all those articles and remove the translations ???? Adamstraw99 (talk) 18:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

We do. It takes time to go through tens of thousands of articles that either (a) existed before the guideline or (b) have had scripts inserted since by people who are either unfamiliar with the guideline or actively intending to ignore it. See WP:DEADLINE. - Sitush (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

cool, thanks for telling me about WP:DEADLINE... i didn't know it ... will go through it with my two bottles of beer tonight... thanks... cheers :-) -- Adamstraw99 (talk) 18:41, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Please don't revert my edits

Hello, you've been baselessly reverting my edits on Dulla Bhatti. Earlier you claimed we had to go by sources. Even though all my edits were only from the sources themselves. I even clarified it by adding url to a readable version and the quote itself. You have still removed them claiming they are already there in the article. However they are not.

Gaur which is used in the article clearly states the rescue of women is folklore, "He was a Robin Hood sort of figure who not only took from the rich and gave to the poor, but, as folklore tells it, saved girls from being captured and sold into the slave market. His rescuing of Punjabi girls from abduction and in betrothing them to suitable matches while also providing their dowries has made him a legend."

You also baselessly removed my other addition about a folk tale of his assistance to a Brahmin. This too is not mentioned.

I am only correcting the wording as per the sources. I'd undertand if it was a real dispute. Why are you removing my edits under baseless reasons when my edits are nothing like you are claiming? 117.224.85.83 (talk) 22:49, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Dangit, caught a sly tampering at Shivaji

In the bit where it explains the Mughal incursion that forced Shivaji to surrender and sign the Treaty of Purandar, for at least several years (maybe far longer) it's said "a force of 150,000 men". On a hunch I checked on that, and the exact source cited clearly says "15,000 men". So someone sneaky added a zero who-knows-when, so now the internet is full of less-reputable books/articles all saying "150,000". So basically some Maratha partisan sitting at his computer has successfully convinced thousands of people that the Mughal forces were ten times the size they were. Glad I caught it, but kicking myself for not catching it earlier on a page that gets nearly 2 million views per year... MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:05, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Actually, that said "well over 100,000" all the way back to this edit in 2008. That IP editor seemed never to provide refs, but that long ago it was commonplace. They wrote a considerable part of the article. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:15, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Warning

The next time you remove appropriately cited content from an article I'm working on we're going to have a problem. I suggest you move on. Pergaps fix up your own articles. As I pointed out to you, you often fail to introduce the subject in the lede and don't cite controversial content. You can do better. FloridaArmy (talk) 02:08, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

You have just posted on one of the more watched user talk pages on this project. It might well rebound on you. I stand by what I said on your own talk page. - Sitush (talk) 02:20, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Nepali vandal

Please look at the contributions of this Nepali vandal [4] who wants Ranas be called Thakuri. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.34.104.197 (talk) 04:00, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Sitush, ran across this post and so I went to Thakuri; whole bunch of malarkey, the absolutely only properly cited thing was the 2011 census (I verified it) so I cut out the whole shebang (minus Notables list, fwiw) and replaced it with like four cited sentences. Standing by for some screaming... MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Sounds like par for the course, unfortunately. - Sitush (talk) 12:10, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 14#Why Am I receiving a FINAL WARNING?

You might want to see this. Doug Weller talk 13:42, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I think the warning came from SpacemanSpiff but I am in agreement. - Sitush (talk) 13:44, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Link for discussion of the topic.

I am not getiing the suggested link. --Padmanabhanunnips (talk) 18:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

It should be Talk:Pushpaka#Proposed_merge_with_Pushpaka_Brahmin. Is that what you mean? - Sitush (talk) 18:23, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming Shivaji GA nom: should I focus on keeping it stable, or kick the hornet's nest?

Hey Sitush, not asking for your personal involvement since you're pretty booked in the struggle, but just asking your advice.

I intend sometime this year to put Shivaji up for GA status. I'm steadily fact-checking every single "cn" in the article, bouncing it against longer accounts to make sure major details haven't been glossed over (the article liked to avoid mention of Shivaji's alliances with his sometime-enemies and make him look more independent), copyediting, fixing layout, etc. The quandary I find myself in: if I just cite and clean the article as-is, it's been really stable for a couple years other than the constant mayfly editors pleading with us to jam honorifics everywhere. So to one degree, I'm inclined to let sleeping dogs lie and just make a steady thing cleaner, then GA submit it.

On the other hand, one could argue that avoiding the controversy over Shivaji's ancestry and qualification for coronation would require adding about one single sourced paragraph to the page, but is almost guaranteed to kick off a major feud on the Talk page no matter how well I source it or how balanced and/or proportionate I am with "A says, but B says".

So, do I GA submit an article that pretty much everyone is okay with that might be missing one controversy of interest (which to be fair isn't absolutely vital to our modern understanding of Shivaji), or do I pour some gasoline onto the fire in the spirit of not avoiding controversial material? Thoughts? MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:00, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

It is GA, not FA, but I still think it is an issue that needs to be addressed if modern reliable sources address it, as I rather think they do. You will just have to live with the flak and, after all, simply having controversy on the talk page is no bar to promotion provided that the issue has been dealt with properly in the article. An equivalent example would probably be the James Tod biography, which inevitably attracted massive opposition from Rajput glorifiers etc but nonetheless made its way through the process.

Yes, there is a "stability" requirement but common sense applies. There is no accounting for who might review the thing, of course, but a decent reviewer would see through the talk page noise. It isn't a subject that I have ever really looked at in depth but if you need a lift dealing with issues of weight, verifiability etc then I can probably spare the time. As I recall, his qualification for coronation is one of those things that attracts the Hindutva types but there are a few admins watching this talk page who might assist in that role if needed. What you really need is a decent reviewer and there is an element of luck regarding that, unless someone like Eric Corbett is prepared to take it on. I can't do it because I am way too involved in associated subject matter. Someone like Eric would be tough but fair and you would almost certainly learn a lot along the way. There is nothing in the GA guidelines etc that says you cannot select a reviewer, although I think that is something of a double-edged sword in terms of making GA status actually mean anything. - Sitush (talk) 00:54, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

BTW, as the article stands right now, citations 32, 54 and 125 are broken and there are others that would need to be correctly formatted etc. I am also doubtful that using Sarkar as a source is a good idea: yes, he is often cited but he has quite a reputation for glorification of the Hindu agenda. - Sitush (talk) 01:19, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

By "broken" you mean the link itself doesn't work? And I'm steadily formatting the bare URLs and cites missing data.

Sitush– Regarding Sarkar, he's not optimal but his is a seminal work, and I don't feel too bad about using it for what we do, mostly just chronology "went here did this, went there did that" and less opinion stuff. Though for Sarkar, now that I've united disparate footnotes I realize we cite two different editions. And I'm banging my head against the wall because we have four cites to the 1920 edition that's Full View on gBooks, and 14 to a 1992 edition that's Snippet only. There's zero reason not to be using the 1920 edition since it's one people can actually page through completely. I'm debating whether I'm sufficiently a glutton for punishment to find the correct page numbers to get all the cites in the 1920 edition. Then again, I *have* intended to sit down and just read Shivaji and His Times straight through, so finding the right pages wouldn't be any harder than that... MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:52, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Let me know if my Shivaji musings get more distracting than amusing, and I can tone it down.

I noticed in the article that the 1671–1674 was really sparse, with only some mention of him negotiating with the English for what damages he owed for sacking one of their factories. "Ah hah!" says I, "there must be other things that happened in this period that are somehow missing!" So figuring that Sarkar, while imperfect, is the most detailed in blow-by-blow chronology, so I searched Sarkar with terms like "1672" and "1673". Welp, according to Sarkar, Shivaji spent pretty much that entire time arguing liability law with the English, so not the most exciting period of his career, apparently. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

It is fine. I'm just having a few days where there is a lot going on off-wiki. You may find the 1920 Sarkar at archive.org, which may be more universally accessible than GBooks. I'm sure someone like Newyorkbrad might dispute your assessment of the excitement to be gained from arguing liability law. - Sitush (talk) 02:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I'm coming "loaded for bear": Talk:Shivaji#Covering_the_controversy_of_Shivaji's_coronation. I got 33 freaking citations to a wide array of works, scholars both Indian and foreign, 19th century and last year, etc. that clearly demonstrate that their is a controversy over Shivaji's qualifications to be crowned.

I realize that there are going to be a chunk of people who will absolutely not, no matter what, agree with the article having the slightest implication that his coronation was controversial. But I'm never winning those folks over anyway, so I'm not worried about them. So I just figure with a whole sheet of direct quotations and cites to works that say "there is a controversy" and explain the different possibilities, any neutral editor dropping in would be 100% on-board with the article presenting it as controversial.

I'm going to hold off for a bit on adding in the controversy, since if there's going to be a fight I want to have the table clean first, so that I'm not getting reverted in the middle of trying to fix cites and whatnot. This may get interesting. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:47, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Re the gap where Shivaji mostly just argued liability with the English: I found a few cites about forts he seized during that period as well, but given that Shivaji seized forts like most of us eat breakfast, it's barely worth noting.

I've added the "Brahimns didn't want to coronate Shivaji because they thought he was a shudra rather than a kshatriya", so let the chips fall where they may.

As I go through this with a fine-tooth comb, I'm finding many places where the basic facts are true, but I need to add something like "Abandoning his agreement with Bijapur and allying with the Moghuls he..." or "With the Sultanate of Golkonda's consent, artillery support, and funding he..." So that's been engaging.

I'm sure adding more reality and less myth to the article is going to upset some people, but frankly I find Shivaji more interesting the more I dig into it. Dude was freaking clever, all kinds of strategic maneuverings, but certainly no Boy Scout. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:28, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Kurup family

Please add old article.. Prasanthclnivas (talk) 06:18, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, at least three people reverted the additions you are referring to regarding Kurup. That is primarily because they have no reliable source. I've replied to your note at Talk:Kurup#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_7_March_2018 pointing out that you need to be aware of the information at this page. - Sitush (talk) 06:29, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Dogra dynasty

Hey, can you please have a look at sources of Dogra dynasty. It even includes Gyan publications. Thanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 09:33, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot about this. I will try to get round to this but, for now, you can safely remove the Gyan stuff and point people to User:Sitush/Common#Gyan. Ping me if anyone starts arguing about it and I will comment. - Sitush (talk) 18:14, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

tag

Hey can u pls label the references number 18,24,28 on this page [5]. Thanks! (119.153.58.55 (talk) 15:43, 10 March 2018 (UTC))

Done. I did it the quick way, using the WP:Reflinks tool. It isn't perfect by any means but it does fix barelinks such as those. - Sitush (talk) 16:23, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Project Tiger Writing Contest

In 2017 – 2018, the Wikimedia Foundation and Google working in close coordination with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Wikimedia India Chapter (WMIN) and user groups from India, are piloting a program encouraging Wikipedia communities to create locally relevant and high-quality content in Indian languages. This program will (a) support active and experienced Wikipedia editors through the donation of laptops and stipends for internet access and (b) sponsor a language-based contest that aims to address existing Wikipedia content gaps.

Phase (a) has been completed, during which active contributors were awarded laptops and internet stipends. Phase (b) will be a contest in which editors will come together and develop a writing contest focused on content gaps. Each month three individual prizes will be awarded to each community based on their contribution for the month. The prizes worth 3,000 INR, 2000 INR, and 1,000 INR, will be awarded to the top contributors for each month. The contest started at March 1, 2018, 0:00, and will end at May 31, 2018, 23:59 (IST). Useful links are as follows:

• Sign up at: Wikipedia:Project Tiger Writing Contest/Participants
• List of the articles can be referred at: Wikipedia:Project Tiger Writing Contest/Topics
• Submit/report your articles/contributions at: https://tools.wmflabs.org/fountain/editathons/project-tiger-2018-en
• For more details, rules, FAQ etc. kindly refer: Wikipedia:Project Tiger Writing Contest

Looking forward your participation, all the best. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) at 22:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

Main thing I could use at Shivaji is your support re Legacy section

Hello Sitush, on Shivaji I'm tracking down the last handful of cn's, and I'm almost totally done with the actual biography section. I need to do some re-writing on the section on his governance policies, but that's the last major thing outside of Legacy. Vanamonde (who has offered to review from WP:I) said that Legacy is the main area they wanted to see meatier, to see what Shivaji has meant since his death. Vanamonde also said using Sarkar heavily for basic timeline was fine, and per your suggestion I switched the URL for Sarkar to Archive.org since they have the same edition and pages all match, so that's a relief.

So should you want to dip in for a bit, the main thing I could use is help on "Legacy", particular on the "Contemporary" section (which I might expand to "Early" instead). I have a few sentences on what the Mughals wrote about Shivaji, but if you run across any nice meaty descriptions of what the Brits thought about him, that would be useful to add.

In the "Legacy#Inspiration" section (roughly 1930s–1980s) I need to flesh out the ways Shiv Sena and RSS use Shivaji's mythos, so if you have insights there that'd also be useful. No pressure at all, but since you showed some interest that is the single biggest area where I could use your expertise. Thanks for any support, whether contributions, words of wisdom, or just moral support! MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:05, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I will take a look. A quick glance just now tells me you need to sort out a consistent citation style - it appears to be all over the place. - Sitush (talk) 12:05, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Re citation style, I looked through them but I'm missing whichever is the most severe problem. I've found a few to correct, but which am I missing:

• Some books lack ISBN number
• One or two cites has "42" vice "p. 42" My mistake, that's the correct use of the volume= parameter.
• I use two different editions of the same book for Mehta, and should probably find the equivalent page numbers and make them all from one edition
• A couple news article have the name of the paper within the title= parameter vice publisher=
• Is the big issue that some are "Lastname, Firstname" and some are "Firstname Lastname"?
  • The issue is that the "First Last" names are all one entry in the author= parameter, but in just a few cases the name is broken into firstname= lastname= and Wikipedia automatically sorts to "Last, First" in those cases. Do I need to simplify the split-parameter ones into a simpler author= parameter to make them match?
• Some of the quotes are from before I learned the quote= parameter and need to be changed to such

I plan to correct all these, so thanks for letting me know to look through the cites, but is there something big I'm overlooking?

Are you familiar with the American expression "...aside from that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?" ;) Is it overall headed the right direction, or do you have major concerns about the coverage itself (other than I need to flesh out Religious Policy and Governance, and make Legacy strong)? And thanks by the way for the copyedit, good to have fresh eyes. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:05, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Oh, akin to the issue of whether the kshatriya-shudra controversy (which iirc was the initial thing that first brought me to this article) is fundamental to coverage, I'm thinking that for Legacy to really be comprehensive I need to get a copy of James Laine's work, since presumably it's the now-seminal work on historiography of the topic in English. I had previously kind of avoided using Laine because I didn't want to constantly litigate "Laine is a hack because he said mean things about Maharaj!", but I don't think it's fair to the reader to just skip over him when he is a serious scholar published by a serious press. I plan to see if my local library can acquire a copy via interlibrary loan, or worst caseI can buy a copy off Amazon. Thoughts? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I know little about Laine, I'm afraid. Regarding citations, aisde from what you have mentioned, something that stands out is that the article sometimes uses {{rp}} and sometimes does not. Another is a tendency to say "pages=220-" and that implies the information is to be found from that page right through to the end of the source.

It is headed in the right direction, without a doubt. A lot of the outstanding issues are of the pernickety variety. - Sitush (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I prefer to use the first and last parameters for names but I don't think it is a requirement. What is necessary is consistency. - Sitush (talk) 21:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

If the requirement is consistency vice specific, I favor "First Last" since that's how Wikipedia titles are presented (at least in English, I know Russian does Last, First as the actual title). Regarding the "rp", the reason I use it is for refnames where different footnotes cite different pages. Is it required for consistency that single-page(s) footnotes also use rp's even though functionally it's not necessary?

I am genuinely surprised that the version as of a few months ago was so stable, since it doesn't have much of the Hindutva cast that modern partisans demand. The main points of contention are of course the coronation controversy, and I never understood why people were so fixated on Dadoji (Shivaji's childhood mentor) until I realized that it's because Dadoji was a Brahmin, so different sides want his role shown differently. A little similar on guru Ramadas: Brahmins say he was Shivaji's main influence, non-Brahmins point out that Shivaji only met him late in life. The coronation part has been unmolested for a few days now, and I'm curious to see if that one suddenly comes under daily attack, like the mention of Sambhaji's prodigal habits at Sambhaji (deleted practically every other day until recent pp, and they still keep trying). MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:06, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Frick, it turns out that Shivaji is the 49th most-popular article on all of WikiProject India, per Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Popular pages. I vaguely recall it was around 134th back in 2012, and 76th at last point I checked in the remote past. I'm feeling good about this being a good choice to press to GA and possible FA. That leaves the question: once I GA or FA Shivaji, what do I do next? Do I just go through the WP:I list of top articles until I find an Indian historical biography that's in terrible shape? And btw I standardized the Firstname Lastname in the references, thanks for that note. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:58, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Huh, Alauddin Khalji, a ruler of the Delhi Sultanate in the 1200s whom I've never even hear of, is the 5th most popular article in WP:I with 50k views/day (Shivaji has 10k/day, Mahatma Gandhi has 20k/day). And it's only Start class. Maybe that will be next on my list. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:01, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Ah, Khalji is normally way lower, but had an insane spike to 250k/day earlier this year for whatever reason that throws off the average. I hunted around a bit and I'm pretty sure it's because of the recent film Padmaavat (itself 3rd most popular WP:I page) in which he's a character. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that movie has created a few problems. - Sitush (talk) 01:24, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Sitush your edits on this link are not valid.Large portions of highly valuable content have been removed. I am working on the construction of this page, so you can kindly contact REDACTED before making edits

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=W._V._V._B._Ramalingam&oldid=578742173 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.107.73.189 (talk) 03:14, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Please see WP:V and then I suggest that you build the page up slowly, citing as you go along. Reinstating all of that unsourced information in one go is not a good idea. - Sitush (talk) 01:24, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Abel Crawford

I am amazed and impressed at how quickly you turned a problematic stub on Abel Crawford into a fully-realized and well-written article. I would like to correct the geographic information about Crawford Notch while granting that the source gives a different reading. The Franconia Range is only on the west side of the notch in that you reach it before you hit the next road, but there are several other ranges in between. The Willey Range is the one that overlooks the notch. Do you have any suggestions? --Ken Gallager (talk) 18:07, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I think you are probably better asking this at the article talk page. I know some people are watching it and they might have some idea of how best to approach it - looks like a tricky one! There are also some other threads on that talk page where your input might be of benefit, if you have the time to peruse. - Sitush (talk) 18:13, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Okay. I'll wait to comment until I can get home and consult my AMC White Mountain Guide and provide a non-web ref. --Ken Gallager (talk) 20:06, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

		The Biography Barnstar
		Excellent work in an incredibly short period of time. Thanks. Derek Andrews (talk) 16:46, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Derek Andrews. I've enjoyed it - makes a change from spending most of my time deleting stuff and reverting people, usually umpteen times over! - Sitush (talk) 01:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Madivada

Why u changed the contents of Madivada. I provided all the required sources, but u changed it solely for purpose of edits Nag Sam 10:16, 13 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagsamm4 (talk • contribs)

As I said in my edit summary, you were using caste-affiliated sources and primary sources. You can't do that in the manner that you attempted to do - please see WP:RS. - Sitush (talk) 10:18, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello Sitush

Todawata is a Jat clan found in Rajasthan, India. Reliable source for this clan is - http://www.jatmahasabha.in/p/blog-page_21.html , please see the list of Gotras, there is Todawata exist in the list at T series Gotras. Todawata, Todawat both are same clan. Please don't revert my contribution on Wikipedia, I'm new to Wikipedia. -Ashok Todawata (talk) 14:29, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

This is all being discussed at the AfD. Please do not bring it here, especially when I have already addressed the points you raise at that AfD. I realise that you are new to Wikipedia but that does not give you a blank cheque to ignore our politics and guidelines. - Sitush (talk) 15:24, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

whats your problem man?

hey why are you removing my conversation on Kautilya3 talk page? if you can not read hindi then why are you bothered about someone else's talk page?? kautilya3 is my old friend and i talk with him in hindi why are you putting your bloody leg between us?

I can "read Hindi". Kautilya3 is not replying to you and has told you before to go away. You are insulting them. - Sitush (talk) 18:29, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Great Article Siva Bommireddipalli (talk) 23:22, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi

If you feel like the Catherine Lynch article should be kept you can !vote on the issue instead of the gender discussion which is as you correctly stated getting out of hand. But you do as you wish. Regards.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

I am better off out of it. I can see it being the thin end of a very dangerous wedge. Every common criminal who gets more than a couple of local newspaper mentions would qualify, especially if they were women. And I do firmly believe that it is not our job to promote women, any more than it is our job to promote ethnic minorities, the socially oppressed, gay people etc: if they're notable then create an article but don't bend the rules just to make them notable. So that puts me in an awkward spot because the precedents that could stem from this one article are too awful to bear thinking about, even if the one itself is ok. The battle-lines have clearly been drawn and I do not want to be a part of it.

In addition, the sole modern source also opens a massive can of worms due to its effective SPS nature. I happen to believe that local historians are often best placed to document stuff like this, but they are also prone to getting it wrong due to lack of training etc. Their works are often good reads but not necessarily in the Wikipedia sense. - Sitush (talk) 18:41, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

check the sources before reverting

Hello, this is the third time you reverted the edits without referring the source. please refer the page again. like u said that i have removed the category beacause its totaly wrong see this 129 page (https://books.google.co.in/books?id=COcwoYRCYhcC&pg=PA129&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false) there MD stands for madras not madhya pradesh. it totally misleads the concept. i also added infobox for betterment of the page after referring the sources (https://archive.org/stream/castestribesofso03thuriala#page/46/mode/2up/search/gamalla) this community is native to only erstwhile andhra and madras states not madhya pradesh. so pls refer them before reverting.Sathishkagitha (talk) 16:25, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Your second link above is not a reliable source. I will have to look at the article regarding the other one. - Sitush (talk) 16:29, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Ah, the reason is that your edit summary was meaningless and you made so many changes in one go that it was difficult to untangle what you were doing. - Sitush (talk) 16:31, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Ho yes my second link above is wrong now see this. [6] Here, It is clear that these people are natives of AP(andhra) and MD (Madras) states. and the next link proves that[7] PO stands for Pondicherry. so i am going through a realiable source this page also clarifies that Gamalla, Gowda, Kalali are same and u dont have a chance now to point out me.Sathishkagitha (talk) 15:31, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

I amended the article quite a few hours ago. Have you checked it again? - Sitush (talk) 15:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Birbal Jha

You are missing the point - if you want to take it to AfD, by all means. The fact remains: the article of a living person has no sources, and therefore, BLPPROD should be tagged.--Cahk (talk) 07:59, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Give me a chance! - Sitush (talk) 08:00, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Birbal Jha

Hello Sitush. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Birbal Jha, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: SOFTDELETED materials can be recreated without prejudice.Another AFD would be needful. Thank you. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 06:03, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for taking it to AFD:) I was just planning to launch one.Anyways, this AFD can't be closed as softdelete, even in case of non-participation and the outcome will be binding.On a side-note, whilst SOFTDELETES are useful to reduce the burden of no-interest-AFDs, it has surely got it's own follies!~ Winged Blades^Godric 08:11, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

sogam

In the article Sogam Lolab you removed the references calling them not reliable but the site named fallingrain is reference to many wiki articles and is a reliable source. The article named Lolab Valley has the same reference which i used. Asrar 45 (talk • contribs) 04:45, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Fallingrain has been discussed at the Reliable Sources central noticeboard where consensus was that it is not reliable. I am aware that it has been used in lots of articles but that just means those articles need to be cleaned up. - Sitush (talk) 09:34, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

A tip

Hi, I see you are still attempting to improve the two articles that are currently being discussed regarding deletion. Your changes are not likely to make any difference to the outcome and, as I have said to you before, you should not even be editing the one that concerns your grandfather.

It is quite common for people new to Wikipedia to attempt to create new articles at the outset and quite often those articles are unsuitable for inclusion because the creators do not understand our policies and guidelines. It might be better if you - like them - began by editing existing articles, of which we have over five million, and through that learn what is and is not acceptable here. - Sitush (talk) 13:16, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Sitush for your tip, and I'm reading Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to improve my knowledge. I assure you that next articles are fully sourced and reliable for citation. Ashok Todawata ^Talk 13:28, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Mr Sitush, I really apologize if I did something against wiki policies. As I have already told, I am new to Wiki. Please have the big heart to forgive me. My request to you is, please take my sources seriously with an unbiased mind. I am not pushing my POV. I am only trying to make the article better Sharkslayer87 (talk) 23:04, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Apologize for my behaviour

Mr Sitush, I really apologize if I did something against wiki policies. As I have already told, I am new to Wiki. Please have the big heart to forgive me. My request to you is, please take my sources seriously with an unbiased mind. I am not pushing my POV. I am only trying to make the article better Sharkslayer87 (talk) 23:05, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Raising your issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

I am raising your issue at the Administrators' noticeboard. I apologized to you for giving too many sources. I condensed my sources and started a new section. You still didn't bother to respond. You monopolized the Raju page and are behaving like you decide what is correct and what is wrong. I sent many reliable sources that prove the Kshatriya status of Rajus but you have completely ignored them purposely. All this makes me believe that it is possible that you have an ulterior motive. I won't make any personal attacks on you and go against wiki standards. I still believe Wikipedia is an information resource and it is the duty of every person involved with wikipedia to make sure it maintains its standards as people use it to access information. I also believe that there are good people in Wiki who are unbiased and accept reliable sources. I will fight till my last till justice is served. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 15:16, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Mumba Devi and Kolis origin

I added a discussion on here about this, please discuss: Talk:Mumbai#Etymology. A145029 (talk) 19:12, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

It has been one week since you last replied and nobody else has commented. Please discuss A145029 (talk) 15:39, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

can we discuss this?A145029 (talk) 21:13, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand why Munshi's source is not being added to the article. Please discuss. A145029 (talk) 20:27, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Kolis

In the article Koli people regarding what % of Gujarat is Kolis - you removed the 1931 census source and said its unreliable, but the 2004 book which says that Kolis are 24% of Gujarat is itself based on the 1931 census. The 2004 book cites 1994 South Asia Bulletin which gets its stats from the 1931 census. A145029 (talk) 21:23, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand how 24% = 31%, and just because a 1994 SAB cites the census doesn't mean we should use it. I would have to read the SAB, I guess. - Sitush (talk) 21:29, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

What I am saying it is that the 2004 book says "Kolis are 24% of Gujarat's population" is itself based on the 1931 census. You have previously said the 1931 census is unreliable and so it shouldn't be used. So either this info should be removed or at least it should be mentioned that it is from 1931 and not from 2004. A145029 (talk) 06:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Additionally can you reply to this talk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mumbai#Etymology — Preceding unsigned comment added by A145029 (talk • contribs) 06:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

I am having a rather full day elsewhere but will get round to it. - Sitush (talk) 15:31, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

@A145029: is this edit the one about which you are concerned? In future, it would be better if you raised such issues at the relevant article talk page because they're likely to attract more attention from interested contributors. - Sitush (talk) 09:41, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

It is this edit. I have added a discussion on the talk page. Talk:Koli_people#%_of_Kolis_in_Gujarat — Preceding unsigned comment added by A145029 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Why remove a citation?

Hi Sitush, can you please explain why you removed the citation to s:1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Romesh Chandra Mitra, Sir in the Romesh Chandra Mitra article. The piece of text "When the post of chief justice was temporarily vacant in 1882, the marquis of Ripon, then viceroy of India, appointed Romesh Chandra to officiate in that post—the highest judicial position in the Indian empire." was taken from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article and Wikipedia policy is to provide citations.

Would you also kindly provide evidence that 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica is a "... a source that we deprecate for Indian stuff"? An who is the "we" you refer to? There are currently 16,939 articles in Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica with Wikisource reference so it is widely-used resource in Wikipedia. DivermanAU (talk) 01:54, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

See WP:HISTRS. I've already demonstrated why EB was poor in that specific article. I couldn't give a crap how many articles already cite EB1911 because historically this project grew through people copy/pasting stuff from it. The project has matured, we shouldn't need it and we definitely should not be using it for anything related to India/Pakistan etc history. There is a long-standing consensus that we avoid sources from the British Raj era and copy/pasting florid language from Edwardian sources is not helpful anyway. It is also damn lazy. - Sitush (talk) 02:00, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

S Janaki

And you are not allowing to add her final public music event too ! What an irony!! AjaykumarAdhisha (talk) 01:50, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

No idea what you are talking about, sorry. Something to do with S. Janaki, I presume? As I suggested on your own talk page, perhaps raise whatever issues you have at Talk:S. Janaki. All I know for sure is that the article attracts a lot of unencyclopaedic fan trivia etc. - Sitush (talk) 02:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Filed a request for response

I filed a request for response at Dispute resolution notice board and included you as you are not responding to me.Sharkslayer87 (talk) 22:44, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

I have already explained why I am not responding. I simply cannot cope with the walls of text etc, and that is saying something given how frequently I do deal with such things. Sorry. - Sitush (talk) 02:07, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

About my draft

Being a general seceratary appears to be a thing in the city level as, it is a ruling party and secondly it is a capital city . So being at. capital city is directly related to the state politics Anonymous17576 (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

What article/draft are you referring to? - Sitush (talk) 02:07, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Pushpaka Brahmin

It will be better if you remove the entire page. There is no use of such an one line article. Further, the remaining line is also not authentic. There is no such thing at all. DELETE everything. --Padmanabhanunnips (talk) 16:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Notable Thevar people

Hi Sitush, you were involved in a request adding further notable people to the Mukkulathor article. It seems the editor created a content fork with a dedicated people about notable people. Given the article is under active arbitration sanctions, I wanted to run this past you for a second opinion. Having thought about it, I might be inclined to AfD the new article. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 13:41, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: keen to also include you as you seem to have been involved with the user recently. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 13:48, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

That guy has been disruptive in this are and is topic banned, no need of an AfD, it can be G5ed. Thanks for the ping. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 13:53, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Warning

We have been exchanging words in another place. I hoped that we could agree to differ.

You have now deleted material I have written and reduced the article (Wells and Fakenham Railway) to almost no useful information. Writing my material had taken some considerable time and included visiting a University reference library some distance from my home for research.

I understand your preference that page numbers would be quoted in citations, and I have explained why in some situations I think that is unhelpful and off-putting to inexperienced users.

Your disagreement with my point of view is your privilege, but deleting my material, calling it "crap", and incorrectly claiming that it is impossible to verify, is improper behaviour.

I still hope that we can amicably agree to differ; my objective, and I presume yours, is to improve the quality of Wikipedia as perceived by users, ("customers" if you like).

I ask you now to desist from harming my edits. Afterbrunel (talk) 05:46, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

If you provide page numbers there is unlikely to be a problem. See section immediately above, see Andy Dingley's response to you on his talk page, see the comments of Redrose64 and others on your talk page, and see WP:CONSENSUS. There is no way you can cite entire books etc and, while I appreciate the effort you make and your prose style, it is really not negotiable. You will note that I did not delete your stuff at Golden Valley Railway, nor indeed any other past efforts, because although you say you are not prepared to help fix it, it is now part of our history; I deleted your most recent effort at Wells and Fakenham Railway because that was a new addition of a large chunk of material made after I had explained the issues to you. Painful as it may be, this is a collaborative project: you are expected to collaborate and to abide by its norms. - Sitush (talk) 07:38, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Call for opinion

If a book comprises 114 pages + an index, should we expect people to cite the specific page(s) that they are relying upon when citing it or is it ok just to cite the entire book? I would appreciate thoughts from the watchers here. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 20:48, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Need the page or chapter at the very least. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:51, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't see that it is essential. You are referring to railway history books, which are almost always sequential. If someone really wants to verify the text material [how often is that done in the real world?] they only need to go through the date order. Even in the 114 page book you are referring to the substantive history (as opposed to peripheral padding) is often only 30 pages or so.

An example of this page-citation being taken to ridiculous lengths is at Great North of Scotland Railway where there are 222 citations, most of them from Vallance's book (218 pages). Afterbrunel (talk) 07:43, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

I couldn't care less what you think in this situation. It is a long-established practice and, as I said some days ago on your talk page, you are free to attempt to achieve a change in consensus but until you achieve that you should abide by the existing consensus. - Sitush (talk) 07:50, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Look, I deliberately kept your name out of my opening remarks in this section because I didn't want to bring unnecessary attention to bear on you. You've now posted here, on one of the more watched user talk pages on this project, and have effectively put the spotlight on yourself. It is unlikely to benefit you, just as a trip to WP:ANI would be unlikely to benefit you. - Sitush (talk) 07:54, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Of course page numbers are essential. Why should railway books be different to any other sort of reference book? J3Mrs (talk) 08:48, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

• Can't see any valid reason not to include page numbers, unless the copy you're working from is unpaginated or you're indulging in a bit of synthesis. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 16:36, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

railway history books, which are almost always sequential and at Great North of Scotland Railway where there are 222 citations, most of them from Vallance's book - great example. Vallance's book on the Great North of Scotland Railway isn't sequential; he groups into chapters events that occurred in the same geographical area although not necessarily in the same timeframe. For example, chapter 9 concludes with events that occurred in 1897; and chapter 10 commences in 1883. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:53, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, anything over about 10 pages should have page numbers cited. Duh. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:07, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Edits on 'Sant Singh Maskeen.' Comment

Hey there. I am not sure what does 'hosted copyright violation' mean. I cited a biography book to the content I added, which is written by a third party. I thought it's alright to cite it. The content I added was taken from a physical copy of the book, and that's why I cited it on a random place. Though, I was looking forward to adding the citation in places that looked critical enough. Moreover, I couldn't find the concerned topic on WP:RS. Thanks. Haritdeep Singh (talk) 15:54, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

It is ok to cite a book that is not online but not ok to link to an unauthorised copy that is online, eg: a lot of the scans at the APNA website, most of what is at scribd.com and much of what exists on personal googlesites. Just because other people are prepared to ignore copyright does not mean that Wikipedia is prepared to do so. This is also why there are often issues surrounding links to uploads on YouTube, quite a lot of which have been problematic over the years. - Sitush (talk) 16:02, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Whoa, I never thought of it this way. Though, I looked for the copyright before citing the online copy of the book which says, it is under CC license, making me consider it a legit source. Is there a way to figure out cases like this one? How could I know if an online copy is authorised? Plus, if the issue is resolved now, may I start editing the article again? - Haritdeep Singh (talk) 13:48, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

You can always edit the article. It is not protected and you are not subject to any sort of topic ban. There are various forms of CC-BY license, so that can get complicated. I will take another look at it later - Sitush (talk) 14:20, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

That'd be great. Thanks. - Haritdeep Singh (talk) 04:47, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

About Lokendra Singh Kalvi Page

The Wiki Page of Lokendra Singh Kalvi encompass three major sections i.e. About him, His Political life and the controversies. In the About section, the details of his life was given. In terms of Political life, all his political life was mentioned except one line about the emergence of Karni Sena. The third section is about the controversies that have been faced by him. Its obvious that such a big personality will undoubtedly have some controversies. So, I request you to make this page live and consider the recommendation. There are many more updates like DOB, Education, Personal life that needs to be added later. But for now, this is the only information available. So, I request to activate the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.207.175.247 (talk) 13:29, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

If what was there is the only information available then my redirect is appropriate. The sources were really talking about the organisation, not the person, and there was much in there that was either unsourced or which misrepresented the source. People are not inherently notable just because they lead an organisation that might itself be notable. - Sitush (talk) 13:41, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

I have just reverted you again. You were bold in creating that article, I redirected it and left a note at its talk page. I really don't think there is sufficient in the article to justify it standing alone. Perhaps work on it in a sandbox or draft space? - Sitush (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Kumawat

Please sir don't edit history of kumawats again and again you Dont have any knowledge what this community is about so please do not hurt the feelings of community Rajputhotehaihum (talk) 19:18, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Suraiya

Way too many edit conflicts and I will leave the task to your able hands:) Anyways, are you aware of any way, to remove a particular reference from every particular place of it's being cited in the article, with a single click? That ought to be helpful, in certain cases.......~ Winged Blades^Godric 14:46, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Nah, you take it on. It is better if it doesn't all come from me because that way the inevitable complaints can be spread around. I just search for the source in the edit window and delete every occurrence (although I haven't done for this particular article). - Sitush (talk) 14:48, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

That's a good workaround! Thanks:) ~ Winged Blades^Godric 11:06, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Ha!

TOI is usually reliable as a media-unit but what the heck is this piece? Unadulterated PR?!~ Winged Blades^Godric 11:06, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

ToI is nothing like it used to be. There have been discussions about it at WT:INB. - Sitush (talk) 13:37, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

hi Sitush, you removed a couple of cricketers (Umesh Yadav, and Prashant Vaidya) from List of people from Nagpur, ive reinstated them with refs. hope this is okay.

Coolabahapple (talk) 11:57, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

@Coolabahapple: well, at least they're sourced. I have never been convinced that those sources are reliable, though. - Sitush (talk) 12:27, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Sir Why You Blocked Me

If Editting Was Wrong Then defenitly you Will Blocked But Give Me 1 reason Someone Changed This Article Then I Will Correct Its My Problem Or Someone Abusing Me Or Threating violence And Warn Me Dont Post True Article Or Do Not Change Sir is this my Fault Tell Me . I will Give You All Proof of this Article The town of Khaga is said to have been established by a brave ruler belonging to the martial Suryavanshi clan, named Maharaja Khadagsen (also referred to as Khadag Singh). Maharaja Khadagsen Was The Son Of Maharaja Dalpatsen . Maharaja Dalpatsen Belongs to Raja Kanaksen Family And Raja Kanaksen Was a Bloodline Of Raja Kush . And Raja Kush Was The Son Of Lord Rama . The Suryavanshi who ruled doaba region post Gupta period, came to control large parts of Fatehpur district (including Ayah and Khaga) and parts of Allahabad region under Khadagsen's rule. It is also said that Ark Nagvanshi kshatriya (also referred to as ' Ark the synonym of Surya ' ) rulers conducted Dashashwamegha yajnas (Horse sacrifices) in the doab region (area between Ganges and Yamuna) to prove their supremacy. Their power decayed with the rise of competing powers in the form of other Rajputs and Muslims. Fort Was was situated near Kukri kukra lake but is now in ruins, however many people say that there was a fort there. Many stories about Maharaja Khadagsen were destroyed during the British Raj, or by singrour Dariyao Singh. That's the reason the history was lost.

I did not speak very much english thats why i did not understand any of your warning — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeep Suryavanshi (talk • contribs) 08:50, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Crawford family of the White Mountains

On 15 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Crawford family of the White Mountains, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Crawford family were pioneers of tourism in the White Mountains of New Hampshire and have numerous places named after them there? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Crawford family of the White Mountains. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Crawford family of the White Mountains), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde (talk) 00:01, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Geo/date commas

Hi there. Thanks for asking. I'm not in the mood for a revert war this morning, but take a look at what the Manual of Style has to say.

• In geographical references that include multiple levels of subordinate divisions (e.g., city, state/province, country), a comma separates each element and follows the last element unless followed by other punctuation. Dates in month–day–year format require a comma after the day, as well as after the year, unless followed by other punctuation. In both cases, the last element is treated as parenthetical.

Correct: He set October 1, 2011, as the deadline for Chattanooga, Oklahoma, to meet his demands.

Incorrect: He set October 1, 2011 as the deadline for Chattanooga, Oklahoma to meet his demands.

Regards, Moscow Mule (talk) 12:32, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. That explains one of them, using US style. What about the others? Are they also US grammar issues? - Sitush (talk) 20:17, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

The "mmmm dd, yyyy," date format? (Horrible format that it is.) Yes, that's covered. So is the closing comma in a city/state pair: the deadline for Chattanooga, Oklahoma, to meet his demands -- "In geographical references that include multiple levels of subordinate divisions (e.g., city, state/province, country), a comma separates each element and follows the last element". The comma article also gives the example "The plane landed in Kampala, Uganda, that evening." Moscow Mule (talk) 03:21, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Well, I decided to AGF and self-revert even though it looks wrong to me, then FloridaArmy reverted me for basically the same reasons as I originally reverted you. I now notice that you have had a couple of comments on your own talk page about your use of commas, including for one article that was FA status. I think perhaps you are in a minority here and possibly even misinterpreting MOS. In any event, regardless of what MOS might say, your changes appear to make the article more difficult to read. - Sitush (talk) 11:39, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

I remember the FA case you speak of: more than a bit of WP:OWNERSHIP involved there, I recall. Still, the wiki has its ways, and it appears to have autocorrected over the ensuring months: I can't see any missing commas on that article as it currently stands. And meanwhile, someone else has come along and reverted FloridaArmy. Anyway, thanks for discussing this in a civil fashion and for the AGF. And I love the box at the top of your talk page, btw. Moscow Mule (talk) 14:11, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Sir Can You describe How I am Disguised

Sir I beg you please try to understand some one missguiding you about my behavior i am belong to the khaga maharaja khdagsen blood line if someone change my article then definetly i will try to to correct or history so sir please is it wrong sir Some one abusing and said that dont correct this article if you correct this article i will complain you if you have any confusion about khaga history article i will give you proof sir gazeteer or other books or papper article or other proof sir please try to understand — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeep Suryavanshi (talk • contribs) 16:05, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Tiruchirappalli

Hi Sitush. I see a lot of content added from a fansite point of view and unfortunately this article is an FA. I think it's time to delist this? Your thoughts? — LeoFrank  ^Talk 18:07, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't have many dealings with Indian city/town/district articles. Can it not be cleaned up? Are the people still around who took it to FA? - Sitush (talk) 19:49, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Satya Nadella photo

Hi, Sitush. Would you be able to make an edit to the article Satya Nadella? He recently released a number of images on https://news.microsoft.com/exec/satya-nadella/ under Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike, and I've uploaded them to Wikimedia Commons. He says he'd prefer this one for the article photo. I'm hoping it would be a non-controversial replacement, but technically shouldn't do it myself, since I do work for the company. Would you be able to? --GRuban (talk) 13:26, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

While he may prefer it, and it is a BLP, I think you need to seek consensus for changing the image. We don't always do things just because the article subject prefers it. You can be involved in a discussion on the article talk page without getting on the wrong side of WP:COI.

I have no particular opinion about it other than that the new image is a decent photo and is up to date, so I doubt there would be any issues. - Sitush (talk) 16:14, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks, will do. --GRuban (talk) 17:04, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Sowler

Thanks for your comemnt about the Sowler category. I have no particular inside knowledge about the person, and I have to say that your guess is as good as mine on most of the questuins that you asked, It just seemed to me to me that his principal distinction was in business, not politics, from the narrative. It's really not a big issue; by all means revert it if you feel inclined. Rcb1 (talk) 16:31, 18 April 2018 (UTC)rcb1

@Rcb1: I think the issue is much broader than just the Thomas Sowler article. Unless you have a citation that says the award was actually given for business, it should not be categorised as such. In modern times, the London Gazette often does say someone was knighted for services to business, or to politics, or to charity etc but that is a fairly recent development.

It's a pretty useless category anyway - we've got enough problems with poor categorisation without introducing new ones, and a part of the reason we have those problems is precisely because the category geeks do not actually understand the subject that they are categorising. They seem to skim articles, take things a face value and then come back a few weeks later and fiddle around yet again. It's an easy way to boost edit count but it does no-one any favours. I've no idea if you spend a lot of time categorising but it is a pattern that I've seen of others and in this particular instance I think you have fallen into a similar trap.

I've no idea why you replied to my post on your talk page here but, since you have, I am responding here. That's pretty odd behaviour, too, in my experience but so be it. - Sitush (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Pasi CasteRemoval of word Tradition and Pig Rearing to Animal Husbandry

Hi Sitush, I hope i am requesting the edit at the right place. I am new to Wikipedia and i am sorry in advance if i am writing at wrong place. I have objection with the words {{hoax}}{{Tradition and Pig Rearing}} in the article Pasi (Caste) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasi_(caste)

I believe these two words as a hoax created about my community and the sources provided do not clearly state these thing. I have already requested edit on the Pasi Talk page but it seems nobody is looking at it and that is the reason why i have come to you just to get some help and at least for a reply. The primary reason i want to change these words is because i also come from this community and the article is saying that we had pig rearing as a tradition. I believe for being a tradition it is needed to be followed by the majority of people. Just because Chandra Bhan Prasad's book says that 5 out of 25 pasis of his village reared pigs that doesn't mean our entire community was following this as a tradition.

Itself chandra bhan's Statement contradict to it that if 5 people out 25 were doing this activity that simply means majority of people were not doing this even in his village at that point of time which he mentioned decades ago. This clearly states that even decades ago majority of people even in his village were not following it, then how can he say it a tradition?. May be those circumstances were created because of the heavy taxation imposed by the British Government and the famine that occurred in India. But, it was not our primary tradition, we were peasants, the farmers of India, in most parts and were involved in various agricultural farming related activities. Like other peasants we also performed animal husbandry we had cattle to plough the field to sow seeds, other animals for milking etc then why just the pigs rearing word was used there ? And, if we were not peasants then why we joined peasant movement of India. Also, the Sarah Beth book which the writer has provided citation doesn't describe much about our community he just said caste of pig rearers how can someone just blame entire community without any census ?

I have come here with lots of hope that you will help me in changing those two words as they are not true and defaming our entire community worldwide after it has been posted to Wikipedia. People are copying and pasting this article and spreading this wrong information. I just want to stop it before it gets too late. Later or sooner my community will gather to change this misinformation but i wan't it to be edited before it spreads all over the internet.

In India, you can understand it can become a big problem for our community which is already growing slowly. Since, we do not yet have much writers to describe our caste properly, in better words our community is still backward in terms of education. Without proper information if people post such thing then it will become a great problem for us. In India even small things get viral without thinking it scientifically like the latest incidents people are not taking small one rupees coins and 10 rupees coins that have 15 lines on it. Even when RBI has clarified it multiple times. I simply want to say if this information which is not true gets spread then our lives will become hell in this country. I tried to find sources and read multiple articles. First there are not much information available about our caste and the information that is available mostly say we were peasants who were involved in various agricultural activities. Please review my edit request and remove the word 'tradition' and replace 'pig rearing' to animal husbandry. Thanks.

OK. I will take a look at the article talk page later today. That is where the discussion should be happening. - Sitush (talk) 07:25, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Mohit Ahlawat

Hello Sitush, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Mohit Ahlawat, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: This is a perfectly valid disambiguation page that links to two articles. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:29, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

@Eastmain:: we do not do dabs for situations where there are two articles or less. That is the entire point of CSD G6, according to Twinkle. Please see the discussion here. - Sitush (talk) 09:52, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

But then there is this. There appears to be a contradiction between Twinkle, the dab MOS and the CSD criteria. Whatever, I don't appreciate template-style notifications and "you may wish to review" crap. - Sitush (talk) 09:58, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) The key point in Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Disambiguation_pages#Disambiguation_pages_with_only_two_entries which you link to above is "if one of them is the primary topic for that term". In this case neither of the Mohit Ahlawats is the primary topic, so the dab page is valid, and it's correct to have an incoming redirect from "... (disambiguation)" too. If the only two articles for "Jane Smith" are "Jane Smith" and "Jane Smith (politician)" then we don't need a dab page, because a hatnote at the base name article is all that's needed. I hope that helps clarify. PamD 11:54, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Ah, you are using an automated thing - CSDH. Probably the template is out of your control. Still mystified about the contradictions, though. - Sitush (talk) 11:56, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Not really, PamD, but thanks. Clear as mud. Who on earth decides which is the primary topic? Seems random to me but, as with categories, dab stuff is for geeks and I am not one! - Sitush (talk) 11:57, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Basically, if it's debatable by reasonable people, there is no primary topic (e.g. New York, Clinton). If it's not really debatable, then there is one (Reagan, Boston). --GRuban (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Hm. Define "reasonable". I think Boston, Lincs, is significant to people from the UK but, yes, Boston, US, will be the same for people in the US. It's all relative and usually parochial. But, like I said, the only people really interested in the technicalities of dabs are geeks. I've got better things to do, like actually improving this encyclopaedia's content rather than fiddling around with its structure. - Sitush (talk) 02:23, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Muley Jats

I posted a comment earlier and I've had a relook on Muley Jats. The text about contested conversions under either Akbar or Aurangzeb or the Sufi Ganjshakar was always unsourced. See [8]. The newer sources added by the IP editor too don't contain any such information.

I haven't found any reliable source that talks about contested conversions under Ganjshakar, Aurangzeb or Akbar. I will keep looking. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 11:24, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

I wasn't able to find anything confirming the contested conversion under either Akbar or Aurangzeb or the Sufi Ganjshakar/Baba farid so I removed the unsourced claim. Regardless, I have corrected a source and added that the information of forced conversions from both sources (another is actually an extract of the same Nonika Datta source without the references) was originally from Punjab Notes and Queries sine the sources themselves state so and it's quite an old colonial era source not based on any primary source. See [9], [10].

I've also corrected the article a bit. It is their ancestors who are traced to have been forcibly converted and circumcised. I could only find a source from Richard Eaton regarding Jats claiming conversion through Baba Farid and added it as well. To make up for a lack of primary source about forced conversion, I have also sourced thattheir own tradition states so.

Couldn't find out anything about Akbar or Aurangzeb converting them. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 13:17, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Another RfC on Net Neutrality

A month ago you participated in an RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 147#Net neutrality. The same proposal has been posted again at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal: A US-only CentralNotice in support of Net Neutrality. (This notice has been sent to all who participated in the prior RfC, regardless of which side they supported). --Guy Macon (talk) 20:51, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

April 2018

You are doing a good job of suppressing truths. You are a classic example of an anti Raju POV pusher Sharkslayer87 (talk) 22:16, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

All your talk of "suppression" and "justice" and what the government says, together with ultimatums, edit warring despite being reverted by two people in good standing, and claims of "racism" and that I "will pay for it" (see here) is not helping you. - Sitush (talk) 23:06, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

All your personal attacks on a community will definitely not help you. You called an entire community of people self glorifying and you have also issued threats to block me just because you have admin rights. This amounts to abuse of admin rights and I will raise this issue. Thanks for treating me as a slave. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 23:19, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I do not have admin rights. I have not threatened to block you. It is indisputable that some people within the Raju community are self-glorifying: that has been stated by academics and is also self-evident from the edit history of the Raju article. - Sitush (talk) 23:22, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

You have clearly stated that Rajus are self glorifying people. You targeted an entire group of people and you even threatened me that I am attracting a block. The Rajus are Kshatriyas of Andhra and they are recognized as such by the governments. What is wrong in considering themselves Kshatriyas when they have that status? Is that self glorification? Thanks for your vitriol. You even refused to consider any of my sources and started an edit war without any justification. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 23:26, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

You have had numerous warnings and notification of the sanctions regimes that apply, yet still you breach WP:3RR at Raju, despite having been reverted by two people in good standing. This is not going to end well for you and I suggest you self-revert there now. - Sitush (talk) 23:29, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

This is the exact statement you have used

"except in the minds of self-glorifying southern communities such as the Raju and the Nair". You have clearly targeted an entire community of people. Now you are threatening to block me in spite of providing sources. Please go ahead and reinstate your Rajulu which has no citations. Please go ahead and block me also. I didn't even revert thrice. I wonder what mistake I did other than providing genuine sources. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 23:34, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I will not revert again as I understood by now that it is futile. I am sure there will definitely be some good editors who will understand my intentions and who will value genuine sources. Thank you very much for your royal treatment. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 23:38, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The mistakes you have made have been explained to you here, at Talk:Raju and on your own talk page. That you either cannot or will not understand those explanations is unfortunate but competence is required. I am not prepared to deal with someone who adds walls of text and engages in personal attacks on a subject that has for a long time attracted sockpuppets and pov-pushers and which has thus had several periods of protection. You either understand that we have to be neutral or you do not, and you are either capable of phrasing nuanced statements or you are not. At the moment, it looks distinctly like "not" in all cases. - Sitush (talk) 23:41, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge, I have never instroduced unsourced material in any of my edits. I have tried my best to conform to wiki standards. I didn't even indulge in an edit war. I just tried to reason. I am not here to fight with others. My genuine intention is to make the articles reflect reality. I am from Andhra Pradesh and I know the ground reality of my society. And I don't want Wikipedia to take my word for it. I will provide genuine sources. I will not revert that article again. I will do everything I can to make my point by without flouting any of the wiki rules. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 23:47, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#I am not being allowed to contribute from genuine sources and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Sharkslayer87 (^Talk/_Edits) 00:10, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

You've taken that to the wrong venue and way too soon for any venue other than the article talk page. But watch out the for WP:BOOMERANG nonetheless. - Sitush (talk) 00:44, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

That is fine. I believe my concerns are genuine. I just want to add reliable and true information and I was reverted and treated badly for a very long time. I believe I won't be punished for no fault of mine Sharkslayer87 (talk) 00:53, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 12:06, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at WP:AN regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 12:18, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

The Wire removals

Hi Sitush. Your removals of The Wire as a source are now being cited by one of our old friends as a reason for removing that source elsewhere. I have no issues with those specific removals, as I can see plenty of reasons why it isn't an appropriate source in that circumstance, but given that the organization itself is run by an ex-editor of The Hindu, which both you and I probably agree is one of the better newspapers, I wonder if you'd care to expand on your rationale, just so I'm sure you're not being misunderstood. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 13:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

It was mostly scraping from other news sites, some of dubious reliability. I think scroll.in does the same. I'm fairly sure SpacemanSpiff and RegentsPark have said something similar in the past but, of course, if The Wire is publishing stuff from PTI then that would be ok, and since they're mostly scraping it should be possible to find an alternate source if it really matters. - Sitush (talk) 14:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

scroll.in is a different story; as I understand it, they primarily post user-submitted content, whereas the Wire is based mostly on its own staff (and opinion pieces/user-submitted stuff is marked as such). Its editor, Siddharth Varadarajan, was previously the editor of The Hindu; which is primarily why I would consider it reliable. @RegentsPark and SpacemanSpiff: do you know anything to the contrary? Vanamonde (talk) 15:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Ok. Of course, any source can be reliable for some stuff and not for other stuff. We even use Raj ethnographers in a limited way, for example. There is a simpler way to look at this particular issue, though. Basically, if Capankajsmilyo approves of a source then it is useless, and vice versa. - Sitush (talk) 15:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Kantha vibhag

Hi Sitush. Could you please take a look at Kantha vibhag page? Thanks. —usernamekiran(talk) 05:44, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. It is at AfD now and I have commented there. - Sitush (talk) 23:57, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

I just want to say thanks for all the great work you do on Wikipedia. Hopefully see you at the India Noticeboard soon, I think people are getting bored of me replying to things. Kind regards, Cesdeva (talk) 22:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I think people get bored of seeing me replying to things also. And I know for sure that I am becoming fed up of dealing with the crap, much of which resembles Groundhog Day. - Sitush (talk) 23:58, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

It's funny...

It's funny the way the caste warriors tend to stop cold after a sharp warning: they don't argue, they just stop editing.[11][12] Did they use to do that? Anyway, to me, that suggests they find creating new accounts easier than defending the old. As indeed it is. 😕 Bishonen | talk 19:21, 19 April 2018 (UTC).

It does seem that way. I am going through one of my phases of being very disillusioned with it all and with the more experienced people who knowingly or otherwise facilitate it. In fact, I'm becoming rather disillusioned altogether - see comments about categories above, which is an area where I get fed up of seeing the same names fiddling around with the same material over and over again, for ever refining, refining without really understanding the subject matter and often seemingly without even reading the article (just like the caste warriors). Waiting for another set of biopsy results probably hasn't improved my mood. - Sitush (talk) 02:19, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that( about the biopsy). Hope all is well. Best wishes. Acharya63 (talk) 00:56, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

German war effort arbitration case opened

You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 30, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:01, 16 May 2018 (UTC)