Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:50, 17 January 2007

Welcome!

Hello Unre4L! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! NinaEliza 16:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Misplaced Pages Tutorial • The five pillars of Misplaced Pages How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Please sign messages on Talk India page

Please sign your messages with four tildes ~~~~ Unsigned messages cause a lot of confusion because they appear to be part of later signed messages; consequently, users address their replies to the wrong person, as I did on the Talk India page. Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 05:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

PS. I look forward to receiving references from you on the Talk India page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 05:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your last message

Thanks for your last message on the Talk India page. As I said there, I don't disagree with your observation. Personally, if it were up to me, I would write, " ..., IVC, in what is now Pakistan and Western India," (in the history section) but because brevity is needed on the India page (it is already bloated) and because all kinds of Indian chauvinists will jump right in and change it back to suit their personal world views, we have to be content with "Indian subcontinent."

BTW, a historian on harrappa.com--Mark Kenoyer, of the University of Wisconsin, is someone I respect. Thanks for pointing out harrappa.com, I look forward to reading Mark's essay there one of these days ... Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

from Nadirali

Hello,I got your message,but I unfortunately didnt get any link.I'd love to help Pakistani site in anyway I can.

I also advice you against posting on talk pages if there are too many Indian users as they usually like to gang up.

Please do send me the link and please help keep the Pakistan articles safe from the vandals.Also contribute to the Pakistan related articles as much as you can.

Please also write to user:Szhaider. He's a proud Pakistani wikipedian and would just love to hear from someone like you. Szhaider has recently engaged in edit wars to protect all refference to the IVC from falling into the History of India page.He's also stood up to some biased Indian administrator threatening to block him.I have offered my verbal support to him and your adding your support will just give him more courage.

Thanx alot for contacting.Regards.Nadirali 03:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Nadirali

I got the link

Okay thanx alot for the link.I also again warn you from engaging in any conversation with some of the Indian wikipedians when raising the issue of Pakistani history,And watch out for user:HeklerHekler.He's full of tricks and extremely provokitive.Do not converse with him on this subject.he almost tricked me into getting blocked.

Also dont forget to contact user:Szhaider.He'd just love to hear from another proud Pakistani like you.He's also working hard to protect all reference of Pakistan's ancient history from falling into Indian hands.

Anyways thanks for the link and I'll see how I can contribute to the site.Also keep in close touch with other Pakistani wikipedians if you can.All the best.Nadirali 05:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Nadirali

Question

Hi Unre4L, I saw the discussion at Talk:History_of_India#indian_hijacking_of_Pakistan.27s_history and posted a question for you which I'll hope you will answer. Thanks a lot Gizza 06:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Answer posted Unre4L

Panini

Hey, I appreciate that you feel strongly about references to the "ancient Indian subcontinent" (indeed, your user page makes it clear that that's your raison d'être so to speak). But I'd like to point out that you violated WP:3RR on Panini in the last two days, and that continuing to revert will result in your getting blocked. Instead of edit-warring, try and build consensus on the talk page. Good luck. --Xiaopo (Talk) 03:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

3RR block

You have been blocked for 24 hours for breaking the three-revert rule at Pāṇini. Please refer to: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Unre4L reported by Bakaman (Result: 24 hours). More information on the three-revert-rule can be found here: WP:3RR. You are welcome to return after your block has been completed. -- Samir 05:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

advise

Unre4L,perfectly I understand how you feel about Pakistan's history being robbed as I feel the same way too.

However,I discourage you from responding to wikipedia:trolls.Do not respond to Bakaman's provokitive comments. Bakaman already provoked me into getting blocked once and was also told to stop being so provokitive by an administrator.

Also,I think readers on that discussion page(Indian,Pakistani or others)will be able to see that someone cares by reading the topic and discussion. And just for the fact that we brought up the subject,it will definately give readers something to think about.The whole point of brining that up was it brings it to people's attention. This is a first positive step on our side.

But I also warn you to abide by the rules and not carry out any violations,as that harms nobody but you.

Szhaider has attempted to remove Indian tags from the IVC and other south asian history articles,only resulting in an edit war.Not only that,but he was threatened of being reported by a biased administrator.He is now currently in the process of creating a "History of south asia" article to make it more "neutral" based on the demands of other wikipedians.

If you want to try and help out or state any objections to Pakistani-related articles,then you can bring it up here http://en.wikipedia.org/Category_talk:Pakistani_Wikipedians or talk to Szhaider about it.

But refrain from responding to Bakaman's "Pakistani textbooks","anti-Hindu" or "the Indus was a Hundu civilization" or lectures on the persicution of Hindus or any of that non-sense.

I'll talk to Bakaman seprately regarding her comments if you want me to.She's already been told by administrator:tariqabjotu to stop,but if it continues,don't repond.Instead,copy and paste these comments on administrator tariqabjotu's talk page as he's already warned her from continuing her behaviour.Responding will only get you into more trouble.

I hope my advise proves useful.

Regards.Nadirali 05:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Nadirali

The problem Nadirali and Unre4L, is that you have a misconception of what Misplaced Pages is for. You may feel that Pakistan's history is being robbed, but reflecting what you feel is not what this project is here for. Misplaced Pages is specifically here to reflect what the consensus of scholars have written. Please read and think about Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view. You don't need to turn everything into an us vs them. Just do good research and add facts to articles to help them reach NPOV, not your POV. - Taxman 14:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thats the whole problem Taxman. The stuff I am arguing about doesnt have ANY sources. Apart from hindu sources. I asked them about one single source which said that they guy was ancient Indian. They couldnt give me any. Their only comeback was Pakistan didnt exist in 1947. Why am I getting the feeling you are refusing to understand aswell? User:Unre4L

Your statements above conflict with each other. But in any case, if the fact is that there are only "Hindu" sources, then I'm sorry you'll have to accept that. If you can't provide sources for your position, you can't keep reverting your edits in. That is Misplaced Pages policy and for a reason. But you're really missing the more important point about Misplaced Pages not being here to promote your views. If you don't come to accept that you're going to have a hard time here. - Taxman 23:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Unblock Request

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 146.87.193.90 lifted, since the original block has since expired. Sorry about that! Request handled by: Luna Santin 09:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Template

==I've added an (overdue) welcome template at the top of your talk page. I hope you find it useful.NinaEliza 16:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Please pardon my snooping; your page is now on my watchlist. First of all, beautiful taxobox, and lovely message. Second, I'm afraid your link:

http://www.pakhub.info

doesn't work. At least it didn't work for me. However, it's a good and appropriate thing to have on your user page, in my opinion. It's always a good thing to take dialogue or debate off Misplaced Pages as much as possible. Thanks for that. NinaEliza 17:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. Should have posted this. The domain will start working later today. I just bought the domain today and need a little time setting it up. User:Unre4L

That's wonderful - out of your own pocket, you are willing to do this great thing. Remember to sign your posts with four tildes. For example, ~ ~ ~ ~ without the spaces will get you NinaEliza 17:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC). The "tilde" should be located to the right of the "1" on the numeric portion of your keyboard. If I'm telling you something you already know, please forgive me:).NinaEliza 17:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Thx for informing me. I always signed my posts by writing out the link to my talk page. Unre4L 00:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. NinaEliza (talk • contribs • count • logs • email) 01:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Pakhub

Please stop. If you continue spamming you will be blocked from editing. अमेय आर्यन DaBrood 21:03, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Spamming?

I will need a second opinion on that. We have had our arguments regarding Pakistans history, and obviously you will be the first person close this down. Sorry, but you have already shown your ability to discuss maturely before, so I want to talk to some non Indian member of this board.

You might want to go back to your hinduunity forums and inform them about this so they can try to spam my forum again. Unre4L 21:30, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Pakhub was speedy deleted due to comments on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Pakhub (a cursory look tells me that not all who commented were Indian or Pakistani, so the delete comments were not all nationality-motivated). If you wish to appeal the deletion, please make a request on Misplaced Pages:Deletion review. Kimchi.sg 01:01, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I looked at the "discussion" and it seemed a bit short to me.Please note it's a non-for profit site.Why were we not consulted of this?How harmful is it to consult an editor(s) before vandalizing their article(s)? Nadirali 04:20, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

good source

Check out this Source.It seems to be from a non-South Asian writer. http://www.geocities.com/pak_history/name.html

Regards.Nadirali 06:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

barn star for you

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For struggling to protect our history by basing them on facts. Nadirali 07:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi

In retrospect that "english" remark was a personal attack and i apologise. I'm usually not very emotive but just that i feel you guys are indulging in overt revert warring and cabalism. As for tags, if you dont give valid reasons and references to your tags, they will be deletd. अमेय आर्यन DaBrood 06:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I am sure you do apologise, but striking out the warning and labelling it bogus, is not exactly a good sign when apologising. Your comments deserved a warning, and by editing the warning, you could get another warning. Unre4LITY 14:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Pak templates

Hey man please dont forget to add Pakistani templates to your userpage.Stay on the categories of Pakistani wikipedians.Best regards.Nadirali 08:02, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

Regarding the Pakhub article, have you read WP:WEB? May you please give an argument based on WP:WEB on why it should stay. Please respond on my talk page and only answer these two questions. I am willing to discuss this since you are obviously disappointed that the forum you created can't have an article on Misplaced Pages. If I still disagree with you after the discussion, you can request the page to be re-created to another administrator who has no connections with India or Pakistan whatsoever. This is the list Misplaced Pages:List of administrators. I am sorry if I have insulted you and hope that we can set all of the disagreements we had in the past. Thank you and have a good day. Gizza 08:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

your recent edits

Hi - looking over many of your comments to and about other editors (including the report on me at ANI), I must say that is causing disruption. While your warning to Ambroodey was justified, I strongly urge you to follow the same standards. Please discuss and edit with a cool head and respectful attitude. Making false accusations and disrespectful insinuations, as well as pushing your POV in a hard fashion is unacceptable. Please go over - WP:POINT, WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA, WP:NPOV. Thanks, Rama's arrow 16:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that Ambroodey's behavior is far from acceptable - I've already warned him. But neither of you is doing enough to resolve this debate properly and as per the dispute resolution process. The reason I warned you is that you are skating on very thin ice when you start making insinuations about nationality, religion, etc. Even your vehement contention of using "South Asia" instead of "India," and wanting to laugh that there is no article on ancient Indian history, are comments that anybody with less patience would translate as personal attacks and POV-pushing.

I do not agree with your perception that I'm "with them" (whoever you mean by "them"). I don't feel any need to defend myself but it will perhaps help to point out that I agreed on the ban given to user:Hkelkar by ArbCom. It does not help you to make accusations against me on ANI if you don't understand the policies on basis of which Szhaider, Nadirali and Siddiqui were blocked. The main problem is that you are replicating their behavior, so I strongly urge you to cool down and change the way you go about dealing with others. Rama's arrow 17:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

1 week block

You have been blocked for persistent incivility, disruptive editing on articles and their talkpages, harsh and constant POV-pushing. This block is enforced on the basis of WP:POINT, WP:NPOV, WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Rama's arrow 02:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Disruptive edits? What edits are you referring to? I never re-edit a page, or take part in edit warring. I mostly put my points across on talk pages, backed up with sources. This ban is as unfair as anything gets. Indian users get away with openly insulting me, and you are banning me for...well I dont know, could you at least put some sources here? Unre4LITY 15:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI: Your 1-week block of Users Szhaider, Nadirali, and Unre4L

Dear Unre4L, For your information, I posted the following on Rama's Arrow's talk page:

Dear Rama's Arrow, As someone who has done battle on occasion with all three users, I nonetheless feel that your recent week-long blocks of them, especially the latter two, are a little heavy-handed and over the top. I feel that they should have been given more warning, and perhaps slapped with 24-hour, or 48-hour or even 3-day blocks first. I went back and re-read WP:NPA, especially the following, which I'm sure you well know:

In light of the above caution, I actually went through Unre4L's "contributions" log between the time you gave him a warning on his talk page and the time you issued a 1-week block. Although, I am sure you have your reasons for blocking him/her, I aipersonally couldn't find anything that disruptive, and feel that the 1-week block is extreme punishment for the crime at hand. I am not asking for your reasons, but simply that two neutral administrators (like say Dbachmann, Nichalp (if he is not too busy), Saravask, Ragib, or Aksi_great) review the blocks, especially those of users Nadirali and Unre4L. Thanks! Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Let's hope someone follows my post up with a review of your block. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I honestly dont know what I have been banned for. I never Edit war with anyone. Please explain my ban. I dont even remember making any contributions between his warning and the ban. And, this is a shared IP, so I would appreciate if someone got it unbanned asap. Unre4LITY 15:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Please use the {{unblock}} template to request an unblock; you may also want to contact the admin who blocked you through the "E-mail this user" link to the left of his or her user page. Thanks, Tangotango (talk) 15:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Unre4L (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have been blocked very unfairly. The same comment was used to warn and block me. The comment was "You dont get to change anything anyway", in response to a ridiculous claim by another user. Please read the discussion below, and you will find out how another user insulted me, edit warred and disrupted, but got away with it. I on the other hand got a weeks ban for nothing.

Decline reason:

This block is justified, although probably overlong. I would support unblocking of this user if they would agree to take their complaints to the Mediation Committee as a formal attempt at dispute resolution, but until then, it should stand. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 06:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Honestly. What is this about? I am so shocked that an admin would abuse his powers like that.
User:AMbroodEY gets away with comments like these.
"First i'd do take additional English lessons."
"By your dumb logic."
"AN article doesnt become disputed just because you get nationlistic epileptic fits, every now and then."
And I get banned for what you call POV pushing? I put my argument across backed up with sources and facts. Not only do you ignore them, you ban me.
This is clearly breaking Wiki rules, and I really wish a neutral admin to review this case.
--Unre4LITY 15:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Note: I was stupid enough to have a go at Unre4L and his mindless POV-pushing at an article and promptly apologised to him... ... I really see no point in odefying this! Do you want a written apology or something? Amey Aryan DaBrood 18:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

No. But do you think this is fair. I am getting banned because of you. And you got away with insulting me. This is unbelievable. Unre4LITY 19:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

You certainly werent banned because of me. Your ban is result of your own actions. Perhaps you should reflect upon your behaviour over past 2 months... Amey Aryan DaBrood 19:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Blocking admin's response (from user talk:Fowler&fowler)

Hi Fowler - lemme begin by clarifying that I have absolutely no problem with criticism. I knew the blocks would concern others, so I am prepared to discuss at length and accept criticism.

(1) Szhaider has been guilty of violating WP:NPA by attacking Indian and Hindu editors, presenting them as a perpetual cabal. Szhaider describes himself as a "Pakistani nationalist" and has made some comments to other users in which he demeans Hindi and Indian history. Nadirali - , , , , , , , - and Unre4L - , , , - are guilty of making similar accusations, especially through repeated subtle insinuations on article and user talkpages. The problem demanded blocking because of the wide-range of articles in which they have repeatedly pushed their POV - Panini, History of Pakistan, Pakistani nationalism, History of India, Iqbal, Jinnah, Abrar-ul-Haq, Doosra. These editors have repeatedly insisted and insinuated that Indian editors have no "right" to edit Pakistani subject articles and should seek the approval of Pakistani editors before inserting any information - , .

(2) I am an Indian and Hindu, no doubt. However, I have always worked for Misplaced Pages, and I don't see any reason for me not to lay down the law on these editors just because I am a part of a demographic with which they have a conflict of interest. If such a norm is to be observed, a vast majority of Christian heritage administrators cannot then interfere in disputes involving them, can they? I was involved personally with Szhaider on a dispute on Iqbal, but I blocked him only after he violated WP:3RR, which is an explicit and unsubjective rule - additionally, there were plenty of violations of WP:NPA and WP:NPOV, which to me justified violating the norm that one does not block based on 3RR an editor with whom he/she was involved.

(3) These editors qualify for blocking under the rules for a disruptive influence on articles and other editors - A user may be blocked when their conduct severely disrupts the project — their conduct is inconsistent with a civil, collegial atmosphere and interferes with the process of editors working together harmoniously to create an encyclopedia. Disagreements over content or policy are not disruption, but rather part of the normal functioning of Misplaced Pages and should be handled through dispute resolution procedures. Blocks for disruption should only be placed when a user is in some way making it difficult for others to contribute to Misplaced Pages.

Why is their behavior "disruption?" Apart from expressly violating WP:POINT, WP:CIVIL, WP:NPOV, WP:NPA, it is because of their repeated accusations against Indian and Hindu editors, attacks on the Indian point of view and insinuations that there is something intrinsically wrong with it and the editing of Indian editors. I see absolutely no effort in way of respecting other people's arguments, providing various sources and proper debating, or seeking mediation - the editors in question keep repeating their POV again, again, again and again - , - while accusing others of not respecting their POV.

Does one expect that Indian editors will put up with this forever and not feel a need to retaliate? Will this not start a massive range-war over South Asian articles that will bring Misplaced Pages into disrepute? I just don't want this to happen - as far as warning Indian/Hindu editors in question, I have already warned user:AMbroodEY and user:Bakasuprman and repeatedly urged them to be civil and work through Misplaced Pages policies.

I have been accused by all the 3 editors in question of being pro-Hindu, pro-Indian. Such type of flak almost every admin has to put up with, so I am not too concerned. But I would object if someone argues that I should not have acted just because I fit the demographic these editors have a problem with. I will have no objection whatsoever if Indian/Hindu editors are blocked if their conduct is disruptive.

(4) As for prior warnings and attempts to resolve disputes, I have repeatedly drawn attention to Misplaced Pages talk:Notice board for India-related topics/India disambiguation discussion - where a group of South Asian editors addressed the very issue these editors were waging a POV-pushing war on. Agreed that there is no formality about this discussion's outcome, but where is the kind of effort on part of the editors in question to resolve this issue in the same spirit and non-disruptive fashion that the dispute resolution process demands?

(5) Nichalp observes that I should have reported on WP:ANI, which is correct - I admit my mistake there.

(6) To add, I decided on a 1-week duration because there is a need in cases of chronic disruptive behaviors to have a suitably long period of block, which will allow a proper period of non-editing and permit the editor to discuss and reflect. I feel that WP:POINT/WP:NPA/WP:NPOV violations are serious indeed, but a block more than 1 week would not have been justified.

I am completely willing to continue this debate to help resolve this issue. Cheers, Rama's arrow 18:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Now,Now,Now just a minute!What's this tag-team edit war against Szhaider you,Bakman and anapum pulled off if it's not disruption? Are remarks like from Bakaman not racist? Just look at what Bakaman and deeprivia plan on writing . And look at comments like this .Comparing us to the Nazis.Are you sure we're not dealing with racists? Szhaider gets harrassed by Bakman and all you give him is while Szhaider gets .Same thing with Unre4L who gets harrassed by dabrood and all dabrood gets is wheras Unre4L gets . The only guilty people are you RA and your fellow racists Bakaman,Dabrood and all. Corrupt admins like you have given wikipedia a bad name all over the internet,which I will also prove on WP:ANI. Sure you can find Indian POV pusher warriors.Just look at the history of the articles and you'll see tag-team edit wars everywhere.You can find racist articles and comments against Pakistani users everywhere.I just provided a few links as mere examples of hundreds more. You hear that Fowler&Fowler?He wants to retaliate for something he and his pals started. Misplaced Pages is not my life but I will make sure justice is found this time. user:nadirali

P.S. - I have no objection if any admin decides to lift the blocks. In the past, I have always asserted that all matters are best resolved without blocking. If there is such a possibility, I would never stand in the way. Cheers, Rama's arrow 18:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you at least lift the ban from this Shared IP. I will keep my contributions to my own talk page until the ban is lifted. You have my word. And it would be really nice if you could give me a link to the exact comment I got banned for. Thank you. Unre4LITY 19:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Under (1), I have provided several diffs in which you speak disparagingly of India/Indians (how India "doesn't yet have a history article on Misplaced Pages"). Most poignantly, you said that you are reclaiming that which "India has ripped off" the history of Pakistan. Your comments on the talkpages of Panini, History of India, History of Pakistan and others are confrontational and incivil. Your last comment on Talk:Panini included a claim that "you don't get to decide this anyway." This behavior pattern is evidenced throughout December 2006 and this January. Another thing I felt was very, very wrong (and I admit I could be feeling this way perhaps out of prejudice) - you kept insinuating that Indian editors have "ripped off" Pakistani history, have insulted Pakistanis by claiming them as part of "ancient India," but showed no respect or courtesy in continously asserting that "India did not exist" and all of conventional history that identifies "India" as bogus and inherently against Pakistan. You felt insulted at something you alleged Indian editors of doing, but didn't see anything wrong in provoking others in the same way. You'd have a hard time proving that Indian editors have been focused on rigging up Pakistan articles, but your own comments are proof enough of your disrespect of India and Indian editors. My block of you is intended as a means to enlighten you to considerably change the way you discuss these problems. Your POV-pushing to avenge the "ripping off" of Pakistani history is not welcome on Misplaced Pages - see Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages is not a battleground. Rama's arrow 19:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Look who's talking.You tell Fowler&Fowler that Indian editors should retaliate.The pot calls the kettle black.User:Nadirali

Please tell me you are joking me.
You gave me a warning Yesterday, and then you pick statements from weeks ago and ban me using them?
The only comment I made after you gave me a warning was "you don't get to decide this anyway.", and that was to a user who mindlessly said Pakistan has no right over their own Hindu history.
I got a weeks ban for this one comment? Besides, I disagree with the articles, and no matter how polite I am, they always throw insults at Pakistanis or me. But obviously those comments are ignored. I havent used any offensive words whatsoever, I was simply putting my ideas across, and this is what you have banned me for.
Unre4LITY 20:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I too wish you were joking. Again, you did not get a block for that "1 comment." You got the block because of a disrespectful, POV-pushing campaign that has played out over December and January - please see all the diffs I've provided. When I warned you, how did you respond? You accused me of siding with those whom you see as your opposition. A close examination of your edits forced me to conclude that there was a disturbing pattern that was not going away. I will be very happy to see this wider POV dispute being resolved peacefully and without a resort to blocking. If Hindu, Indian editors are blocked for disruption, I really cannot disagree. Rama's arrow 20:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Just think of the gravity of your comments about Indians "ripping off" Pakistani history, of "India never existed," of how it is amusing to you that "India has no history article on Misplaced Pages." All of these are offensive to a nation, are provocative and irresponsible. With your own admission that you are on a mission to revert what you see as Indians "ripping off" Pakistani history, how can I not reprimand you for disruption? Rama's arrow 20:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok. My comments might not have been the most peaceful. But what else can you expect when Indian users ignore academic sources which I provide and revert information according to their own POV.
I will however ease my comments to a more acceptable level.
This still doesnt change the fact that you are banning me for the same comments you warned me for yesterday. That is not allowed.
--Unre4LITY 20:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

We all have to do our level best. I too have often felt frustrated by the conduct of Pakistani editors on Iqbal and Jinnah, but I've learnt to improve my own conduct. I expect you and the Indian editors to do the same. And don't tell me that its a no-recourse situation for you - to request outside help, you could have filed an WP:RFC or gone to Misplaced Pages:Mediation cabal. Warnings are to be respected. You can't accuse the person who warned you of bias, adhere to the same behavior and expect the warning to "protect" you. However, any means of resolution should be preferred over blocking. If you commit here to do the best you can to adhere to the spirit of Misplaced Pages policies, be entirely respectful and positive in your comments to others, I will lift your block - trust me, I have no desire to block others. I also admit that there are other parties also responsible for fueling this wider conflict. If you find yourself unable to cope, I strongly urge you to seek recourse in mediation or an RfC - that is the right way. Rama's arrow 20:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

What about User:AMbroodEY. He got 2 warnings for insulting me, which he simply called bogus, and he is always disruptive since he never has anything productive to add to my arguments. Could you at least give him a warning, since he doesnt take mine seriously? --Unre4LITY 20:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Why do I have to repeat myself? I have already told you that I've warned him. If he violates WP:NPA again, I or another admin will be justified in blocking him. But unless you (and him) are willing to WP:AGF and work with a fresh, positive attitude, it will only hurt Misplaced Pages - something no one else, admin or non-admin, can allow. Rama's arrow 20:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Look who's talking... classic case of pot calling the kettle black. Those "two" warning were from none other than User:Unre4L which i maintain were uncalled for. As for disruptive behaviour allegations! Provide diffs or keep quiet. I have been here for over 2 years, made 1500 edits, edited 500 unique article and contributed substantially to two GA's... You for your part havent done anything other than removing Indian project tags from talk pages.

P.S Unre4L stop going to town over one remark i sincerely regret ever making... Amey Aryan DaBrood 20:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Listen mate. I have NEVER removed or added any tags (apart from 1 disputed tag). And your comments are always off subject and aimed at insulting me. I did provide you quotes. And you scored them out. Unre4LITY 21:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Aite, both Unre4L and AMbroodEY - please be cool and don't keep posting ripostes, stoking fires. I would like to see both of you "earnestly" (not sarcastically!) apologize to the other - that's a suggestion I'd like you two to consider seriously. Both of you are guilty of offending the other - now either you can admit that your conduct needs significant improvement or you can take your feud outside Misplaced Pages. Rama's arrow 21:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

This may help the situation. Rama's arrow 21:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Look dude i'm not even asking you to reciprocate... all i ask of you is to reflect upon your actions over the past month. We all have our biases. We all love our countries. And i respect you for loving yours. There are times when we feel compelled to "defend" an article. I suggest you review your POV. Perhaps reading Indian POV history or books by neutral and notable non-Subcontinental scholars could help. Also do read this article which i wrote ages ago... | How Indo-Pak rivalry is harming Misplaced Pages and perhaps click on a few google ads there maybe! ;) . Amey Aryan DaBrood 21:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Rama's Arrow. Let me just tell you now. I think I have been banned extremely unfairly. I will pursue this.
None of my comments were ever half as bad or disruptive as AMbroodEYs.
AMbroodEY insulted my language, and my intelligence, and I never made any offensive remarks against anyone.
Unlike AMbroodEY, I never participated in any Edit wars.
Yet here we are. I am on a 1 week ban, he is not. And to add to that, you used the same comment to warn me and ban me.
If this is your definition of being a fair Admin, then I am not the only person who needs to make changes.
I will end this discussion as I am still waiting for another admin to comment on this matter. It has been nice talking to both of you.
Unre4LITY 21:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Do you realise you were banned for WP:NPOV and WP:POINT? Amey Aryan DaBrood 21:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I dont. I have been putting arguments backed up with sources for Wiki articles not being NPOV.
NPOV states "All Misplaced Pages articles must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV)"
But the problem is, I havent written any articles. 99% of my contributions belong to the talk pages. And your responses havent even been on topic let alone NPOV.
I mean, we have articles claiming, Lahore used to belong to Republic of India, and Republic of India existed in 1910.
I am sure you know which article I am talking about, and how false the above information is. I got a warning for speaking out against those statements. That would be the work of neutral admins of course.
--Unre4LITY 22:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Btw. I was banned for "disruption and POV-warring". Where one comment of mine was used for the the warning and ban. Unre4LITY 22:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you go through Rama's arrow's comments and see why you have been blocked. I must ask you to stop making unsubstantiated allegations against me...

Cheers

Amey Aryan DaBrood 22:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I will take the word of the Block Log. Not his comments page.
Nice talking to you. Unre4LITY 22:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Jesus. what did you guys do?--D-Boy 04:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

AMbroodEY insulted my intelligence, my language, Pakistani text books, edit warred, tag warred, caused disruptions. Which he got a warning for.
I made the following comment (to another wiki user): "You dont get to change anything anyway", and got a warning, immediately followed by a weeks ban.
Neutral Admins for life!!!
Unre4LITY 04:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Stop misrepresentintg the facts... i didnt edit war... i got a warning for that incivilty. You have nearly closed the door on reconciliation.. Amey Aryan DaBrood 14:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)