Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:33, 25 August 2020

An editor thinks something might be wrong with this page. They can't be arsed to fix it, but can rest assured that they've done their encyclopedic duty by sticking on a tag. Please allow this tag to languish indefinitely at the top of the page, since nobody knows exactly what the tagging editor was worked up about.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Talk:Baji Rao I/GA2

Sitush, this reassessment has been open for two weeks, and nothing has been posted to it since it opened. As this is an individual reassessment, the closure is entirely your decision.

Unless you think it would be worthwhile to list all the specific issues where the article falls short of the GA criteria for the original nominator to fix in order to attempt to bring the article up to meet said criteria—that it isn't in what would normally be quickfail territory for a normal GAN—there's no point in delaying this unless significant progress has been made in improving the article since the reassessment began. While the "delist" comments by other reviewers are useful, it's up to you. Thank you very much for taking this on. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

BlueMooset I was hoping to get some other opinions but fair enough. I will have to look into how to formally delist, which is going to involve more than removing the GA icon, I guess. - Sitush (talk) 15:54, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

BlueMoonset - mispinged above; sorry for describing you as a sad herd of cows. - Sitush (talk) 15:55, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Sitush, not sad at all. ;-) I've added the Article history template. In case you're faced with a similar situation in the future, all past GA reviews need to remain on the talk page unless an Article history template has been inserted to gather them together under one roof. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:15, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Hopefully, for me and everyone else, I will steer clear in future! I am much better with content than templates etc. - Sitush (talk) 20:38, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Meraka Veedhi Telaga

You don't necessarily have to give a full review, but could I get your thoughts on this draft? Just skimming it sounds like the utterly whitewashed nonsense that led to WP:CASTE being enacted. Primefac (talk) 15:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC) (please ping on reply)

Primefac, yes it is rubbish but in the glorifying rather than whitewashing way. The sources are terrible. - Sitush (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Primefac (talk) 16:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Editor assessment sought

Does SadaikkaThevar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) seem legit to you? El_C 20:07, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

He edits like IruTheLord. This could be one of his sock accounts. Or he could have help. He is replacing valid references(like Robert Hardgrave) with poor quality references (newspaper articles). I reverted his edits. But I am quite sure he will be back. This is my opinion.Mayan302 (talk) 06:19, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

El C I thought it was another Eru sock until I noticed a couple of instances where they seemed to revert Eru. Still seems very dodgy to me, though and a CU might be worthwhile given Eru's history. I did start to post such a message on your talk yesterday but then spotted the two revert instances. - Sitush (talk) 16:06, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I just indefinitely blocked before seeing your response. Seems suspect to have all these new or dormant accounts involve themselves in this castes-related edit warring. Please let me know if you think I made a mistake. El_C 16:18, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

El C that seems reasonable to me. Could you also take a look at this, please? Pasword wiki is still making a mess of things and I think they are at the end of the line. You've blocked them previously. - Sitush (talk) 18:30, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely. El_C 20:41, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Vandal activity on Yadav and Ahir

Hi please take note of activities on Yadav and Ahir editors are removing image in order to glorify the caste. Heba Aisha (talk) 01:39, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

• Let me tell u the user Hindu kshatrana is famous for creating mess on Hindi Misplaced Pages.Now he is here.Take a lookHeba Aisha (talk) 01:41, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

• Yes, I thought they had been topic banned on English WP but it looks like I am wrong. They will be eventually, I'm sure. - Sitush (talk) 04:36, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Madhvacharya article

Hello. I read on one of the talk pages that you feel the Madhvacharya article needs to be rewritten completely. Any ideas on how to improve it? And what is currently wrong with the article that needs to change? I'm willing to put in the effort to clean the article up. Thank you! Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 13:45, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, any idea which talk page? I don't usually get involved in articles related to deities but, from a quick glance, that article doesn't look in need of a rewrite. - Sitush (talk) 17:35, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Oh damn. My bad. It was a caste related article (Madhwa Brahmins). I apologise. It is nice connecting with you however! Have a great day! :) Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 11:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

No problem. I'd rather people ask if they are unsure. - Sitush (talk) 12:58, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Swaminarayan

Hi Sitush. Did you notice the efforts by Swaminarayan-believers to over-emphasize his relevance in Hinduism? See the recent edits at Hinduism, Vedanta, and, most notably, Darsana diff. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Can't say I have. I don't edit much in the "pure" religion articles. - Sitush (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Biswas caste page neutrality issue

Sitush, I was going through an article: Biswas, it appeared to me that too much glorification had been done, I saw edit history and I think some have been recently done by a user supposedly belonging to the community. Kindly take a note about that and it’s neutrality, if you could. Thanks. Shresthsingh71 (talk) 10:24, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, I saw that sometimes, people from unknown IP adresses come and delete Scheduled Caste reference in the article, because they feel this makes their caste article in low light. Or, I saw, a user added Kayastha to it and stated the article to be linked and used by Kayasthas “mainly”, or added “used by some” Scheduled Castes although the caste surname is a common name shared by both Kayasthas and Scheduled Castes, as stated by references, by which I think the page is being edited by some users of the community to give it appeasing, uplifting, glorified look. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shresthsingh71 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Big edit at Rajput

I can't tell if it's a better version or not. Bishonen | tålk 11:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC).

I can't tell, either. I am struggling to keep up with Hebe Aisha - there is something happening that I can't quite put my finger on, leaving me with doubts about their numerous edits which I haven't yet resolved. Just at a superficial level, I'd say the revert linked in your diff is poor but there is a massive qualifier. I know I'm supposed to AGF, so that's what I have to do here. - Sitush (talk) 12:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Heba Aisha - Sitush (talk) 12:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi....any problem because of me Heba Aisha (talk) 12:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Massive edits at Rajput it was not done by me but by @LukeEmily: Heba Aisha (talk) 12:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I don't know, and it pains me to say it because I am supposed to AGF. I pinged you because it isn't fair to talk about you behind your back. There is no doubt in my mind that you have made some good contributions and I know you have asked me for advice etc on occasion but, well, you've come from nowhere into a highly controversial topic area and have made a phenomenal numbers of edits in it, across a wide range of articles. It isn't "normal", which is not to say it is "wrong". In any event, if other people are happy with what is happening then that's fine by me.I know someone tried to out you recently in an edit summary (can't remember which article but the summary was soon hidden). Chances are they were wrong anyway, and even if they were right I'd never heard the name before, but I'm being honest here: that sort of thing just leaves a little niggling sensation in my head. Blame my weird head, I guess! No offence was intended to you: I was just trying to explain why I'm unable to give Bishonen an opinion on an edit when usually such an opinion would trot off my keyboard. Probably I should not have said it, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 12:35, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

And, yes, Luke Emily is another. Maybe it is lockdown circumstances bringing out people who previously had no interest in Misplaced Pages. Whatever, carry on as before and ignore me. - Sitush (talk) 12:35, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I will never ignore you Sitush or any other editors. When you told me not to add the Shivaji to the Bhosale page, I did not. The big edit was not done by me it was by Anony20. . Basically what he has done is just gone back to a very old version. What he has done is reverted every addition that Heba Aisha and I did for the last few days. It is true that I have added content but it is all high quality and sourced. I am sorry if I added anything incorrect but it is accurate to the best of my knowledge. All edits are accurate and in good faith. Please verify the accuracy of my edits for your self. My apologies if I hurt anyone. If you tell me to revert any edit I made I will do so. You are very senior so I respect it.LukeEmily (talk) 13:01, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Both of you, there is nothing to apologise for. It's just an odd situation but I have no reason to doubt your contributions. I'm struggling to keep up with them but there presumably are other people watching. - Sitush (talk) 13:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Sitush. ...i follow ur edits and i learn what sources to use and what sources are not reliable from ur edits only.Till recently i was editing caste article but after being trolled by an editor who made accounts after accounts( finally blocked by Materialscientists) in order to harrass me; i m now diverted to indian history related article.Heba Aisha (talk) 14:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• And yes😊 let me confess, two months before now i didn't knew that people like us write on Misplaced Pages.This is the lock down effect.Heba Aisha (talk) 14:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Sitush, I agree with Heba Aisha. I have seen her talk page and some editor was intentionally harassing her I have seen some her edits and I feel she uses very high quality sources and her edits are in good faith. She is also very polite. Her interest is castes in Bihar. Mine is caste mobility which is a controversial topic by itself. Hence, I almost never use sources that are not academic (either a university press or the author is a historian , etc.) For example, all my recent edits were sourced from David Lorenzen, Daniel Gold, Andre Wink, Dasharatha_Sharma, Parita Mukta (Oxford university press), Stewart Gordon (Cambridge University press), Burton Stein, etc. I have not used a single non-academic source to the best of my knowledge. version simply reverted all these high quality additions(in addition to Heba's image additions) because he did not like what these western scholars had written about his community. There was another user who did exactly the same - User:Wikimaster2107 because he found things offensive - and he got banned by admins for three days. I am pinging both Wikimaster2107 and Anony20 if they want to explain why they are deleting large amounts of sourced high quality content that other editors have painstakingly added. Admins have already explained to wikimaster2017. Rajputization like Sanskritization is a hot topic, especially because it deals with infanticide etc. yet there was no mention on it on wikipedia not even on the Rajput page. Why are people so obsessed with caste promotion in the 21st century when it is irrelevant(at least to non-Hindus) and we should learn from the mistakes made and learn accurate historical facts rather than promote a community. Does anyone really care if you are Brahmin or Dalit (except in arranged marriages)? There are blogs and websites that do promote communities but wikipedia needs to be neutral. My last comments are to these two users wikimaster2017 and Anony20 and not to others like Sitush and Heba who I feel are far superior editors as compared to myself. BTW, Sitush I did not realize that you are from the University of Cambridge before!! Hopefully, we will learn something from you. And, you are spot on about the lockdown comment. LukeEmily (talk) 15:17, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• And they are trying to make Misplaced Pages a blog.The specific thing i noted in all caste related article that they want to delete the Shudra word from there.I m M.A history and damn sure that except Brahmin no community could claim a pure vedic kshatriya status.But here the things that they find offensive are written in one line and glorification is the main focus.Also in this particular article Rajput, image of forts were placed.Though commons is full of pic related to Rajput people.I have been adding images to a lot of articles like Ahir Koli Kushwaha》Dhangar and many more which are suitable to a caste article.But they want fortHeba Aisha (talk) 15:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

The caste edit-war is spreading to multiple articles. I've left a DS alert on a couple of new editors that haven't been notified about them and asked for protection on one page that's seen a fair amount of edit-warring. It feels like this stuff comes in periodic waves and right now there's a pretty good sized wave close to cresting. Ravensfire (talk) 15:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

See, I thought there would be other people watching! Yay. The waves often relate to specific castes, brought on by off-wiki mentions in websites dedicated to those castes. Socks abound and I think we need to be much more pro-active in protecting caste articles because even at the best of times it is a huge timesink just cleaning up these glorification efforts etc, let alone trying to expand etc as Heba and LE have been trying to do. - Sitush (talk) 16:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Battle of Maonda and Mandholi 》》 let me tell both of you is a controversial war fought between jats and Rajput in which both side claim victory.Recently an ip requested me on my talk page about disruptive editing on that article.There were three people one named Meethamonkey(was supposedly a Jat as he was writing it as a victory of Jat while other were an ip and another user who particularly edits Rajput related article.I knew about the battle and source there was Jadunath Sarkar, who is considered the cousin brother of col Tod(sry in Indian context a Historian of Nationalist school of thought).So i wrote the whole article putting infobox and a balanced view.But this seemed offensive to the proud Rajput editor who on talk page of Rajput article blaming me of having biased view. I TOLD him to look my edits on Kumbha of Mewar and Lekhapaddhati if u think i m biased.In the meantime another ip became active at Battle of Maonda and Mandholi.So i told the litigant that i have nothing to do with degrading ur victory and ended it with the sweet message of Happy Birthday to You😊🎂Heba Aisha (talk) 16:14, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Sitush, you need to interfere here. This could soon turn ugly. <Personal attack redacted>. He has an agenda. Can you investigate into this sockpuppetary. Proud One 999 (talk) 20:26, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Proud One 999 is now indef blocked for that grossly unacceptable attack. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:05, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I was adamant to not respond to all your uncultivated conversations but after seeing the message on my talk page I had to change my mind. Editors like Heba Aisha who are running multiple accounts to make edits and establish Jat, Goojar and milk man Aheers as Kshatriya should better run their facebook pages only instead of shitting on wikipedia. If you guys were really educated then you would have read some good books like "Reema Hooja", "Kshatriya and would be Kshatriya", "James Tod" or "GH Ojha" to name a few. All your attempts to make Shudras like Jat/Goojar/doodhiya Aheer rise to Kshatriyahood are nothing but show you are living in a bubble in 21st century. Anony20 (talk) 09:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

opinion about an edit

Hello! Kindly give me your opinion about this edit. Was the information added in the right way, or that could have been added in a better way (if yes, how?) ? Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 09:37, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Please wait — I missed something there. I will re–edit that section and come back to request your opinion. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 10:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I think, I have got it right now, but still, I would like you to have a look at this edit and please tell me if there is something to learn for me here. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 11:57, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Strange numbers

Any idea what is going on in these diffs (from 2017 and now): diff + diff. The first changed linked "Mailapura, Yadgir" to "Devaraj Mailapur 8861834742", and the second to "Devaraj Kadipontgi 9614906666". I have a feeling I saw mention of similar strangeness on a noticeboard. Johnuniq (talk) 01:40, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

@Johnuniq: I've believe they're phone numbers. If you look at the vymaps entry for Mailapura it's listed as a phone number there. The first number has also been posted on this page on Kannada-wiki. It would be interesting but perhaps ill-advised to give them a call. Regards, Zindor (talk) 16:55, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

I've blocked them (and their alternate account). Busy under the radar for a long time! --RegentsPark (comment) 17:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I wondered if there might be an AGF reason but that was naive. Johnuniq (talk) 23:07, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

It's always worth being thorough. It could have easily been some kind of reference number, like an ISBN, in the wrong place. Thanks Zindor (talk) 01:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Repetitive one sided editing at Rajput page

@Sitush Please look into the matter. There have been heavy editing on Rajput page by two editors @LukeEmily and @HebaAisha. I tried to build consensus on the page but @LukeEmily who edited most of the page didnt engage and kept on editing the page. I sense once sided view in the editing and asked about it but in vain. When I removed some portion after giving solid reason but he didnt listen and reverted everything back I dont want to engage in edit war. Please look into the matter. Sajaypal007 (talk) 16:14, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

There is no "one sided" edit. Neither me nor Heba have deleted anything on the Rajput page. We expanded - unfortunately you did not like what the scholars were writing so you blanked out my citations. Sajaypal007, Please note that wikipedia is not censored. If you want any WP:RS removed , you can discuss why you need to have it removed. It looks like you want anything that is academic/scholarly *but* unpleasant removed from the page. The Shudra, illiterate and peasant/pastoral origin is supported by multiple independent academic sources. The wikipedia intent is not to disparage any community but to portray an accurate representation as given by scholars. Sajaypal007, if you want to promote your community, no one is stopping you. But don't use wikipedia for it. Create a website or a blog and write whatever you want on it. You will be the owner of the page. You do not own wikipedia. In wikipedia, students of history will make changes based on what the academic sources say - even if it is not flattery. For peasant/pastoral origin - see Talk:Rajput#pastoral_origin. The very fact that you want to remove any mention of shudra, peasant and illiterate (all three are well supported by multiple academic citations), shows that you are interested in glorifying the caste. @Sitush, Ravensfire, and Bishonen:. This is another example of what is going on the Rajput page : Showbiz826 removed a source completely from the page. Its gone! In and - Sajaypal007 completely removed sources. If you want wikipedia to be neutral please stop such editors from promoting their caste. Please check the history of the edits by Sajaypal007. He seems to take offense and blatantly delete any source that says anything unpleasant about Rajputs. is by wikimaster2017. He did the same - deleted academic references but at least he was banned for 72 hours. LukeEmily (talk) 07:20, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Only deleting something is not one sided edit, adding something heavily can be a ine sided view too. You accuse me promoting caste many a times and I told you I only write about rajasthan history that is my specialization not any caste. I told you multiple times in the past too. What I wanted was made clear in my short descriptions of the edits which you reverted. Anyway dont debate here like many other fronts just keep debate on the talk page and let this page only be about intimation to @Utcursch. He can read the talk page too no need to discuss same thing here. Sajaypal007 (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)