| Revision as of 05:36, 21 July 2011 editMangoWong (talk | contribs)2,844 edits →Appreciated← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:36, 21 July 2011 edit undoMangoWong (talk | contribs)2,844 edits →AppreciatedNext edit → | ||
| Line 76: | Line 76: | ||
| I like your new edits at the Ahir article. <div style="text-decoration: blink;">Please keep up the good work!!!</div>-] (]) 17:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC) | I like your new edits at the Ahir article. <div style="text-decoration: blink;">Please keep up the good work!!!</div>-] (]) 17:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
| I find that you are having some issues at the Ahir talk page. Here are some points that came to my mind. It is about the misuse of the word "Shu***" in that article. I think that word should NOT be anywhere in that article. When someone writes an article on "]", there is usually no need to say anything about "]", because the earth is not flat!!!! We all know that much. If someone wants to talk about the "Flat Earth theory" in the article about "Earth", they would have to establish that the Earth is flat or that there are a large number of ''<u>contemporary</u>'' scientists who think that the Earth ''is'' flat!!!! If they can’t do that, it can’t be mentioned in that article. Saying that a large number of people used to think in the past that the Earth is flat is not enough, and is of no use. <u>As simple as that.</u> ] (please click through the link and read it). Similarly, the Ahirs are not regarded as "Shu***" by anyone in the present world. If nobody regards Ahirs as "Shu***" in the ''<u>present world</u>'', the word need not get any mention in the article on "Ahir". If anyone wants to mention this word in the article on "Ahir", you can challange them to prove that the Ahirs are regarded as "Shu***" in the ''<u>present world</u>''. Moreover, you can also challenge them to prove that Ahirs "were" “Shu***”. They were not. They were people. Nobody in the present world says that the Ahirs of past "were" “Shu***”. What others of that time may have said does not matter. If the people of present think that people of past were mistaken, they "were" mistaken. And this is what matters. If they cannot prove that the Ahirs of past "were" “Shudra”, your argument should prevail. I think <u>nobody</u> can prove this. What they ''were'' regarded as by others does not matter. You can use this argument if you want. But there is no assurance that it will be accepted easily. If you want, you can use it, and if the argument be correct, you should be able to have your opinion prevail. I hope you do not mind me dropping in here from time to time. And if you argue this point, make <u>absolutely</u> sure that you do not say anything even remotely insulting or do not make any sort of threats. Even if ''others'' misbehave, keep your cool. People might try to trick you into misbehaving by themselves saying something offensive to you, so that they can get you blocked. It's a trap. And <u>please</u> don't violate the "3RR" under any circumstances. Folks may also try to trick you into doing that. ] means you cannot revert anything more than 3 times within a 24 hour period. If you '''can''' do this much, then we will see... You can also come to my talk page and drop comments whenever you like. It may be that your opponents can violate all the policies and guidelines of Misplaced Pages, and still go scot free. But you can't. But you need not do so!!!! You can still see your opinion prevail without breaking any policies!!! If you want to practice your editing skills or anything, you can also create a sandbox by clicking on this red link ]. This sandbox will also have a talkpage and you can create that too. I can also create them for you if you want. With best regards....-] (]) 05:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC) | I find that you are having some issues at the Ahir talk page. Here are some points that came to my mind. It is about the misuse of the word "Shu***" in that article. I think that word should NOT be anywhere in that article. When someone writes an article on "]", there is usually no need to say anything about "]", because the earth is not flat!!!! We all know that much. If someone wants to talk about the "Flat Earth theory" in the article about "Earth", they would have to establish that the Earth is flat or that there are a large number of ''<u>contemporary</u>'' scientists who think that the Earth ''is'' flat!!!! If they can’t do that, it can’t be mentioned in that article. Saying that a large number of people used to think in the past that the Earth is flat is not enough, and is of no use. <u>As simple as that.</u> ] (please click through the link and read it). Similarly, the Ahirs are not regarded as "Shu***" by anyone in the present world. If nobody regards Ahirs as "Shu***" in the ''<u>present world</u>'', the word need not get any mention in the article on "Ahir". If anyone wants to mention this word in the article on "Ahir", you can challange them to prove that the Ahirs are regarded as "Shu***" in the ''<u>present world</u>''. Moreover, you can also challenge them to prove that Ahirs "were" “Shu***”. They were not. They were people. Nobody in the present world says that the Ahirs of past "were" “Shu***”. What others of that time may have said does not matter. If the people of present think that people of past were mistaken, they "were" mistaken. And this is what matters. If they cannot prove that the Ahirs of past "were" “Shudra”, your argument should prevail. I think <u>nobody</u> can prove this. What they ''were'' regarded as by others does not matter. You can use this argument if you want. But there is no assurance that it will be accepted easily. If you want, you can use it, and if the argument be correct, you should be able to have your opinion prevail. I hope you do not mind me dropping in here from time to time. And if you argue this point, make <u>absolutely</u> sure that you do not say anything even remotely insulting or do not make any sort of threats. Even if ''others'' misbehave, keep your cool. People might try to trick you into misbehaving by themselves saying something offensive to you, so that they can get you blocked. It's a trap. And <u>please</u> don't violate the "3RR" under any circumstances. Folks may also try to trick you into doing that. ] means you cannot revert anything more than 3 times within a 24 hour period. If you '''can''' do this much, then we will see... You can also come to my talk page and drop comments whenever you like. It may be that your opponents can violate all the policies and guidelines of Misplaced Pages, and still go scot free. But you can't. But you need not do so!!!! You can still see your opinion prevail without breaking any policies!!! If you want to practice your editing skills or anything, you can also create a personal sandbox by clicking on this red link ]. This sandbox will also have a talkpage and you can create that too. I can also create them for you if you want. With best regards....-] (]) 05:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
| an | |||
| == Automatic footnote generator == | == Automatic footnote generator == | ||
Revision as of 05:36, 21 July 2011
Welcome
|
July 2011
Welcome to Misplaced Pages and thank you for your contributions. However, I noticed that your username (Bill clinton history) may not meet Misplaced Pages's username policy because it is the name of a well-known American president. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account to use for editing. Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:46, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
i think it not voilate any policy of wikipedia.morever i am not defaming any body .i have adopted a name only as a name.any person should be free from adopting any name in respectable form in real life or as a username.it also suits the democratic ethos of globalised world and particularly wikipedia.Bill clinton history (talk) 15:02, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Appreciated
I like your new edits at the Ahir article.
Please keep up the good work!!!-MangoWong (talk) 17:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
I find that you are having some issues at the Ahir talk page. Here are some points that came to my mind. It is about the misuse of the word "Shu***" in that article. I think that word should NOT be anywhere in that article. When someone writes an article on "Earth", there is usually no need to say anything about "Flat earth theory", because the earth is not flat!!!! We all know that much. If someone wants to talk about the "Flat Earth theory" in the article about "Earth", they would have to establish that the Earth is flat or that there are a large number of contemporary scientists who think that the Earth is flat!!!! If they can’t do that, it can’t be mentioned in that article. Saying that a large number of people used to think in the past that the Earth is flat is not enough, and is of no use. As simple as that. WP:FRINGE (please click through the link and read it). Similarly, the Ahirs are not regarded as "Shu***" by anyone in the present world. If nobody regards Ahirs as "Shu***" in the present world, the word need not get any mention in the article on "Ahir". If anyone wants to mention this word in the article on "Ahir", you can challange them to prove that the Ahirs are regarded as "Shu***" in the present world. Moreover, you can also challenge them to prove that Ahirs "were" “Shu***”. They were not. They were people. Nobody in the present world says that the Ahirs of past "were" “Shu***”. What others of that time may have said does not matter. If the people of present think that people of past were mistaken, they "were" mistaken. And this is what matters. If they cannot prove that the Ahirs of past "were" “Shudra”, your argument should prevail. I think nobody can prove this. What they were regarded as by others does not matter. You can use this argument if you want. But there is no assurance that it will be accepted easily. If you want, you can use it, and if the argument be correct, you should be able to have your opinion prevail. I hope you do not mind me dropping in here from time to time. And if you argue this point, make absolutely sure that you do not say anything even remotely insulting or do not make any sort of threats. Even if others misbehave, keep your cool. People might try to trick you into misbehaving by themselves saying something offensive to you, so that they can get you blocked. It's a trap. And please don't violate the "3RR" under any circumstances. Folks may also try to trick you into doing that. 3RR means you cannot revert anything more than 3 times within a 24 hour period. If you can do this much, then we will see... You can also come to my talk page and drop comments whenever you like. It may be that your opponents can violate all the policies and guidelines of Misplaced Pages, and still go scot free. But you can't. But you need not do so!!!! You can still see your opinion prevail without breaking any policies!!! If you want to practice your editing skills or anything, you can also create a personal sandbox by clicking on this red link User:Bill clinton history/Sandbox. This sandbox will also have a talkpage and you can create that too. I can also create them for you if you want. With best regards....-MangoWong (talk) 05:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Automatic footnote generator
Hey Bill, you might find it a great timesaver to use http://reftag.appspot.com to format your footnotes from GoogleBooks. Whenever you find something on gBooks you like, just copy the URL from your browser bar and put it into the entry box at RefTag. The only catch is that if you're using Snippet View, or if you scroll down in Preview/Full to a page other than the one you landed on, RefTag might not fill in the page numbers right, so make sure you observe your page# so you can enter it manually and update the result as needed. Hope you find this a useful tool. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:21, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Category: