Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:57, 15 November 2012

Welcome

Welcome to Misplaced Pages! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

National RTI Forum

Hello, I have reverted your changes to National RTI Forum, and request that you discuss further changes to the article on the talk page. The article went through the AfD process and was kept, in large part, because of the references I added. You've now removed them. By the way, I have no conflict of interest as you mentioned in the edit summary, because all I know about this group is what I've learned from reading reliable sources. Please explain why the sources cited are not reliable, as they are major professional journalistic sources in India? Also, please be aware that an external link to an organization's website is perfectly acceptable in an article about that organization. Please make future edits on the basis of consensus with other interested editors. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 16:23, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I replied on my talk page. Cullen328 (talk) 06:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I edited to clarify that murdered activists were not necessarily members of NRF. References in a regional edition of a newspaper are still reliable sources. For example, articles in the Northern California edition of the New York Times are just as reliable as articles in the New York edition. The fact that an organization is regional does not make in non-notable. Many regional groups are notable. Lucknow is a big city. Distinctions between "association" and "trust" seem trivial, and you provide no alternate source. Long-term notability will be decided by history and reliable sources, not by your personal opinions. COI and sockpuppeting by the original author (then a new and unsophisticated editor) are irrelevant now that other editors are involved and that editor is inactive. Base your future contributions on reliable sources, please, and write from the neutral point of view. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 07:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Yahoogroups

Please be aware that Yahoogroups is not a reliable source, as it has no professional editing or fact checking. Misplaced Pages articles must be based on reliable sources, and statements backed by reliable sources should not be removed without consensus. Please also be aware that the designation of a group as "small" or "large" is subjective, and that a group that some people may consider small can also be notable and eligible for a Misplaced Pages article. Cullen328 (talk) 07:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I am perfectly aware that YG is not a RS. I was clarifying the context of the individuals behind the NRF as you alluded to, and considering the pending sock report. In passing, do you plan to respond to my other concerns for that article, especially the issue that the sources do not back the sweeping claims made about NRF.RobertRosen (talk) 08:09, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Your recent edits

Hello, I have reverted some of your recent edits. The murders of RTI activists are well-sourced and provide context for the activities of the National RTI Form. Post-secondary education is appropriate for biographical articles - why is it uncyclopedic? I will be expanding the Amitabh Thakur article soon. Please discuss your concerns on the article talk pages, or on my talk page. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 15:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I will give you a few hours to have the opportunity to remove all material you've added that violates the neutral point of view. The court case is a primary source - it is not allowed. Blogs are not allowed. Spam is not allowed. Personal accusations are not allowed. Everything in this article mus be backed by reliable sources. Do not inject your personal point of view into the article. That is simply not allowed, and it will not stay in the article. Do not add material until you have the reliable sources to back it up. This is non-negotiable.

Immediately disclose any conflict of interest you may have regarding this article. Cullen328 (talk) 20:01, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I think we should discuss this on the article's talk(discussion) page only. This will allow other editors to assist us better. You have also raised several technical issues. I perceive these to be "wikilawyering". I will have to research intensively the technical points raised by you, such as if citing the "reported" version of a court's decision qualifies as RS or not. As I have conveyed to you previously I am as equally concerned as you that the article should conform to all applicable Wiki norms especially 5P (and 3RR). RobertRosen (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Dear RobertRosen
Thank you for your message on my talk page. I am just a simple layman so I am not connected with NeGP in anyway. But I am interested in the subject matter and so I follow it closely. I am not sure I understand you correctly about your statement on stakeholder feedback on a draft electronic services delivery bill of DIT. I hope you can help me understand with a little elaboration. I am generally opinionated, so would definitely give you my 2-cents worth in whatever discussion you wish to have. Feel free to contact me via 'talk' page or email me from my user page. Look forward to getting more details from you.
abhishek singh (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
P.S. I have read the article and its associated discussion page.

Namesake

I suspected as much :-) Do take care abhishek singh (talk) 17:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Other matters

You are a very intelligent fellow, Robert Rosen, and you are introducing many new topics into the discussion. You may think that I am a fool, and perhaps you are right. When I was young, I thought that I was brilliant, and the older I get, the more humble I become. As for bishul yisrael, I am not an Orthodox Jew, but rather a modern one - a Reform Jew who tries to observe traditions that speak to me while embracing the modern world and all cultures. These concepts (bishul yisrael) have absolutely no relevance to my daily life, other than as interesting intellectual concepts worthy of encyclopedia articles. If I had written the article on the topic, I would be in a position to discuss it. If you were here or I was in India, I would be happy to dine with you. We would just leave pork and beef off the menu. As for the Naxalite insurgency, I believe that such movements have to be dealt with from the point of strength of a modern democracy - with firmness to combat terrorism but with also a political and social response where an open society is contrasted to fanaticism and sectarianism. It isn't easy. I mourn for the Indian police officers who have lost their lives in that fight as I mourn for the New York policemen and fire fighters who perished so heroically on September 11, 2001. As for the Indian caste system, I must confess that it mystifies me. Our social struggle for progress here in the United States is in exactly the opposite direction. Egalitarianism is the ideal of my social circle, but I am acutely aware that the wider world does not necessarily share my ideals. Enough for now - it is time for bed for me. Cullen328 (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Dear Jim, I am not a young person either, nor am I a Jew nor did I ever consider you to be a "fool". As part of my profession I meet many Israelis and I've stayed in Israel for extended periods. My user handle is a tribute to one of the 20th century's greatest thinkers Robert Rosen (theoretical_biologist). We learn from various cultures, I see you've experienced Ramakrishna, you could also research the one person he acknowledged as his superior (Debendranath Thakur) - unfortunately you wont find many RS on him. In wikipedia (as in religion) many things are taken on faith. Trust me when I say that these Thakurs (and their fora) are unworthy of our labours when the real ones await. Being aware of essays like this causes one to question if we should participate in flawed processes (like Misplaced Pages) or shift the goal posts. RobertRosen (talk) 07:28, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Arvind Kejriwal image

Hello, Can you please explain the copyright problem you've identified with this photo? The image is properly tagged with a free license. Also, there is nothing wrong with an SPA uploading photos. For example, if a company makes a truly notable product it is fine for them to make a freely licensed photo of it available. A portrait photo is preferable in every biographical article. Please explain. Cullen328 (talk)`

There is no evidence that the uploader actually created/owns the image in question or is in a position to assign the copyright. Also, there is also no evidence that the image was taken with the consent of Kejriwal. Wiki Image Use Policy: - "Along with a tag, specify the source or copyright holder information. Provide as much detail as possible." For instance it could be a copyvio of this copyright asserted image . Your example about the company is apt - the company would own the copyright and could assign it away. RobertRosen (talk) 16:44, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

The evidence is the statement "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide." It is signed by user Jaipuriar in 2006. In more recent years, Wikimedia projects have asked for more detail, but older licenses remain valid forever. Please restore the image, because I find it to be of encyclopedic value. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 17:15, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Policy "Always specify on the description page where the image came from (the source) and information on how this could be verified. Examples include scanning a paper copy, or a URL, or a name/alias and method of contact for the photographer." RobertRosen (talk) 17:48, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Notwithstanding WP:IUP, the copyright of this image seems almost certainly to fall under the Indian Copyright Law since the image was first published in India. Under this law, the copyright holder can only relinquish his copyright through a formal notice u/s 21 of the Act to the Registrar of Copyrights which then notifies it in the Official Gazette. In other words a mere declaration on Misplaced Pages is not sufficient under Indian Law. I'm sure that "Advocate D.J.Jaipuriar" would confirm this. OTH, if Jaipuriar retained his rights but GP licenced it online, the licence would be in writing and "signed" by a digital/electronic signature issued by a Indian Certifying Agent under provisions of the Indian Information Technology Act 2000 which would authenticate Jaipuriar's identity conclusively (and this is something User:Abhishek can confirm). NB: Usually when a non-US Wiki editor points this out the argument eventually descends into "Wiki servers are primarily located in Florida and only US laws apply") RobertRosen (talk) 18:06, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

National RTI awards

Hi there, I have recently developed a new article related to RTI in India. It is National RTI awards. Given that you are a fellow editor on a similar matter, I was hoping that you can help me take a look at the article, improve it, give feedback or rate it, so that it can be up to the Misplaced Pages's high standards. It has already been edited/reviewed by one editor. I'd greatly appreciate your help. I agree that there's a serious lack of RTI related articles on Misplaced Pages and just like you, I am trying to fix that. Hopefully together we can do it a lot faster. Thank you in advance
abhishek singh (talk) 19:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited India Against Corruption, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Baba Ramdev (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:50, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

_morelMW 01:12, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Your WP:ANI entry

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. _morelMW 09:31, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Daniel L. Akin

It looks like the other half of the tag team is following me around and will not let me again tag an article...Daniel L. Akin. Basileias (talk) 08:31, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

This looks taken care of. I may have error'd on this one. Sorry for the litter on your page. Basileias (talk) 15:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

WP:OWN

I know that you were trying to help, but this edit seems to me to be a breach of Misplaced Pages:Ownership of articles. It certainly came across as saying that I should butt out. StAnselm (talk) 08:19, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Regarding your offer of a Third Opinion

Hi, you dropped this message on my talk page . I thank you for the care and service you provide as a third opinion editor. However, I am not the one engaged in the conversation that requires your third opinion. The other two editors in the section that you are offering your opinion are the ones involved. Here is the user talk page to the editor that needs your opinion. http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Ajaxfiore I noticed that you already contacted the second editor. Thank you for being a helpful wikipedia editor. Fordx12 (talk) 00:00, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, I noticed your edit in the talkpage to the RfC on user conduct. What exactly to you wish for me to do? I have already began offering some sort of good faith gestures to RidjalA. I will respond in the article talk page as per your instructions. Fordx12 (talk) 01:24, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

November 2012

Hello, I'm Gwickwire. I noticed that you recently removed some content from La Luz del Mundo without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Misplaced Pages with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. You removed a very large chunk of the article. This isn't looked well upon here at Misplaced Pages. If you have a problem with it, or if it is directly copy pasted from a source, then you should edit it to make it not copyvio, not just remove all of it. I didn't see too many copyvio issues, so I reverted all of your edits. There was no reason to make over 10 edits removing chunks at a time from the article. If you have questions, reply here and I'll come answer. gwickwire | Leave a message 02:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

After further review, I see you had come in as a third opinion on this issue. I can see nowhere that you tried to resolve the dispute, only that you went in and blanked anything you didn't feel was neccesary. That's not how third opinion here works. A third opinionater is supposed to resolve the dispute with a compromise everyone can agree with before taking action on the article. That clearly wasn't done here. I have advised other editors to take it to dispute resolution, and I stronlgly advise you to re-read policy before participating in any more 3Os. Thank you. gwickwire | Leave a message 03:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Talkback - gwickwire

gwickwire | Leave a message 14:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the dispute resolution community

Glad to have you on board. There are a lot of different personal styles for doing dispute resolution work and a great deal of latitude in how one chooses to go about them, so what I'm about to say is merely a suggestion. In doing Third Opinion work, could I suggest that a 3O has more weight when it comes from someone who does not get caught up in editing the article where the dispute is pending? For that reason, when I give a 3O — and I've given a lot of them, over a hundred — I generally either opine or edit, but I don't do both. As one particularly wise Third Opinion Wikipedian, RegentsPark, once succinctly put the purpose of Third Opinions like this, "It's sort of like if you're having an argument on the street in front of City Hall and turn to a passer-by to ask 'hey, is it true that the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale?'." Just like that, jump in, bam offer a well-reasoned opinion, and ride off into the sunset. It seems to work: Somewhere around 75% of the disputes in which I offer an opinion either settle or stop. But other 3O'ers get more involved than I do and do good work too, so your millage may vary, as they say. Best regards, and thanks for your help, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:54, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Of course you're correct, and one should be emotionally detached and do 1 or the other. BUT .. WP isn't the same place (or encyclopedia) it used to be .. so I'm trying to fine-tune a "Judge Dredd" approach which works on the C and low-B pages with 2 (or max.3) warring "bad" SPA type editors (the good ones wouldn't need to ask for a 3O). I would be in the other 30 as I want clean pages (not a temporary cessation of hostilities till the under-resourced UN peacekeeper goes away) and that can't be done by riding off into the sunset. PS: Is this connected to my 2 recent/ongoing WP:3 attempts, and do we need to discuss it ? RobertRosen (talk) 20:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

More power to you and I hope it works. You may need to be more emotionally detached for that approach than for mine, as it will put you into the thick of things. But that's all good. One possibility you might want to consider is the non-3O. I do that occasionally, either when I think I may want to get more involved or when I've had previous dealings with one of the editors. I openly recognize that I became aware of the dispute when I saw it at 3O, but then go on to say that I'm jumping in as just another editor not under the auspices of the 3O project and am leaving it listed there in case some other 3O'er wants to issue a "real" 3O. That explains, if nothing else, why I'm mentioning 3O but not removing it from the list there, but it also makes it clear that my opinion or discussion "counts" towards consensus, since 3O's arguably do not (see the history here). That may be more persnickity that you care to be, but that's the way I am. Again, just FWIW, and glad to have you around, TransporterMan (TALK) 20:31, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Talkback - gwickwire

gwickwire | Leave a message 22:31, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "User talk:Gwickwire#recent_reversion_of_La_Luz_del_Mundo". Thank you! EarwigBot 03:55, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Civility

Please do not attack other editors, as you did to La Luz del Mundo. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

RobertRosen, please note that Misplaced Pages:Single-purpose account indicates that "Many single-purpose accounts turn out to be well-intentioned editors with a niche interest", and that "a user who edits appropriately and makes good points that align with Misplaced Pages's communal norms, policies and guidelines should have their comment given full weight regardless of any tag." Hence we should assume good faith even if another account appears to be an SPA. Since WP:CIVIL supersedes all issues of NPOV, etc., please avoid using words such as WIKISCUM to describe any other editors. I hope we can collaborate to improve La Luz del Mundo. Λυδαcιτγ 17:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

@Audacity. I have no problem with SPAs. What I do have problems with are SOCKs who abuse Multiple (unverified) User accounts to prevent neutral editors from doing their job (and wasting incredible amounts of time while f***ing bleeding heart editors go spouting rules and policy). I see you are an Admin. Please use your regular admin statistical tools (I'm not asking for a SPI) and see if you detect what I can with only the basic open source tools Misplaced Pages provides ordinary editors. FYI, I have already detected the master puppeteer on the page, but I had to go a long way back in time to sniff him out. This article is an abomination, and its a disgrace to Misplaced Pages that editors can get away with this. I'd really like to see if (not how) YOU can clean it up. Finally please don't preach the elementary rules of WP to me - I am a very long term Misplaced Pages user and NOT an editor here and I'm absolutely convinced that Misplaced Pages cannot be depended upon for more than, say, 0.1% of its pages. RobertRosen (talk) 18:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I haven't seen any evidence for sockpuppetry yet (and as far as I know I don't have any special tools related to sockpuppetry), but if I do suspect something I'll ask for an SPI, and I'd suggest that you do the same. Or, per John Carter below, discuss your findings with one of the SPI clerks. In the meanwhile, there's no point to anyone making allegations which can't be proved without an SPI. Also, again, calling me or anyone else "f***ing bleeding heart editors" is uncivil and hence uncalled for here. Λυδαcιτγ 22:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Use of Tools

I regret to say that although I have a lot of tools as an admin, I really only became an admin to work on protected templates, like WikiProject banners, and that, and only a few other things are about all I've ever really done as an admin. This, honestly, is something well outside anything I've done before, having not dealt with that many multiple account editors, and I have a very strong suspicion that anything I do could be seriously flawed and possibly counterproductive. Sorry, but I'm almost certainly the wrong person to ask for something of this sort. User:Dennis Brown or one of the editors at WP:SPI/C would probably be in a much better position to deal with this.

On a side point, I have started to go through some of the information on databanks, and have found a rather significant amount on the LLDM from them. A lot of it is in Spanish, and a lot of others look like strictly local stories in some areas, but I would be more than willing to forward what I can find to ou if you were to give me an e-mail address to send them to, particularly if you know how to speak Spanish. I don't. John Carter (talk) 20:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)