Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:26, 1 December 2014

It's time to make a stand against the arrogant and incompetent Wikimedia Foundation and its complete disregard for those of us who actually build this encyclopedia. Their salaries are paid on the back of our unpaid work, therefore in line with some others I've decided to withdraw my labour every Monday until things change. And if they don't, I'll be extending the length of my strike. I encourage everyone to join me.

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.

Rajput

Sir, a half-truth article is a deceptive article. Why not presenters of the statement so removed present a fact in its favor .The whole article puts history in totally wrong and unverifiable way. Please tell user Rajput334 to provide a secondary source rather than using a tertiary source for whole article. He is trying to surpass other contributors. Moreover, as per Policies of Misplaced Pages, it should be verifiable, which it is not. Truth should be our priority.John811jd (talk) 14:49, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Sir, a half-truth article is a deceptive article. I have provide sources, Please cite themJohn811jd (talk) 14:22, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I have taken the issue to ANI. - Sitush (talk) 16:14, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

List of Nadars

Thank you for the explanation in my talk page, with all due respect sir, all the other names in that pages have no reference at all, at least I point a article where the subject's father caste, that is same as his own. No problem, I am a newbie to the wikipedia, thanks for pointing to the right direction. :) Regards,

it's me Kristine

Does the category I created Category:People_from_the_Inuvik_Region make sense to you? Can you tell me if it should be deleted? Venustar84 (talk) 18:35, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I responded to this question at User talk:CaroleHenson--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:52, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll look in later. - Sitush (talk) 22:54, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

No need to, she was banned from adding categories - so it's a moot point.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:09, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Tito☸Dutta 23:20, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

• The link was changed Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(proposals)#Wikimedia_and_Right_to_Information Tito☸Dutta 17:11, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• I read it yesterday, Tito, but couldn't really grasp what you were getting at (were you asking what info the WMF might be legally obliged to disclose about individual editors?). I'll take another look tomorrow. - Sitush (talk) 22:16, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Normally

I wouldn't edit other people's comments, but I have tweaked your "troublesome" priest to "turbulent".  pablo 15:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

It's fine. For someone with a couple of history degrees, I should know better than that. It is one of those quotes that I consistently get wrong. With quite a few of the committee deciding not to stand again, just perhaps they'll be prepared to tackle the god-king issue. In retrospect, I should perhaps have pinged the man himself but I'll leave that to the committee now, should they choose to take a look at it. - Sitush (talk) 15:32, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

I hope they do, it would be a terrible precedent if acolytes started to think (even more) that the way forward was to interpret JW's utterings and bring tribute of heads on platters to appease. pablo 15:42, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Weird science

Hm. We have a 100% success rate in landing something on a comet nucleus ca. 490 million kilometres from Earth but letters sent to me by my doctor, who is about 2 kilometres away, regularly go astray. I quite like astronomy but I'd rather know when my next hospital appointment is happening before the date has passed. - Sitush (talk) 22:14, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Gurjeshwar

FYI, WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Gurjeshwar. Regards, kashmiri 15:05, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Here we go again ... Thanks for that. Wouldn't surprise me if they are a returning sock from ages back but I'm not trawling the history for it. - Sitush (talk) 15:11, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Added User:Rana the warrior and User:49.202.60.236 to the stable. Seems the guy is a Misplaced Pages addict who can't survive 48h without editing. kashmiri 23:21, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Mr. Sitush :: BE Polite

'Mr Sitush, you are doing what you think right? Why? have you given any references that, why you are deleting other writer's content. You are reverting the stuff from various wiki pages including this, by saying no? This is not good way. You should present the concrete reasons before to revert.

Now complaining me as a puppet user. I have my own identity and forced myself to write on wiki after viewing your forceful editing on Gurjar. I have no time to argue with rigid writers like you.

There is lots of wiki writers whose work are really appreciable. But here the writers like you are not doing good work to improve Misplaced Pages. Nothing is going wrong as you are removing and reverting the contents from various wiki pages. I hope you will be able to understand that being a human you also can not be right every time as You do not own this wikipedia. Be polite and prove that you are doing in right way. BE Polite & more concern on text grammar & phrases rather than argue & reverting existing texts thanksRoyalGurjar (talk) 17:47, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Moving the discussion to a more appropriate venue

I have tried to post this to User:Bishonen/Clueless complaints about Sitush noticeboard but I see it is on hiatus. Regarding your comment:

I would be pleasantly surprised if you got your article space contributions above, say, 50% rather than the 24% or so that they are at present. When you get above the 80% mark, and that includes more than just tinkering with things, I'll treat you as my equal. Oh, was that a pig that just flew past my window?

In a word: no. Just as you are on strike Monday, I am on strike every day, since February 2013. My only exception to editing is to try to change the circumstances that lead to my retirement. I don't really feel like going into it any further than that, but if you are all that curious about something that most people would find boring and overly convoluted, there is a link on my talk page somewhere, and I have enabled the script that allows you to look at my month by month edit history as well.

Since you seem to thrive on caste warriors, perhaps I could interest you in a slightly used article about Buddhism, that is only slightly watched by Islamists and Hindus?....I have been looking for someone who can do something with the POV and COPYVIO issues, but it will be difficult to find someone with level of skill needed to handle it. Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 18:19, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

No sense buying a pig on a poke, this is what you would be getting into. Bodu Bala Sena It's much more stable than it was a year ago but it has been blanked and replaced several times with a copypasta text, that is most certainly COPYVIO. From what I have been able to piece together, Sri Lanka has three main ethnic groups, the Buddhists who are in the majority, the Tamils, who are Hindu and politically aligned with India, and who seem to be in control of the article POV, and the Moslems, who are an emerging minority and whose edits have mostly consisted of drive-by vandalism on Friday afternoon, Asian time, although they have been quiet lately. OH, and google translate doesn't do Sinhalese language yet, so much for world peace. —Neotarf (talk) 18:46, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Raraya

Could you take a look, I have a feeling it will be deleted. Bgwhite (talk) 06:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I've PRODed the thing. - Sitush (talk) 15:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

About Bargurjar

Hey Sitush (whoever you are)!!!

I have found that you are deleting the real comments and creating myths about this topic.

kindly stay honest and read the real scriptures without having a myth of fabricated and self-designed books. We have a legal work that has done years ago and you are deleting the ancestors comments and their real histories.

Why don't you say the origin of your ancestors from where they came from, so just start with about 500 years ago at least. So the world with come to know the origin of Jaat/Gujjar. Sitush describe your identity of your ancient ancestors first then come to discuss with this topic.

You may have expertise in all sections but the truth is truth whatever you may change or delete to hide the originality.

Be honest...!! Jay Hind... M Singh 18:37, 19 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mukt ash (talk • contribs) 18:40, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Ancestry means nothing around here. Only reliable sources.Charles (talk) 19:34, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Mukt ash, You may want to look at the edit summary. Your comments don't synch up with the reasons for the edits: content not covered by the source, Misplaced Pages:BLP violations, etc.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:50, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I am in fights on at least two articles at the moment, one being Bhargava and the other Bargujar. Obviously, I'm in the right in both cases. Just another day in wacko-land, then. - Sitush (talk) 20:17, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot: it is three, not two. Gurjar has also blown up (yet again). And with the disappearance of admins who used once to help out with the excesses (Boing! said Zebedee, Qwryxian, SpacemanSpiff, PMDrive1061 etc), this is getting more and more difficult to keep in order. - Sitush (talk) 20:47, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Just FYI, the recently reverted stuff here was an attempt to draw my attention to this as a source. The Amazon blurb begins "India Treasures is a monumental work of fiction covering the sweep of Indian history." A bit like a lot of our caste articles, then. - Sitush (talk) 21:41, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Mukt ash is blocked as sock, but who was the master? Bladesmulti (talk) 04:21, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Blocked for meatpuppetry, I think. Ponyo did it and is a checkuser, so we may never find out. There were several IPs knocking around before the semi was put in place, so perhaps they decided to register and rack up a few edits to circumvent the protection. - Sitush (talk) 04:24, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

No master, the account just reeked of meat. Anyone who's first edits are to your talk page yammering on about truth and honesty and using "we" can safely be assumed to be socking or canvassed. --Jezebel's Ponyo 18:10, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Your comment

Next time you want to make a comment like that do it on my talk page. You took a kind sentiment from me and made it into some sort of fucking drama. I don't appreciate it. Chillum 03:54, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

You know that Eric doesn't appreciate your comments and is liable to react badly to them. You are now also informed (although I'm fairly sure that I've told you before) that I do not appreciate your comments either, so go away and stay away please. - Sitush (talk) 03:57, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I open up to a person in an attempt to console them and you shit all over it. Consider for just one second that just because a person and I disagree that perhaps we can have common ground in some circumstances. How about you stay away from me and think about how you have acted? Chillum 04:00, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Piss off. - Sitush (talk) 04:01, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

And there was no need to follow up with a thank notification to me either. Are you completely bonkers? - Sitush (talk) 04:04, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Just happy the conversation is over. In respond to your request I am only slightly mad. If you want to talk to me further please use my talk page, I don't feel welcome here. Chillum 04:11, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Which bit of "piss off" did you not understand? A rhetorical question, of course. I've long thought you were a bit of a wind-up merchant but this is ridiculous. How the heck people like you get the bit is beyond me. - Sitush (talk) 04:13, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I take it the "bonkers" bit was rhetorical as well :-) ~Adjwilley (talk) 04:45, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

It was. That is the only way to read it, given my earlier comment. I'm not Eric's protector but I'll do my bit to limit potential flashpoints where I can, and in my experience Chillum is a high risk in that regard. Doubtless, plenty of people will disagree with me but Eric can tell me himself if he so wishes. If Chillum wants to make up with Eric, it would probably make more sense to do so by email rather than chance it on-wiki. - Sitush (talk) 04:55, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Admittedly I already knew your question was rhetorical, as was mine. Heh. ~Adjwilley (talk) 05:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Ha! Ever-decreasing circles. - Sitush (talk) 05:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Kannada Language

There is a new section opened in Kannada page and some vandals are removing entirely sourced section (please verify all links) so that I reach 3 reverts and block me. Also talk page contains a huge number of anti-kannada and pro-tamil comments and are derogatory and racist in nature. I request a protection tag for the article and also cleanup of talk page. If these things are not taken care of it may amount to cyber crime and racism and[REDACTED] may well reach Indian police. Please take care Karnāṭa dēśamaṁ (talk) 11:16, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

It seems likely that you will be blocked before much longer. Assuming that is not an indefinite block, please take the time to read some of our policies and guidelines. Among the relevant ones are WP:CONSENSUS, WP:NPOV, WP:RS and WP:3RR. The essay at WP:BRD is also very relevant.

However, my suspicion is that you may have already fallen foul of our policy regarding legal threats. Are you actually saying above that you will take it to the police unless you get your way? I hope not. - Sitush (talk) 12:44, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

For the "will", see . I've taken it to ANI. Voceditenore (talk) 12:59, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Ah, damn. I suppose that they might back down after reading WP:NLT. And a pig just flew across my window ... - Sitush (talk) 13:01, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Karnāṭa dēśamaṁ: Out of sheer curiosity, are you arguing that a crime has been committed on Indian soil? What do you think Indian police will do to Wikimedia Foundation? Send it a chalaan by post? Sorry I can't keep serious, lol. kashmiri 12:55, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Sigh. That's three so far today. I must be infectious or something. If you don't want to be blocked, it might be best to avoid me until 23:59 GMT. I've got the feeling that there are going to be at least two more, maybe four. - Sitush (talk) 13:41, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Special treatment for groups or just one.

It's not workable, because a list of editors for such special treatment would need to be setup & there'd be an endless dispute over who belongs on that list. The community won't accept special treatment for just one editor. If a group of editors or one editor is already getting special treatment? codifying it will only cause trouble, as opponents will jump up & holler "we knew it, we knew it". GoodDay (talk) 17:51, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm interested in knowing where you buy your crystal balls from, as I could do with a new one. Eric Corbett 17:55, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I have the only one. Anyways, here's hoping that nobody gets banned over that GGTF stuff. IMHO, bans should be limited to vandals and/or cronic socks :) GoodDay (talk) 18:24, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

There isn't much point in telling me here, is there? I doubt many (if any) arbs watch this page and without elucidation your comment will just be treated as a throwaway remark, just as the unsupported, illogical hyperbole of Djembayz etc will be so treated. - Sitush (talk) 17:59, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, arbitrators will either take note of my response to Adjwilly's proposal or entirely ignore it. GoodDay (talk) 18:06, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Tutelary (talk) 18:04, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the discretion. That was the last round of IAC nonsense, ending India Against Corruption 0 vs me/WP/WMF 1. - Sitush (talk) 18:10, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Your recent good-faith edits to Satti

I've noticed that with this edit you reverted several previous edits, including my addition of three categories to the Satti article. You then, with this edit, re-added one of these three categories to the article, clearly showing that at least some portion of the reverted material was reverted needlessly. Please consider reading Misplaced Pages:Revert only when necessary#Alternatives to reverting before making any further reverts. Thank you. Iaritmioawp (talk) 23:43, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

I think I know what I'm doing, thanks. I've been here a while now. - Sitush (talk) 00:14, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Iaritmioawp I could have reverted four different people, who had contributed numerous edits, or I could have taken it back to the last good version and then reinstated the one valid category of your three. The first takes four edits and the latter takes two but in both cases the summary would have been the same: H. A. Rose is not a reliable source. - Sitush (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

The optimal way of handling the situation would've been to manually restore what was in your opinion "the last good version," leaving the correct bits intact; that way, one edit would've sufficed, and your actions wouldn't have resulted in other users' needlessly receiving a revert notification. Iaritmioawp (talk) 00:49, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Nope. That would have meant a lot of unpicking. Have you any idea how many articles I have watchlisted and how many of them get bad edits every day? Although, tbh, I wasn't even aware that using Twinkle's "restore" function (as opposed to "revert") resulted in every person getting pinged - are you sure about that? - Sitush (talk) 00:52, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

You reverted a number of edits, and then restored a portion of the reverted content without properly attributing the original source of that content. In this particular case, that content was merely a category and thus arguably doesn't need attribution, but what I find worrying is that in the future you may inadvertently do it to a more significant chunk of text thus needlessly aggravating another editor. Whenever there's any salvageable content whatsoever in any of the edits you consider reverting, it is advisable to edit out the "bad" content manually instead of using the "undo" button. As for pinging, I cannot speak for everyone whose edits were reverted, but I assure you that I did, in fact, receive a notification of your revert. Please understand that I did not come here to complain; I came here to offer advice which I think you could benefit from. If you believe my advice is unneeded, feel free to ignore it, but I would ask that you at least take what I said into consideration. Thank you. Iaritmioawp (talk) 01:37, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

@Drmies and Bishonen: do I need to modify my behaviour of the last seven years or so? I've gone 130k edits without anyone complaining but, hey, maybe I'm wrong? - Sitush (talk) 01:39, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, Category:Punjabi tribes is redundant, since Category:Rajput clans of Punjab is already listed in that category. Category:Muree hill tribes, I don't know: there's no Muree and no hills in the article. For the rest, I find the verbosity and tone here a bit patronizing, esp. coming from someone with so few edits. It is possible that they have a theoretical point, which could have been made if the message had been less wordy and more collegial in tone. Moving right along, Drmies (talk) 04:08, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Bearing in mind that Iaritmioawp is linking to an essay, I am inclined just to carry on as before. I've gone this far without even being aware of the thing and without anyone ever mentioning it to me, so it sounds more like a pet peeve than anything with real weight behind it. The attribution is, of course, always there in the history because the edits were on the same article, not a copy from one article to another. So, thanks Iaritmioawp but no thanks: I'll stick with my own judgment here.- Sitush (talk) 04:21, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) What Sitush has done is the normal way of salvaging any useful information. As it consumes less time. @Iaritmioawp: I don't think you need to feel aggravated. Content matters above anything else. You can go to your preferences and turn off the notifications for reverts. I am surprised that you even brought this up.--Vigyani_talk 05:12, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Since I was pinged (without being aggravated), I'll say my piece, even though I see Vigyani already made my point, Iaritmioawp : that if you don't want to be notified about reverts, whole or partial, you can turn off that function in your preferences. Reverting the whole and then restoring the good bits by hand is a normal procedure because it's often the simplest way to partially revert. I have done it many times. In a more complex situation, it can be the only practicable situation, and there is nothing "optimal" about doing it in a more complicated way. "Needlessly receiving a revert notification" is not usually thought onerous. On the contrary: that way, you're informed that you were reverted (partially), which people generally will want to know about. The Echo notification system is supposed to be useful, not aggravating. Again, you can turn off the parts of it you don't like. Bishonen | talk 05:34, 23 November 2014 (UTC).

I'm not sure why you pinged me; there isn't much more to say here. I didn't come to Sitush's talk page to complain. I didn't come here to criticize his/her edits. I didn't come here because the notification I got aggravated me—which it most certainly didn't. I didn't even come here to talk. The one and only reason why I came here was to offer a friendly suggestion to a fellow Misplaced Pages editor. No response was expected beyond perhaps a simple "I'll take a look at the essay, thanks." It didn't quite work out that way, but all one can do is one's best. I'll be moving on now if you don't mind.

As for the two now-removed categories, since Drmies was kind enough to share his/her thoughts on the issue, I thought I'd reciprocate; the Muree hill tribes category was suitable for the old version of the article I categorized, which contained the now-removed content mentioning the Muree Hills, and the "redundant" Punjabi tribes category is actually not redundant as per WP:DUPCAT—which is quite an interesting read if anyone's interested. It was a pleasure talking to you; we'll have to do it again some time. Iaritmioawp (talk) 06:47, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

@Iaritmioawp: Ha! Now you are patronising three of us. Don't bother with "we'll have to do it again some time", please. Just stay away until you learn some manners. - Sitush (talk) 10:55, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

It never was my intention to patronize anybody; I genuinely enjoyed our little conversation, and I hope it wasn't the last one. As for "staying away," from your talk page I presume, I'd be happy to accommodate your request provided you indulge mine and kindly not ping me any more. Thank you. Iaritmioawp (talk) 11:16, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

You have been caught socking and also generally acting twattishly before. My prediction is that you will not be around here for much longer unless you change your style. - Sitush (talk) 11:18, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Two things

Nice to see you back, and shame on me for not noticing you'd taken the bait and been goaded into making a nice WSB article, complete with photos! P Pat would be proud. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:46, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I need to dig through the Records for the William Stone Building refurbishment stuff. That boatie book I mentioned and which I needed to find is The Oxford and Cambridge Boat Race by Christopher Dodd (Stanley Paul: 2007). You've probably already got it. - Sitush (talk) 21:50, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: ... but if you have not, then obviously I'm happy to help. - Sitush (talk) 00:57, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I've got the first edition of that book, what was it we were talking about? Memory fail.... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:23, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

A thread on Sitush's talk page that is civil, no ANI talk, people being kind and helping each other. This just can't happen. The Rambling Man, I'm taking you to ANI for failure to take Sitush to ANI. Bgwhite (talk) 08:59, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm sure it won't be long before someone fabricates a bunch of nonsense to get me back there for another waste of bytes! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:04, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Doubtless! - Sitush (talk) 18:33, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Sitush, what did you want the book for? I'm struggling to remember... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

T'other way round, TRM. You are on your mission to get the boat race articles up to a very high standard & I mentioned that I had a book lying around somewhere that might be of use. As it now turns out, I've found that book among my 7,000 or so ... but you've already got it. As an aside, I'm vaguely toying with perhaps doing an article that goes into some depth re: the buildings at Peterhouse, the principle snag being that at present I would be very reliant on the Record as a source. The other big snag might be COI, although I probably would dispute that. - Sitush (talk) 19:09, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Ok, understood. Phew. I'm currently sitting on my sofa with Drinkwater to the left of me, Burnell in front, Dodd is at work, but the Livingston brothers' account of the 2003 race is to my right.... As for the Record and COI, I agree, it's not an issue. If you can find the Record in question, (I have a few, but not many....) then it's a no-brainer to use it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:14, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I've got all of the Peterhouse Annual Records from ca. 1985 and perhaps a few before then. Somewhere! - Sitush (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Sitush, Bgwhite, well whaddya know, I'm dragged back to the circus yet again! And without even the courtesy to let me know!! Standards really are dropping.... The Rambling Man (talk) 06:00, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I was going to ping you, but I was afraid you would get a bit snarky again. It would be easier for we onlookers if that didn't happen! Johnuniq (talk) 06:20, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

The place seems to be falling apart at the moment. I wasn't joking when I said that getting William Beach Thomas through FAC might be the point where I rethink yet again. - Sitush (talk) 06:26, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks to @J3Mrs, Richerman, Eric Corbett, and RexxS: setting the world to rights and giving me a sense of perspective. - Sitush (talk) 18:33, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Jimbo

@Jimbo:, I've completely lost track of whether I am persona non grata on your talk page or not, so I'll say it here to be on the safe side.

Regarding your response here, it is certainly convenient to "not know enough about the specific details" when you are asked about an obviously racist etc attack made on people some of whom you have repeatedly and without foundation attacked yourself on your talk page. Your silence regarding the integrity of ArbCom is also deafening, of course.

I can understand you not wanting to read through the voluminous ArbCom case pages relating to this matter but it may well be time to shut down your page, comments regarding which have been a part of the case. Like it or not, you are perceived both within and without Misplaced Pages as being somewhat different from other members of the community: yours is a unique position and you are far too frequently abusing that with your remarks. Perhaps your best response sometimes would be to say nothing? - Sitush (talk) 22:07, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Interesting, in several ways. However, I wonder whether {{ping|Jimbo}} would work. Of course, it redirects to User:Jimbo Wales, but is mere redirect enough to make a "ping" work? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:28, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

My mistake. Too late now, I guess, but if the pattern continues he'll do it again before too long. - Sitush (talk) 12:30, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, my post above should have pinged him, since I linked to his user page, so if he wants to reply to you, he can. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:54, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Aam Aadmi Party

Lots of activity there this morning, JamesBWatson just protected it. Judging from Diff of Aam Aadmi Party (54 intermediate revisions) it should be OK, shouldn't it? Best, Sam 11:16, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Left a note on JBW's talk, since both you and someone else had commented there. - Sitush (talk) 12:17, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Endorsement request

Please see this and if please possible endorse it User_talk:Titodutta#WMIN_Infrastructure_Scholarship_endorsements --Tito☸Dutta 11:50, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Will look properly when I return from a short trip out, Tito. Coincidentally, I'd just sent you an email regarding an earlier query of yours that, on the face of it, might relate to this issue. - Sitush (talk) 12:16, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Would appreciate your opinion

Hi Sitush. When you have a moment to spare, would you mind awfully taking a brief look at Nisha JamVwal? I've just declined a CSD on it and done a bit of tidying - my gut feeling is that she might just scrape notability, despite the conclusions of the previous AFD discussion (the current sources are significantly different, which means it can't really be deleted under G4). I'd like to hear your thoughts, though: would you consider this salvagable, or do you think it would be worth a second AFD? Cheers, Yunshui _水 14:51, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

User:Yunshui It will be good as a stub. I don't see any point in writing articles with the citations like wikipedia, youtube, and so many others that we avoid. Bladesmulti (talk) 15:13, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

The YouTube sources gave me serious pause when I was fixing some of the formatting; I very nearly deleted them all out of hand. To be perfectly honest, I've no real interest in doing anything more with the article myself; if you (or anyone else) want to stub it, fix it or slap it with tags, be my guest. Yunshui _水 15:16, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

And good job on declining CSD. Some people just don't care about Misplaced Pages:BEFORE when they are tagging for deletion. Bladesmulti (talk) 15:18, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I can't do anything with that. Far too much YouTube stuff, none of which I can hear. My gut feeling is that she is probably not actually notable, with most of the stuff being passing mentions etc, but someone else will have to sort it out, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 16:57, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I've popped it into AFD after reviewing the sources. Yunshui _水 12:24, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Yunshui. - Sitush (talk) 12:30, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Raghav (surname)

I reverted in Bargujar; searching Google for strings in the reverted additions led me to both Old Kingdom of Bargujars, an article by the same user, and Raghav (surname). In the latter I'm inclined to restore this previous revision and discard the rest as coat-racking. It appears to have been copy-pasted from several on-line sources. Would that be a fair call? Sam 19:39, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

The puffery relating to this community has gone on for years, as has that relating to many other communities of India. If there is a {{unreferenced}} or {{refimprove}} tag on such an article and it has been there for, say, four months, I'd remove everything that is not sourced. Almost always, the content comes from either oral history (alas, not acceptable here) or via Raj ethnographies etc (also not acceptable here, and often thankfully so). Any large blocks of unsourced text that are less than three months old should ideally be checked for copyvio issues and sometimes can be rescued if you're prepared to put the effort in. Of course, in theory we are supposed to put the effort in but, bearing in mind the sort of sources where such info tends to come from, the occasions when it is a good use of time tend to be few and far between and the real burden lies on the person who added it.

The above is a harsh but rational approach given the extent of the problems in the topic area. I don't always follow it but I probably do so on more occasions than not. These articles can always be rebuilt (if notable as topics) and often I do that over a period of time.

Does this help as a general guide? It is my common approach but is neither endorsed by anyone else nor applied by me without at least some discretion. Applying the discretion is something that becomes easier with time: you get a feel for the subject area, for what sounds right/wrong etc and, of course, you develop a pretty good understanding of the merits of the commonly used sources and editorial techniques (which includes phrasing, especially in relation to copyvio detection). - Sitush (talk) 19:56, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your tips on how to navigate these choppy waters. As you may remember I am always happy too try to add a reference; in the case of Old Kingdom of Bargujars that seems impossible judging from a Google Book search, and I have tagged it as a hoax and will take it to AfD to get the opinions from other editors. As for Raghav (surname) most of what has been added has nothing to do with the article subject and I will remove it. Sam 22:31, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

No problem. The tips didn't specifically address your queries but they are an accumulation of my experiences here. I suspect that the kingdom article is not a hoax but rather oral history: there were a lot of very tiny chiefdoms in India, for example, some of which even became recognised by the Brits as princely states or as zamindari estates. I've not yet checked either online or in my references here at home but I wouldn't be at all surprised if there are no written sources of merit that support notability. As I intimated above, this issue with oral history - while probably not capable of being resolved without WP entirely losing credibility - is an example of systemic bias.

I'll take another look at the surname article after you have done your stuff. Most of the issues seem pretty obvious to me but I'm not going to be around for ever and I'm really pleased when other sensible people take an interest in the subject area. It is possible to turn some caste-related articles into encyclopaedic articles but I don't think a lot of people appreciate just how difficult it is to achieve that and in particular to do so when faced with so many that quite simply will never amount to much at all unless some future anthropologist or whatever decides to conduct a formal study. An awful lot of my time here is spent trying to ensure that they do not get worse rather than that they improve. It isn't something that I am particularly proud of because it gives the impression of deletionism etc but, hey, some sort of standards need to be maintained and as long as there are only a few people taking an interest, it is a rather difficult task just to try to stand still. - Sitush (talk) 01:44, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

My change at JAT PEOPLE

Please let me know why did you revert my changes at Jat. Thanks. Vdhillon (talk)

Sitush is a busy fellow; allow me to step in. I can't speak for Sitush, but here's why I'd have done what he did, remove:

• Dhar (guerrilla_warfare) audacious daring tactic of Jat and Marathas warriors
• Hinduism

In the first, I have trouble imagining an audacious tactic that isn't daring, or a daring tactic that isn't audacious. So you can cut one or other of these two adjectives. Actually you can and should cut both, as either is mere editorializing. The link takes the reader to "Dhar (guerrilla warfare)" a wretched article whose sole plus is its unintended humor ("with minimum loss to the attacker who is numerologically much lower in number", etc).

As for the second, all you need do is link the word "Hindu" or "Hinduism" to the article Hinduism. -- Hoary (talk) 09:08, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

PS I have made the article less obviously terrible. The description of "Dhar (guerrilla warfare)" now reads "Dhar is a tactic of sudden attacks in asymmetric warfare to ensure maximum benefit with minimum loss to the less numerous attacker". This gives me the impression that "Dhar" just means "guer(r)illa warfare". -- Hoary (talk) 09:23, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Hoary. If I could be bothered, I'd probably send that article to AfD as WP:DICDEF. - Sitush (talk) 09:25, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

ROIS

Any thoughts regarding the proposal? No worries, if you don't want to get involved, however, as I see it that article is a key to develop a large net of articles which have stagnated in the era when WP editors used to whole sale copy from the 1911 Britannica (BTW, the ODNB references you nuked were not meant to be citations rather to fix the mess using a standard biograph etc.) Solomon7968 13:58, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Replied at the article talk. - Sitush (talk) 02:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Ha!

And with this rubbish, I see no further purpose here. - Sitush (talk) 18:35, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Erm . . . the aqueduct? Sorry, I mean such things as helping to defend India-related articles against boosterism, invention, trivia, myth, plagiarism, misreading, and the other miscellaneous sillinesses that are endemic in such articles. This sounds like an excellent purpose to me. The task probably requires not a mere "force" but a battalion of Situshes, but one Sitush is a good start. -- Hoary (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

I understand your point but none of that stuff needs me. Some other idiot (yes, I am one in this sense) can take it on, although they will most likely will suffer the same fate, ie: massive weariness in the face of people who simply do not understand what the primary purpose of this project is supposed to be and who seem intent to impose a form of cultural imperialism that is in fact not dis-similar from what they have been claiming is my approach. You probably do not realise but this situation comes on top on some highly racist comments that Jimbo Wales seems to have brushed off and which relate directly to both the current fracas and to my long term involvement here: I am, apparently, some sort of apologist for the British Raj, have upset "1.2 bn Indians" with my nonsense etc. That is bollocks, of course, but there are too many, too ignorant people around who simply like to take a pop without even knowing either British imperial or Indian history. Alas, a fair amount of the very best evidence for this is off-wiki.

Of course, I really don't care that much what Jimbo says about me but he needs to learn that his best position is either to engage fully or not at all, rather than seemingly cherrypick his moments around his holidays. - Sitush (talk) 02:30, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

New FoF and Remedy involving you at GGTF PD

Looks like you've already seen, but there are new FoF/Remedies up involving you at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_Gap_Task_Force/Proposed_decision. You may wish to comment on them. Regards, NativeForeigner 02:23, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

I've seen it, thanks, as you suggest. I am not seeing much indication that the committee members have seen my responses. This is an absolutely shocking situation and it doesn't take a lot of effort to work out how it has happened. I've spent the last hour or so wading through a ton of emails relating to it and now I am off to bed. - Sitush (talk) 02:33, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Nisha JamVwal again

They have returned. But I still think the subject is far from notability. Jim Carter (from public cyber) 08:11, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Cheema Page

Hi Sitush, On the Cheema page you keep undoing my edit because you say I have not added to prove that Cheemas are Jats and that many if not most Cheemas are Muslim. First lets prove that Cheemas are Jats even if they belong to the Sikh faith, (some also show Cheemas Muslim faith):

• The Punjab Bloodied By Ishtiaq Ahmed pg.285
• The Sansis of Punjab: A Gypsy and De-notified Tribe of Rajput Origin, by Sher Singh "Sher."

Quote:"the Man, the Cheema and many other castes of the Jats were Sikh as well as Muslim, and sometimes they were found living in the same village. After partition, the Sikh Jats of these castes came to India whereas their Mohammadan caste- brothers are now living in the West Punjab."

• East of Indus: My Memories of Old Punjab By Gurnam Singh Sidhu Brard pg. 264
• India's communities, Volume 1; Volume 5 by Kumar Suresh Singh, Anthropological Survey of India pg.1371

Now Muslim and Pakistani Jat (although their is enough evidence above):

• Across the Wagah: An Indian's Sojourn in Pakistan By Maneesha Tikekar pg.253
• The Pakistan People's Party: Rise to Power by Philip Edward Jones pg. 351 & 397
• 1998 district census report of Mandi Bahauddin Population Census Organisation, Statistics Division, Govt. of Pakistan, 2000 pg.5
• KASHMIR - THE UNTOLD STORY By Christopher Snedden Index
• From Punjab to New York: A Reflective Journey By Surjit Singh Pg. 29
• "All-Jatt contest in Wazirabad". Dawn. Pakistan. 12 August 2005. Retrieved 14 August 2014.
• Invasion of the Genes Genetic Heritage of India By B. S. Ahloowalia pg.65
• Contemporary Forms of Slavery in Pakistan by Human Rights Watch Pg. 42
• Census of India, 1901, Volume 17, Part 1 By India. Census Commissioner, Edward Albert Gait p. 243

--Thank You Nawabmalhi (talk) 22:39, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring and discretionary sanctions

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Template:Z33

Dear Sri Situshji, please note carefully I am telling 2 you with emphasis so you can understand it, Native language in the lead "There is ultimately no consensus about which language to use, but I see a fair bit of support in regards to IPA and pronunciation and would think this would help normal readers, so I am going to say that Using IPA to clarify pronunciation is the consensus of this discussion, all other sections do not meet a level of consensus needed to pass. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 09:38, 26 January 2012 (UTC) " Not tata (talk) 03:26, 1 December 2014 (UTC)