Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:12, 1 August 2007

Archives
1 2 3 4

dear Hornplease

I think I'm close to leaving Misplaced Pages, as I indicated in the famous ArbCom case we know. I'm on the verge of finishing a few things in the french pages, then I will sign off. I just wanted to say you good bye, and to thank you for your interventions, both in the case and also about Koenraad Elst, which is the topic I mainly contributed to in the English Misplaced Pages. I guess that, like me, you've got not so much good time with all the events that happened around, but I wanted to tell you that I appreciated your interventions and the intellectual honesty you still try to achieve in the Koenraad Elst article.

I see that you are still following the discussion in the talk page there. I give up but I think that all that Zydenbos has said about Elst is perfectly trustable and correct, and, anyway, the link appears in the "link section" of the article. If one day Zydenbos writes the same in a more "official" publication, I will mention it in the article directly.

In fact, what I can tell without a doubt is that Koenraad Elst is an extremely suspect writer, and not only for the political reasons explained in the Zydenbos page, but mainly for all his intellectual approach to Hinduism and India's history. The links given by Bondego about some criticisms placed at Elst (and Elst's counter responses) are in fact irrelevant, just as irrelevant as can be S. Devi w.r.t. Hinduism. If you have some time, I hope you'll find some interest to Rene Guenon's Introduction to the study of Hindu Doctrines (and also to other books by that author) which place you on the right intellectual setting for understanding metaphysics. It is worth reading.

That's it. I would like to thank you again, and to wish good time in Misplaced Pages and in your life for the years to come.

With warm regards,

TwoHorned 20:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		For all the energy and effort Hornplease displayed, I think Hornplease deserves this ! TwoHorned 20:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Introduction

Hello User:Hornplease, just want to introduce myself. I've seen that you seem to do some really good work on wiki. I'm also interested in some of your areas, especially South Asian topics and wanted to help promote a fairer more unbiased work on these different articles. I was hoping you wouldn't mind me coming to you with some questions sometimes as I am not as familiar with all of wiki. Have a good day and keep up the good work--Kathanar 21:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello User:Hornplease, thank you for the welcome, I might need your advice soon. I am observing I think vandalism over at Indian American politics section. I'll be back in touch.--Kathanar 17:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello User:Hornplease, could you look at this ] and give me your opinion or help on this matter. There is a move to delete a category I created for religious supremacists. Thanks --Kathanar 22:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

My comment

A book on Hindutva forces misrepresenting history isn't the best book to show to a person who already has the impression that Indians are stealing Pakistan's history, it will push the two parties involved (Indians and Pakistanis) a lot further apart. I stand by my comments, it wasn't prudent for fowler to show him extracts from that book. Nobleeagle 23:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, bad faith was a bit of a heavy statement to use. By the way, my new signature isn't working, could you take a look at User:Nobleeagle/Sig and try and see the problem: Signing gets me this:

<font color="#000080">N</font><font color="#12098A">O</font><font color="#120ABA">B</font><font color="#2015E3">L</font><font color="#1364EA">E</font><font color="#2BA4EC">E</font><font color="#1364EA">A</font><font color="#2015E3">G</font><font color="#120ABA">L</font><font color="#12098A">E</font> ^{<font color=#2015E3 size="0.2" face="Arial Narrow"> <nowiki></nowiki></font><font color=#2015E3 size="0.2" face="Arial Narrow">&nbsp;<nowiki></nowiki></font>} 23:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

It is meant to be this: — NOBLEEAGLE

Don't worry, I fixed it. — NOBLEEAGLE 23:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Question

Hi. I was going to copyedit your recent and very informative addition here to match the other citations in form, but then realized you cited a page but no edition (which makes the citation unverifiable). Could you please either add the edition data (publisher, date) to the article or leave a note on my talk page indicating it? Thank you. Dahn 10:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. If I understood correctly, you wish to revisit that article and add more to it - I suppose this is from the same book. My main concern was to apply a single format to all references - since I edited the article, I stuck with the system of references I find most comfortable (book titles at the bottom, shortened citations as "author, page" in "Notes"), but we could just as well change it if you have any objection; however, I think that whatever format we use, we should be consistent throughout the article. That is to say, I will change the citation to the format currently used, and you are free to change it throughout the article or you can ask me to do it. Either way, yours was a very interesting addition.

I originally bumped into Nasi while editing on a related subject involving, of all places, Romania. I could provide citations for his activities in relation to Moldavia, but then noticed that the article was unreferenced (and my additions appeared over-detailed in comparison), so I just did some research into what was available on the net, and added some stuff. Overall, there is too little I know about about the man, so I would definitely encourage you to add more detail wherever in the article you see suited. Cheers, Dahn 12:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Squatting MOPs

I fully agree with you. That's why I moved the factoid to the "personal life" section as a matter-of-fact statement of where he lives. dab (𒁳) 15:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Indo-Aryan Migration

I'm sure he had a good reason, which was precisely why I asked. I know that there has been some conflict at that article - the reason I have it watchlisted is because of a particular user that had been creating POV redirects and other nonsense. That's actually why I was suprised that their wasn't further explanation in the edit summary or a direction to the talk page. To someone unfamiliar with the topic, like myself, it just looks like a sourced paragraph, since I'm not familiar with who's fringe in that particular field. Natalie 23:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Temp Page

The only way that this can work is if solid contributors like yourself help it work, Horn. You have seen how contentious the back and forth is in the Discussion area. Nothing is getting done and people are just getting mad at each other. By focusing the energies of the two groups interested in each area, we get twice as much done, instead of the tug of war we have now. I have asked Mar and Niko to put together a 2-sentence summary of the sections to be focused on in the Temp Page, so that somethin remains in the article until the Temp Page is reintegrated in a couple of weeks. Help me out, please.Arcayne 23:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, how to contact you?

Hi, Is there a way to contact you? I see that it wouldn't be reasonable to reveal your email address here, amidst the animosity prevalent. Can you please send an email message to {zalimjadir} at gmail.com (leaving out the braces)? Systemic rant 06:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

300 Article

You are going to find that being polite with me will garner you much more assistance than would my ire. Please endavor to be more civil.Arcayne 22:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

You will note that in each of your references of my remarks, they were not directed at any one person. I commented because your were. And no, I don't expect the film to be as rosy as that of a bad children's flick, but I do expect people to roll up their sleeves and actually doa little research. We have wasted over a week arguing about two reviews - two. At Rotten Tomatoes, there are gathered at least two dozen articles. In order to avoid the POV nonsense that will cripple the article's ability to reach GA and FA status (as that is what we ar aiming for, after all), we need to start utilizing more than just the sentiments of a minority or reviewers. I ask you to try and accept that, for a majority of the English wiki, the concerns of the Iranian cultural brigade is not going to really matter. Not that we are insensitive to your concerns, but rather that they carry less weight here than they would in, say, the Iranian wiki (if there is such a thing). Arcayne 23:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Again, I am going to ask you to be a tad more civil than you are now. Suggestin that I don't know my way around Misplaced Pages is pretty insulting, and not really conducive to working politely together. Please, don't do it again.

As well, rather than remind me of RS, perhaps you might endeavor to actually quote in the article some of the sources you allude to. Instead, we keep hearing about the Slate interview. I am not saying that it doesn't bear mentioning. I'm not even suggesting that were we to find a great many sources that say otherwise that we should ignore ones that point solely to the cultural insensitivities, we should not mention it. I am suggesting that these other sources should be cited, so as to avoid the appearance of wearing blinders. Lastly, you misunderstood my point about the English-language wiki. We aren't supposed to focus solely on Iranian news sources, and yet we have. I am not going to dwell on that. Hopefully, this will correct itself. Please, do not ever accuse me of cultural bias ever again. You don't know me, and you quite clearly have no idea what sorts of bias I do or do not have. Let's not talk about this anymore. Arcayne 00:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Are you done now? Is it out of your system? I certainly hope so, as I considered the conversation closed after my response to your last email. I archived my talk page with that understanding. Had I simply blanked my page, that would have been rude. Instead I archived it, because even the most inane conversations wherein the other person repeats back to me word for word (as if I somehow cannot remember) what I said teaches me something. That you chose to respond afterward, to have some sort of last word on the subject, kinda teaches quite clearly that this ego-driven and relatively uncivil behavior isn't really something I care to engage with. Please do not respond to my Talk Page any more; you have nothing to say that I find necessary to hear. I certainly hope I am being clear this time. I wouldn't want you to misinterpret or misunderstand me yet again. Arcayne 09:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Karunanidhi Article

I appreciate your efforts to remove POV statements from Karunanidhi article in both Achievements and Controversies section. You have removed statements regarding Selling SUN TV stakes as Original Research.(Synthesis). These reports of comparing Karunanidhi selling price and actual share IPO price appeared in many Indian newspapers, columns etc. For sample you can see here. I can give many more citations if required. I am reinserting those statements. I suggest you can modify statements in line with encyclopedic standards if required instead of removing paragraph completely. --Indianstar 06:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Rosser

Isn't Yvette Rosser notable? Birdsmight 07:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Lemme elaborate. I'm sorry if we got off on the wrong foot. I'm just sayin' that Rosser and Bhatnagar are hardly "random people". Rosser is a notable academic in such areas (politics I guess) and Bhatnagar is a notable personality (as the chief editor of a important periodical). Dunno much abt this Sundaram chappie so a removal of his opinion might be in order. What do you think? Birdsmight 07:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Does "partisan" necessarily mean unreliable as far as Rosser is concerned? I don't see anything in BLP that bans her opinions from the Bidwal page, particularly given the fact that the material is a reproduction of documentation from the Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The University of Texas at Austin (and so has some academic standing). As far as the Michael Moore comparison and your "polemical==inadmissible claim", websites like http://www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com/ are, by construction, polemical. Yet it is referenced as a criticism of Moore.

Partisan groups are routinely quoted as criticisms of people, for instance,Bernard Goldberg's criticism of Michael Moore in Michael_Moore_controversies#Criticisms_by_conservative_authors (Fox News would certainly count as "partisan" in that case).What about this ? Partisan? Perhaps. But certainly notable given that they are the one Bidwai targets for his attacks on Hindus. These are the best quotable criticisms of Bidwai, and some criticism obviously belongs in his page, given his inherently inflammatory remarks against Hindus. Birdsmight 08:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that the issue is a bit more complicated than literal adherence to wp policies. the issues here are as follows:

1. Bidwai has made some heavily incendiary remarks against Hindus, targeted at Hindus in a broad sense, that have encouraged violence against Hindus and encouraged discrimination against Hindus. These remarks border on hate speech. That much is clear
2. Those remarks have provoked a response from certain parties who have been bold enough not to be intimidated by Marxist threats and intimidation tactics
3. For the sake of balance in the article, those responses need to be stated on the grounds of quotability and notability. Since Rosser has academic qualifications her criticism is certainly notable enough for mention.
4. Rosser does not make ad-hominem attacks against Bidwai, so libel issues don't apply. She is not defaming him, merely criticizing his position.We can talk about Bhatnagar separately (he is, in fact,a prolific contributor to multiple periodicals, and heads io, which is more than an "online publication").Birdsmight 09:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
5. wrt your statement "If Bidwai can get published in RS, then surely his critics can". In an ersatz-democracy like India, that is not the case. Birdsmight 09:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
6. As far as Bhatnagar is concerned. He had a discussion with Bidwai "I accosted Praful Bidwai also who had implied that all the alleged social and economic disasters in India are because of Hindutva and Hindu BJP-led governments. He first tried to evade, run away and ignore but, when squarely confronted, admitted that he did not blame BJP for all the ills, the Congress party was also guilty." so that interaction makes it notable (it's certainly not inherently disparaging to the man so there is no libel here). Perhaps it needs to be reworded a bit, but certainly not removed.Birdsmight 09:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

BLP is not being violated here as there is no defamation of character. Birdsmight 09:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid then that we are at an impasse, since I maintain that Rosser does not violate BLP, although Sundaram and Bhatnagar might. There are two options. Noticeboard or mediation. Which do you want to do first? I do not think I am under any obligation to "make my case" to you as such, only to an accredited[REDACTED] committee, with whom I am prepared to argue my case.Birdsmight 10:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

John Keegan Casey

On 22 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Keegan Casey, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 23:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Unseemly template

Horn, The Communism in India template (an ugly-looking one) is really improper in most of the places. For example, see EMS. The template has several fringe organisations, highly irrelevant in the case of the article. Then the Naxalbari movement was something antagonistic to the party EMS led. In fact the Naxalite organisations formerly used to call CPI(M) a social fascist organisation. Such antagonistic elements whose views have nothing in common shouldn't be brought under an umbrella template. What do you think of it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vidhrohi (talk • contribs) 16:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

Anti-Hinduism

Thanks for working out imbalances and undue weight from that article. Your edits look good so you can probably expect my support when the inevitable disagreement arrives. The Behnam 19:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Is Narendra Modi an infallible figure

Have a look at the pace with legtimate criticism of Modi is being removed when it has been clearly pointed out in Indian media that the Gujarat government has acceded that there have been fake encounters of Muslims claiming they were headed to assasinate Modi and have a look here congratulating each other.

The fake encounter issue has been raked in Gujarat assembly and even some BJP members have asked for full scale enquiries into the doings of Narendra Das Manohardas Modi.

WP does not restrict edits by IPs so why ] has run a tirade against unknown IP edits on Naranda Modi even though the POV is supported by newspapers and link on TOI provided 125.23.99.152 12:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

300

I beg to differ. An agnostic approach does not emphasise any historicity upon the film, it merely avoids the use of labels prone to personal interpretations, such as "fictional account of". In case you didn't notice, the alternative view to "fictional account" is to leave it blank, nobody suggests to coin it a "historical account" or anything like that. Don't you think that an agnostic approach is the most neutral strategy to follow? Miskin 01:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Gujral.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gujral.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu badali 17:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Zoroastrianism and Hinduism

Hi, this article that you tagged recently was originally created by the banned Hindutvaadi troll User:Maleabroad, which explains the unverified claims scattered throughout the article. In one sense the topic is valid since the Avesta and the Vedas, the texts which modern Hinduism evolved from share many similarities. But I wonder whether the page will look much different from Proto-Indo-Iranian religion once it is cleaned up. What are your thoughts? Gizza 22:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I thought I'd seen that article somewhere, and was planning to look for it. You're right, it might be the case that we have a good case for redirection here; perhaps DBachmann might want to weigh in, given that this is close to his area of expertise? I'll let him know. Hornplease 22:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Please see Request for Arbitration

Corrected direct link: I am informing you of this request for arbitration, initially filed by User talk:Notmyrealname, since you are an "interested party" who contributed comments in Talk:Lewis Libby (see archived talk pages) about these issues pertaining to Libby's "ethnicity" and his identification as "Jewish" and the category "Jewish American lawyers" in Talk:Lewis Libby (archived talk pages); I modified the heading to focus on the articles in dispute as opposed to on a contributor and explained that there . Please go to the link and indicate that you confirm having received this message. Thank you. --NYScholar 09:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC) --corrected link; updated. --NYScholar 19:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Tendentious editing

Thanks for the information, Hornplease. *scratching head, trying to remember where I've run into you, because I think we have too...* :) – Riana 14:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Setalvad changes:

• Her group, Sabrang Communications, received funds from the Congress Party to run anti-BJP advertisements in national dailies for the 1999 Lok Sabha elections.

Um, you might have a grouse againt Varsha, but the above story is a fact. I dont see why you deleted it. You can read Javed Anand's interview on the 3rd link. Mikeslackenerny 09:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Your VB and AID edits

1. The Career Break part was authentic, and sourced from two places. Why did you remove it? 2. AID statements which you removed and replaced were sourced as well. Why are you removing these? You can add to them, or modify them, but removing sourced statements is a stretch. 3. PIPDPF .. don't know much about it. They have their own website I believe if you want to source information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikeslackenerny (talk • contribs) 02:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

Would yahoogroups messages be a newsgroup? And would not a message from Varsha herself on the group authenticate it? Re blog, I can still agree with it, however, the post is an independent corroboration. And there is a thing to be said about going by the letter, instead of the spirit of the law. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikeslackenerny (talk • contribs) 04:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

Protection

BLN: I've been cleaning up a few Sangh Parivar articles, and I see that you protected Hindutva. Any plans for unprotection? Let me know what you need to have cleared up first. Hornplease 21:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure really. Could you ask another admin in due time? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Koenraad Elst

Hi - I see you have taken to removing texts and references related to this particular historian - I hope this is not a spree inspired by the blocking of Bakasuprman. There is no ban on Elst's works being used as a reference, and each article needs to be examined carefuly about whether Elst's works actually qualify as "non-notable" and "fringe" as you claim. Please desist from removing these texts and sources without prior discussion. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 19:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Your arguments on Elst seem reasonable - I don't personally think he is a fringe scholar, but that's me. However, my point was that you should not remove text/sources as if you're reverting vandalism. You need to launch a discussion with other editors and undo only if there a consensus. Also, you can balance the amount of weightage given to Elst's works. If 1-2 paras are on Elst, that is not appropriate. However, there is no problem in having 1-2 sentences discussing his theories. For example, in the Maulana Azad article, Elst's theory can be summarized in a couple of sentences - no need to give him a whole para.Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 22:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Hornplease, if you suspect some intrinsic problem or something like "wikibombing" and corporate infiltration, you should raise it at ANI so we can effectively tackle it. It is true that I've never heard of Azad being criticized as a closet Islamist, so I'll check if any other credible source discusses the same possibility. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 23:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Re. Disruptive IP

Not yet. When an unregistered user vandalizes after their block expires, they must be warned and then reported to WP:AIV if they transgress a final warning.--Húsönd 10:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Well done! :-) Regards, Húsönd 11:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

your arbcom statement

Hi - just a clarification - when you talked about an administrator's conduct in your opening, did you mean me or Porpington? Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 14:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

P.N. Oak

Thanks for your recersion on the Oak page. I got fed up reverting Kkm5848's appalling edits. Despite listing RfCs, I got no support, so I'd appreciate some assistence to counter Kkm5848's unrelenting edit warring. Paul B 23:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

pomp...pomp...pomp..=

Dear Hornplease, I gave verifiable link about Thelka link and Babubhai Khatria to proof that it's not POV but NOR. with love John Paul 10:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

On user's page:

Hornplease, Do you call contribution to[REDACTED] articles with verifiable information is combative attitude! Your recommendation to discuss point by point had been valid when I had objection with the contents of articles but I am contributing additional information reflecting other facts that are purposely ignored by pro authors. These articles are guarded like fort and none other than pro authors are allowed to add or edit and your reminding me WP policy.

"If its not about religions minorities, then why do mention below point in “Central Concept” of Hindutva article “emphasizing historical oppression of Hindus by invading forces like the Muslims (see Muslim conquest of the Indian subcontinent) and the Christians (see Goa Inquisition) and the call to "reverse" the influence resulting from these intrusions.

What is the need to mention “but came to prominence in Indian politics in the late 1980s after the events of Shah Banu Case and Babri Masjid”.

"The very reason Hindutva or Hindu Rastra exist are for above reasons and you say it’s not about the effect of on religions minorities! John Paul 10:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Replied . Hornplease

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2

Hello,

An Arbitration case on which you commented has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 02:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Please also note the arbitrators' comments here regarding scheduling matters. Newyorkbrad 02:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Moose knuckle

Hi Hornplease. You recently deleted my {{prod}}s on the Moose knuckle and Mooseknuckle articles, as you said they were "sketchy". I am curious why you think so. I feel that mooseknuckles are deserving of their own article, should someone decide to create it. But a redirect to the cameltoe article, in my book, is akin to redirecting penis to vagina, which hardly seems appropriate. Gobonobo 08:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Theocracy

Template:Theocracy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Majoreditor 00:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

delsort India

Hi, could you add new entries to the top please. Also, it would be handy if you used the linked article title in the edit summary for additions so others can jump straight to the article — I like to see the article before I read others opinion to be sure I dont look at the article with a bias. It is also handy to have the article link in the edit summary for entries that are removed as well (even redlinks) so others can see which survived. Anyway, many thanks for doing the delsorting. John Vandenberg 09:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/NYScholar

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/NYScholar. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/NYScholar/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/NYScholar/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | 00:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:India

Hi, and welcome to the India WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Please participate in any of our descendant workgroups that might interest you.
• The project has a bimonthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered in its entirety, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every India article in Misplaced Pages.
• Can you code? The automation department uses automated and semi-automated methods to perform batch tasks that would be tedious to do manually.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! — Lost 14:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I saw that you have joined mainly for the newsletter. Looking forward to see you contributing to it. There is an edition due in May — Lost 14:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

email

My email is paul.barlow_at_unn.ac.uk. If you have time to forward the PDFs I'd be grateful. Paul B 23:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Teesta (again)

• You are removing contecnt, including some that is not controversial. I dont understand why. And you are rewording things from a very particular angle. If she signed the letter (which she did) she herself calls herself leftist, and pro-leftist. If you have any problems, I would prefer that we request a moderator to examine this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikeslackenerny (talk • contribs) 08:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC).
  • Fair enough. I apologise for the slant accusation. Have added a new primary source. Can we conclude that she is an anti-BJP/Hindutva activist from that? Have a look. Mikeslackenerny 08:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Please see talk page. Mikeslackenerny 09:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

70.112.77.235

Already blocked him yesterday. . - Aksi_great (talk) 11:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Nice to see that someone else is on the lookout too. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Per your request

"of course anyone calling for divestment from Israel would be viewed as antisemitic by the sources in question" - POV, and OR to boot. "Jay is unlikely to be cautious about accusations" - POV and a personal attack, as well "these views are marginal in any rational analysis." there are many, many more, but this should suffice. Isarig 20:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see. My assumption that there are those who believe that divestment from Israel is motivated by, and part of, the new anti-Semitism is actually based on things that I have read on Misplaced Pages. If you disagree with that assessment, perhaps you should edit that page. My statement was made in the light of the fact that the sources cited invariably used the fact of Sabeel's presence in that movement as indicative. Do you disagree? If so, you should have done so at the time.

And about my comments re Jay: he has accused me, and many others, of various things in the past. The simple truth is that he is a little quick to judge about these matters. Note that he accused me of stalking, someone else pointed out that that was a little silly, and I chose to laugh it off by saying that that's just how Jay does business here. Would you prefer that I took it seriously?

More to the point, where do you get off telling someone who hardly ever edits mid-east stuff, and came here in response to an RfC, that they have an obvious POV? I have no idea who you are, but I do know that you have no idea at all what my views are about any of this. I do, however, know that WP isn't the place for fringe views to be pushed as the mainstream, and some of this is happening here.

Don't be so quick to judgment, and attempt collegiality on article talkpages. WP is not a battleground, etc. Hornplease 20:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Spam filter

Yes. The spam filter must have prevented you from saving the article with the link in it. I had arranged for someone to run a bot and replace all references to the website with {{fact}}. But looks like there is a problem. Now I think I will have to manually go through the list. - Aksi_great (talk) 06:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Shakespeare

Just a note re the Kathman debate. Thanks for commenting, but you've got it the wrong way round in this case! Kathman isn't Kazanas, he's Witzel. Kathman represents the mainstream opinion. But because mainstream scholarship does not typically debate this issue within its journals, most of the published material is from conspiracy theorists (hence my analogy with The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail on the talk page). Kathman is one of the few maintream scholars who examines this in detail, but most of this work is on his website, not in "hard copy". Kathman is indisputably a real scholar who represents the mainstream. Smatprt is trying to delete all the arguments and information from Kathman's site while retaining all material published by non experts in non-scholarly, purely commercial presses. This is like accepting Ithias Patrika as a reliable source and rejecting the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies - simply because one is on paper and the other isn't. Paul B 10:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Heh. I thought I might have, which was why I was hedging my words around with a dozen modifier and caveats. Hornplease 19:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Edits to Jayalalitha article

I have removed NPOV inserted by you in Jayalalitha article due to following reasons.

1) No discussions in Talk page 2) I am not sure whether you are inserting NPOV for few points in achivements section or Achivements section/Criticisms section together. There are tonnes of materials written in criticisms section. Her achivements in Veeranam scheme, Veerappan issue etc are verifiable and there are dozens of verifiable sources which talks about these achivements. If required you can mark them as so that people can add citations. We can remove points if people cannot add verifiable citations. 3) I wish to ask peer review of Karunanidhi/Jayalalitha articles. I feel these articles are being edited by same individuals. Most of them add wild allegations in Jayalalitha article and un verifiable appreciations in Karunanidhi article. --Indianstar 01:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Will add citations for some of the points. Do you sincerely believe Achivements in Karunanidhi article and criticisms in Jayalalitha article looks encyclopedic?. Does it look as properly sourced?. I mentioned Peer review to check neutrality.--Indianstar 01:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Lead section

Sorry, I misunderstood your edits. The word "its" is intended to refer to "the subject". Jayjg 01:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nehrudeath.jpg

Hello Hornplease, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Nehrudeath.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Hornplease/Nehru. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srikeit 05:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Mediation for MA article

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Misplaced Pages:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.--Pejman47 19:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad mediation update

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_mediation/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad --Sefringle 19:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Kiwi Camara re-nominated for deletion

The article Kiwi Camara has been renominated for deletion. You are being notified of this because of your participation in the first nomination process last year. Please visit the debate page to state your opinion and vote. Thanks. -- ßίζ·קּ‼ (talk | contribs) 01:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Cool down

Hornplease, everybody is hootin' and hollerin' on that case but nobody is listening - not even ArbCom. I know it feels like denting one's pride to let the bitching slide, but just forget about it. I'm tryin' my best as well. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 13:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

As for the nuts you're engaging, they never listen and they never will. That's why they're in the mess they're in. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 13:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

HSS Article

Your points are not supported by the articles that you mentioned. One, because you don't provide direct reference to your argument. Second you sources (Outlook and The Economist) can't be verified since they are behind the paid wall. Please provide other sources or have the courtesy to revert your changes until you have the resources. I am sure, since you are a longtime WP contributor, you must have checked the discussion page before reverting my changes since I posted the exact same argument there too. Sjain 06:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

_________________________

Hi Hornplease! I'm a new member from India. You're work on India is great. Thank you for keeping up the fight against obfuscatory, fundamentalist forces. I promise to do my best to carry on your good work. Regards -- Amit 13:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

attacking hindu articles?

Why are you only deleting hindu cats? Your friend kathanar Special:Contributions/Kathanar seems to be adding uncited cats left and right yet no censure. I politely and kindly ask that you cease and desist in taking such iflammatory actions. It's better for the project. --D-Boy 21:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Please do not lie to me. It is not nice. I implore to look over this statement you made on his talk page. Why on earth did you lie to me? I am deeply hurt by your previous statement.--D-Boy 21:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from personal attacks. Your bias against Hindus gives you no right to call me such indecent names. I will be unable to have a civil discussion with you if you keep up such personal attacks.--D-Boy 22:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I really didn't know that Biography of Living Persons applied to dead people. Arbcom has no rulings on BLP that concern wanton emptying of Hindu cats, though it has ruled that begging for blocks on users whose ideologies you disagree with is unacceptable.Bakaman 21:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Sheila Chandra

Great point you made about need for the person to be self-identified with the religion in question. Cheers, Dogru144 20:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Edit comments are not for discussion, talk pages are. IPSOS (talk) 21:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with you about talk page usage. By putting discussion in edit summaries, you are inviting reversion in order to reply to you in an edit comment. Think about it. IPSOS (talk) 02:27, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Reply

I'm truly sorry that you believe so. Please feel free to restore it if you believe it needs further discussion, even tho my own analysis led me to believe otherwise. Regards, Phaedriel - 08:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party is now active, and your input is requested. Further information is available at the Mediation location, Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for mediation/Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Kind regards, Anthøny 16:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)