en User talk:Sooku

Welcome!

Hello, Sooku, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! AdamJacobMuller 05:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ciel-2

Wikipedia is not a news service. Please stop reporting your television provider's current outage. -- WikHead (talk) 05:54, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is preposterous. I referred to a public source on the Internet and I said that there has been no announcement of a satellite problem. Obviously a powerful corporation is exerting pressure on you. Now I know where the power center is. Wikipedia also has hundreds of articles that have a disputed status and your reviewers have their own biases. No one cares because there are no powerful lawyers involved. Try to be a little less of a corporate lackey. There is such a thing as freedom of speech in America. Sooku (talk) 06:02, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what that means, but I do know what WP:NOTNEWSPAPER means, and I think it would be helpful if you did too. Television and communication service disruptions are common everyday events, and when they happen, technicians routinely work around the clock until the problem is resolved. I'm sure this temporary outage was an inconvenience to many television viewing customers, but it's a few short hours of their lives that will soon be forgotten. Trivial announcements and news flashes like these are best left posted to the provider's customer support message board, rather than preserved in the time capsule of an encyclopedia. Such information is simply not of interest or importance to the reader once the technical issues have been resolved. -- WikHead (talk) 04:03, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I get it. I am a principal systems engineer interested in all communications satellites. My intent was to add a note to Ciel-2's in-orbit performance, in the Wikipedia article describing the satellite, and not to complain about my favorite soap going down. Your initial comment was presumptuous and disrespectful, imho. Was it meant to be funny? Sooku (talk) 03:48, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject India Tag & Assess 2012 Contest

Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.

As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.

If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.

You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.

ssriram_mt (talk) & AshLin (talk) (Drive coordinators)

Delivered per request on Wikipedia:Bot requests. The Helpful Bot 01:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Personal criticism

You have made things personal with your edit of 03:02, 14 March 2012 at Talk:Breeder reactor#POV tag, see [1]. I’ve taken no joy in adding this tag, and have already said: “There really is no choice but to add a POV tag to this article, as the article is unbalanced for the reasons discussed by other editors in the above sections on this Talk page”. Since then another editor has agreed with the placement of the tag. Please remove your personal criticism of me from the Talk page as it is not helpful and is against Wikipedia policy. Johnfos (talk) 03:16, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the revision, which makes my point without a personal reference. Sooku (talk) 03:31, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

— Newslinger talk 01:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Hindutva#Rollback are for discussion related to improving (a) an encyclopedia article in specific ways based on reliable sources or (b) project policies and guidelines. They are not for general discussion about the article topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 13:24, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 10:46, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your edits to articles, such as the edit you made to Terrorism in India. This is a common mistake to make and has probably already been corrected. Please do not sign your edits to article content, as the article's edit history serves the function of attributing contributions, so you only need to use your signature to make discussions more readable, such as on article talk pages or project pages such as the Village Pump. If you would like further information about distinguishing types of pages, please see What is an article? Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I understand Sooku (talk) 20:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rants

It is evident that you are up to no good except in using Wikipedia talk-pages like a forum. If you continue, I will report you at WP:AE. TrangaBellam (talk) 08:30, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

REPLY: While I respect your opinion and freedom of expression, I don't know what specifically you are talking about. I am an independent researcher with several patents and refereed publications, and experience in academia, engineering and business. I only comment when I disagree with something, or have additional related information, to avoid wasting editors' time. This Talk page, for some reason, does not list most of my comments, which correct errors or add citations, including references. Not sure how to respond to "up to no good". Sooku (talk) 09:13, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a forum - if you disagree with something, you must provide a justification centered on our policies. Your personal credentials are irrelevant. TrangaBellam (talk) 12:48, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I know that. I gave you my credentials only because you rebuked me as if I was a random heckler. There is no specific disagreement since I don't know what you're angry about. Sooku (talk) 08:44, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

Please refrain from using talk pages for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. RegentsPark (comment) 12:21, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm looking through your contributions and they are almost entirely centered on what you perceive as bias on Wikipedia. Please note that general comments such as this or this or this are not helpful. If you feel that something needs to be changed, please make specific suggestions that are backed up by WP:reliable sources. I note that @Doug Weller: has warned you about this and has notified you about sanctions in the ipa area. Please be aware that, if you continue to comment in the same fashion, you face the possibility of blocks or topic bans. --RegentsPark (comment) 12:27, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RegentsPark, thanks for the note, I will not submit any more personal opinions or comments. But if I have a specific and properly sourced edit, should I propose it in Talk, or just change it in the Article? Sooku (talk) 20:02, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You also don't understand WP:NPOV. It's a policy that applies only to articles - everyone has a pov and we use sources with a pov. Doug Weller talk 12:42, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Doug, you are right. I do need to understand the NPOV policy better. As written, " a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Is there an enforcement process? For instance, if I can show that the article on Indigenous Aryanism exhibits clear editorial bias, i.e. takes one side in a multi-sided debate, do I have any recourse? Sooku (talk) 19:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article talk page or WP:NPOVN. Doug Weller talk 20:18, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions, as you did at Talk:Hindu American Foundation . Abecedare (talk) 21:28, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding: as I mentioned on my talkpage, I almost blocked you as not here to build an encyclopedia since despite multiple prior warnings, you resumed treating the article talkpage as a forum. And your comment cast aspersions on a real-life person, which is a violation of WP:BLP. The next time you repeat such behavior I will block you if I spot it, and recommend that any other admin who happens across it, do so too since you have been given ample warnings by now. Hope you'll reconsider your (mis)use of this platform instead. Abecedare (talk) 21:37, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand what specifically you are objecting to. Is it too much to ask that you explain it to me? What does " treating the article talkpage as a forum" mean? What "ample warnings" are you talking about? How is the Talk page supposed to be used if not to leave comments? I did not edit the article. Why the angry outburst? It seems to me that I am not the one being irrational and arrogant here. 2600:1700:38D0:56D0:FCD1:85EF:D6B2:3304 (talk) 22:09, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see:

WP:FORUM, which says, Wikipedia is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses... as in an editor's personal speculation about how a judge's assumed religion may have played a role in their dismissal of a case.
WP:NOTAFORUM, which says bear in mind that article talk pages exist solely to discuss how to improve articles; they are not for general discussion about the subject of the article

Also read WP:BLP carefully since it applies to the latest comment I warned you about. If you need further help about wikipedia policies and guidelines, I would suggest asking at WP:TEAHOUSE. Abecedare (talk) 22:27, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Sooku (talk) 22:44, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Doug Weller talk 12:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for continuing to treat wikipedia as a soapbox and web forum (eg, most recently, here and here) despite numerous previous warnings.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Abecedare (talk) 15:32, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sooku (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I withdraw the statement about the judge's religion in response to Kautilya. I understand that it violated policy. However "judge", as far as I know, is not a specific living person.~

Decline reason:

I took a look through your contributions and am left with a feeling of "ugggh". This unblock request doesn't come close to addressing the problems here. Frankly, I think it's time for you to move on from Wikipedia. Yamla (talk) 10:42, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Clarification

Does "time to move on from Wikipedia" mean that I can no longer USE Wikipedia? Please clarify. Also, your comment "ugghh" is not helpful.

The core issue in my record is that I don't know how or whether I can include an unrepresented POV in an article. Doug Weller told me that everyone has a POV. The NPOV policy specifically allows a balance of multiple POVs. Yet any time I try to insert new, relevant but unorthodox information, some editor shoots it down.

If there is room at Wikipedia for a genuine NPOV policy, with regard to India, I would like to be reinstated. However, my input will always be decolonized.