This is an archive of past discussions with User:Souravmohanty2005. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello. I see you have reverted the removal of your additions to the above article, including restoring a picture that has been deleted as privately owned. If the SBS owns this pic and permits use of it, then those 2 things must be notified in writing to the Wikipedia administration. User:Will Beback will be helpful in explaining how to do this. Apart from that, this is a highly contentious article, and a number of important issues are under discussion on the talk page. Please join in these discussions freely, but remember that reputable sources are required for all assertions. Also please remember that if undiscussed edits such as the ones you have just made are allowed, editors who hold a precisely opposite view to yours on the subject will be just as free to put in their views and beliefs. This will create an edit war, which will get everyone concerned banned. If we discuss extensively, and only make edits we agree on, we may end up with an article that none of us would have wished for, but with which we all can live. Thank you. Rumiton (talk) 10:01, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm open to all sorts of debate on Sri Satya Sai Baba. I'll actively participate in the talk page of the article. But I appeal u that, the edits must not removed till they are removed(especially the age at the time of Death).
And also, I request u to debate and remove the controversies(which were always baseless and never proved against him). The criticisms and controversies section must be removed as the allegations were baseless and were never proved.
Thanks for responding quickly. These are difficult issues and people have strong feelings about them. We are working towards a wording that all editors can live with. We need to refer to the allegations because reputable sources tell us they have played a large role in his notability, but we can certainly state that he was never brought to court about them. Right now we are looking into the US court case against the Sai Baba Society, which has been much misrepresented on the Internet. User:RadiantEnergy has requested a few days to examine some documents before we make any changes to the current article wording. In the meantime I had to revert your changes. I hope you understand the reasons for this and will be patient. Rumiton (talk) 10:36, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah I can understand. Please take your time, after all, we all want truth to be revealed to the world. If possible, please extend the protection of the page, so that there is no more Vandalism from unknown and unwanted IPs.
Thank you.
There was a flurry of unsourced and biased editing recently, but that level is manageable now. We are at silver lock protection level, which seems adequate. Rumiton (talk) 12:54, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
OK, we were not at silver lock level. That page protection icon was apparently illegally added by you. You seem to be trying to bend Wikipedia to your own purposes. Please change your attitude immediately. Rumiton (talk) 04:23, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
I had initially added the silver lock, long back, but realising my mistake(which was pointed out by an editor) I had undo-ed it. Later I recommended a page protection for the page which was subsequently done by one of the esteemed admins. I have never used Wikipedia for my own "purposes". I want the truth to be revealed, that's all.
Anyway, say me, there are many accusations against Jesus Christ, many baseless allegations which can shake the entire Christian system? Why are they not added to that page. It seems you are busy protecting your faith and also protecting the wrong allegations against another faith.
To be very precise, you not neutral, are you ?
You are accusing me to have a friendly approach towards Sri Satya Sai Baba (by saying I'm a 'devotee') of Sai Baba, similarly I can point out the hostility you are having towards him.
Please never accuse me( as u had earlier pointed me as a 'devotee'), ever, baselessly.
Thank you
I don't think I ever said you were a devotee of Sai Baba, and it wouldn't matter to me if you were. You also seem to be implying (rather offensively) some kind of religious bias in me which I do not have. I am very passionate about Wikipedia, for a lot of good reasons, and intend to do my best to uphold the rules which have arisen within it. That's all. Rumiton (talk) 11:18, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Reluctantly, I had to revert this article all the way back to the version of February 26 because this edit of yours, which formed the basis for the current article, included material copied from other websites. Everything we add to Wikipedia needs to be in our own words - we can't copy the words of others except for quotations. Feel free to add back any material you wrote yourself, and photos for which there is a proper license. Will Bebacktalk 10:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC)You can delete the copied words.
But reverting back the whole article is inappropriate. I'm reverting back the article. Plz delete the copied words. Plz donot revert back the entire article, as thebody of the article is not entirely copied.Sourav Mohanty (talk) 10:54, 13 May 2011 (UTC):You've restored the copyvio material. This is stuff you added - if you want to do a more detailed cleanup that's your responsibility. Please remove the copied material immediately. Will Bebacktalk 11:39, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Sure, that will be done. But I need time for that, to read and delete whatever has been copied and restoring & upgrading the contents of the articles in a better way. Plz do understand.Thank youSourav Mohanty (talk) 11:49, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Please make this your sole task until it's completed. If I don't see immediate progress I'll remove the material again wholesale. I suggest you copy it to your personal computer if you need to do lengthy revision. Then you can upload the corrected version when it's ready. Will Bebacktalk12:12, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
No, I'm afraid you haven't. It looks like you changed a few words, but I still see copied material. Please be more thorough or I'll restore the old version again. Will Bebacktalk01:28, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Are you unaware of which text you wrote yourself and which text you copied? I don't understand how that requires a 3rd party. Let me ask you directly: which parts of the article did you write from scratch? Will Bebacktalk07:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Well, when you told about the copied material, I had a re-look on the article and re-edited it ! Now you are saying that, the copied material is still intact. So do one thing, point out the "copied" material and tell me here.
And also point out which source, the exact words are copied from. That will be a polite and neutral approach.
That's an approach which puts the entire burden on me. I don't want to do that work. You can do like I did: copy a phrase into Google and see what comes up. The best thing may be to restore the clean version from February and paste your revised version into a user sandbox, where you can fix it at your leisure. When it's ready we paste it back. Then you won't have me hovering over you, nagging you to fix it immediately. How does that sound? Will Bebacktalk08:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
No reverting back to the February version is wrong. Infact, that February version, was entirely copied from the above subject's official website, hence I had edited the article.
Since, u pointed out copied parts, I re-looked into the article and removed it. There's no malicious or incorrect information in that article. Hence it should not be reverted back. Rather, I would say, the article must be kept intact for other editors to contribute and edit if they find any wrong or inappropriate info.
Thank you.
You're right: even the February version was a copy, and so was the first version. That leave no alternative but to delete the whole thing and start again from scratch. I know it won't be easy, but then there'll be original content of which we can all be proud. As you work on it, remember that no more than a few words at a time should be used verbatim from other sources. Let me know if I can help.
In case you're concerned, I'm not biased against this institution. I watch over hundreds of school and university articles. For some reason these articles are particularly prone to plagiarism, it's not just AIT. But no matter how common it isn't acceptable. Will Bebacktalk09:11, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
But, the current version, hardly has got any copied verbatim from official or other sources. Deleting the entire thing is inappropriate.
Thanks for clearing the thing that u are unbiased against any institution.
The current version requires no deletion, since the article is genuine and provides correct info about the institution.
Deleting the article would be a wrong approach, rather it must be left intact for other editors to post their views and edits.
<a href="#cite_ref-5">^</a>(C) 2009Acharya Institutes. <a href="http://www.acharya.Ac.In/csr.php" class="external text" rel="nofollow">"Top Engineeing college of Bangalore. Best engineering college At bangalore ranked 10 Th best by CSR survey"</a>. Acharya.Ac.In. <a href="http://www.acharya.Ac.In/csr.php" class="external free" rel="nofollow">http://www.acharya.Ac.In/csr.php</a>. Retrieved 2 April 2011.
I've posted above the list of refs for the old article. I haven't reviewed them fully but I see the list includes a blog, which usually aren't allowed as sources. I've created a stub with the old infobox and photos, etc, so there's a framework for future improvements. WP:UNIGUIDE is a helpful guideline for writing university articles. For example, we don't need to list every major or program. Will Bebacktalk09:28, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Will take care of the above while making future improvements.
Hello, Souravmohanty2005. You have new messages at Odisha1's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I see you did an unbelievable job of writing the article. For example, this edit you wrote the history.[1] Yet there's no source or citation listed. Where did you get that information from? Will Bebacktalk21:47, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
At this point you are acting like a repeat copyright violator, and have apparently taken to lying to cover your violations. Unless there's a suitable response I will block this account. Will Bebacktalk03:36, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Since you've repeatedly engaged in copyright violations and plagiarism despite warnings, and have lied about it, I have blocked this account indefinitely. Will Bebacktalk04:05, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
1st let me clear up things here, I never lied abt anything here. I had asked u to see the new edit and give me suggestions for improving the article ! There has been no copyright violations as far as the article is concerned. Moreover, U could have suggested me to add some references to the sections of articles if u found them to be untrue. Blocking my account is a very bad approach, infact a hostile approach !
I approached u in a friendly way, but u showed me hostility!
You lied to me when you said you had created a new version of the AIT without copying anything. I see you also copied most of the text in Acharya Habba, another article you created. Maybe you don't know what the word "copy" means. You've engaged in repeated copyright violations and have lied about it. That's sufficient grounds for blocking. Will Bebacktalk04:36, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I did not copy anything in the new article AIT, but I don't remember about the article Acharya Habba, since I had written it long back, probably when I was new to Wikipedia.
I request u to unblock me, so that I can give enough references for AIT, to prove that it's not an untrue article. Sourav Mohanty (talk) 04:41, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Unblock request
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.
I have been blocked indefinitely by User:Will Beback for copyright violations. The thing which I did was re-writing an article AIT, after it was deleted, citing copied material. After re-writing the article, I asked him to see the newly written article, but he deleted that article citing inadequate references and untrue statements. If I'm unblocked, I can give enough references for the article AIT and prove it as a truthful article. User:Will Beback also claimed that I had copied many things in the article Acharya Habba. Frankly speaking, I wrote that article when I was new to Wikipedia, so may be becoz of ignorance, I did it. I apologize for my mistakes, and promise not to repeat any such error again. I, sincerely, request and appeal to unblock me
Correction: I did not block you for the lack of citations in the AIT article. I blocked you because it contained copied material, despite the fact that you said it did not and despite the fact that I had to delete the previous version because you'd added so much copied material. In addition you created a second article with copied material and added copied material to at least one more article. You appear to have no concept that you are copying or that it is wrong. If you cannot acknowledge your errors there's no reason to think that you won't continue to copy text from other sites. Therefore your editing privileges have to be suspended to protect Wikipedia. Will Bebacktalk05:03, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello User: Will Beback, after u said the article had copied material, u deleted it. U created a stub of the article Acharya Institute of Technology. Then I added info to it and asked u to see it. I never created any second article or added any info in the meanwhile. The article Acharya Habba was created long back when I was new to the Wikipedia.
You created the Acharya Habba article on February 28, just six weeks ago. Less than a month ago you added copied material to this article.[2][3] And then yesterday you added more copied material to the AIT article, yet again. That's on top of your edit warring over a copyvio image on a biography. Will Bebacktalk05:28, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
(non-admin observation) I don't know if you have a look at non admin observations for unblock requests, but here's my take: Whether Souravmohanty2005 has been inserting copyvio material into Acharya Institute of Technology, I do not know, as I have not been following that article's progress. However, he has been doing good work in some other articles, and I'd like to point out this particular massive edit. IMO, Souravmohanty2005 is a good guy, who has probably erred just once somewhere in the line. He seems to be genuinely interested in improving the project. I request Will Beback to relook his decision. Whatever happens in the end, I will respect Will's decision, and hope Souravmohanty2005 will not err again. Regards, Yes Michael? •Talk05:16, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
If the user acknowledges his error and promises not to do it again I'd unblock him. However he's still in denial, or simply has no understanding of what the word "copy" means. Will Bebacktalk05:28, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Okay User: Will Beback, I accept my mistake and assure you that I won't repeat any such error again. Whatever error, has been committed by me, was out of utter ignorance. I apologise, for that. I request you to unblock me.
Sourav Mohanty (talk) 05:32, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Not good enough. On May 14, 2011, at 20:19, you added this text:
Students are trained and encouraged to participate in a number of inter-collegiate, inter-university and inter-college sports competitions. Acharyans are proud winners of a number of individual and team competitions such As Cricket, Football, Volley Ball, Chess, etc.
Where did you copy that from, why did you do it, and when did you realize that copying material from other websites is not allowed? Will Bebacktalk06:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I copied that from this place. I did it because, I was ignorant about a fact that, copyvio material is not allowed in Wikipedia. I regret this copied edit.
When did you learn that copying material is not allowed? Why did you not understand or comply with my previous instructions, or with the text right underneath the "save" button?
What other webpages did you copy from?
When you wrote, "Kindly check out the new article which I wrote (without involving any copied material). Regards, Sourav Mohanty (talk) 21:33, 14 May 2011 (UTC)", was that a truthful statement? Will Bebacktalk06:39, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I regret that statement. I wrote that on ur talk page with an intention that u would correct the article, if there are any more mistakes. I had approached u with a friendly attitude.
Sourav Mohanty (talk) 06:45, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
As I said earlier, I regret the copyvio material, but plz don't interpret me as a liar or a cheat. As far as article Acharya Institute of Technology is concerned, I only copied from the official website of the subject, no other website is involved in borrowing copied material for this article. I got to know the fact that copied material is not allowed on Wikipedia, when you deleted the article Acharya Institute of Technology.
Sourav Mohanty (talk) 07:55, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Intentionally making false claims is lying. Denying that you've lied is more lying. Copying material and claiming it's yours is cheating. Lying in order to get me to do something is manipulation.
You say you learned that copying is not allowed when I deleted the article, but you immediately added more copied material, knowing that it was not permitted and then lied about it. I believe you're still lying or failing to tell the complete truth. I'm not going to engage in this discussion any further. I'll leave it to other admins to unblock you if they see fit to do so. Will Bebacktalk08:08, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm not lying here! Whatever statements I have made above are truthful. I told that, I regret the part of edit which was copied from the official website. U should have removed that particular sentence or paragraph when you found that it is copied. I even told here that I copied the particular sentence or part from the website, why did u delete the entire article ?
I never added "more" copied material after u deleted the article. It was just a part of the old edit which was not changed in the old article.
What's the point of still blocking me when I apologized for the mistake I have done!?
Sourav Mohanty (talk) 08:25, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps this user can find an adopter, perhaps an experienced user from his country and agree to not upload pics for some time and to seek advice from the adopter and to not make the same mistakes. Off2riorob (talk) 18:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree with you User:Off2riorob, I will henceforth seek advice from experienced users. I promise, I shall not make any mistakes or errors in the future.
I once again apologize for my mistakes done. I request you to unblock me.
Sourav, Off2riorob has taken up your case and out of respect for him I'll give you a second chance to "come clean". I realize it's difficult for you to remember what you copied into deleted articles. However you also copied material into Sathya Sai Baba. Please review your contributions to that article and list the copied material.[4] You made 47 edits to that article,[5] including fighting over the copied picture. Please list the dates, times, and sources for the material you copied into that article. Will Bebacktalk21:53, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
11:06, 13 May 2011 (diff | hist) Sathya Sai Baba (Undid revision 428867087 by Rumiton (talk) Information provided is highly authenticated. This page is repeatedly VANDALISED by RATIONALISTS. Correct information must be made public.)
01:09, 13 May 2011 (diff | hist) Sathya Sai Baba (This is a controversial section, which in status, is disputed, hence it should not be posted on a biographic account of a late person.)
I didn't ask for a link to every edit you made. What I'm asking for is a list of every edit in which you copied material from another source. That's important because if you're unblocked your first task will be to undo each of those edits.
I realize that English may not be your primary language, and that you are apparently trying. However you still don't seem to be understanding the issue. The issue is not "getting information" from a another website or source. That's what we all do - we're not allowed to do anything except add information from other sources. Instead, the problems is with copying text instead of using your own words. Let's try an exercise. The text underneath the "save" button we push every time we make an edit says, "All text that you did not write yourself, except brief excerpts, must be available under terms consistent with Wikipedia's Terms of Use before you submit it." Could you please restate that in your own words? Will Bebacktalk10:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
In my own words, I write the above as :
" The contents which you did not compose by your own, excluding a few words/extracts, must be subjected to terms and conditions of Wikipedia'sTerms of Use before giving it for final use. "
Better. If I unblock you do you promise to remove all of the text you copied from other website (excepting only brief quotations punctuated by quotation marks), and to not add any more copied text in the future? Will Bebacktalk23:03, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
On that basis I will unblock your account. Please go through your contribution list[6] edit by edit and remove any copied material. Do not make any other edits until you've completed that task. Let me know when you're done. After that you can recreate Acharya Habba, work on AIT, or do whatever else suits your fancy. If I see you copying again I will give you only one warning. If you copy again after that you will be blocked indefinitely. Will Bebacktalk23:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Adoption
Hi Sourav - I see your unblocked - great. Please take your time and tidy up those edits as Will has requested - beware you are on good faith here and Will has warned you of the consequences if you repeat the same mistakes. Feel free to ask for help, from me if you have any questions or doubts please consider adoption WP:ADOPTION as it will benefit you a lot to get good advice , guidance and personal support. This user is experienced and adopting now and from Bangalore User:Tinucherian - why not say hello and ask him to adopt you - regards. Off2riorob (talk) 00:41, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
There is no procedure as such. Just leave a note on his talk page, requesting him to adopt you and review your edits. You may tell him about this discussion if needed. Yes Michael? •Talk05:09, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Sure, I can help you as time permits and as much as I can. Thanks for adding me to gtalk. I will be reachable faster on gtalk IM. Feel free to ping me for any Wiki related queries and doubts. -- TinuCherian - 12:52, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of Copied Material
Regards User:Will Beback, I had added copied material to these articles :
(cur | prev) 10:01, 15 May 2011 Will Beback (talk | contribs) (-6873) (rv to 05:16, February 9, 2011 to remove copyright violations)
I'm unable to undo the copied material. Kindly help me in deleting my edit.
Since the article Sathya Sai Baba, is fully protected, I'm unable to undo the edits in which I had added copied material. Moreover, User: Rumiton had reverted my version of the article :
(cur | prev) 15:45, 13 May 2011 Rumiton (talk | contribs) (-5604) (reverting to version under discussion on talk page. Please follow correct procedure for allowing pic to be used, and discuss issues before making further edits.)
The Sathya Sai Baba article protection expires 14:17, 20 May 2011, UTC time (same as Greenwich Mean Time). That's less than two days from now. In the meantime, you could work in a personal sandbox. User talk:Souravmohanty2005/Sandbox. You could either create a draft a new version of the Habba article, or work on new sections for the AIT article. Once the you've completed your cleanup work your drafts can be uploaded to the main article space.
While I have your attention, you appear to be marking most of your edits as "minor". Minor edits are those which make no significant change to an article, such as fixing a spelling error or formatting a picture. Adding or deleting text is never minor. See WP:MINOR. Will Bebacktalk22:59, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your valuable advice. I have created the sandbox. Now, I'm collecting information about those articles. I'll start working on the drafts soon.
I'm disappointed. Souravmohanty2005 pushed hard to be unblocked, promising to undo his inappropriate copying. He was unblocked, but hasn't done a thing to clean up as he promised. If I have to do the cleanup myself I'll reblock the account. Will Bebacktalk20:43, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Regards, User:Will Beback, Since my edits in the article Sathya Sai Baba were reverted by User:Rumiton, the copied edits were no longer there in that article.
And coming to other articles like Acharya Institute of Technology and Acharya Habba, those articles were deleted by you. And also the article Visvesvaraya Technological University was reverted back to an older version, hence my copied material no longer exists in those articles.
I'm extremely sorry for the late reply as I was busy with my exams. Sorry for the inconvenience.
(cur | prev) 15:45, 13 May 2011Rumiton (talk | contribs) (68,309B) (reverting to version under discussion on talk page. Please follow correct procedure for allowing pic to Be used, and discuss issues before making further edits.)
You'll have to remove the text "manually". That is, click on the "edit" link and then find and delete the copied text. Will Bebacktalk18:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you User: Will Beback. When I clicked on the Edit link and tried to find any of my copied material in that article Sathya Sai Baba, I could not find any. That's because User: Rumiton had reverted my edit and with that all my copied edit was gone from that article.
Here's the edit of User:Rumiton, in which he had reverted my copied edits :
(cur | prev) 15:45, 13 May 2011Rumiton (talk | contribs) (68,309B) (reverting to version under discussion on talk page. Please follow correct procedure for allowing pic to Be used, and discuss issues before making further edits.)
Please review all of your contribution list to make sure there is no more copied material on any article. When you're done then we're clear. Will Bebacktalk05:55, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you User:Will Beback. I once again reviewed my contribution list. There is n't any more copied material. All the copied materials have been deleted.
Thank you. Based on your solemn assurance that every bit of copied material you once added to Wikipedia is gone, you are now free to edit normally. Please seek help from other editors, such as your mentor, if you have any future questions about what kinds of edits are allowable. Will Bebacktalk20:02, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
