User talk:SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2011/April


Rice and curry

Please take a look at Rice and curry. one editor is very much stubborn and wants to call it a "national dish". Thanks Arjuncodename024 17:24, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Seems to be a talk page discussion going on, so let's see where that leads. —SpacemanSpiff 17:02, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Sinsen again

He is back as Transnivas (talk · contribs). Please block this account--Sodabottle (talk) 11:09, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Just seeing this now, I see that he's already been blocked by TnXman307, am going to be on and off for a while, so if you don't hear back from me quick enough, check with TnXman307. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 16:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal: Case update

Dear SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2011/April: Hi there! I'd like to let you know that in a Mediation Cabal mediation case that you are involved in, or have some connection with:

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2011-02-01/Ramachandra Guha

I've made the following changes:

This is a different request, filed by a different user back on 01 February 2011, that appears to relate to the same issue(s) as 2011-02-26/Ambarish Srivastava. Both cases mention you as the secondary involved user. As yet, the Cabal hasn't heard anything back from you on either of these cases; we would welcome your involvement.

Please have a look at the mediation case page linked to above, and participate in the current stage of the mediation process if you wish. Of course, participation is completely optional, and if you don't want to take part in this mediation at any point, that's totally fine. If you have any questions or concerns relating to this dispute, the mediation, or the Mediation Cabal in general, please do let me know. Thank you very much. Best regards, NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 16:49, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

There's nothing to mediate here, one particular editor is interested in inserting his personal opinions to a BLP in clear violation of our BLP policies, when cornered on that, he wants to use a selective segment of an answer to an interview question as an unequivocal opinion on the subject. There's no talk page discussion on this and no other editor has ever been involved, so what's there to mediate? As for the other one, multiple editors have already told the editor in question that using wikipedia for promotional purposes is not on, including via 3O and talk page discussions, and this one editor refuses to accept that self published blogs and images are not sources for architectural and poetic contributions and is spamming all those links. Sorry, but neither of these is mediation time worthy. —SpacemanSpiff 17:00, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
OK. Thanks so very much for your prompt reply. Sorry for bothering you. All the very best, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 17:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Image Question to Speedy Deletion: How so, the license is right under Wiki

You have marked images "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Page_1_-_Schweizer_Illustrierte_1991_Pages_38_to_39.jpeg" and "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Page_2_-_Schweizer_Illustrierte_1991_Pages_40_to_41.jpeg" to speedy deletion. How so is your license and authority to deletion valid? The images in both flickr which posted by someone else is posted under some rights reserved and I posted it under the same license that is valid under Wikimedia commons. Please enlighten me on your reasoning if I am wrong. If I am am let me know to what license these two shouyld be changed so I can request the author in the flickr for the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chindia (China-India) (talk • contribs)

The fact that someone has made a copyright violation on Flickr does not make it acceptable here. The copyright belongs to the magazine, so you'll need a release from the magazine. Are you the person who has uploaded it on Flickr? —SpacemanSpiff 07:03, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I do not hold any files or accounts in Flickr and that is not my account. You shouldn't speculate things that are not in reality. However I know that he is a guy who is a writer for the magazine. Should I ask him to email you for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chindia (China-India) (talk • contribs) 07:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Jacob Sahaya Kumar Aruni

Did I remove references from Hindu man? You are funny. Gnanapiti (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Please stop calling the edits as disruption. Providing non-working links to blogs and calling them references is actually the disruption. Please take it to ANI or wherever you want if you think what I did was disruption. Gnanapiti (talk) 17:14, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Nothing funny about your disruption, you removed this from The Hindu. As for deadlinks, they shouldn't be removed as an archived copy can still be found. Oh and I will take it to ANI if you keep continuing this way. —SpacemanSpiff 17:14, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Please take it to ANI. We'll sort it out there. Gnanapiti (talk) 17:20, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

India's Military Modernization

Thanks for your feedback SpacemanSpiff; I really appreciate it. I definitely understand your point regarding the little added value another reference would make for those two specific sentences.

Alternatively, may I suggest an additional sentence in the "military" section of the "India" page with my reference included? I recently added my reference to a previously unreferenced sentence under the "Budget" section of the "Indian Armed Forces" page. The sentence I'm referring to is:

"A major portion of India's current defense budget is devoted to the ambitious modernization program of the country's armed forces."

My reference speaks specifically to this crucial point about India's defense spending. I would suggest inserting this same sentence along with my reference after the 120th reference on the "India" page. Again, my reference would be formatted as follows:

Lombardo, Nicholas R. "India's Defense Spending and Military Modernization" (PDF). Center for Strategic & International Studies. Retrieved March, 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

Thank you again for your assistance.

Best regards, Lombardo.nick (talk) 19:26, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

PAGE PROTECTION

Hello. Some editors are continuously vandalizing Tamil Kshatriya page. Is it possible to protect it ? Rajkris (talk) 14:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Lifting_the_Indian_history_topic_ban and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks, Zuggernaut (talk) 15:58, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

India at FAR

India is now at FAR. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification, don't think I have time to contribute on that front right now. I might make a few drive-by comments later. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 10:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

C R Krishnan

Sir I wrote some details about C R Krishnan, author and film maker whose details are available on IMdb et al. You say you did not see any articles about the book in a Sussex newspaper ('The Leader') and any other significant details. You could easily ask me and I could have sent you a copy of the article with date etc.,. Another article about the book appeared in 'The Observer' a Sussex newspaper a couple of years ago and I have a copy of the extract. The book 'Frogs Under the Wheels' is selling quite well and are in libraries in Hastings, Sussex and a couple of stories are already made into films. Please check IMDb details of C R Krishnan. I rest my case, as I do not think that the absence of C R Krishnan on this site will make any differnce to his life! Kind regards Ian Holt

www.grenadierpp.com e mail admin@grenadierpp.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iansholt (talk • contribs) 08:20, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I did not delete the article, it was deleted through the WP:AFD process where I was one of a few editors who commented. Wikipedia articles require verifiability and subjects need to conform to certain standards of notability. If there's evidence of such, then an article can be created and you can contact the deleting administrator or follow the process listed at WP:DRV. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 10:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

Undo civil service article.

Hi,

You have been undoing an article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Secretariat_Service). You state that some of the txt is as same as another wiki articles. This is true but nothing can be done about it because the civil service in India is a common exam for all present central and all India civil services in India. Even the structure of the services, remuneration, post, salaries are mostly common and same. Hence you see the sentences, paragraphs and ideas same in mostly these articles.

I do not think you can delete just because some line are same because in reality it is. The civil service entry and remuneration in India is common for all.

IF you want pleaee reiterate or rephrase it but as in rpesent reality the civil services is common to all cadres, this is something cant be solved. You cant claim that I copied from other articles.

Thanks!

User:Vrghs jacob, you are blocked indefinitely and your socking/copyvio contributions are not welcome here. —SpacemanSpiff 09:42, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Ashes series/archive2

Hey, wondered if you'd take a look at List of Ashes series for me, and help me get this former featured list back to featured standard. Harrias talk 07:18, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to chip in, I have very little wiki time for a while. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 09:42, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

sock concerns

User:Nagarjuna198 has previously been suspected of operating an anonymous IP for sock puppetry. Just yesterday the suspected sock account User talk:98.114.218.85 engaged in a revert despite being warned by another editor about 10 days ago regarding sock puppetry. Have a look at the history for this page. ¬ Aog hac 2z | 22:04, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, jsut seeing this now, and it appears to be an old edit warring complaint so I can't take any action. Please submit at WP:AN3 for quicker action. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 07:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Clear sock--is this PONDHEEPANKAR?

I saw your comments on User talk:Kongu Kaviyarasu Gounder, so it appears that you have experience with User:PONDHEEPANKAR. Could you take a look at the most recent comment on Talk:Tamil Kshatriya, made by User:Ajatshatru1. Since this is Ajatshatru's first edit, yet xe admits knowledge of something xe says has "been going on for many months, probably many years now", it's obvious that this is a sock of someone. Does the style of writing match that of PONDHEEPANKAR? Qwyrxian (talk) 05:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

At this point I don't think so, I believe this is one of the socks/SPAs that are active on Nair and related articles, but just that one edit is difficult for me to say. The Nair group and PONDHEEPANKAR are two groups that have a presence on an off-wiki forum (Orkut is one) that coordinate edits (see the walled garden of nonsense on articles relating to Kshatriya) and attacks here. I think it can be blocked for block evasion currently though, just waiting for confirmation on the master might make things easier. —SpacemanSpiff 06:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Alright, I'll wait and see if the person posts anymore, or if that was just a one-shot to insult CarTick. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:03, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
The insults to CarTick and Sodabottle happen across both groups of articles -- the Nair garden consists entirely of synthesis while the Nadar/Kongu gardens consist of unreliable sourcing and attacks happen on anyone that removes anything. It's no different from other castes, unfortunately we seem to be getting too many casteist editors and it's very difficult to keep the areas clean. For a while, semi pp was used, but most articles have been unprotected so this problem will continue going forward. Nothing really to do about it except in the cases of socking and blatant attacks and edit warring. Small steps of POV introduction aren't exactly considered a problem by the wikipedia community. —SpacemanSpiff 07:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

About your edits in Babri Mosque

Hi, you have deleted these following lines taken from its main l1=Demolition of Babari Masjid Aftermath and l1=International Reactions. "The destruction of the Mosque sparked outrage and riots which spread to several cities. The demonstration was criticized internationally included widespread retaliatory attacks on Hindu citizens, temples and properties, by Muslims in Pakistan and Bangladesh. In subsequent years, thousands of Pakistani Hindus visiting India sought longer visas and citizenship of India, citing increased harassment and discrimination. The destruction was misused as an excuse in subsequent bombings like 1993 Mumbai bombings and other violence and terrorism." Exactly which line or content would you consider as POV? If telling a lie a hundred times and it becomes the truth then it doesn't affect truth, only perception. Truth is independent of 100 lies...असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. 09:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisthat2011 (talk • contribs)

And where in that article's reference does it say what the article is saying? Just because one article contains misinterpreted POV, it doesn't mean you can copy it over. —SpacemanSpiff 09:42, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
l1=Demolition of Babari Masjid Aftermath:

"The destruction of the Mosque sparked Muslim outrage around the country, provoking several months of intercommunal rioting in which Hindus and Muslims attacked one another, burning and looting homes, shops and places of worship. The ensuing riots which spread to cities like by riots in Bombay, Surat, Ahmedabad, Kanpur, Delhi and several others, eventually resulted in 1,500 deaths.[9][10]" .....(ignored gory details)..... "The demolition and the ensuing riots were among the major factors behind the 1993 Mumbai bombings and many successive riots in the coming decade.[13]"...

l1=International Reactions

"The international reaction to the demolition of Babri mosque criticised the Government of India for... Strikes were held across the country while Muslim mobs attacked and destroyed as many as 30 temples in one day by means of fire and bulldozers, and stormed the office of Air India, India's national airline in Lahore.[3] The retaliatory attacks included rhetoric from mobs calling for the destruction of India and of Hinduism.[3] Students from the Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad burned an effigy of the then-Prime Minister of India, P.V. Narasimha Rao and called for "holy war" against Hindus.[3] In subsequent years, thousands of Pakistani Hindus visiting India sought longer visas and citizenship of India, citing increased harassment and discrimination in the aftermath of the Babri mosque demolition.[4]... In December, 1992 Muslim mobs attacked and burnt down Hindus temples, shops and houses across the country.[5] An India-Bangladesh cricket match was disrupted when a mob of an estimated 5,000 men tried to storm into the Bangabandhu National Stadium in the national capital of Dhaka.[5] The Dhaka office of Air India was stormed and destroyed.[3] 10 people were reportedly killed, with many more Hindu women being victims of rape and Hindu temples and homes being destroyed in the hundreds.[5] The aftermath of the violence forced the Bangladeshi Hindu community to curtail the celebrations of Durga Puja in 1993 while calling for the destroyed temples to be repaired and investigations be held on the atrocities against Hindus in Bangladesh.[5]" Please read the main section of said page before changing everything. I had mentioned the main article sactions way back and now I have to explain the details..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. 12:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Once again, read the sources before justifying the text. Wikipedia is not the place to push your POV. —SpacemanSpiff 12:34, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
How is this my content or POV? This is mentioned in the main article mentioned in the link..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. 13:59, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Pon deepaankar again

Nagaswami (talk · contribs) - newly created account, heading directly to Madukkarai wall and saying he is acquainted with pon deepankar and praising him as "criminal genius". block per WP:DUCK? --Sodabottle (talk) 10:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I believe he is impersonating former ASI chief Nagasamy - has given a link to nagaswami's website in his user page. (deepankar usually quotes him in his pov arguments)--Sodabottle (talk) 10:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

It's a sock or proxy -- he is actively soliciting editors on his behalf on Orkut as per his post on his talk yesterday. —SpacemanSpiff 12:19, 29 April 2011 (UTC)