User talk:SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2013/October


Reema returns

Fancy nipping back to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Reema_Welling? She's active again and it is blatant. - Sitush (talk) 20:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Blimey, that was quick. Are you wearing that hat with a blue flashing light on it? Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 20:10, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I saw it on my watchlist before your post here, so I took care of business then. —SpacemanSpiff 20:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
There appears to be some similarity with Akshata Sen. I stopped doing an SPI for that as sleeper checks were declined -- there really is no point in cleaning this mess if you can't figure out who to clean up after. —SpacemanSpiff 20:38, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
If you mean that sweeps are necessary even when the sock is obvious then I certainly agree when it comes to situations such as this one. My bet is that AGK is in a minority there.

Sen seemed to be creating hoaxes etc, whereas Reema's problem is mostly promo and notability. But tell me, how do you remember all these gems from 2 years ago and more? You must have an amazing memory - I couldn't even remember Reema's name from earlier this year until I checked my watchlist for an archived SPI. - Sitush (talk) 21:28, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, this reema her i have got to know that someone is miss using name as my account is blocked since Jan 2013... i am not able to edit... nor create account i have no issues as at that point of time i was new to wikipedia... now that sweetsamaria2 is blamming me for the same i have no other id... so i would i like to suggest that as sweetsamaria2 has called me and abused me so i have taken certain action her.. so please u, sitush are right person to guide me... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.193.41.232 (talk) 13:44, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

The reason you are not able to create an account or edit is because of your past behavior here. You have consistently engaged in disruptive behavior. If something as changed you'll need to request an unblock from your original account explaining why you will not engage in the same behavior and how you will edit differently. —SpacemanSpiff 13:50, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


Hi, good morning as i was new to Wikipedia i didn't knew many thing i thought that people are bully as we face few problem in the page before i never new that sitush and u or any other were in administration... so it was like we planned to take legal action so later on we came to know from concerned person that u guys are in admin... but then i was busy with work... later i got to know about it... the time you wrote Reema returns it actually sound like mummy returns... please guide and help me... for the same... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.193.41.32 (talk) 05:53, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Another who is this?

Bookishness: Jumping into Partition of India and warning other editors of arbcom sanctions, within a day of account creation. Abecedare (talk) 21:34, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I was going to say Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Crème3.14159, but apparently unrelated per technical evidence (currently). If he has issued the arbcom sanctions warning, I'm assuming he's been warned too? —SpacemanSpiff 02:02, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 October 2013

Nirmal Baba

Don't know how & when this article got on my watchlist, but recently it has been a target from POV pushers on either extremes, makings edits like this vs this. So can you and some of your page-watchers add the article to your watchlists, and/or semi-protect it? Btw, I am not interested enough in the subject to have read and verified the current version of the article, so if someone undertakes to do that, that would be a bonus! Abecedare (talk) 19:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Sigh, one of the extremes qualifies as BLP vios, so I'm protecting. The other extreme reeks of COI/NPOV issues. While I'm watchlisting, I'm not going to be available much over the next 10-12 days as we have guests, so I'm alerting @Dougweller: as he is very fond of such articles. —SpacemanSpiff 04:53, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Sarcastic much? Anyway, on my watchlist. Which somehow led me to Payagpur - is my new lead right? I removed the bit about its king as badly sourced. Dougweller (talk) 12:20, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Doug, it is one of few such articles that I haven't seen your thumbprint on before I visited, so you can't blame me :) —SpacemanSpiff 16:06, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Regarding deletion of Image ShivamPatil.jpg from the page "Shivam Patil "

Why was the image removed by you from that specific article ? It was not a copyright violation . Check this - http://www.flickr.com/photos/92400734@N04/10132111193/

A mail has been sent to Wiki regarding the grant of permission . I can even produce evidence of the mail being sent .

And what makes you think that it is persistent sock puppetry ?

Also see this link -https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ShivamPatil.jpg

A message has been displayed saying that " This image was originally posted to Flickr by PrakharGupta_Lucknow at http://flickr.com/photos/92400734@N04/10132111193. It was reviewed on 7 October 2013 by the FlickreviewR robot and was confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the cc-by-2.0. "

According to wiki rules of uploading a flicker image under cc-by 2.0 is accepted . Please do not nominate for deletion from commons. It is not a copyright violation. Please review my request .

Regards Hungama.com (RevengeTimeComes (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 06:58, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad if you leave a reply and help me out . Please . Regards . (RevengeTimeComes (talk) 17:13, 7 October 2013 (UTC))

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
You deserve this for your consistent great work on significant contribution to articles related to India :)

Regards .

Hungama.com (RevengTimeComes) RevengeTimeComes (talk) 08:43, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Another sock

Hi SpacemanSpiff, just so you know, here's another sock. Thanks - this kind of thing must feel a bit discouraging sometimes, but your work is very much appreciated. --bonadea contributions talk 11:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, this is a real mess as there's a copyvio aspect which is how I got to blocking the early socks. —SpacemanSpiff 16:06, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

an issue to sort out

i noticed that your Tamil aswell..I have been issued a warning for my edits on the page Seeman(director) though i have provided highly reputable citations for the same...and pro-separatist content has been restored on the page..wonder if you would be able to help?! Thank You none-the-less — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arlok2005 (talk • contribs) 09:33, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't have time to look into this over the next few days, but as this is some controversial information (and I have no idea about whether there's merit to it or not), you should post something specific at WP:BLP/N for the attention of the wider community. Be sure to highlight what content is controversial, why and why any references used are not of good quality and any alternative references that you have. Also, pinging @Bbb23: as he has been doing a lot of clean up work on India related bios recently. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 09:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Urgent: Contact regarding an issue

Hello, SpacemanSpiff. As you are a part of WikiProject India and have been an active administrator on the page Shivam Patil, it has been brought to the said actor's notice that an image copyright violation issue is taking place on the page, and among other issues and apparently repeated disputes, this is now preventing the page from having an image alongside the written content. He (Shivam) has asked for the e-mail address/any other contact detail of the administrator regularly involved on the page, as he would like to contact you directly regarding the matter himself, and obviously cannot do so on a wiki talk page. Please leave the best way for him to get in touch with you here, or as a reply to this ID, as soon as possible. A non-response to this message will necessitate approaching the Wikipedia Delhi office directly, where a top-down contact method would have to be employed. On behalf of Shivam Patil, thank you for your cooperation.--Myvictories (talk) 19:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Top-down contact method... hahahahaha!!! They think this works like our govt office. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:43, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 October 2013

Michael Krupa article

Hi

just noticed the Michael Krupa page was deleted via lack of sources. The author has recently passed away - 6th october 2013. As mentioned he wrote a book shallow graves in Siberia however he was also a member of the Cichociemni after his escape here are some sources

http://www.thenews.pl/1/9/Artykul/149376,Tribute-to-WWII-crack-paratroop-force-unveiled http://www.the-prophecy.webspace.virginmedia.com/SGIS/ http://www.the-prophecy.webspace.virginmedia.com/SGIS/Hellandback.htm http://www.the-prophecy.webspace.virginmedia.com/SGIS/Talesofsurv.htm http://www.the-prophecy.webspace.virginmedia.com/SGIS/Myesc.htm http://www.the-prophecy.webspace.virginmedia.com/SGIS/condtdeath.htm http://www.the-prophecy.webspace.virginmedia.com/SGIS/sithbltttt.htm http://www.the-prophecy.webspace.virginmedia.com/SGIS/ascstory.htm http://www.the-prophecy.webspace.virginmedia.com/SGIS/tmwwlfd.htm Jedrzej Tucholski - Cichociemni - Instytut wydawniczy Pax, Warszawa 1988 ISBN:83-211-0752-4 http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1061628.Shallow_Graves_in_Siberia

though his book has never achieved the prominence of the long walk or archipelago gulag it still is a prominent text of polish russian ww2 history which is why it was originally edited by Thomas Lane from Bradford University 94.171.167.19 (talk) 19:35, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

This was deleted over three years ago as a result of an AfD. If you think things have changed then feel free to create a userspace version (you'll have to register first) with reliable source references that address the concerns in the AfD. You'll need to be able to reference the newspaper articles to the date/issue/author/publication etc. Just clippings won't do as it's difficult to figure out if they meet our reliable source guidelines otherwise. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:41, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

u need some hisotrical correction, 1st.Pakistan is not a part of republic of India. Both republic of India and Islamic state of Pakistan was the part of British India as bangladesh is not the part of british india but pakistan. so the successor of British india is not only india, but pakistan also . u cant decide it on the basis of UN membership. Pakistan got its independence before Indeependence of India not after . . . so technically im right :-) thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajkumararslan (talk • contribs) 21:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Melgiri Pandit

This article is heavily edited by an IP hopper who besides any pov issues doesn't understand or agree with WP:NOR as shown by their recent restoration of content I deleted. If you have time, I'd appreciate your putting it on your watchlist. Probably needs long term semi-protection. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 10:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Watchlisted. The Chinese IP on this subject rings a bell though. I'll think about it, Elockid may remember if I had run a CU then (but my memory on this is a bit hazy). Abecedare just mentioned this problem in the section above!—SpacemanSpiff 10:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)


Tamil people etc

I read the first sentence of the text you were removing and thought that's not so bad and then I read till the end! That is some soapboxing... in an FA... in the lede... in the very first para... wow! And for a fine example of source-bombing, see what I removed from Shiva today. Even better, it was placed in the Historical development of Shiva section. What will they think of next? :) Abecedare (talk) 22:13, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

That type of behaviour seems particularly common for Tamil-related material. The only thing that comes close to it, in my experience, is overloading of stuff related to dalit issues. Both seem to attract a sort of missionary zeal that leads to loss of focus and weird games of connections often based on poor sourcing and even worse writing.

Having said which, I've never even read even 1 per cent of our articles. And of those I've not read, the "random article" feature seems to suggest that probably 50 per cent are pop culture nonsense and schools/places that really, really are not notable! As this thing continues to grow and our active editor base falls, the task of maintenance will get more difficult and the scope for legal problems will increase. The project is going to implode someday unless the community gets a grip. - Sitush (talk) 22:33, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, unfortunately this sort of poppycock peddling is far too common, I did see the Shiva thing briefly pop up on my watchlist, part of it is the Kalarimaster nonsense -- we blocked another sock just a couple of weeks ago and haven't gotten to a complete cleanup of that. Sitush, it isn't that it's higher in Tamil-related material, it's just that there's a lot of scholarly material easily available for this to catch a lot of the nonsense without much effort. Ask Fowler and he'll tell you how some of the other regional FAs suffer a more unique problem! You'll see a years long edit war on whether Babur was Persian, Turkic, or Uzbek and so on :) —SpacemanSpiff 04:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I remember the Karnataka history related disputes that had flared up some 5(!) years back. And Maratha/Shivaji related articles are so bad, that most neutral editors have just let them go to rot. Guess our Tamil friends cannot even be the best at POV-pushing <ducks>  :) Abecedare (talk) 05:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Did you know about this? First time I'm actually hearing about it, though I don't know if second language status means official language like in the case of Delhi. Will need to check that out. —SpacemanSpiff 06:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Spaceman, can you look into this article and use your linguistic knowledge to determine how months/years it needs to be rolled back? Also can you keep an eye on Shiva and Eshwar.om's edits? Abecedare (talk) 20:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

@Abecedare: I think Dab Nov 5, 2008 appears to be the best version, but it looks like Kanatonian July 19, 2012 could also serve as a starting point. The major problem came from August 2012 when the subject was reversed and no one noticed until now! I'm not sure about many of the words though, will have to look those up separately. As for the other bit of Eo, I'll keep an eye when I can, but he's quite persistent with dubious sourcing, I've had to clean up after him on Tamil lang I think; but I can't keep an admin-eye on that due to earlier involvement, asking @Dougweller: on that. We had one ed trying to add to India that India came from Tamil cintu which is the source for Sanskrit Sindhu because cintu (in proto-Dravidian and therefore Tamil) meant dates and therefore the Sanskrit word it was derived from it! It's likely somewhere there on the tp archive, dab and I then spent some time cleaning up after that editor avedeus, but it was a futile exercise, there are some seriously messy articles around such as Ancient Dravidian culture which can't even be cleaned! I just enacted the merge/redirect on that one now, so hopefully that would be the end of it. —SpacemanSpiff 22:24, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Restored Indo-Aryan loanwords in Tamil to the Kanatonian version.
  • On Shiva, regular watchlisting should suffice for now. Looking at the article history I noticed that Eshwar.om has added the same undue POV content three times over the last month, and it so happened that it was me who removed it each time (w/o realizing till now that it was just one editor pushing that POV). I don't want the "issue" to seem personalized between Eo and me through such back-and-forth reversions.
  • Amazing how much of our on-wiki time is spent putting out bush fires and cleaning up after POV warriors. I have been meaning to work on User:Abecedare/Twenty-sixth Amendment to the Constitution of India, but haven't touched it for over a month... Abecedare (talk) 22:55, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Shivaji and Maratha Empire

182.182.40.150 (talk · contribs) and 182.182.85.55 (talk · contribs) are obviously the same editor, Sitush thinks a Mrpontiac sock. Dougweller (talk) 20:49, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

No, this isn't MrP. This is another one, I'm not entirely sure if it's Mughal Lohar (a good friend of yours) or someone else. —SpacemanSpiff 04:04, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Protect the page Shivaji, it is having some good amount of vandalism. Bladesmulti (talk) 10:03, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
I should have recognised the IPs as Mughal Lohar socks. Blocked. Dougweller (talk) 13:53, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the page: Anushka_Shetty

Hi,

Hi SpacemanSpiff,

You undid the last edit I have done on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anushka_Shetty stating that the image is copyrighted, that image is clicked by me and it is mine. That is a free work and I have distributed it almost everywhere. Please let me know what made you think that is a copyrighted.

Thanks SaiChand T — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saichandt (talk • contribs) 10:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Can you let us know what camera you used for the image? Also, if it is your upload, then please upload the original image and not a scaled down version and subsequently send an email to OTRS about this. Thanks. —SpacemanSpiff 14:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi why didi u removed my link. Thats an Article regarding Ayurveda.

That's spamming of products under the guise of an article. —SpacemanSpiff 14:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 October 2013

Sock at AfD

I see you've just blocked User:Marcelrios as a sockpuppet. Af I right in thinking the sock's posts at this AfD [1] should be struck through? AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Strike through or just noting should be fine. I haven't seen the contributions yet as my WP connection seems to be wonky right now. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I'll do it then. Thanks. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Should have been "seen to" above. Go ahead and do it, I just managed to finally close the SPI. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:48, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Finally managed to go through the contributions, looks like nothing outstanding now. —SpacemanSpiff 03:53, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Jayadeva

Spiff, could you take a look at the talk page of this article. Thanks. --regentspark (comment) 22:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Warned and watchlisted. —SpacemanSpiff 03:54, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

why people ganging together for editwar?

May i know the reason why your edits encourages and supports edit wars like lord siva article ?--Eshwar.omTalk tome 07:10, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

You've been told politely many times that the kind of edits you're making don't belong in an encyclopaedia as you aren't able to contextualize sources or content. Given that, it is bound to happen that many editors are going to revert you. Discuss any additions you have on the talk pages of the articles and gain consensus before you add to the article. —SpacemanSpiff 07:13, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
User:Eshwar.om, I am currently making a page, where your content(that you wants to be added on Shiva) will be helpful. As for SpacemanSpiff, you may just block that page for now, no more edit warring. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:24, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
You'll have to ask at WP:RFPP for protection as I'm obviously involved. That said, I don't think this is a case for protection. —SpacemanSpiff 09:37, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Eshwar has raised a complaint at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring mentioning your talk page. I've commented there. I've also posted to User talk:Hasteur#Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bangalore Tamils about his AfC which is made up of copyvio from other Wikipedia articles. I don't know enough about AfC to know if someone else can stub it, but it needs to be stubbed or deleted I think. Dougweller (talk) 10:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
There was something else similar to this that came up on WT:INB a few weeks ago reg Tamil language too. —SpacemanSpiff 10:24, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

UIDAI

The blanking of an entire article for a single, small and easily corrected (by paraphrasing and copy editing) copyvio is a bit excessive. The copyvio tag could very easily have been placed in the concerned sub-section for better effect/ limited blanking. The page has been through some edit-warring recently so this will further embolden all warriors and vandals.

BTW: I am the contributor of that text, so I was required to have been intimated on my talk page (perhaps you forgot).

Just FYI, I believe that the quantity of text I inserted meets WP:FU as it is only a few sentences from the cited source and which are essential to conveying the gist of the scholar author's scholarly research. Nonetheless, I concede that it perhaps ought to have been paraphrased and which I undertake to do if you self revert.Notabede (talk) 10:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

It is not an excessive action as this clearly is a copyvio. As I have mentioned at the reports page, I couldn't figure out who was responsible so I did not notify. I will not self revert, the entire article has to be checked as there's far too much content in it that does not appear to be original. —SpacemanSpiff 10:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I thought the goal of Wikipedia was to NOT include "original" content (and to have material from reliable secondary sources). But I'm sure you know policies better than I.Notabede (talk) 10:18, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Please read WP:C. You have copied content from elsewhere onto articles here. NCPRI is another example of where you have done this (and have in essence created a duplicate article too). You have to paraphrase content and cite it to the reliable secondary source, you can not copy their words or expression. —SpacemanSpiff 10:20, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
And I have clearly indicated that I am willing to paraphrase any such instances as and when they are intimated to me. BTW, it is policy to inform contributors. And FYI insofar as the UIDAI text is concerned, I stick to my stand that it falls within fair use, but could benefit from paraphrasing. We can discuss NCPRI on its talk page or my talk page (I'll get on to it in any case now that you've brought it to my attention).Notabede (talk) 10:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

NCPRI

Where is the text now for the organisation "National Campaign for Political Reform in India" which is the original NCPRI ? The Political Reform campaign and the RTI campaign forked in 2003-4 but carried on using the same initials.Notabede (talk) 10:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

That is deleted as it is a copyvio. —SpacemanSpiff 10:47, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Just to be clear, if the copyvio issue is resolved, the NCPRI link can then be used to disambiguate the 2 branches of the fork (subject to other WP policies) ? I may mention in passing though that the usual course of action is to place a notice on the talk page of the concerned article or the concerned editors and give them a chance to resolve things on their own.Notabede (talk) 10:57, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
If there isn't a copyvio issue and the organization is notable then a new article can be created, and just to be clear, you have been indulging in more copyright violations, I just found another on the UIAI page and therefore to be clear I will not provide any chances to resolve these copyvios as they've festered on here long enough. I hope you will take this as a reminder to not violate our copyright policy and guidelines any more as you've had sufficient warnings now. —SpacemanSpiff 11:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Multiple "warnings" given by a single user (even an admin) in the space of 1 hour do not constitute "sufficient warning". The actionable offence occurs when habitual and persistent copyvios occur on multiple occasions despite warning. In any case I stand shoulder to shoulder with you in removing all contraventions of policy on UIDAI.Notabede (talk) 11:32, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Let's be clear, in this case it is sufficient, you have been habitually violating copyright policies since you joined until now. —SpacemanSpiff 11:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
And when was this first pointed out to me ? In any case I disagree after having reviewed my edits to UIDAI. The texts inserted were all properly cited from reliable / reputed newspapers and magazines, and only a few short sentences were used ("Fair Use/ Non-Free Content"), which could be easily tweaked for copyvio (if any) by using "quotes" and "paraphrasing". I think your reaction is excessive AND without giving the contributing editor opportunity to resolve such easily corrected issues.Notabede (talk) 11:45, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
And for the record. Whatever happened to Assume Good faith and Civilty?Notabede (talk) 11:47, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
My talk page is not the place for you to wikilawyer, if you follow our policies in future, then there's nothing more to discuss, if you continue to edit like in the past then there are problems. AGF is for genuine problems, not like in your case where you decide to wikilawyer instead of accepting the errors and moving on. This is the end of the discussion as far as I'm concerned. —SpacemanSpiff 12:16, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  • deindent:Dear Spiff, please don't bring your "frustrations" and 'adminship" into this. Had you posted your copyvio observations to the concerned talk pages and assumed good faith, we would not be discussing this. If you check Talk:UIDAI, you will notice that I had substantially cleaned out much muck, pointed out that the page was still biased, and was willing to work with any and everybody to improve the article under WP:CON. And I did all this well before you blocked the page.Notabede (talk) 12:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

My pages

Would you protect them please? Sohambanerjee1998 12:04, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

I've protected your user page for a week, if it recurs you can ask me again or request at WP:RFPP. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:09, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
You're one of the best Indian Admins I've seen. Willing to work and not afraid to speak the truth even if it means drawing a lot of flak, that takes guts man! Sohambanerjee1998 12:11, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
I've stated the reason(s) above. Sohambanerjee1998 12:13, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. —SpacemanSpiff 13:04, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2013

AfD closes

Is "no consensus" applicable here? It looks like I may as well have PRODed the thing. I'll take it up with the closer but would appreciate it if you and/or your stalkers could first tell me whether I'm going mad or not. - Sitush (talk) 11:26, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't hold my breath for any talk page stalkers, don't think I have any. It is a common enough practice to close these as no consensus when they've been listed for so long without any participation. —SpacemanSpiff 13:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Ah, we've just conflicted. I've seen such things deleted as being effectively expired PRODs and thus had just asked that question of the closer. Thanks for your input. - Sitush (talk) 13:05, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Greetings and... reasonable doubt

Greetings SpacemanSpiff. I've just reverted this edit (diff.) at Ramayana because, as per my edit summary, it breaks existing links. As I see from the revision history that you've participated in that article, I'd be grateful if you could just check it out to see if there is any basis for changing Nepal to Nepali in the names for the languages mentioned (and the corresponding modifications elsewhere... although a quick glance at random references tells me there isn't, but I know nothing about the subject. There is also an article called Nepali language). Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 12:42, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I think the script has been called Nepal script as it was region and not language specific and as far as the language name goes "Nepal Bhasha" and "Nepali language" are two different ones, albeit related, so your revert appears fine given that no explanation was provided. Page 935 and page 852 seem to support the current content. Perhaps @Abecedare: has some better idea about this. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:36, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
First, I have to admit that I didn't know that Nepal Bhasa ≠ Nepali language till date; so I again learned something editing wikipedia. :)
Looking up sources, everything in the version User:Technopat reverted to checks out, except that I couldn't verify that the old Ramayana manuscript was written in the Nepal alphabets (which may still be true), and the date of the manuscript needed to be moved from 14th -> 11th century (a rare instance in which wikipedia article under-claimed antiquity!). The rest looks fine and I copyedited and added citations for the two sentences. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 05:25, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I found out about them being two different language groups only today -- was always under the impression they were more like Bhojpuri-Maithili. —SpacemanSpiff 14:27, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Anagha Deshpande AFD

In case you aren't aware already: AFD. I have half a mind to close it as a point violation/obvious keep, but am desisting for now. Abecedare (talk) 09:27, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I remember reading about it on the other AfD, but didn't think there was an afd for this. —SpacemanSpiff 14:27, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Non-improvement messages on article talk pages

How should we react to messages such as this on article talk pages? It has no real bearing on improving the article but is exactly the sort of generalised comment that often leads to further irrelevant comments and even fights (especially, in this case, because of the "crazy people" phrase). Sometimes I delete, sometimes I ignore, sometimes I tell them about the purpose of such pages; almost invariably, somewhere down the line, replies come in and they're never useful ones. I've seen situations where people have entered replies to comments of this nature from a year or more ago, thus prolonging the agony. - Sitush (talk) 10:03, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I would normally delete per TPG, but I don't understand what's being said here. This topic is one of @Abecedare:'s expertise areas ;), so I'd wait for him to opine. —SpacemanSpiff 12:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I know what is being said ;) Thanks for the input. - Sitush (talk) 12:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Agree that deletion would make most sense for the reasons Sitush already listed. Sometimes, simply ignoring off-topics comments is preferable to avoid drama or biting... but the former is not even an option with the articles/editors involved. And nice try Spiff trying to send me down that rabbit hole again :) Abecedare (talk) 13:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
The wise and the worldly have spoken. I've done dat ting. - Sitush (talk) 13:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for all your help. If you could take a look at the discussion pages for BAPS and Swaminarayan, it would be really helpful. I truly am thankful that you reached out and corrected any mistakes that I have made. Please reach out to me anytime. Thank you.

Bluespeakers (talk) 14:48, 30 October 2013 (UTC)