This is an archive of past discussions with User:Srikeit. 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.
Why did you delete the Soul Weaver page? It was all factual and NOT plagerized material. It presented information about a new religious movement. The best answer I received so far is "conflict of interest". With who? I don't get it. My first contribution to wiki was not a plesant one! Grant swm21:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume 1, Issue 2 - November 2006
Project News
The Performing Community: Thanks to many contributors like you, we're proud to share that our community is the third most performing community. It has more than 50 FAs related to India, to its credit, lagging only behing Wikiproject Biography and WikiProject Military History.
The Wikipedia 1.0 Assessment statistics for India related articles show there are 51 Featured Articles, 5 Class-A articles, 16 Good Articles, 101 Class-B articles, 167 Start-Class articles and more than 4000 Stubs. There were more than 10000 unassessed articles related to India.
Welcome. It has been weeks and months since the idea of newsletter was mooted among the WikiProject India Community. This would be our first full-fledged edition of our Newsletter, and we'd like to start by saying we are very happy to have you among us.
This is your newsletter, and we want you to be part of it as well. Provide us with news tips here. It can be anything related to the project, from discussions to calls for help, and other interesting stuff within our community. If you have received or given any barnstars recently, do let us know.
Advertisements for recruitments within your WikiProject sub-groups are also welcome. We'll run special sections, and recurring columns in the coming issues.
This edition special
Cartography Department (Shortcut:WP:INMAP): The Department of Cartography within the WikiProject India is a group of wikipedians who work on providing quality maps related to India. Their contributions gain more significance as we try to provide more information on places, districts and states of India. As a thumb rule, maps serve better if they are in SVG format. The location maps by the cartography department has helped us include location information based on latitudes and longitudes for a give place within India. The Indian Roadways map is a featured image, one amongst the few best road maps in the world. Still, there is more work to be done. There are 604 districts in India (see List of districts of India), and each district page needs a map of that district. You can help too. Contact the Cartography Department to learn how you can help in making the best maps in Wikipedia to be India-related!
Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may mention it at WikiProject India Outreach Department.
=( India's not in the Southern Hemisphere? Lol...that was a very stupid mistake then. Thanks for pointing it out. Nishkid6401:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Why was the article on Pbrain deleted? The comments said it was an expired product, but it is a recent extension to the Brainfuck programming language.
192.127.94.7
Konstable RfAr
Hi. I see you're doing some clerking for ArbCom now; hope you enjoy it. Quick suggestion: I think that wangi, who filed the case, should probably be listed as a party to the Konstable arbitration. Not that I am suugesting any action of any kind should be taken against wangi, but as a matter of form and to make sure he's getting the right notices, etc. Regards, Newyorkbrad02:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion. I've done the needful. I am quite enjoying clerking for arbcom and am looking forward to continue. Cheers --Srikeit06:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi :-) I saw your ping. Sorry I missed you. If you were asking about the above case you closed; it looks GREAT! It was a tricky one too. Take care, FloNight17:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward
Thanks for the vandalism revert on my talk page, I appreciate it. I've put it back, but that's just so that I can recognise him the next time he pops up. Have a pleasant day. yandman08:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Why Tagetik has been deleted?
I don't understand why you deleted "Tagetik" page.
I look for the other Corporate performance management vendors pages and I can't find the reason why only Tagetik has been deleted.
I looks like a number of statements of non -parties have disappeared; they need to be copied to the talk page of the main case page. Also you need to set the majority. Thanks. Thatcher13100:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Srikeit. RfAr ScienceApologist has changed since it was opened. Most of my statement is missing. The evidence space I reserved on the Evidence page is missing. Would you happen to know what's going on here? Asmodeus14:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I have restored the missing statement; just a goof. If you feel you must have the top section of the evidence page, you can make a space there. It's largely irrelevant, though. Thatcher13114:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. (However, I do find it remarkable that almost all of the "goofs" appear to work in one particular direction around here.) Thanks. Asmodeus14:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
That's not a particularly fair statement. The case was formally opened by Srikeit who has nothing to do with the ongoing dispute. I reviewed the open procedure and caught another error but not this one. As Srikeit explained on my talk page, he opened the case at 2am his local time. This being a wiki, your your full statement was preserved in the history and it was trivial to find and recopy it. Any suggestion that this was deliberate is totally uncalled for. Thatcher13114:48, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
When I checked yesterday, the RfAr had been opened with my statement intact. That somehow changed. Since I don't know exactly how things work on your end, I won't be overly judgmental about it. But my experience with Wikipedia administrators and adminstrative procedures has thus far been skewed in a way that has not been satisfactorily explained. I hope you won't mind if I occasionally voice this observation. Thanks again, Asmodeus15:12, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I believe you are mistaken. The history of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/ScienceApologist shows only two edits; Srikeit's creation of the page and my addition of the rest of your statement. The process of opening a case is somewhat complicated, involving, among other things, copying and pasting the statements from the main RFAR page into the main case subpage template. Although your statement in full was on the main RFAR page, it appears that Srikeit left out several sections while creating the case page. I assure you this was inadvertent. Thatcher13115:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I wholeheartedly apologize for my error in opening the case. I assure you that this was completely unintentional and accidental. As I mentioned on Thatcher's talk page, it was very late in the night and I should have probably left the case opening for the morning when these slip-ups could have been avoided. Once again I apologize for any inconvenience caused. --Srikeit16:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation, Srikeit. I find it credible and satisfactory. (I know that some of you admins must be worked to the bone, and I greatly appreciate your willingness to serve the community under such adverse circumstances.) Best regards, Asmodeus16:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
You seem to have forgotten to remove the Konstable arbcom case from the list of cases in the evidence phase, now it's progressed (and been added) to voting phase. David Mestel(Talk)16:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Only a proposed motion is in the voting phase, the rest of the case is still in evidence/workshop, so it is listed in both places. Thatcher13116:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I am requesting it be undeleted. Any reason why it was deleted, "expired prod" is not exactly a "informative deletion reason" (in fact it is asked not to use that)?
Zujik, expired prod means that someone used {{prod}} to suggest its deletion and nobody contested it within a reasonable period. If you'd like the deletion reversed, make your request at WP:DRV. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Really, a prod does not need to go to WP:DRV. If an admin disagrees they can re-create the article. That was the original thinking behind the prod process. Both less contentious deletion and re-creation. --FloNight17:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
You may take this matter to WP:DRV if you wish or re-create the article if you wish (I have emailed you the content). I would also like to point out that the article had been PRODded for seven days at the time of deletion (i.e two days overdue). Also it is the obligation of the editor proposing the deletion, to inform the creator of the article about the prod. Nevertheless I apologize for any inconvenience caused. Thanks --Srikeit05:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Audio samples
Could you specify what language this is spoken in? Also consider uploading it to Commons. If you do, use the format xx-file_name.ogg where xx is the current language code. If possible, try to specify the age, sex and place of residence and/or birth of the speaker.
Um... the file is a pronunciation clip. It is the way Kerala is pronounced in the voice of a native speaker (i.e me) and is not spoken in any particular language. I had uploaded the file along with quite sometime back along with many others and unfortunately did not know the benefits of uploading to commons at that time. Re-uploading nearly 500 files to commons will be a really onerous task (not to mention extremely time consuming and quite pointless). I'll do the needful when I upload media in the future. Thanks for the note --Srikeit06:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume I, Issue 3 - December 2006
Project News
Name change of cities in Karnataka: A straw poll was conducted on the proposal to change the name of cities in Karnataka, per the Nov 1, 2006 decision by the Karnataka government to rename them from the current anglicised forms. The result of the poll was to change the names. As controversial as the decision may be in the real world, the article Bangalore in Wikipedia still reflects the old name. You may be interested in knowing why. Dig the archives.
New Project Noticeboard (Shortcut:WP:INB):WikiProject India now sports a new colourful centralised noticeboard. An effort to make the noticeboard current and dynamic was mooted a few days back, and Ganeshk came up with the new format. The new noticeboard will strive to be the one-stop shop for all project related information. The shortcut is WP:INB.
Members List: The old members list is being phased out to give way for the new members list. New members are requested to add their names to the new members list. As the newsletter grows, further issues of the Project Newsletter will be delivered to those enlisted in the new list. So dash down now, to check if ur name is in there.
Congratulations to all contributors who helped to develop the above content to represent the best of Wikipedia!
Need some help?
Are you stuck at a point where admin help is needed? There are 22 Indian Administrators in Wikipedia at the last count. If you need some help with anything related to WikiProject India, they are just a couple of clicks away!
Welcome to the December 2006 edition of our newsletter. Time flies past like matter into the black hole. It is interesting to notice that we are already into the last month for the year of 2006. 2006 saw discussions and development beyond realisation. In the world of Wikipedia where quality counts than quantity, we have come a long way. We've made better than 'nothing', to say the least, and even that is an achievement. I take this opportunity to thank everyone including those who have dotted the i's and crossed the t's.
As before, we'd like to stress, this is your newsletter, and we want you to be part of it as well. Provide us with news tips. It can be anything related to the project, from discussions to calls for help, and other interesting stuff within our community. If you have received or given any barnstars recently, do let us know. Sponsored content for recruitments within your WikiProject sub-groups are also welcome. We'll be very happy to include them here.
Before we sign off, Advance New Year Wishes, everyone.
The rating process gains more significance as we try to sort out which articles and which topics need more attention to balance the India related systemic bias within wikipedia. As a thumb rule, anyone can rate any article based on the related criteria, within the Stub/Start/B/A levels. However, ratings for Good Article Status and Featured Article status go through the nomination processes.
How to?: The "how to" part of assessment is very simple. Just head on to the talk page of any India related page and you'll find the {{WP India}} template. Simply classify the article based on the content and the criteria mentioned here. You can find the detailed instructions here. If you think it may qualify for GA/FA status, first consider submitting the article for peer review.
You are receiving this newsletter because you part of Wikiproject India. If you'd like to change your subscription options, please say so at the Outreach Department.
As you know, Essjay redid the main CU page so that pending cases are listed on RFCU/Pending rather than the main page. Unfortunately, the closed case header on all the old closed cases still points to the main CU page. I was hoping you could use AWB to fix all the old cases. The url in the case header
Will be no problem, just a "find and replace" job using AWB. However what really ticks me off is that the dates are wikilinked which means I can't do a direct load from the links on the page without a lot of tedious omissions. Why are the dates linked anyway? Its completely useless AFAICS. Do you mind if I un-wikilink the dates so that my job gets easier? Cheers --Srikeit06:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Posted a Wikipedia article on Santa America a few weeks ago. It was deleted due to a {prod}. I'm not entirely sure why it was flagged for deletion. Can't see the discussion on it since it is now gone...
Any information on why the article was deleted and what needs to be done for encyclopedic validity would be greatly appreciated.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot05:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I've noticed the edit summary given for some deletions is listed as simply 'expired prod'. What exactly does this mean? Is it some kind of administrative cattle prod used to 'expire' articles? :) 80.47.187.12011:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Not at all silly of you to ask, guess you already know but I'll still give you an overview : "Expired prod" is used as a deletion reason for an article that has been proposed for deletion without objection for over five days. Please feel free to ask any other questions you may have. Cheers --Srikeit11:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Nice to see you working on a Sunday (as usual, perhaps!). I fixed the typo to rec ord that the bans have come to my notice :). I too hope that you are very fine. --Bhadani07:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up. I had noticed that and was about to correct it when we had a power outage in our area and I was unable to access the internet for several hours. I have done the needful now. Thanks again --Srikeit18:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Spelling
Evening Secret, just dropped by to say that if you had a normal username, I might be able to remember how to spell it... ;pEssjay(Talk)06:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
I see that you have removed votes cast by users before they were banned. Surely these votes are valid and should stand? Abu ali12:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes they were cast before they were banned, but they will be accounted for in the duration of the ban and banned users do not have suffrage in the elections. --Srikeit14:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I need assistance in how to report something, regarding the new ArbCom case at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions. Part of the conflict has to do with non-consensus page moves. However, one of the involved users Yaksha(talk·contribs·deleted contribs·page moves·block user·block log) is continuing to engage in page moves of hundreds of pages, without consensus or any attempt at RM procedure. How do I request an injunction to get these moves to stop and/or be reverted, while the ArbCom case is in-process? Some of the evidence that I would like to present involves pointers to current categories, but if everything gets moved, I won't be able to provide clear examples. :/ Plus, this constant stream of moves is just escalating tension and exacerbating the situation. --Elonka22:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
You have already proposed a temporary injunction at the /Workshop page though I believe the wording could be more precise. This injunction may however take a few days to be enacted so I suggest you contact an arbitrator directly (on their talk page or email) explaining the problem as you have here. Alternatively you could post this on the Incidents Noticeboard to attract some attention to the matter. --Srikeit04:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Dear. Srikeit
I am writing to you regarding the Sacha Baron Cohen article. For the past few months there has been an argument regarding the Sacha Baron Cohen’s mother. There are four reputable sources that say she is a Persian Jew. However there are some users who believe this is not true. Their argument is that the sources have taken their information from Wikipedia. People who share this belief however fail to provide any evidence that the sources are quoting a vandalized wikipedia article. After much debate with one of the users who shared this belief it was decided to leave the Persian Jew in the article until they can prove that the sources were quoting wikipedia. Recently a user by the name of Abu Ali has been editing the Persian Jew out without providing any evidence that the sources were using wikipedia. I have tried to reason with him however he continues to edit the article without providing any evidence or logic for that matter. I have never talked to an admin regarding a dispute so I am not sure about the process. If you could take a look at this matter I would be grateful.
Hi Srikeit, The issue has been discussed at length in the talk pages of Klymen, Mad Jack and on the article itself. Unfortunately Klymen insists on repeatedly reverting the edits of various people who dispute "Persian mother" claim. Abu ali12:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Abu Ali who disputes the "Persian Mother" claim has no evidence against the four sources. He has based his logic and argument on Ad Populum, personal belief and assumptions. Jack has no problem with the Persian Mother staying in the article at this point because he understands that the argument he has presented lacks evidence. Klymen13:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Jack does present evidence on the article talk page which is in my opinion very convincing. The statement that "Jack has no problem with the Persian Mother staying in the article at this point because he understands that the argument he has presented lacks evidence." is in my opinion not totally honest. In [2]. He says he will leave the "Persian mother" claim in the article, because he knows that any attempt to remove it will be immediately reverted by our good friend Klyman. Abu ali13:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is no place for opinions. It is a place for verifiable facts. Abu ali is also wrong about Jack. Jack included the Persian Mother in his last edit regarding this matter. If Jack had a sound argument that was verifiable he could have easily stopped me from reverting. The different between Jack and Abu ali is that Jack understands the flaw in his argument and is working to fix it, Abu ali on the other hand uses the flawed argument to push his own beliefs.Klymen14:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Brahma Kumaris case. Timescales
Hi Srikeit.
You posted a notificatoin on my talk page regarding the Brahma Kumaris Arbitration case [[3]]. I am in the process of preparing evidence now but would like to know how long I have to submit it. The Wikipedia:Arbitration_policy suggests that the time is one week. Have I understood that right? Would that be one week from me receiving the invite? I ask since I, along with other editors, were brought into the case later.
Also I am curious to know if me and the other late-comers should make "statements" in the same way that User:195.82.106.244 and User:Riveros11 did. Or was that just for the case to be accepted?
I have also asked a question about timescales on the talk page [4] but have sofar received no reply. Was that the right place to ask?
I apologise for the delay (bit busy in RL). There is no deadline per se for submitting evidence The official grace period for submitting evidence is one week, however this is often extended to 2-3 weeks if there is a steady flow of evidence being submitted and proposals on its basis are still being made. None of these time limits are followed rigidly however you would do well to submit whatever evidence you have as early as possible so the arbitrators can consider it for making proposals. You may also make a statement explaining your position and arguments in the case however this is completely optional (evidence in lieu of this is sufficient). If you have any more questions regarding the process please feel free to ask on the case's talk page. --Srikeit05:12, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi! I would like to request you to put your thoughts into the Sindhi-language talkpage. A Wikipedian switched the order of Sindhi and Devanagari on the article page. This was minor, but I thought is was a type of POV-pushing and an unjustified edit. Sindhi is a language that has been written in many scripts over the course of its history. The Sindhi-Arabic script is the only one used in Pakistan, where the vast majority of Sindhi speakers are located (around 19 million). Even in India, where 2 million Sindhi speakers live, Sindhi-Arabic script is actually more popular than Devanagari because the latter was introduced by the Gov't in 1948. So despite the fact that Sindhi-Arabic script is the most popular and commonly-used script for the Sindhi language, users are pushing for Devanagari to precede Sindhi-Arabic on the Sindhi language page. And although this is a very very minor issue, I think it should be address to the benefit of a major language's article page to be accurate and encyclopedic. Thank you, and best wishes-- Mar de SinSpeak up!01:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University
Hi
with regards the arbitration for the BKWSU topic page, here; [5] may I request that Sethie is co-joined as they are having equal or greater influence onto the page than many of the other users named making entire article reversions and influencing discussion?
After discussion with an arbitrator it has been concluded that since Sethie has made only one reversion in the last 500 edits to the BKWSU article, he may not be named as a party to the case if he does not wish to. --Srikeit14:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)