This is an archive of past discussions with User:Utcursch. 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.
Hi, I see that you were involved in the mess that was socking by Mughal Lohar (talk·contribs) around 12 months ago. Nev1 (talk·contribs) did a lot of protecting and blocking but is presently not active.
I am hitting problems in tidying Aurangzeb but while trying to do so I looked at Siege of Orchha. The latter was created by Mughal Lohar on 31 October 2011 and is at the point an unattributed copy/paste of the section at Aurangzeb on 30 October]. Little of substantive merit has happened to the Siege article since.
Now, I know that there is a way to retrospectively attribute such actions (a null edit?) but the problem goes deeper because the sources used in both articles do not in fact even remotely substantiate the statements made. The source does not even consider events before the 1850s, which is long after the siege. Furthermore, although I have so far not been able to prove it, I am convinced that the content is in fact a copy/paste from another source: the style is too polished for ML to do and also too polished by the standards that have existed generally at the Aurangzeb article for many years (numerous comments regarding poor English etc at Talk:Aurangzeb, plus my own delving through the history).
So, do you have any thoughts regarding what we do now? I simply do not have the time at present to fix both articles: the Siege one would have to be completely rewritten and sourced, but the Aurangzeb one is the more important of the two in terms of visitors etc and it is my intention to concentrate on that for now. - Sitush (talk) 16:49, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
I think so. The chief problem with the Orchha article is that the source is an English translation of a primary source that was apparently whetted by Aurangzeb himself. --regentspark (comment) 19:00, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Well, yes, there is that problem also. But since the source doesn't appear to cover the period, I have no idea what was intended. There doesn't appear to be another volume, per Worldcat etc. Frankly, the cites given seem to be fake refs, although I know that the original was practically a ghost-written autobiography of Aurangzeb, I'll mull over it for a few hours: in my ideal world, the article would be deleted pending a recreation but that is not likely to happen. Thanks for jumping in. - Sitush (talk) 19:56, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Please add correct info in charminar wikipedia citiation No.11
Please add correct information in the begining of the article in the citiation No.11, which you have changed recently. Please show me where is it mentioned in your citiation reference that there was a small hindu shrine and a holy stone located at the base of the Charminar and the words which says (some local hindu organization says it is old as charminar ) why are you creating problem by adding wrong information about the Charminar which leads to communal voilance. and also please note this is the second time you have change the citiation reference but your article is almost still same. As being a admin of wikipedia its not good to add wrong information. please don't take this Personally.
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Charminar wikipedia". Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!
Guide for participants
If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.
What this noticeboard is:
It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.
What this noticeboard is not:
It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.
Things to remember:
Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.
The article of Bhagyalakshmi temple under charminar wikipedia
Can you please let me know why did you add the temple article On 12th of November 2012 when there was riots in Hyderabad before everything was fine. Firstly you have added 1 line below the wikipedia page of charminar then later you made a paragraph of the article and after you add picture.
Please remove the article from the charminar wikipedia page actually this article should be added to Bhagyalakshmi temple page.
Thanks for creating the category for Bayley's novels. It will help with my current aim of gaining Bayley some posthumous recognition for his extraordinary work.--Wyvern Rex. (talk) 11:21, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I am dude3950 and I rally appreciate what you did with the Weslaco East High School page, especially the columns. But there is a problem, I don't know if it is just my browser (Google Chrome) but when I open the link, the server that the link is on doesn't like it and just sends me to the home page. I tried fixing it by removing the symbol code and just put the symbol but then the columns don't show any more. Do you got an idea as to how to fix this? Dude3950 (talk) 01:22, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Before making any changes to Sikh national history pages, i would suggest you to refer the history books in details, especially the ones which are written by Indians. please stop asking for citations for facts... It has been noticed that a constant vandalism was committed from your UserID. Would suggest you to refrain from it. Thank you Vickle1777 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:36, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
big format for dab hatnote
The reason I added the "big" format to the dabhatnote in the Sagar, Karnataka article, is because several people missed reading it and edited the article as if it were the Sagara, Karnataka article. Is there a better way to catch their attention? The existing dab hatnote didn't seem to work. --Bejnar (talk) 20:36, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello my Indian brother... I just found your great discovery that wikiuser81 is a sockpuppet of Vickle1777 based on the fact that wikiuser81 is making the same edits as Vickle1777. Brother, why don't you listen to your heart that truth needs to be told un-adulterated. Well, I admit wikiuser81 is not a suckpuppet of the Vickle1777. But it is the very Avatar of me, as was Vickle1777. But you Indian administrators don't want to indulge into sane wikipedia and mis-using your powers have blocked my Avatar Vickle1777 indefinitely. To be frank enough, even Red_Rose4u is also my Avatar. I am not your enemy as long as you don't think i am. But following your other actions, I emphasize, you have also blocked someone JackSinghSully and Bikramjit (i don't remember their ids exactly) by calling them sockpuppets of Vickle1777. Let me tell you, by supporting the Vickle1777's argument they don't become Vickle1777's suckpuppets and it is unfair to block them.
My Indian brother, everyone loves their respective nations more or less but they do love it. Because Nations are very life and breath of its nationals. You Indians have lived slavery(internal and external) for 1000 years and it was the Sikh Nation, the Khalsa, which came to your rescue. A lot of you people joined the Khalsa and cut their internal fetters as well. But yes, when external fetters were cut, everyone of you rejoiced but at the same time went back to your ancient culture of destruction. And this time, after assuming power, you started destroying your very own saviors. But, let me very emphatic here, if the Khalsa is the complete Satguru (as in the words of Great Guru Gobind Singh, the 10th King of the Sikhs), then the Khalsa is Sovereign as well. But unfortunately for you people, the Khalsa is also the republic of the Sikhs. And you tried to annihiliate my republic my nation my Guru.
But its ok, wikipedia in order to survive in India needs to take the perspective of you(Indians) rather than of the historical proofs. So, don't worry, you understand everything and yet don't want to speak out the truth.
Because if you were so truthful, why did you change the Nationality to Citizenship on Bhai Balwant Singh's page. And if they are different (as you have proven it by commiting the change) and which by any means Nationality and Citizenship are different aspects of life and politics, why did you not block another Indian (Neelkamal) from causing vandalism on that page by entering editwars and making it a point, under the aegis of your authority, to prove Bhai Balwant Singh an Indian national? Bhai Balwant Singh is the national of the Khalsa or simple terms Sikh National. As word Sikh reperesents both nationality and religion. And which you probably with all your fictitous and superficial knowledge will never understand that how Gurus made them inseperable. Take care my brother, i will create more Avatars and more and more as long you try to suppress the truth and keep blocking discriminately and keep pouring in your Indian persecptive into the Sikh pages. Wikiuser81 (talk) 06:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I looked at the Kumhar page and see that it needs a lot of clean up. I see that you have previously made edits to this page. I will spend some time cleaning up the page, can you also do the same. TimesGerman (talk) 18:21, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
I had edited it long time back, when I was working on cleanup of caste-related articles. But I stopped bothering about caste-related articles once I realized that people just come and turn them back into glorification propaganda. The same thing has happened to this article. Feel free to edit it, I will chip in if required. You might want to involve User:Sitush - s/he works on a lot of these articles. utcursch | talk18:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey thanks for the advice and I agree with you. My addition was related to the views based on the community, but I agree that neutral view is always the best option for learning and knowledge, which Wikipedia stands for.
Thanks again :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innovator GenZ (talk • contribs) 01:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
It began with user:Rahuljain2307 inserting 'Jain' religion in infobox. You consider it NPOV? There were edit war, too many complaints on talkpage, ANI, DRN, RSN, India related topics noticeboard. Where was you? No admin came forward to resolve dispute. Now as per all this long drama I mentioned both sides and suddenly you dropped to revert it? This is absolute nonsense. Please make it clear on talkpage of the article. If you don't, I will again go to any forums I think is appropriate. 18:22, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swami Aseemanand until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -sarvajna (talk) 20:53, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Need Your Help
Hi Fellow editor. Can you read the Sikh section under Spirituality. There is a nother editor who definitely has WP:Competence issues who wrote it before and made a hash of it with poor grammar etc. I think it maybe useful if you cast your eye over it. Thanks in advance. SH17:42, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi
Thanks for your suggestions on Jainism, seems to be perfect explanation. The whole "decline" related text seems to be useless on that page after knowing about the actual view of this page. I think you should make a full edit on that article, which would clarify the whole summary better. Thanks Capitals00 (talk) 05:07, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Attention
Kindly have a watch on this page, Jainism, this user "Rahul Jain" is simply reverting the edits by making claims that are equal to any assumption like "i don't like this, so removed". Capitals00 (talk) 06:16, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Kalapani border dispute
Bladesmulti has deleted nearly all text about the Kalapani India/Nepal boundary dispute and renamed the article to Kalapani, territory. Bladesmulti is also proposing deletion of the article here: and he and I have also been discussing his changes here:.
Since you have contributed to this article in the past, I invite you to look at these links and then participate in the discussions. LADave (talk) 21:08, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Sagara Karnataka
In February of last year you removed my increase in type size of the dabhatnote at the Sagar, Yadgir district that I had placed there because of the repeated confusion between the two places in Karnataka with the same name. Since then, this confusion has still reigned, with the result that now, before I fix it, there are four articles on the the city in Shimoga district, and none on the village in Yadgir district. I believe that this is an appropriate time to apply WP:IAR and make the dabhatnote slightly more noticeable. --Bejnar (talk) 02:39, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
I restored the village article and name, but there still remains the problem that we have three articles about the city, one at the correctly spaced Sagara, Karnataka the history of which begins with your move last March, one at Sagar, Karnataka, and one at the incorrectly spaced Sagara,Karnataka and which contains the whole history of the original article. Is there some manner in which you can switch the history to the correct article, or the correct name to the history? --03:08, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:SMGULP logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
I note you have just edited the above, but would point out that the two “Notes and Comments” should read 1 and 2 – and not 1 and 1. I have taken the liberty of reversing this part of your edit. If I have done this incorrectly, please let me know Alanfromwakefield (talk) 19:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Indian election
Note, were not opposed to your edits per se. Everyoen agrees that we need to make changes, but in accordance with the WP:BRD cycle when your BOLD revert was made the onus is on to get consensus for your change and then seek the change. Not to revert simply and then await a discussion. Seems like were agreed on talk and all willing to work there.Lihaas (talk) 19:42, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Could you please look into this investigation or suggest what can be done. Lihaas was requesting an adminsitrator JamesBWatson to close this investigation and he immediately closed the investigation!!!! Lihaas & Shriram was suspected of sock puppeting in Indian General Election Page
The admin who closed the investigation is right - there is absolutely no evidence of sockpuppetry. Editors agree and disagree with each other all the time. utcursch | talk17:22, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
On 4 May 2014, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Gulzar, which you substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
Dear Utcursch, thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia, especially your recent creation of Iraq, Ludhiana. Keep up the good work! You are making a difference here! With regards, AnupamTalk06:15, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
