User talk:BhaiSaab/A5

Archives

1 2 3 4

Hkelkar

Hkelkar is trying all his fundamentalish ideas in Tipu Sultanand frequently vandalises it in the disguise of vikramji and just have a look what he has to the article! to whom should i report about his attitude.

Mujeerkhan19:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Er, I am not the one citing fake links to websites that don't exist. One wonders who is the real fundamentalish [sic] here.Hkelkar 19:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Qur'an

Are all Muslims fundamentalists? Ewan G Keenowe

Caliphate

It was democratic before the Ummayads. Zazaban 20:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

3RR

Although I know that you know... Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Islam. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. -Patstuart 22:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

regarding Tipu Sultan

I'm sorry I used popups (I won't in future unless it's vandalism).However, the edits are still POV, and I have balanced it out. Plus, the Irfan habib link is dead (check it) and several of the edits need citations. Why don;t you try to provide them instead of deleting everything?Plus, I have an advocacy request and an RfA pending on the article so I'd appreciate some patience with you and other meatpuppets of the Muslim Guild.Hkelkar 18:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Come on, BhaiSaab. Be objective. Surely you can do that. I think you can.Hkelkar 18:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I know that you know that I know that you know that I know that you know that I am right about the Muslim Guild. It's not my problem as you all seem to be more involved with whitewashing Islamism right now. However, I'd appreciate it if you could hold off the revert wars on Tipu Sultan until the admins mandate action.Hkelkar 18:51, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Well can you ,er, proove[sic] it?Hkelkar 18:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Simultaneously???Hkelkar 18:55, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I know you have been blocked recently and reacted to it with a rather large amount of hostility.Maybe you hould cool off about that as I was not involved there.Hkelkar 18:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Very well.I have seen evidence that there is an Islamist cabal on wikipedia and will continue to regard you as a member, no hostility there either. However, the removal of sourced edits is an act of vandalism, particularly when I did not remove that Mujeerkhan chap's unsourced stuff. Also, I have maintained a meutral narrative in the edit to Tipu Sultan, not taking a position on the allegations of religious persecution so my edits still stand on their own metir. Hope you will realize this.Hkelkar 19:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

And accusations of sockpuppetry and Hindutva come from Islamists and their left-wing sympathizers, not a lot of merit there either :-) .Hkelkar 19:08, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

So what you are saying is that you're basically supporting a bogus troll made RFCU just to get Subhash-bose banned by crook?Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Since you obviously support the RFCU, do you think I'm subhsh_bose?Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. Didnt see that.Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

"Likely" is hardly conclusive. Plus, you're only speculating of course.I doubt that the admins will make any summary judgements based on the needs of the Muslim guild.Hkelkar 05:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

helker is using terms like "mohammedians" for muslims, which is a insult to all muslims and further more he said "Jews, Hindus, christians, and Baha'ii would feel the same way about being routinely called "Kaffir" or "Dhimmi" of "Dar-al-Harb" yet the terms are frequently used by Muslims/Musil-leem" which does not have a nexus with regards to Tipu Sultan

i tired to explain him but to no avail and also demanded an apology from him but he refrained from doing so which amounts to NPOV, uncivil, etc

Mujeerkhan 18:52, 1 october 2006 (UTC)

Help required

I need your help in improving article regarding The Quran and science as without proper reference and more material it might be deleted. Can you please help in extending it? --- ابراهيم 01:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

RFCU

This might be interesting: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser#Freestylefrappe - Valarauka(T/C) 17:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Now that the article is unprotected, I'll try to expand it with some useful information. - Valarauka(T/C) 00:55, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Admin

Not currently an administrator. DRK 19:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm not currently interested in pursuing a nomination though. DRK 22:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

That's not particularly nice. What exactly is your point? DRK 22:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Here, you must note the "currently". It's my (poor) understanding that FSF used to be an admin, but got desysopped (spelling?). As of now he's working on regaining his lost status. He works his good contributions on his main sock, while keeping the controversial stuff on alternates ones. He got a good grasp on policy gaming so he'll probably succeed, which isn't necessarily a bad thing since most of his non-controversial edits are top-notch. Jean-Philippe 22:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Pakistani nationalism

Hi. Think calmly. Several users, including Ruylong, regard the edits of seagal as vandalism (see edit history). Plus, the copyvio image of the Pakistani soldiers praying that he put there has been speedily deleted (check for yourself) per my db request. I am looking at the part abt nationalism and politics and will re-add that bit myself if it looks okay. The military edits are pure garbage and violate at least 2 wikipedia policies.Hkelkar 05:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

The politics part does not seem so bad so kept it. The entire military part is unsourced (the only ref is a rediff article that does not correspond to the edit at all).Hkelkar 05:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

See the issues in my latest post of Talk:Pakistani nationalism. Claims of "Humiliating defeat" to India by pakistan are absurd per wikipedia articles on the Indo-Pak wars themselves, and the SI war entry is irrelevant as Pakistan had nothing to do with it. The war on terror part may be ok.Hkelkar 05:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern

But I did not deliberately add any incorrect information to any articles.

Cheers, Uzumaki 18:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. I do not care for your incivil comments or your attempts to provoke me. Just leave me alone. Uzumaki 20:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

3RR

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in User:Uzumaki. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.

I'm warning you both, btw. --tjstrf 20:34, 5 October 2006 (UTC)