User talk:Sitush: Difference between revisions
Oh come on - I'm trying to be nice. And I just deleted the diff I was about to use. And really ... putting forth that people should follow the pillar of 5P4 is tendentious? Hopefully not! |
|||
Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
* {{no ping|SpacemanSpiff}} Actually, I don't think both the accounts are linked. Karnata (or Karnataka) was a dynasty which ruled [[Mithila (region)|Mithila region]]<ref>https://books.google.co.in/books?id=A0i94Z5C8HMC&pg=PA153&lpg=PA153&dq=karnatas+of+mithila&source=bl&ots=Dq87Uegtas&sig=U_jmTzQJ487ljX2d4lY3RMjXcL4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi6-PT-1vnVAhXLK48KHUY3CtsQ6AEIPTAG</ref>, a region now divided between India and Nepal. The editor who created the page titled "[[Karnataka (Nepal)]]" have seems to be pushing his own POV while the POV of {{no ping|Damien2016}} was quite opposite. Both the editors acting against Wiki policy. [[User:Ind akash|Ind akash]] ([[User talk:Ind akash|talk]]) 10:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC) |
* {{no ping|SpacemanSpiff}} Actually, I don't think both the accounts are linked. Karnata (or Karnataka) was a dynasty which ruled [[Mithila (region)|Mithila region]]<ref>https://books.google.co.in/books?id=A0i94Z5C8HMC&pg=PA153&lpg=PA153&dq=karnatas+of+mithila&source=bl&ots=Dq87Uegtas&sig=U_jmTzQJ487ljX2d4lY3RMjXcL4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi6-PT-1vnVAhXLK48KHUY3CtsQ6AEIPTAG</ref>, a region now divided between India and Nepal. The editor who created the page titled "[[Karnataka (Nepal)]]" have seems to be pushing his own POV while the POV of {{no ping|Damien2016}} was quite opposite. Both the editors acting against Wiki policy. [[User:Ind akash|Ind akash]] ([[User talk:Ind akash|talk]]) 10:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC) |
||
*{{ping|SpacemanSpiff}} I have opened an SPI against the suspected sock master {{noping|Robbinssharma}} and his suspected socks [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Rabinssharma here]. Thanks for all your help. {{mdash}} [[User:Ind akash|Ind akash]] ([[User talk:Ind akash|talk]]) 03:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC) |
*{{ping|SpacemanSpiff}} I have opened an SPI against the suspected sock master {{noping|Robbinssharma}} and his suspected socks [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Rabinssharma here]. Thanks for all your help. {{mdash}} [[User:Ind akash|Ind akash]] ([[User talk:Ind akash|talk]]) 03:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC) |
||
{{reflist}} |
|||
== September 2017 == |
== September 2017 == |
||
[[File:Information orange.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Please do not [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|attack]] other editors, as you did at [[:User_talk:Jorm#Stop_it]]. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please [[Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot|stay cool]] and keep this in mind while editing. ''As I'm sure you are well aware, calling other editors "fuckwits" is a clear and obvious violation of both the No Personal Attacks policy and the Civility policy. Please refrain from doing this in the future. ''<!-- Template:uw-npa2 --> [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">⇒</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] <small><sup>Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!</sup></small> 02:48, 1 September 2017 (UTC) |
[[File:Information orange.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Please do not [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|attack]] other editors, as you did at [[:User_talk:Jorm#Stop_it]]. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please [[Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot|stay cool]] and keep this in mind while editing. ''As I'm sure you are well aware, calling other editors "fuckwits" is a clear and obvious violation of both the No Personal Attacks policy and the Civility policy. Please refrain from doing this in the future. ''<!-- Template:uw-npa2 --> [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">⇒</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] <small><sup>Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!</sup></small> 02:48, 1 September 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:53, 4 September 2017
An editor thinks something might be wrong with this page. They can't be arsed to fix it, but can rest assured that they've done their encyclopedic duty by sticking on a tag. Please allow this tag to languish indefinitely at the top of the page, since nobody knows exactly what the tagging editor was worked up about. |
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Neutral parties on Bengal famine of 1943?
Hello Sitush.
I have no recollection at all how I started working on Bengal famine of 1943. I grew up in suburban US in a rural state, and all of my relatives are very rural 'Muricans. I don't give a flying hoot about the Raj. If anything at all... I can come clean and confess to being obsessively perfectionist (in many but not all cases; sometimes I DGAF, esp. for pop culture crap) about Wikipedia. I probably have lost friends because of it, in fact.
I spent a year rewriting Bengal famine of 1943 because it was massively POV horse manure. I made a half-completed list of all the POV aspects, and even half done, it was distressing. Huge aspects never even mentioned, etc. That list is given on the MilHist try I think.
I acknowledge that I perceive Fowler&Fowler to be an admitted pro-British POV editor because of this comment: "This is in part because BFo1943 is only obliquely military history. In fact to cast it as military history is to buy into a POV out there that exceptional war time conditions allowed the famine to fly under the radar of British responsibility."
F&F has already asserted that he thinks I worked in userspace to protect a POV.
Are there any very experienced and very neutral editors who can help satisfy F&F's demands that the article must be checked?
Having said all that, I have to confess: I very clearly believe (and invite you to consider the possibility) that there are exactly three forums in the whole of Wikipedia that even come close to being equipped to handle this article. Those three forums are WP:FAC, WP:FAC, and WP:FAC. GA? Please. PR? Well, yeah, in theory, but in practice it is undermanned. It is designed to be of lesser quality than FAC. MILHIST? Same as PR, plus A- level reviewers are all at FAC already anyhow... In FAC people have to stow away their POV, and the best reviewers in Wikipedia congregate at FAC. I would be quite content for the article to sit three or four months in FAC, if that's what it takes...
Sigh. I give up; I forgot that you already said at Bish's page that you don't have a good view of the article. Cheers; I'll go bang my head against a wall at WT:FAC. Lingzhi ♦ [[User talk:Lingzhi|(t
RFC on flags at the rls template
Hello there. I seem to recall you being quie au fait with a few procedures here. Specifically with RFC could I ask the best route to go, I know you have given me advice on the binary side, but would it be best as a
- Resolution noticeboard (Request)
- Get a third opinion (Request)
- Request comments (Request)
- Formal mediation (Request)
Having never done it before I would want to bring a swift, and rounded result, as I've committed to setting something up, but that doesn't good enough for everyone. Just looking for a little assistance to bring a proper resolution to the flags question. Warm regards.Fleets (talk) 20:30, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Correctly formatted RfCs posted on project talk pages are automatically notified to various lists etc, as explained at WP:RFC. There is certainly no need to approach the mediation or 3O people (in fact, 3O wouldn't touch it because the "dispute" involves more than two people). The issue you have is that there you can publicise the RfC more widely than the default lists by adding a neutral note to other relevant talk pages, as is also mentioned at WP:RFC. Eg:
There is currently a request for comment at XXXX regarding the use of flags in rugby league infoboxes
.
- One issue is whether to use {{rfc|soc}} or {{rfc|policy}}, and I'm really not sure about that. At the end of the day, it probably doesn't matter because the centralised lists are watched by a wide range of people anyway. I warn you now: anything to do with infoboxes tends to result in a very high heat-to-light ratio!
- At the end of the 30-day period, unless the RfC has been closed early due to WP:SNOW (unlikely in this case, I think), an uninvolved person can close it. That usually happens via the listings at the top of WP:AN but if it looks like no-one is taking it on then there is no harm posting a neutral note there asking for an admin to step forward and do the needful. - Sitush (talk) 17:02, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Many thanks for that. Genuinely appreciate you taking the time there, and hopefully a resolution will be found on the flags in a timely manner. Kind regards.Fleets (talk) 17:16, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- There is no rush about it but, clearly, the issue does need some sort of resolution. FWIW, I can't recall ever opening an RfC myself but I've seen and/or been involved in enough ones that have gone wrong due to poor understanding at the outset, so it's always A Good Thing to try to avoid the pitfalls.
- Many thanks for that. Genuinely appreciate you taking the time there, and hopefully a resolution will be found on the flags in a timely manner. Kind regards.Fleets (talk) 17:16, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- I think I've said this before but, just in case I haven't: it would probably be better to create subsections below the RfC heading, one for extended discussion and one for !votes. As I intimated above, this subject is likely to generate quite a lot of heat. It is also worth bearing in mind that local consensus (eg: consensus determined by a project-specific group) does not over-ride community-wide consensus. The RfC will be community-wide but it is quite possible that the existing consensus re: flags in sports-related boxes has been developed by sports-focussed projects rather than by the community as a whole. IIRc, WP:MOSFLAG is where it all begins. - Sitush (talk) 17:49, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Edits made by me
Sitush In the article Kamma in glossary of castes. It is mentioned that Kamma A dominant peasant caste in coastal Andhra I am not finding forward caste statement. https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/2692.pdf Also in vellalar article many sources state velir only but these have used to add content to the article. is that correct. can you clarify. By clicking the pages I am not seeing anything..Thats what I mean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangitha rani111 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
- H. A. Rose's Glossary of Castes is not a reliable source and is 100 years old anyway, so it would be wrong to use it to support a claim about the present day. Just because you cannot see a source does not mean it is an invalid source. I don't understand your other point, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 17:36, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
So in the vellalar article.
1. There is a sentence "Some of them had marital relations; Ilamcetcenni, the king known for his fleet of warships, married a Velir princess, and his son Karikala Chola also married a Velir princess from Nangur". It refers to velir not vellalar. I think many of the books in this article are actually refering to velir and should be included in velir not in vellalar. Sorry is that clear.. I could be confusing sometimes. The article is trying to mix the two together.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangitha rani111 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Editing warring in this page, also addition of WP:rs sources, I think you will be able to do better job Shrikanthv (talk) 10:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- Not very likely, I'm afraid. I am off out within the next hour and won't be back for a week. I might be able to do a bit from where I'm going but it will not be much. - Sitush (talk) 10:02, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
A page without any WP:RS
Hi Sitush, please take a look at the page titled "Karnataka (Nepal)". The contribution history of the creater of the page is reminding me of Admirenepal sockfarm. Thanks —Ind akash (talk) 09:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- I don't think this is Admirenepal, this is Merosoft, Rabinssharma. Don't know if there are others, but I remember deleting something related to this topic a while back, can't seem to find it or who the editor was. —SpacemanSpiff 09:40, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- @SpacemanSpiff: Maybe, I can help, the page you deleted was Karnatas of Mithila and the editor was Damien2016 alias Burbak, am I right? Ind akash (talk) 09:49, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- That's right Damien and another Burbak sock had edited it. If you think this could be linked to Burbak then I'd suggest SPI as I don't have much on-wiki time for the next few more days to do any research. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 09:51, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- SpacemanSpiff Actually, I don't think both the accounts are linked. Karnata (or Karnataka) was a dynasty which ruled Mithila region[1], a region now divided between India and Nepal. The editor who created the page titled "Karnataka (Nepal)" have seems to be pushing his own POV while the POV of Damien2016 was quite opposite. Both the editors acting against Wiki policy. Ind akash (talk) 10:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- @SpacemanSpiff: I have opened an SPI against the suspected sock master Robbinssharma and his suspected socks here. Thanks for all your help. — Ind akash (talk) 03:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
September 2017
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User_talk:Jorm#Stop_it. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. As I'm sure you are well aware, calling other editors "fuckwits" is a clear and obvious violation of both the No Personal Attacks policy and the Civility policy. Please refrain from doing this in the future. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 02:48, 1 September 2017 (UTC)