User talk:Fylindfotberserk

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 10 sections are present.

Royal Challengers Bangalore

@Fylindfotberserk,

Thanks for the information. The Bangalore wiki page mentions about the Bengaluru and only the matter of time all the Bangalore will be edited as Bengaluru in the Wiki Pages considering the amount of articles and it will take time to rewrite all the articles.

Happy Holidays

DoebLoggs (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy New Year and thanks for your good wishes

Vambu Sandai - Discussion

Please take part in the discussion. Lakshmi Putrudu, the dubbed version of this film, should not have a wiki page. The discussion is located on the page titled Vambu Sandai. Thank you. --DragoMynaa

Yo Ho Ho

Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

A Joyous Yuletide to You!

JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy New Year 2021!

Abishe (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! It's the last day of 2024 and tomorrow will be 2025. Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive 2025. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy New Year, Fylindfotberserk

Welcome to the drive!

Welcome, welcome, welcome Fylindfotberserk! I'm glad that you are joining the drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Fix a random page lacking sources

CactiStaccingCrane (talk)18:51, 1 February 2024 UTC [refresh]via JWB and Geardona (talk to me?)

Infobox

I am having a confusion regarding the Nationality and Citizenship column in Infobox for Indian politicians, should we use these 2 or any one in the BLPs of Indian politicians which are not much popular or are elect for the first time and are not special case regarding their Nationality or Citizenship. Thanks TheSlumPanda (talk) 09:21, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: According to WP:INFOBOXNTLY, both 'nationality' and 'citizen' parameters are not needed if the 'birth_place' is mentioned. However, if 'birth_place' is empty, 'nationality' is enough. 'Citizen' is only important for non-resident Indians. But for politicians in India, they have be an Indian citizen to run for elections. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your guidance TheSlumPanda (talk) 16:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Most welcome. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bagpat district, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ajay Kumar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sock edit

@Fylindfotberserk: please check the user user:(कड़वी मुस्कान), it seems to be the sock of user:I Kadékk Gilang, the account seems to be in interested in the same page Karbi people and have a very similar editing pattern. Thank you! Alaya12345 (talk) 13:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hahaha nice try proof? you loser!

this person is dangerous and spreading false information (कड़वी मुस्कान) (talk) 14:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your anti-Hindu statements are not accepted here (कड़वी मुस्कान) (talk) 14:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alya, thank you for admitting that you are wordain 🙏🏼🥳 (कड़वी मुस्कान) (talk) 14:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now this editor is indulging in personal attacks WP:CIVIL Alaya12345 (talk) 15:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets (Wordain)

Hello please check this user Alya12345 I suspect he is a sockpupet returning from the former account wordain what they have in common is that they are both interested in the tribes of northeastern India and the northeastern states. The latest edit is in the state of Nagaland who again added the map File:Mong_Mao-the_detail_map.svg to the history article (कड़वी मुस्कान) (talk) 13:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

@HistoryofIran, Austronesier, and Gotitbro: Do you guys know who is this. A Gurjar POV pusher for sure, like PakistaniHistorian, but this guy also uses an Indian IP [1]. Definitely a sock. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:27, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gotitbro: See this, same Uttakhand relaed POV like this. Also note this revert of your edit. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:31, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely this Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Anujror. I have filed an SPI here (another one his recent sock networks), comments are welcome.

IPs from this network have ravaged simple and enwiki. If Category:Gurjar clans of India is extensively filled you know the networks active. Gotitbro (talk) 13:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Socky edits from IPs outside India (like this) [Pakistan here] perhaps point towards meatpuppetry. Gotitbro (talk) 13:40, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, don't have a clue right now. If I find anything, I'll let you know. HistoryofIran (talk) 01:01, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Article Creation

Hello @Fylindfotberserk sir, today i checked something randomly that on wikipedia there are accounts of celebrities who are popular only due to reels or TikTok videos. But when i checked scientist names on Wikipedia then i found that are are many highly cited scientists which do not have wikipedia page. For eg. Dipanwita Dutta, she is the most cited author in India as per AD Scientific Index and have more than 2.8 lakh citations. and not only she there are many scientists like this. I want to ask you that should i create wikipedia article on such great scientists. Thanks TheSlumPanda (talk) 06:01, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Sadly yes. And I'm sure majority were just created by fans, instead of getting drafted first. The latter process would've got majority of them stalled or deleted. You can create them scientist articles based on WP:NPROF. I've created quite a few politician articles based on WP:NPOL, only one got deleted, that too because of vague reasons, like him being a mayor. Ironically, another mayor's article was 'kept' who had less coverage than my one. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your guidance sir , surely i will create articles on such scientists.. TheSlumPanda (talk) 17:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Most welcome, and happy editing

. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:14, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sir i have created an article on Dipanwita Dutta, can you suggest me some improvements? TheSlumPanda (talk) 17:49, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Nice work. Please add a few more WP:Independent sources. That would be good to go as of now IMO. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will cite some more independent sources as soon i will find. TheSlumPanda (talk) 20:08, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Fylindfotberserk. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. W170924 (talk) 17:46, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@W170924: I've replied. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vansh Sayani

FYI - nominated Vansh Sayani for deletion with the intent of this being a redirect after a bit of an edit-war back and forth. Notifying you as a recent contributor to the article. Ravensfire (talk) 13:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravensfire: Thanks. Someone linked it in one of my watch-listed pages, so did a little bit of basic maintenance work. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Figured it was something like that. Just hit everyone who's touched the most recent version so there's no canvassing concerns. Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 15:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sock

The IP that is edit warring over at Maratha page likely belongs to this sockmaster , here is their range [2]. Ratnahastin (talk) 16:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch Ratnahastin. I forgot the name, encountered once or twice at 'Gadaria people'. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding recent changes on T. Raja Singh

diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=T._Raja_Singh&curid=43489794&diff=1248954677&oldid=1248921353

You changed all dates to the format DD January, YYYY from YYYY-MM-DD stating MOS:NUM. However, even when it is YYYY-MM-DD, it is rendered and displayed as the format specified there. The intention of making it YYYY-MM-DD is to make it standardized, allowing computers to parse it such as the IA bot which archives links (and also puts the archive date in the format YYYY-MM-DD).

I don't see the point of your change since the end output is the same.

Just wanted to discuss before reverting such a change. Skratata69 (talk) 12:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As clearly mentioned on MOS:NUM, it is acceptable to use YYYY-MM-DD for references, which is what I did Skratata69 (talk) 12:42, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Skratata69: Why would you want to revert it when DMY and MDY are standard date formats in most of Wikipedia articles instead of YYYY-MM-DD. The purpose of the script is to maintain the format type of articles pertaining to the country it is related to. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

because of ambiguities in DMY and MDY. YYYY-MM-DD is the ISO format, as well as an accepted format on wiki.

All of this is irrelevant because the end output is still the same. It was displayed as 1 January, 2024 before and after your change so I am asking what was the point of you changing it from simple number format that is better understood by scripts and bots to this. Skratata69 (talk) 12:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Skratata69: Read at the examples MOS:DATETIES MOS:DATEUNIFY as well as MOS:DATERET. You can't all of a sudden unilaterally change the longstanding formatting style of an article. If you want changes made, you propose it somewhere where YMD is accepted at a global level and thus affects all the articles of Wikipedia. As I said, the formatting is mostly in DMY or MDY format in edit mode in most of the articles. This is an unnecessary discussion. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need protection

Hey Fylindfotberserk, some users are vandalizing Maithili language, Mithila (region), and many more articles related to Maithili, making wrong maps of Mithila region like [[User:Kusinara|Kusinara]] and [[User:Bihar region|Bihar region]] have done! Maithil hoon (talk) 06:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maithil hoon: As I've explained in your talk page, you should seek WP:CONSENSUS in the respective talk pages with other users per WP:BRD. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of non-Hindi songs recorded by Udit Narayan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dhadkan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Help

Hello @Fylindfotberserk Sir, I have some confusion regarding notability of a Surgeon i.e. David S. Feldman, he is a orthopaedic surgeon and have also written some papers on NIH. but i think that there are no any secondry reliable sources which discuss about the subject to establish notability and also he didnt received any prestigious award so i am having confusion that should i nominate it for deletion or not. Thanks again sir TheSlumPanda (talk) 10:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: You may start an AfD IMO, since the article lacks enough secondary sources (there is only one). Let's see. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:50, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks sir TheSlumPanda (talk) 11:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Most welcome. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Fylindfotberserk i also encountered another page i.e., Dror Paley who runs paley institue in which David S. Feldman also works, his article also dosent have independent reliable sources which discuss in depth about him and also he don’t received any prestigious award. I nominated the previous one for AfD should I nominate this also. TheSlumPanda (talk) 11:22, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Another resume like article. Nominate it as well. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:27, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Fylindfotberserk today I encountered a article which was visited by some experienced editors but no one nominated it for deletion. I am talking about Michael Stein, i think this article does not qualify for WP:GNG or WP:NPROF because there are no independent sources which discuss about the subject in depth and also he is not not a vice chancellor or dean of any university, so i think he is absolutely not notable for having standalone articles. Should i nominate this well ??. And again thanks for your constant help sir TheSlumPanda (talk) 10:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Yes, absolutely. I wonder how so many pages like these are kept. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also wonderd how some experienced editors avoid these things. Nomination Done. TheSlumPanda (talk) 16:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Serious concerns

Hi @Fylindfotberserk, I am not going to comment on the talk page of the Nanda Empire as I have repeated the same things, God knows how many times. But certain points I want to make to you regarding the editor in question:

1.) Relentless pushing of Krishna as a terrorist using a unique unknown source [3]. Funnily enough, these are the same people who label Al Qaeda, Maoists, Naxals, Lashkar, and Hamas as freedom fighters.

2.) The issue of continuous editing using their own inflammatory sources while the discussion is ongoing is an old habit of the editor: [4]. @Jtbobwaysf also noted that on [5]. Also, the editor choses to ignore that 'Brahmanism' is an inflammatory term coined by colonial powers and missionaries, just like 'hinayana' was coined by Mahayana Buddhists for orthodox Buddhists. Also, funny that this editor considers Witzel the ultimate authority but still won’t use Witzel’s dates as authoritative for Buddhism. Huh?

3.) It’s not limited to one Hindu or India-related page— inserting opinions as facts like they did on the Geeta page by adding that Geeta is definitely influenced by Buddhism (when Sāṃkhya is already mentioned). Then, when they found out that Sāṃkhya is known as an orthodox Hindu school that considers the Veda as the source of all knowledge, they went on the Samkhya page, pushed the dates of the Vedas, and inserted Buddhacharita (which was composed extremely late in 200 CE) along with the middle Upanishads and Geeta. They created a whole "proto-classical Sāṃkhya" section, which is not a scholarly term. On the other hand, they remove "classical Hinduism" (which is a scholarly term) wherever they can, replacing it with just "Hinduism." There was not even a fragment of Buddhacharita composed when the Geeta was fully composed and quoted day and night by Buddhists. Also, they push "South Asia" instead of "India" wherever they can while promoting "China" instead of "East Asia," if you have noticed. like her [6]. Look how they got rattled when someone changed Confucius’ place to East Asia from China, accusing them of double standards while firmly adhering to their own.

4.) They themselves changed the lead of the Hinduism page, making it "an umbrella term for various Indian religions and traditions unified by the concept of dharma." By this very definition, they made Buddhism, Vedic religion, so-called Brahmanism, Jainism, etc., part of Hinduism. So if it’s an umbrella term, then what’s the point of asserting "this was not Hinduism," "that was not Hinduism," "only synthesis is Hinduism," etc.? Pushing their views as general consensus is an old habit. I’ve told them a zillion times that common people, in the majority, can never be ascetics, especially at a time when no middle-ground schools of Buddhism had been created. Also, there were much earlier ascetic and Sāṃkhya movements than Buddhism. Still, they continuously crib about "What about common people?" "What about common people?"

5.) When someone is motivated, they don’t care about truth; they only care about POV pushing. But the problem is they are confused about how to properly POV push and on which page to add what to make more sense. Also, check out the Shakti page and the image they chose (which was later removed). I was fine with the image, but just look at the comment when this image was added to the Ātman page: [7]. That at least tells me something about the intent.

6.) Also, look at the Yoga page where they added the Jain part [8], using the Jain traditional date of 900 BC rather than the scholarly date to push their view that Yoga may just be totally non-Vedic. Also, there is no known Jainism before Mahavira (which is also dubious).

7.)Now, I have let it go. Whatever makes them happy and sleep better at night. So, I will not comment on all this nonsense on the respective talk page. I have already fought enough and concluded that I cannot change the inherent nature of anyone. They can have their little little moment of happiness Also, the person seems to get away with whatever they do, so it’s not worth fighting. I am no one and have no connections or influence. I am only letting you know in case you didn’t know, and you are a grandmaster editor who might not be fully aware of all this as people are busy with their lives. Although, I don’t have much hope from anyone to stop the vilification of Hindu and India-related pages, as there are more haters out there. These editors are the exact reason Wiki will one day get blocked in India. Then all their POV-pushing work—who will read? Their main target audience to mislead will disappear. Also, I can’t do this anymore; it’s the responsibility of concerned senior editors and admins, not mine. For some reason i thought you should know. I have given up. Too many of them. DangalOh (talk) 12:48, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This guy isn't a scholar of the subject matter. Only notable per WP:NPOL. Also, sources coming from this person is likely to be "non-neutral" considering he is the "the patriarch of the Marxist school of Indian historiography". - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But who cares? As potato potatoes, tomato tomatoes, POV pushers POV pushates. And I also didn't know scholars can be labeled unreliable based on some of their comments on certain unrelated hypotheses (hypotheses are hypotheses; they are not facts with empirical evidence; that's the very reason they are called hypotheses). Everyone has their own hypotheses. Non-acceptance of a hypothesis in mainstream discourse doesn’t make the person making or supporting some other hypothesis unreliable as a whole. But anyway, it’s not about selectively using sources where it suits and disregarding those where it doesn’t. This POV-pushing motivation by some editors is much deeper than that. As I said, FYI, I have given up. I am not properly equipped to deal with evil of such a kind. You guys are veterans and may know what to do here better than I do. Maybe in the future, Wikipedia will be better. Right now, it’s crazy. I have fought alone for far too long. I have also messed up my studies for so many days. I have a big career-changing exam coming up in November. I’ll be mostly absent here. But as I said, haters outnumber at least 5 to 1, so I don’t know how even you or others will be able to keep up with this. Well, I am only 27 years old, so I have my whole life to get back at these people properly. For Wikipedia, I don’t care about it intensely anymore. Thanks and have a good day. DangalOh (talk) 13:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

This is serious

Hello, This is to inform you that @Anshu1799 is continuously making personal attacks on me on my talk page and other places, He also threatened me for consequence and accusing me of jealousy. I've done anti vandalism edits on many articles but never ever i've seen a toxic editor like him. I want you to check his recent edits where he added dubious content based on same Non-reliable sources which were removed from Rajpurohit. I hate to doubt him without proof for edit warring on Rajpurohit with IP but literally all of his edits are directly/indirectly related to Rajpurohit which points towards his edits based on POV. He does not even cares for Wikipedia rules even after i told him about the rules and policies with relevant links.

I am not going to interact with this user neither i will revert any of his POV push additions backed by dubious non academic sources as i don't like personal attacks and don't know how to deal with such toxic editors threatening me on Wikipedia. You must look into this before he vandalises and adds POV push, False content on different articles. Thank you. Vedant Katyayan (talk) 11:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock Ratnahastin (talk) 15:29, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk Hello, So when this guy @Vedant Katyayanis proved to be a sacrilege to my caste Rajpurohit, this is how he approaches a new editor. I have no personal grudges but he is continuously after my caste and community and is indulged in profane acts. He has no right and nor he is crediclke enough to portray my caste, my identity, my ethnicity in such malicious ways. He has hidden all the true information and projected his point of view. Who gives him the right to curb freedom of speech of others and that too of those who belong to that particular ethnic group. and threatening ? you attack on my culture and history and I should not warn you ? Don't act fool. your acts of vandalism will be surely punished.@Fylindfotberserk please check the amount of substantial matter he has deleted on the Rajpurohit caste page. Its my humble request to kindly restore our caste information and block this bogus user with vested interests. REGARDS Anshu1799 (talk) 11:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vedant Katyayan and Anshu1799: I'd suggest you two to settle this in Talk:Rajpurohit, without edit warring in the article itself. Ask for a third opinion and/or dispute resolution if necessary. Note that WP:HISTRS compliant sources are to be used in such articles, as well as WP:independent, meaning sources coming from authors belonging to that caste would be considered less reliable. I'd also suggest you guys to maintain WP:CIVIL. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:03, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk I respect your suggestions sir. I will try my best to do whatever it takes and I am not going to personally message anything at all to him but one thing is for sure he has fiddled and attacked on my identity and raised questions on my ancestors. This is no less than a war because if he would have been a historian I would have argued and counter argued with evidences but any random individual who himself lacks knowledge is not at all credible to demean a whole community. Without any knowledge, he has given his verdict about the history of generations of warriors and is blatantly forcing his version.

If the true version of my community is not restored and revived under able leadership of respected senior editors like you sir, I will certainly appeal to higher authorities and take action.

REGARDS Anshu1799 (talk) 12:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even while replying you he made personal attack on me. Can you enlighten me about the way to report such users who make personal attacks? It's quite irritating when he claims random obscure author as world's most renown historian even though i've never heard about him and his source is non academic.

Regarding edits related to Rajpurohit, I'll not make any edits even when i'll see pure Vandalism as it's none of my business, forget edit warring. I have no interest in getting personally attacked by someone due to issue i'm not personally concerned with. I have informed you so that you can take this situation in your hand and act accordingly. Vedant Katyayan (talk) 12:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~@Fylindfotberserk Vedant Katyayan (talk) 12:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

@Vedant Katyayan Dare not insult historians and authors. If you have not heard of them it is you who lacks knowledge. Read more, search more and educate yourself. Who are you to judge ? Senior editors are asking to read and reach to a conclusion and you are calling authors obscure ? Your illiteracy is none of anyone else's problem. @Fylindfotberserk His insulting notions are unbearable. I mentioned him 3 historians- 2 of them are from 20th century era and the 1 which even they followed was a live account of 17-18th centuries. How dare he calls such senior personalities as random and obscure ? People like him should be suspended. Kindly adjudicate sir. Anshu1799 (talk) 12:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Anshu1799 Name all 3 authors here and cite their source here in a proper way once again. Let @Fylindfotberserk verify their authenticity. To be honest, i searched about the authors of your poorly cited references on google and found nothing. I already asked you yesterday to give me references by citing them properly and i will be the one editing on your side, i even provided you link on how to cite. You still didn't provided me single authentic academic reliable source but just blabbering same thing again and again while attacking and threatening me personally. This is not how it should be done on Wikipedia. Your claims sound more like puffery. Vedant Katyayan (talk) 12:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You must know that i am all here for a Civil discussion and will surely make changes as per you if you provide me authentic sources by properly citing them. I would suggest you to research more and find some authentic well published sources by some reliable historians or scholars. Vedant Katyayan (talk) 12:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you ? Are you some renowned historian ? Are you the owner of wikipedia ? Are you the judge of ICJ ? You're not credible to judge sources man. Mind your own business and Get a life. But just for @Fylindfotberserk I will mention the sources. Sir I might not be very good with formatting in wikipedia but certainly my knowledge is authentic. these are the most authentic sources in the world for the cast Rajpurohits, which I myselk have studied all the books for my research papers:

1. This is the Bible (revised version) for Rajpurohit caste history -- https://rgbooks.net/shop/raj-history-culture/rajpurohit-jati-itihas-1-2/

^[1]

2. THIS BOOK IS IN OXFORD LIBRARY, ENGLAND

https://rgbooks.net/shop/biography-festival/veer-kesarisingh-rajpurohit-ka-jasprakash/

3. THIS IS THE EARLY 18TH CENT ACCOUNT BY CHARAN POET KARNIDAAN JI WHO USED TO WRITE LIVE ACCOUNTS OF BATTLEFIELDS; IT IS DIFFICULT TO GET IN ORIGINAL FORM BUT I HOPE THIS IS SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO ASSURE AUTHENTICITY

https://archive.org/details/suraj-prakash-of-kaviya-karnidanji-series-no.-67-rajasthan-puratan-granthmala

4. There are some other authors like Zahoor khan, Nagar, NS Bhati, etc but I personally have not read them entirely so didn't mention.

ALSO DR PRAHLAD SINGH RAJPUROHIT has been honoured by the state and is the most authentic personality in this topic (Rajpurohits). I hope all of this info is sufficient enough to fall under "reliable sources".

REGARDS Anshu1799 (talk) 13:02, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Please cool down, @Anshu1799~~

Do you realise that none of these are Wikipedia:Reliable sources ?

In first 2 links given by you of books of Prahlad Singh Rajpurohit(Cannot find much info about him on google), There is no way to verify if whatever you are claiming is indeed mentioned in that book or not as your links are for buying that book not to read. Please mention links where it can be read online by other editors.

3rd source you cited by Karnidanji is as unreliable as it can be and is bardic in nature. Bardic literature may have classical value but No historical value hence it isn't taken as something reliable by Mainstream historians.

I would suggest you not to panic and to understand that the current Version on Rajpurohit isn't permanent. It can be expanded by citing sources from mainstream historians. Even after all those personal attacks, i am willing to help you as much as i can if you discuss it with me in langauge of civility.

Also all these rules do not only apply to the article of your concern but to every article on Wikipedia. I can assure you if you show me such imperfections in other articles, i will remove them too.

~~I request @Fylindfotberserk to check his sources. Vedant Katyayan (talk) 13:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

See @Vedant Katyayan you need to understand a few things.

First, not everything great in the world has to be necessarily available on google. Yes I admit that the author's information is not easily available on internet but then most of the senior historians and researchers are popular in literary world and print media and not on social networking platforms. I will try to create a wiki page on such authors but what's been my experience here, I have to give a second thought.

However, when you visit these sites and look for cover page and preface of books you will find authentic isbn and author's name. For exact page wise validation you have to purchase the book and read. These can't be available online as these are premium books, can't be pirated. That's another reason to believe that it is authentic.

Second, You are absolutely right that bardic literature is a sensitive thing because it can be subjective but to say it has no historical value , that's incorrect. Our histories have survived more due to bardic literature than actual foreign authored books. Don't forget that we are talking about centuries before, and this subject is history and culture. we are not talking about science. Don't objectify each and everything in history. As long as we mention the correct sources, it shall be acceptable and not deleted. Even for a hypothesis on wiki, we mention the sources and it works. Then these are the absolute live witness accounts. there should be no issues in incorporating them as long as we mention the right names. Its up to the reader if he wants to believe or not. History comes from various sources and your job is to put them on the plate unbiased. let the reader taste it with his own belief system.

Third, DR PRAHLAD SINGH RAJPUROHIT is the "mainstream historian". You will not know it. Many researchers and scholars of history of Rajasthan have researched under him, including me. He was the first ever to compile discrete and scattered evidences of historical facts related to rajpurohits. You will never ever find a more reliable man in this context in the world. There are high chances that anyone else would have probably taken it from his research.

See brother, I am an educated man with a lot of research on the history of Rajasthan. I know civility but what pisses me off is distortion and monopolised manipulation of history. I don't know which part of the world or culture you belong to but we are talking about some of the best warriors and rulers of their times. Imagine someone with no knowledge about history(suppose you yourself) come across this page and find that Rajpurohits were mere brahmins probably pandits. THE END. Just because of your rigid endeavour, a misconception spreads. Would this ever be acceptable by the members of the community and people who know history ? If you would have done this on a scientific topic, I would not have minded but this is a very sensitive issue. People have fought and died for legacies and you will erode it all just because of an editing privilege ? Sorry, not acceptable.

Yes I agree that you are better acquainted with wikipedia rules and conduct and everything but when we talk about the actual matter/ content, it is non negotiable. No distortion of even a single fact is tolerable.

To end this, I would just say- the true version has to be put up there. The best option would be to grant me editing rights. If not possible, I had already posted, you or some senior editor revert it. if that also not working, delete the entire page and I will create a new and authentic page. Do whatever is within the framework of wiki but the correct thing has to be there. If at all you wish to end this dispute. Anshu1799 (talk) 14:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~@Anshu1799 I have already mentioned it multiple times before to read Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Reliable sources thoroughly.~~

I'm not rejecting historical authenticity of Bardic literature as it depends on source to source but you can only cite sources from well known mainstream Historian and sources which can be read by other editors and readers.

For example, Ain-i-Akbari can be said as historical source but it can't be cited directly on Wikipedia. Content of such literature can only be mentioned if it's quoted by some mainstream modern historian and you are citing it from his book. Many mainstream historians have quoted Bards and such literature in their books. I would suggest you to take some time and do research from modern academic sources where historians write history based on other primary historical sources only like Annals & Antiquities of Rajasthan where the author also quoted bardic literature.

Reverting to your preferred version may get me into trouble now due to me getting into edit warring. I doubt if that version you want to restore will ever get restored as there are many problems with that version as explained by me on Talk:Rajpurohit.

You can approach other experienced editors and admins too meanwhile but they will tell you the same thing.

I request you to Do some research and reach me on my Talk page to explain what changes you want to make while citing reliable sources. I will surely help you in expanding that article. Vedant Katyayan (talk) 14:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brother @Vedant Katyayan, if you don't get digital book of something, then it is not reliable ? and whatever books I mentioned it is no longer original "research", it is well established academics now in Rajasthan and even reached Oxford as I mentioned, so it is "academic enough". Order them and read the paperback version. How can wiki only include so called popular books and simply negate other books. This will restrict valuable information. Is wikipedia a regional centre ? If it is global, it needs to incorporate varied sources. I don't know the exact rules. maybe you are wrong or is it a problem with wiki. This is a restriction to freedom of expression. @Fylindfotberserk @anidiony

If reverting gets you in trouble then you at first place should not have messed up with things you don't understand. This makes me annoyed, Now if I will say anything you will find it rude. EDIT OR INVOLVE YOURSELF IN ONLY THOSE TOPICS IN WHICH YOU POSSESS SOME KNOWLEDGE OR ARE WELL VERSED. THATS THE REASON I LIMIT MYSELF TO ONLY PAGES RELATED TO HISTORY OF RAJASTHAN.

See, I will not buy into the statement that nothing can be done and it will remain as it is and only when any "popular sources" will come then something can be added. How will the popular sources come ? there are no other direct sources. HISTORY DOES NOT WORK THE WAY WIKIPEDIA OR YOU WANT. WIKKIPEDIA HAS TO EMBIBE WHAT HISTORY IS IN ITS ACTUAL FORM.

I will repeat very soberly. Since you began this and you know wiki technicalities better, either do something and restore or provide me the chance to restore the true information, or else I will have to appeal at higher levels of organisation or whatever it will take. Further course of action will put you in trouble or not, I really can't say as of now. But the current changes that you made are derogatory and unacceptable, both as a member of caste as well as historian. I can even demand reliable sources from you for what statements you made and on the limited content you left up there. You won't be able to defend yourself then. Although I should be furious but again I request and with all humility I ask you to do something as soon as possible, otherwise I need to move up. Anshu1799 (talk) 15:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Sevaṛa, Prahalādasiṃha (2021). Rājapurohita jāti kā itihāsa (Dvitīya saṃsodhita saṃskaraṇa ed.). Jodhapura. ISBN 978-93-90179-06-0.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

Regarding Copyright rules for Indian government websites

Hello @Fylindfotberserk sir, i today uploaded an image of a director general of police of Haryana from Haryana police official website and the picture got nominated for speedy deletion. Sir i want to know that in many places i see that there are pictures available on Wikipedia which are under Government of India license on many articles. Thats why sir i am asking should i use images from this site or not Haryana Police Official site or how do i identify these such websites. Thanks TheSlumPanda (talk) 18:48, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Did you take permission from the department as stated here? The user who flagged this image tagged it as a "possible copyvio" for the very same reason. There is a governmental exemption as defined here, but not sure whether it is included. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sir i mailed haryana police department but I didn’t received any response from them then i called the administration department of Haryana Police for asking manually and then some their PA attended the call and said that if i am creating Biography page on their department former DGP then they said sir u can use their image for such good work. TheSlumPanda (talk) 09:54, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: It got deleted I see. I believe you'll need an email response from the Haryana Police Department authorizing the use of the image. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sir TheSlumPanda (talk) 11:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of a police officer

Hello Sir, a head of police of a state i.e, Director General of Police who has received President’s police medal which is highest medal for police officer in india and also have the longest tenure as dgp in the state does this makes him notable ? TheSlumPanda (talk) 17:13, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: I believe the person should be widely covered in WP:Independent sources for multiple events. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But sir he was dgp during 2006 and then the media was not much active as today and sir if he was a dgp for 6 years in haryana then surely there would be a good coverage of him i think TheSlumPanda (talk) 17:35, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Yes, but you have to prove that through media coverage. I'd suggest, you start a draft. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sir TheSlumPanda (talk) 18:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reported harassing sock account

Hi,Sir A sockpuppet is constantly putting unsourced content on the wikipage Uddhav Thackeray,After removing his unsourced edits,he is harassing me on my talk page. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/117.228.176.138 )

Regards Io5678 (talk) 21:45, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Sharda Sinha

On 9 November 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Sharda Sinha, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 19:59, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PFHLai: Thank you

. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 20:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! --PFHLai (talk) 22:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Archiving a reference

Hello @Fylindfotberserk sir, i am currently working on archiving references of articles to prevent link rot in future but sir i am archiving the sources one by one. Is there any method thorugh which we can archive multiple sources in one click like 5 to 10 references in one click. Thanks TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:44, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: Thanks for asking. Please visit this link. Once there, click the "Run-bot" drop-down list, you'll get three options. The first one is for a single page, the second for a bunch of pages that you want to que. Since, I've rarely used the tool, I cheeked it today on one article, it worked fine. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:05, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[:0-1] Sevaṛa, Prahalādasiṃha (2021). Rājapurohita jāti kā itihāsa (Dvitīya saṃsodhita saṃskaraṇa ed.). Jodhapura. ISBN 978-93-90179-06-0.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

[1]