User talk:YellowMonkey/Archive13

All matters relating to religious disputes involving Users Subhash bose, Haphar, WikiSceptic and Anwar saadat

Note to readers: This is not the source of my wiki-stress, but rather the deletion backlog, which is endlessly long and mindnumbingly boring. This dispute is rather interesting and complex. Blnguyen | rant-line 01:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC) [reply]

User:Subhash bose

I've seen Subhash Bose in a number of other articles and while he may seem POV-Pushing at first, he has the potential to become a good Wikipedian. He has a good grasp of things happening in India and doesn't hold the "Get out of this page if you are anti-Hindu" or something POV even though I have seen him get agitated because of some anti-Hindutva edits. Perhaps he just needs encouragement and needs to learnt to conform to Wikipolicy. Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC) You have blocked another user [1] because of WP:NPA. While I strongly disagree with this user's personal attacks and his userpage, a user must be warned before being blocked. Looking at his talkpage, I see he wasn't warned, and the dispute resolution process wasn't followed. The incident should rather be reported first at WP:PAIN. I think a weeklong first block without any prior warning and for a relatively mild case is too harsh. He should first be warned for personal attacks and the first block should be shorter. Please point me to the policy that justifies a weeklong block without prior warning. Especially since in many other cases, users weren't blocked for worse PA's even after warnings [2]. Cheers. --Msiev 11:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You blocked User:Subhash bose for one week. It usually not done so with new users. People have different habits before joining wikipedia. I suggest you to reblock him for a shorter term, unless you have specific reasons for long block. (e.g., a suspected sockpuppet. Simply very strong language is not a valid reason: different cultures have different tolerance to words; it is a matter of education of new users, rather than punishing them. Long blocks are for persisting violators). Thank you, `'mikka (t) 17:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed the uncivility of user:Subhash bose and I must say that his attacks are very mild in comparison what I've seen in wikipedia. Of course, they are inacceptable, but I think the user must be mentored, rather than blocked. I think he may be given another chance, with heavy warning. I am unblocking him, but will watch his behavior. `'mikka (t) 17:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, although I guess I have very harsh standards (relatively), and I intend to enforce them when I come across them. Blnguyen | rant-line 06:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid you are mistaken: he could edit after unblock. At the same time it is quite possible that he was using still another sockpuppet, which was blocked and his IP was automatically blocke when he tried to edit from blocked account. If this is the case, good for him. I am not aware of any other possibilities. On the other hand, I don'd do much blocking and I see that blocking/unblocking tool changed. In particular, I don't quite understand the meaning of the pending autoblock here: Pusyamitra did edit after the indicated date. `'mikka (t) 05:48, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lkadvani&redirect=no

I got this message after a recent edit.I think it is self evident what this chap is up to.

Lkadvani 23:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the sock is suspect but it is probably him; very likely according to the RFCU. So I blocked the IP for a week.Blnguyen | rant-line 01:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2002_Gujarat_violence&diff=64644199&oldid=64626162 Please have a look on the comments - "Pakistani propoganda ...." Anything not corresponding to his personal pro Hindutva POV ..he feels free to remove.

Some of the sites cited frequently by this user has been banned in India in the interest of:

sovereignty or integrity of India security of the state friendly relations with foreign states and public order preventing incitement to commissioning of any cognisable offences.He has been testing patience of many Wikiauthors

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/5194172.stm

Lkadvani 14:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I'm not so convinced that blogs should be cited at all, but as I said before, I was here mainly to make the debate civilised, rather than mediate POV as I am ignorant towards Hindu theology as well ignorant towards the politics of religion in India. Blnguyen | rant-line 01:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the changes made by Subhash which he calls as "Summarized it"

[3]He has made a POV statement against Teesta Setalvad and therefore trying to hide away the truth I have exposed through the Supreme court judgement in this affair. Secondly, he is removing the pamphlet - discussed in Indian parliament as well as by the HRights groups. Lkadvani 22:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bear in mind that LKAdvani here uses CENSORSHIP of the STALINIST UPA government as a justification for retaliating against my own humble self. Why should wikipedia give a rat's rear-end whether the Indian government bans a website or not? eh? A government that practices censorship of FREE-SPEECH is not a democratic government and is automatically suspect in all it's 'disseminated facts' *cough propaganda *cough. Pro-Hindutva am I? Maybe. But LKAdvaani here is equally biased if you look at his edit histories calmly and objectively. His disturbing screed against hindus (NOT hindutva people, ALL Hindus) in various talk pages, combined with his glaringly Hindu userid, indicates either a level of personal dichotomy that borders on schizophrenia, or a deep loathing for all things Indian. What about HIS BIAS? Am I not a counterbalance to his quasi-communist ravings?Netaji 02:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rushdie

If User Subhash is not highly right wing POVed.His knowledge of the topics he is editing is perverted and of the type usually called as misinformation - some call it ignorance and an encyclopoedia in such hand s will be disastrous for Wikipedia.

Take a look on the edits:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2002_Gujarat_violence&diff=61349527&oldid=61286591

Here he adds: The United Nations International Human Rights Commission has not recognized the Gujarat riots as a human rights issue.

Now user 62. something changed it to read: The United Nations International Human Rights Commission has recognized the Gujarat riots as a human rights issue adding links to UN articles http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2002_Gujarat_violence&diff=61353881&oldid=61353537

Pat comes Subhash with the change: The United Nations International Human Rights Commission has not yet fully recognized the Gujarat riots as a human rights issue. However, campaigns to recognize it have been made by Islamist organizations like the world muslim congress demanding expediency in the process

And take a look at what he writes to the user 62.

Removed a redundant link. Oh, and to 62.189.60.30, get a login. That way the NSA can know which school you plan to bomb next

Encyclopaedia under such perverted mind - does not add value to wikipedia.Subhash should better avoid these words as they give him away from any login - zeitgeist,adhominem,mein freund.

There has been an explicit use of fowl language towards Muslims - many talk pages like the one below using (Netaji) Login --Note that "Netaji" and "Subahsh Bose" or "Subhash Chandra" are the variants of the name of Indian freedom fighter Subhash Chandra Bose.

Here he calls the dead in Gujarat as terrorists:

The death toll of Godhra was 3000 terrorist jihadis and their sympathizers. Big difference,see? On, and I know that muslims find loyal allies in left wing liberals (like the organizations above) and self-hating hindus(like you, maybe). Like I said, you may post the link if you wish, but then I have evidence to balance it out with an endless litany of muslim genocides and atrocities in Gujarat itself. The truth about Islam is something you muslim-lovers don't want on wikipedia. Netaji 16:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

and the use of "be" in Hindi is similar to provoking one to fight. Rushdie 12:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Anwar saadat

I also request you to watch Anwar saadat's edits of my userpage carefully. His adding the tag was ok, but he vandalized my page by removing all other content. I have reverted (keeping the tags), bit he will surely vandalize again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Subhash bose (talk • contribs)

I'm well aware.Blnguyen | rant-line 05:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following user has violated 3RR rule and engaged in personal attacks: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=87.74.46.193 I request you to look into this, given your strong stance against personal attacks.(Netaji 17:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

The IP is that of Anwar (Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Anwar saadat). He has been blocked for a month. Blnguyen | rant-line 01:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:WikiSceptic vs User:Subhash bose

Is this worth a ban ? Tintin (talk) 06:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'll put a word in Admin noticeboard so that the others will also see it Tintin (talk) 07:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, he deserves it. Tintin (talk) 07:55, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi: I noticed that on the Administrator's Noticeboard you said that you had noticed that Subhash Bose has not made any pronounced POV edits. I would direct you to 2002 Gujarat violence, which I have stopped editing precisely because of his constant POV-pushing and unpleasantness on the talk page. In particular, [4], [5], [6]. He also tends to remove references and hyperlinks that do not agree with whatever POV he wishes to push at the time. Its not such a problem, because I think he basically is capable of understanding what NPOV actually is, he just acts out a lot of anger in the way he edits. Hornplease 08:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply, and I hope you're back soon. I just wanted to say that I was not in any way comparing the length of disbarring handed out to Subhash Bose and Wikiskeptic, as I dont know anything about the latter's case. Also, I read the various posts above from other admins criticising the ban on the grounds that Bose is a newbie, and I have to say I disagree strongly. This editor does not need to be gently introduced to protocol, he needs no mentoring; he knows exactly what he is doing and thinks he can get away with it. Two different problems, two different approaches, and yours was correct. Hornplease 11:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support, especially on my stance against religious and personal attacks. I'm not stressed by holding personal attackers to account, it's mainly the deletion backlog. And I don't think anybody needs to be reminded about basic courtesy and decency towards other users. Blnguyen | rant-line 01:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I acted out of anger because I AM angry. Nonetheless, those who wish to add edits that don't defame and denigrate hindus in the style of Der Ewige Juden propaganda films are welcome to do so, even when it involves legitimate criticism. Unlike people of a certain 'religion of peace' we don't froth in the mouth when faced with legitimate criticism. If you notice my recent edit of Manu Smriti I have kept all criticisms of it's Brahministic supremacy while removed ridiculous claims of anti-feminism (bah! Feminism is a modern movement and doesn't apply in this context) or racism (racism is a European ideology, what it was was ethnocentric which is different from racism). These details are where the anti-Hindu propaganda begins, and I merely chose to contest that. The reason why I got angry was the clear bias that many admins (not binguyen) showed in favor of muslims like this Anwar saadat chap and Christian Fundamentalists like Wikisceptic. If you're impartial and fair like Binguyen has been (for the most part anyway) there won;t be problems even with punitive measures.(Netaji 10:30, 18 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

There is no room for anger on Wikipedia.Secondly, I believe your sarcasm will not be easily digested by whoever you target.May I remind you that you have shown much more froth at mouth than the people of the certain religion of peace and I suspect certain contributors who have supported you in your suspension have done an equal damage to the articles by introducing Weasel wordings in the articles on Hindutva,Ram Janmabhoomi,Babri Masjid and Gujarat riots.

Lkadvani 17:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow I stumbled on this discussion and found it interesting. Weasel wordings? Muslim scholars (of that age) stated that Babar destroyed the Ram Mandirs and these are primary sources to the devastation. That is NPOV, not the showdowns and controversy a certain couple users make with Mr. BoseBakaman%% 21:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Haphar

I have listed the times when the user has insulted me, he continues to make accusations, and I am responding to a comment he has made to me on his talk page. So what is the issue with that ? I also would like to know what action would be taken against User Subhash Bose now that you know he is the puppeteer ? Haphar 08:19, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does he not continue to exist as User Subhash Bose ? The wind up was less offensive than me being called blind. Also Subhash Bose has got blocked for Shiv Sena revert war, what of his puppetry, does that not get any punishment ?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Haphar (talk • contribs)

I'm waiting for feedback. People are often hesitant when checkuser is not conclusive. Also I don't see how being called blind is worse than religious inflammation and incitement.

192.43.227.18 08:55, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming this is your ip above, so if I tell someone that he is seeing terrorists on the net, that is religious inflammation and incitement ? Sarcasm I buy but religous inflammation and incitement ? The other person can make put "pick up a gun and fight against Christian Missionaries and islamic fundamentalists" on his user page and I get to be the one doing religious infalmmation and incitement ? Haphar 10:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your complaint is not valid as Subhash has already been blocked for a week for his userpage and attacks committed on various talk pages. I have only asked you to stop making sarcastic retorts and inflammatory comments and you have not yet been sanctioned because quite clearly your behaiviour is better. Your complaint of victimization is not valid. Blnguyen | rant-line 01:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have said sarcasm part is valid, ( and if you have to make comparisons it is still a lot less inflammatory than kya karega be). But where is the "religious" in the wind up or incitement?Haphar 01:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly not many people know this, but I actually don't know any Indian languages. So you might want to translate. Blnguyen | rant-line 01:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want the translation of kya karega be - it means what are you going to do. The word be is not the most respectful way to address a person but is not an abuse either. In case you are looking for some other translation, I will be glad to help. Regarding your comments on my talk page, pls give me some time. I will surely answer -- Lost 04:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Be" like "saala" or "saale" is an insult if used with someone you do not personally know. Between friends it might not be seen as an insult, but to say it to someone you do not know is an insult. You do not say "be" to people in office, or on the street, unless you are looking to pick up a fight. Haphar 05:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree with Haphar on that. It is certainly not WP:Civil -- Lost 05:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he's already gone for 7 days. Blnguyen | rant-line 05:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Known sockpuppet still on Gujarat Riots page1

128.83.131.125 has edited the page again yesterday.Subhash Bose He has been proving difficult to manage.Inserts subtle POV in support of the Gujarat Chief Minsiter and Hindutva champions.

If you read articles from the Indian and international media - they all point to the involvement of the Gujarat government in killings of innocent civilians.

This user adds words that seem to precipitate or divert attention from the main topic and cites blogs and Hindutva think tanks to support it and in most cases leaves a general statement, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.84.65 (talk • contribs)

Ok, a CheckUser for sockpuppets will be conducted. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 02:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Hi. Just wanted to point out that anti-Hindu elements have been citing human rights watch reports in the 2002 Gujarat Violence article. Human Rights watch is a controvertial org that has been accused of anti-semitism and biased portrayal against USA and Israel in favor of muslim countries (see their article on wikipedia). Thus, hrw is a POV site that must be qualified.Netaji 11:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Confrontational?

Please mention specifically what part of my typings can be interpreted as 'unnecessarily confrontational'. You must understand that a certain measure of rhetoric and hyperbole are standard methods of discourse among Indians (long story why, probably something to do with the weather, or maybe we picked it up from the Persians, dunno exactly). Just look at the hyperbole in the dialogue of a typical Hindi movie and you'll see for yourself... Netaji 01:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. Implying another user to be celebrating a terrorist attacks is what I was referring to..Blnguyen | rant-line 02:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Thanks for letting know, its as if I'm trying to get one ahead of snotty and i@n and they then come in and clean up :) SatuSuro 04:31, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

User:Jimjones05 received an indef. block (rightly so). One of his actions today was to place a long anti-semetic polemic on the user page of his sock puppet User:Jimjones0005 (that also has an indef block). Can we replace it with an indef block box? It's copyvio if that helps[7]...

I'm contacting you since you blocked User:Jimjones05 today. Wikipedia is not free speech and all that jazz... Thanks, Scientizzle 05:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DaffyDuck619

Thanks, Blnguyen...I saw that after I posted the 3RR template. Cheers. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 07:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mỹ Sơn

Can you translate the Veitnamese[[vi:Thánh địa Mỹ Sơn ]] to English for the my son article? --D-Boy 09:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to. I'll possibly need dictionary help for this one....Blnguyen | rant-line 02:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that your name on the Indian wikiprojects. Your userpage said you knew vietnamese. So I thought I'd ask if you could translate since it was sort of Indian and vietnamese related. If there are any other Hindu temples in Vietnam articles, please translate the. If you want, you could also expand Champa. Hinduism in Vietnam could also use an expansion.

Welcome to WikiProject Hinduism

WikiProject Hinduism — a collaborative effort to improve articles about Hinduism

Discussion board — a page for centralised Hinduism-related discussion

Notice board — contains the latest Hinduism-related announcements

Hindu Wikipedians — Wikipedians who have identified themselves as Hindus

Portal — a portal linking to key Hinduism-related articles, images, and categories

Workgroups — projects with a more specific scopes

For more links, go to the project's navigation template.

--D-Boy 03:32, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Indian military history task force has been setup if you want to join.--D-Boy 03:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on the translation. Interesting stuff!--D-Boy 05:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Australian Olympic medalists in Swimming

Blnguyen, I wondered what you thought of my suggestion above. Be honest. -- I@n 09:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking into it. Sorry, seems like I've caught myself into a moderation of a messy personal attack campaign on some Indian religious articles, I was mentioned in a bogus arbitration case (though not named as a party), and also had to resign from Esperanza, and reply to a complaint as to my comment on an RfA. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 02:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

updating the refresh clock

you forgot to update the refresh clock on your last update to DYK I think. I have tried to fix it by hand Also, we need to talk, try to catch me on IM sometime... ++Lar: t/c 11:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for being bold and taking a stab at updating DYK. [8] However, a few things to keep in mind... items must come from articles that are sourced, not stubs, and newer than 5 days old. A few of the items you chose do not meet that criteria. You may want to see WP:DYK or the guide for more specific requirements. Again, thank you for at least trying to help. There are plenty that don't even bother trying. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 13:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LV, Blnguyen has updated quite a few times before IIRC... I've been quite impressed with some of his selections in the past. Agree with your comments about general principles though. ++Lar: t/c 14:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Don't even bother"? Come now, some of us are writing interesting articles! -- ALoan (Talk) 16:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think he meant don't even bother to try to update DYK... nothing about articles. just guessing though. Your articles are cool, no worries there. ++Lar: t/c 18:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes, yes. I meant some admins don't bother even trying to update DYK. Sorry for the confusion. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 21:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, but I am an admin too ;) -- ALoan (Talk) 21:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To Blnguyen (what a concept: something directed at him on his talk page... ;-)): No problem. I just thought I'd remind you. I always just double check before doing stuff like that, you know... just in case. But hey, anything is better than nothing which is what we get every now and again. Perhaps I'm slightly to blame, as I checked a bunch and didn't comment on the suggestions page... I just didn't take them. Oh well. I'll try and be more helpful in the future. Thanks again. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 00:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boy Charlton

Nice article - I can see a fair bit of work in that. I'll see if I can find a PD photo unless you add one first. -- I@n ≡ talk 04:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't sweat over it - it was only an idle thought (which most of mine are BTW). Whenever you're ready. -- I@n 03:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial Links in Toronto

I am hardly the one adding commercial links in "Toronto." In fact, I have been the one EDITING them out. Many others have posted links to very commercial sites--while they are travel sites, they are aimed at getting money only, nonetheless. I have added other websites which are not ad-based, with information promoting the city in a non-commercial way.

Please be careful with your comments, and learn to look at the history of others before accusing me.

Indian media link on your userpage

Hi Blnguyen, the current link to the news story on your userpage asks for a password. Here's a better and more prominent daily's link [9] -- Lost 17:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou, Blnguyen | rant-line 02:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FA

Just saw your post on the Sean Black RfA. Quite impressive self reflection. Anyone that knows their own faults is worth ten of those that know it all. Good stuff.

I also opposed that RfA which took a lot of time to consider. Sean is obviously a very able admin. But at the end of the day the civility issues are the ones that really hurt wikipedia. There is often misscommunication without incivility, not really surprising given the no body language interface we have to interact through. Incivility sets off chain reactions of mistrust, not to mention huge amounts of wasted time and effort in RfC's. Any admin should know not to be transparent with their thoughts in their admin tasks, even if people are really acting stupid. There is no doubt it takes more skill and thought to be civil ALL the time, but as admins they should, and need, to have the experience and maturity to achieve such a task. Thanks for your thougts in the RfA. David D. (Talk) 03:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Castes and Tribes of the Punjab

Dear Sir, I am asking your opinion on this festering dispute that has developed between myself and Satbir Singh since the past few days.

The facts of the matter are like this:

I created a template called Castes and Tribes of the Punjab with a view to studying the caste and tribal groups that exist in what was the ancient Punjab region (Punjab (Pakistan), Punjab (India), Haryana and Himachal Pradesh). My intention, unlike any Ibbetsons, Todds or Cunninghams was to study these groups from a purely anthropological perspective sans any controversy so that people visiting this portal would get to know about the huge mosaic that my province (I am a Punjabi) is.

I started with a few groups. But soon enough the groups began to increase. For the sake of brevity, I grouped them under Categories. As the template evolved, I learnt not to name any category speculatively.

The final categories were:

Brahmin groups. Dalit groups. Jat clans. Khatris and other groups. Rajput clans. Shaikhs and other groups. Tarkhans and other groups. Others (groups to which i could not attribute any specific status). In the last (Others), I also included groups such as Kamboj, Khasa, Ahir and Gujjar. However, Satbir Singh separated them and bunched them under a new category called "Surviving Ancient Kshatriya Tribes".

Since that day, a revert war has been on between the two of us. According to Satbir, these groups such as the Ahirs (the ancient Abhiras), the Gujjars (Gurjaras), the Khas (the Khasas), the Kamboj (Kambojas) and Yadav (Yadavas) are ancient Kshatriya tribes mentioned in a number of ancient Sanskrit texts.

My own personal opinion is that all this is true. However, some points must be noted:

The Varna System is a topic subject to a lot of controversy and dispute. I have been noticing this in recent weeks. Pages such as Khatri, Rajput, Kayastha and Bhumihar have been vandalised because many people don't agree with the Varna status of these groups. If the Ahirs, the Gujjars, the Khasaa, the Kambojas and the Yadavas are Kshatriya groups, then so are the Rajputs, Jats, Khatris, Tarkhans et al. I did not create a category entitled "Kshatriya groups" in the first place because I knew I was treading on soft ground. All the above mentioned castes claim Kshatriya status. But we all know, how disputable these claims are. The rigmarole that is the Varna System is known to us all. For example, the Jats, who in the Vedic and Mythological periods were workers should be placed in the Shudra Category under the Varna System. But many Jats clans consider themselves the equal and perhaps the superior of Rajputs as adhrents of Kshatriya Dharma. My own caste, the Khatris and related groups such as Aroras claim Kshatriya status. But we have seen on the Khatri page as to what became of that claim. Ahirs, Gujjars and Yadavs are considered to be OBCs in most Indian states inspite of their being the descendants of ancient Abhiras, Gurjaras and Yadus. There is a controversy raging on the Yadav page presently if I am not wrong, on the status of the caste. Taking all these points into consideration and being aware of the fact that there are users (say Sanjay Mohan and Holywarrior, who have caused great disputes on various caste pages, I proposed categories such as "Kambojs and related groups" (Kamboj, Kamboja, Kamboh and Khasa) and "Gujjars and realted groups" (Ahirs, Gujjars, Dhangars and Bakarwals). But Satbir Singh and another user named Sze cavalry01 objected to it. They returned to "Ancient Kshatriya Tribes". I did a little compromise by making it "Ancient Warrior Tribes", which I later realised would also be POV. Therefore, I changed it to just "Ancient Tribes" - A completely unspeculative term.

However, Satbir Singh does not agree. He calls it a "gross suppression of known historical facts", "a crime against history" and "a political agenda" and has termed me a "Vandal". I have put forward my points. But both of us are yet to agree.

I have fighting a revert war with him for almost a week now. Have a look at the template's history page and Satbir Singh's talk page to get a complete idea of the whole fracas.

This fight has become downright silly. I surely don't expect myself to spend my time, money and energy on such a silly matter. And I am sure neither does the other party.

Therefore, I urge you to have a look at the whole matter. Whatever is you opinion would be agreeable to me.

Regards. Rajatjghai 04:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have, as of now, protected the page to prevent this major revert war. Please discuss changes and reach consensus on the template's talk page.--May the Force be with you! Shr e shth91 ($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 04:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

I see that you blocked AmericanBeauty2 for afd disruption. Now User:Americanbeauty2 is doing it. I have reverted it twice. It is a sockpuppet of the first one. Please help.--Ávril ʃáη 06:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much.--Ávril ʃáη 06:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please fix

Looking at this diff, I see that you have inserted a bundle of dates in U.S. format into an article where they are inappropriate, France being one of the vast majority of countries that is not the U.S. and does not use this format. --Jumbo 06:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thierry Henry

I just realised I used the wrong button (revert vandal instead rollback). If you check the warning I left in the anon's page, I chose {{subst:joke}} which is more adequate of course. Thanks for letting me know. E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 07:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Connecticut seal

Hello there, I'm curious as to why you deleted the Connecticut state seal. It is clearly public domain since it is over 400 years old. It seems a bit hostile to delete an image instead of simply changing the licence. Páll ^{(Die pienk olifant)} 14:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I was trying too hard to clear the backlogs. Sorry. Blnguyen | rant-line 05:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza with out you

Blnguyen, I was really sorry to see your comments on the esperanza talk page (i'm posting here in case you wish to leave quitley, as Redvers did a while back). I know that on the talk page we disagreed, but that doens't mean that I don't have lots of respect for you and think that you're a great, kind, committed user. I for one am sorry to see that you thought it best to leave Esperanza, and I would love to see you back, if or when you feel you would want to come back. And if you do start up a project with the ideas about protection and help you outlined on the talk page, I would be glad to help you with it.

I really do look up to editors like you, those who are so committed and good at making this project better, and I really hope that you know that I don't think you were trying to push POV, as I hope you know I wasn't. We were just both being bold in our edits, and had conflicting views. I am sorry if I was the main cause for you leaving, because Esperanza needs good, caring editors like you, and more importantly, I think you're a good person.

Your hopeful future ally and friend, Th ε Halo ^Θ 11:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A sad day

Blnguyen, my friend, I'm so sorry if I've caused you to leave Esperanza! (A fat lot of good I'm doing as AG so far). It was never my intention to alienate you, and I never felt like I was being undermined - nor should it have mattered anyway! You were letting us know your opinion, and should not feel attacked for it, and I'm very sorry that you do, especially if I've caused it in any way. I never meant for my comment to cause you to think that you were undermining Esperanza or weren't wanted here, because that's simply not true. I was attempting to help and diffuse the situation, though it seems I've just made it worse. You have always been a model Esperanzian, going above and beyond the rest of us in recognizing quality editors and brining them some happiness. I am so sorry that you are leaving, and hope that you may reconsider. And if not reconsider, at least except my most humble apologies. Your friend always, -- Nataly a 16:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wind up ?

Do these not qualify as wind up's ?[10]

[11]

Haphar 11:54, 21 July 2006 (UTC) There is only one kind of Islam. The kind that blows things up. Netaji 12:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC- This is on my and his own talk page, so is this not a "religious wind up ?" Haphar 20:32, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 21 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Boy Charlton, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

-- Grue 17:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Creepy

Just keeping you updated, since you've taken an interest in this editor: [12] Hornplease 18:56, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I replied. [13] Hornplease 19:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear it...

Hi Blnguyen, I just saw that you had left Esperanza. :( I missed your presence most at the Barnstar Brigade, where you were by far the leading member in terms of contributions to the project. I just wanted to say that I'm really sorry to see you go, and although I cannot convince you to come back, the door is of course always open. Anyway, I hope this note finds you well. All the best -- Bane s 01:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Misza13's pile!

Thank you for contributing the impressive the pile of supports gathered on my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 0x0104/0x01/0x00. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. If I ever may be of assistance, just leave a note on my talk page.
Misza 13, the rouge-on-demand admin wishes you happy editing!

NOTE: This message has been encrypted with the sophisticated ROT-26 algorithm.
Ability to decipher it indicates a properly functioning optical sensor array.