User talk:Tariqabjotu/Archive Twenty
Aaron Klein: the POV excitement continuesYou helped us out previously on this issue by semi-protecting the Aaron Klein page. I posted this new message today to WP:ANI [1]. I assumed it was more correct to explain the situation on a public talk board rather than just ask you for a block on MikeJason. If you have a recommendation on what to do next, please let me know. EdJohnston 01:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC) Signpost updated for November 27th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC) How crazy was that template or maybe its just me? MetsFan76 05:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC) MetsFan, you can stop now. The template is deleted and, besides, Humus is not doing anything wrong; he is entitled to his opinion. Something that is not a good idea, however, is badgering those who disagree with you. -- tariqabjotu 05:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry if I contributed to the confusion with my comment. No, it wasn't about you. Only after I posted my comment I realized that it could be misunderstood but it was too late. I feel that the whole thing is a huge misunderstanding. ←Humus sapiens ну? 06:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC) Current Affairs PortalJo, Can you have a look at the current affairs portal? For some reason, it is showing today as yesterday. Regards Capitalistroadster 09:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Recent edits to Beit Hanoun articleStriver got an admin to undelete the two pictures. No actual discussion of the matter took place. You may want to talk to the admin and/or Striver. The idea that one of these pictures is fair use has some minimal plausibility (incorrect but I can see why soemoen might think it) but the idea that both of them are fair use in the same article is laughable. JoshuaZ 15:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Beit Hanoun incident may need protecting again.It seems like editors are back to fighting over whether to include the picture. JoshuaZ 22:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
VandalismSorry to bother you, but i'm not exactly an expert around here- I just noticed some vandalism to the sweatshop article, and i don't know how to undo it and warn whoever did it- 70.176.114.118 01:32, 30 November 2006 (UTC) Hercule moveprotectJust saw your re-add of the template and the note on PL(D)'s page (he/she needs to have a name that isn't an article name...). You are right that it's still moveprotected, but the page is no longer listed on Wikipedia:List of protected pages or Wikipedia:List of protected pages/Long-term protection. I believe this has caused the confusion. I've added a note there now. JRP 05:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC) Admin-warming giftAn early *Just missed Election Day, I see. Best wishes anyway! Schweiwikist (talk) 20:20, 30 November 2006 (updated-corrected) (UTC)
Discussions on Indian Caste SystemI have discussed my edits endlessly. We need an outside mediator, and when we tried to get one, no one helped us. Please take a look at the discussions. BhaiSaab talk 16:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Will you please block this slow-speed vandal for me? He keeps inserting original research into Wikipedia despite warnings on his talk page and a massive discussion of the articles he's adding the text on, Grand Slam Champion and Triple Crown Champion (see history of articles). Consensus at the Pro Wrestling WikiProject and Policy state that unverified facts can't be inserted into Wikipedia. I've went through test4 with him (twice) and he still hasn't gotten the hint yet. semper fi — Moe 02:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Re: Protection issueHi - I reprotected here, on WP:RFPP, after the requester noted that Jidan had re-commenced edit warring immediately after protection. For now, I've unprotected, though I'm skeptical as to how well this tactic will work. There is a post about Jidan on WP:ANI here. Thanks - Martinp23 13:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC) You obviously have no idea what you're talking aboutyou are close to violating the three-revert rule for the article. There is no three revert rule for reverting vandalism. User:Zoe|(talk) 01:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Courtesy noticeBibi Mubarika Yusufzay, which you prodded, has been recreated after deletion. I have undeleted the history and submitted it to AfD as a disputed prod. Cheers, - crz crztalk 03:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC) Signpost updated for December 4th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC) The first move was offical move request made and other two move requests are created by me to discuss on talk page. Why you have closed them too? They were part of talk page and discussion on them was not concluded. Even if discussion on them was concluded, there is not logic to do that with talk page things. --- ALM 10:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC) Your input is requestedYour input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 19:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC) Current Affairs PortalThere seems to be some problem with the current affairs portal. The page isn't showing the seventh of December even though it appears when the page is edited. Could you please have a look at it? Regards Capitalistroadster 01:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Could I get some help?I noticed you protected the page I requested to be protected: WWE Armageddon. A little while after, User:TJ Spyke posted on the talk page and told me just to leave the page alone here: Talk:WWE_Armageddon#A_note_about_match_order. That's just bad faith and I consider it a personal attack as well. This user loves to do that, and has done it before. Adding a warning to his user page doesn't seem to stop him either. He either ignores it, or just removes it. Any suggestions? I brought this up on WP:AN/I before, and there is a new post about it as well. Most people just suggested RFC, which isn't the complete solution to TJ and his attacks on myself and his bad faith because of my edits to pages he edits. RobJ1981 01:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC) Why did you revert my redirect? We're trying to divide the black people article into 2 different articles. One for all dark skinned people black people (generic) and one just for people of African ancestry black people (ethnicity) Gottoupload 02:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
TemplatesHi Tariqabjotu. Could you please tell me what templates do you use for closing move discussions? Thank you. Regards.--Húsönd 03:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
help requestYour help is requested as someone with current or recent interest in resolving the U.S. settlement naming convention discussion. I have created a "discussion template" modeled off of an RfC to attempt to structure the discussion, which is spinning wheels and spraying mud. I'd greatly appreciate any input you could provide (including "what are you smoking?"--or perhaps, "keep this in your back pocket"). Thanks in advance. --Ishu 16:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC) Hello Tariq, this user is employing the same techniques that User:Mactabbed employed and is editing on the same topics. See this talk as well as Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Clever_curmudgeon and Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Mactabbed this individual has a long history of disruption on the Wiki. (→Netscott) 23:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC) Ilan PappéYou have declined the request to semi-protect Ilan Pappé, on the grounds that "There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time." I think you should look at the logs for the now-protected Steven Plaut, David Bukay, and Kurt Nimmo, and if possible at the deleted logs for Roland Rance, and reconsider. The latest edits were clearly made by the same person/people, using the same language and accusations. We can be certain that this page will continue to be vandalised in the same libellous way until it is protected, when the culprit/s will move on to attack another anti-Zionist Jew. Why wait for the inevitable recurrence of vandalism before acting? If the article is semi-protected, established bona fide editors will still be able to edit it, but the string of disposable accounts set up in order to carry out such attacks will be stymied. RolandR 02:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Re:Ryukyu IslandsYou said:
Not everyone in the know can check changes to each article on one's watchlist on a daily basis. The article existed without macrons for almost three years prior to the move. The person who renamed it added erroneous information that claimed Ryūkyū Shotō (Japanese term) is equivalent to "Ryukyu Islands" (English term). The two terms actually have different definitions. This incorrect information probably caused many editors who visited the article during that month to not notice the problem. You did point out that a month passed, however I never claimed that a month didn't pass. Almost three years passed prior to the move as well. The creation of a non-macronised article three years ago wasn't the start of a revert war. —Tokek 03:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
what are you talking about?What "personal attacks" are you reffering to?I'd like to know who's been talking to you.Next time I'd preffer a refference to charges directed against me with the warning.ThankyouNadirali 03:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Nadirali
2 sides of the story need to be heardI think you need to here form my side of the story before taking sides.Personal attacks have been launched against me by the same users who reported me along with attempting to intimidate user:Saddiqui by making threatening comments. They have also vandalized my comments once and have been trolling with there provokitive comments non-stop.They have also accussed me of being a "maddrassa student".If anyone's been trolling it's them.Nadirali 04:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Nadirali
consider thishello sir,I would like you to read all the things these users posted on the History of India talk page and would like you to give them a similar warning for personal attacks and racism: "where did you read this? In a Pakistani madarassa? C'mon, have you ever heard of the Indo-Aryan migration theory. After the arrival of Aryans in the Indian subcontinent, the IVC was virtually destroyed. The civilization created by the Aryans afterwards is known as the Vedic civilization. Dude.. go read some history books before blabbering here and stop showing off your madarassa education. --Incman|वार्ता 21:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)" Pakistan puffs it's chest in rabid jingiosm, hides it's problems under the rug, tried to portray itself as a paradise, and get's laughed at by the civilized world as a poor, backward and paranoid nation.Hkelkar 01:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
There is no room in the official historical narrative for questions or alternative points of view which is Nazariya Pakistan, the Ideology of Pakistan—devoted to a mono-perspectival religious orientation. This, as opposed to nearly a sizable of Pakistan up at arms to separate from the state (*cough Balochistan *cough), with another fraction run by the Taliban and Osama, the the remaining half full of jingoist whackos spreading hate against Hindus and Christians and selling anti-semitic Jew-hating conspiracy theories on every street-corner in Lahore[3](Pakistan: In the Land of Conspiracy Theories, PBS)[4][5]. [6].Gee whiz, what a paradise! Hkelkar 23:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)ThankyouNadirali 05:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Nadirali PointI appreciate your being fair. Just like to point out that nadirali has professed to sockpuppeteering[7] and done some post-mediation baiting in my talk page (to which I shall not respond)[8].This, after it was HE who said he would instigate edit-warring with the assistance of Siddiqui (and, presumably,his own socks), not I [9]. Hkelkar 06:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Perhaps Nadirali should be made to read WP:POINT. Hkelkar 06:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
You should be "de-admined".Back in November, you protected the Protest Warrior article because User:Shortbus requested it. You did this due to "edit warring", apparently without checking the factual accuracy or the conformance to policy of his edits and actions. Not coincidentally, the edits you froze in the article were his. Shortly thereafter I pointed out to you that it was he who recalcitrantly refused to discuss edits on the talk page. Despite this you did not take any action to help the situation nor even deign to respond to my comment. Now, it turns out his edits (the ones you froze in the article for two weeks) have been proven factually inaccurate. While you conformed to policy, I find your handling of this matter clumsy, frustrating and offensive and not performed with the due diligence I think one should expect from someone in your position. If the opportunity ever arises for a movement to see you stripped of your administrator status, you will find my efforts firmly in that direction. Respectfully, Lawyer2b 17:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Just want to let you know that most images you removed from that page have since been restored, despite objections from several editors. Beit Or 21:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC) replyAlright I will.Bakaman 00:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC) replySorry, I lost it for a bit there. It's just that some of these Pakistani nationalists on wikipedia frustrate me, with their jingoist historical revisionism and blatant propaganda, portraying the world's largest democracy and bastion of multiculturalism, tolerance and pluralism like India as some sort of war-ravaged apartheid state of "kaffirs" in order to deflect attention from the despicable actions of their own government and the brutal atrocities taking place in their own country. I added some sources to show that he was spreading baseless propaganda (as are many Pakistani nationalists on wikipedia), based on delusions of religious supremacy and their narrow tribalist ethnocentrism. I will do my best to not get baited by this chap anymore. why can't these countries be more modern-minded and liberal like Turkey or Morocco is beyond me. Hkelkar 02:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
