User talk:Sitush/Archive 21

Hotrayrain

Hi, I wondered if I could ask your advice about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hotrayrain. It's a Punjab village with 4000 inhabitants. Does that qualify? Also there seems to be some question about the name. Is there a good source for names of villages in Pakistan? Thanks. – Margin1522 (talk) 02:17, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Inhabited placed are inherently notable. I don't like that but it is the consensus.

I've seen thousands of articles for Indian and Pakistani villages that don't have a single source, often not even co-ordinates. Only once have I seen such things deleted and that was a nuking of several hundred by the now-departed PMDrive1061 (talk · contribs) in particularly problematic circumstances. Unless you can prove the thing to be a hoax, the chances of it being deleted are negligible.

I've no idea how to verify the name, which is transliterated anyway. I vaguely recall that not even all villages are named in the census but I also vaguely recall that the Pakistan census is not available online. Wikimapia, Google Maps etc are of course not reliable sources because at least some of their content is user-generated. Sorry that I cannot be of more help. - Sitush (talk) 10:23, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

No, thanks, that was very helpful. – Margin1522 (talk) 02:17, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Talk:Dhekaha.
Message added 11:40, 25 December 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jim Carter 11:40, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh BTW Merry Christmas friend. :) Jim Carter 11:42, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I've replied at the talk page and sent the thing to AfD. My list of things to search for is long but I've never yet found anything of substance for this particular clan. - Sitush (talk) 11:47, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. BTW your input here is appreciated. Jim Carter 10:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

regarding arvind kejriwal

news are the source for wiki .Doesn't it is good practice to include controversies supported by references in wikipedia articles ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krazylearner (talk • contribs) 11:00 27 December 2014

It can be a bit awkward when it comes to biographies of living people. I think you are probably referring to the claims that he plagiarised an earlier book. I vaguely recall that legal action was taken but I've got no idea of the outcome. - Sitush (talk) 11:15, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Can You please look at this topics in Wiki

Seems these Wiki Articles are biased and based on bogus report defaming hindu religion. If you can look at these pages and remove outdated data, I'll be very thankful to you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhinav_Bharat#cite_note-20 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.59.4.160 (talk) 00:43, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I am not very familiar with the group in question. If you are not getting any responses at the article talk page then it might be best if you post a neutral message at WT:INB asking people if they would review the article. - Sitush (talk) 11:28, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Kerala page

I see that you deleted the entire section about the labourers. Can you be convinced to keep the information and delete the numbers. The info is true, just needs a source, the numbers can be added later. Also please respond to the discussion on citation needed. Thank you for your effort.FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 14:23, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

No source, no mention. Articles about religious matters are fickle things and we really do need to keep on top of them. - Sitush (talk) 14:29, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Bhagat Singh, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:55, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Happy New Year Sitush!

Happy New Year!

Sitush,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Hafspajen (talk) 10:42, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

ANI

Thanks for looking out for me on ANI. Good job I didn't miss it, though — a kind user alerted me — perhaps I'll put it at the top of my page for a while. I'm not as used to these accolades as you are, I still enjoy them. Bishonen | talk 00:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC).

Oh, I quite enjoy them from time to time. If I thanked everyone who looked after me, I'd get nothing more done. - Sitush (talk) 01:18, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Sensible little user

Do you know this user, little Sitush? On face of it, appears very well informed! Fount of good sense! bishzilla _ROARR!! 10:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC).

IAC sock/meat/block evasion (take your pick). See their contributions on 31 Dec etc in a Commons deletion discussion. - Sitush (talk) 11:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hindi speaker needed

I have a feeling Saimkhan994 doesn't really know English because of the message left on my talk page. I've reverted their edits on Rampur, Uttar Pradesh a few times and they are currently working on Draft:Ustad Sohrab Khan. I'm assuming they know Hindi because it sounds like they are from Rampur. Bgwhite (talk) 10:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Hindi is beyond me, Bgwhite. I'm fluent in English and gibberish only. I think you'd be best asking at WT:INB. - Sitush (talk) 11:20, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Cheema article

One person on the Cheema article seems to keep wanting stick with his version, he has reverted my edit as he says he has some issue with you, please check my sources and revert back if you feel they are acceptable. Rowland938 (talk) 16:46, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not reverting back because your version makes no sense. I will, however, take another look at the sources and see if adjustments are needed. - Sitush (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Left a note at Talk:Cheema. - Sitush (talk) 17:00, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

• Hey, this is in relation to the whole Raheja Developers stuff. It's still sort of ongoing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

• I've just noticed :( I'd be surprised if the SPI doesn't turn up something. - Sitush (talk) 09:39, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello Sitush

Can you see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kahloon clan, it is not an important issue that whether it is Kahlon or Kahloon, it is just not notable enough for having its own page. Also see the new changes of Nai (caste), might be important although I haven't searched around. Johnmylove[1] is now blocked indefinitely.[2]-[3] Oh and Happy New Year! Bladesmulti (talk) 05:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

A block for that user was inevitable. As per your link, they were not exactly one of my fans, were they? I've scrubbed the Nai stuff (they're on my list of things to watch out for while reading up on castes) and will take a look at Kahlon/Kahloon. My best wishes to you, also. - Sitush (talk) 10:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Article Jat people

Dear, I request you to please have a watch on recent edit activities on the article Jat people. Its being made a mess. Thanks and regards.--Mahi 17:40, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Will do. I am up to my eyeballs with another problematic article right now but I am aware of the goings-on at Jat people. I know that it is on the watchlists of a fair few sensible people but if they do not pick up on it then I will certainly delve a bit further. - Sitush (talk) 00:45, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

Please see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 02:46, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Nice citation

[4] right? Bladesmulti (talk) 13:39, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

All too common, I'm afraid :( - Sitush (talk) 13:42, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Sitush. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 14:25, 11 January 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Tito☸Dutta 14:25, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Anticline

Did you notice that User:Bishonen/Clueless complaints about Sitush noticeboard, linked in your hatnote, has been deleted?

Thanks for the compliment. I figure that paraphrasing the warning templates is the best way to go with a good-faith user; it avoids the appearance of boilerplate and (ideally) connects already-known issues with the policies in question. It's also an easy way to avoid WP:ABC, and as long as I'm not too detailed, it avoids overwhelming the guy. Nyttend (talk) 20:28, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

List of Nadars

Thank you for the explanation in my talk page, with all due respect sir, all the other names in that pages have no reference at all, at least I point a article where the subject's father caste, that is same as his own. No problem, I am a newbie to the wikipedia, thanks for pointing to the right direction. :) Regards,

Dabbing of Suryanvanshi

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at !dea4u's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Raja Umair

Sitush Satti Rajput is an important tribe of Potohar, Thanks. :)

Sri Divya

She is an actress and i am sure you can find lot of images of her on net which are not copyright protected. What if i can give you a link to download the image of her, can you upload it for me ? -- Amalram (talk) 17:53, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

• Answered on talk page. Drmies (talk) 00:33, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks, Drmies. Off to bed. I may be some time. - Sitush (talk) 00:41, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

• He was quite the looker. I have Roland Huntford's book, and I keep forgetting that I do, so every couple of years I reread and then fifty pages in I remember I read it already, but I keep reading anyway. Anyway, don't. You still have 14km a day in you. Drmies (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Women's rights and men's rights

Sitush, I agree that Women's rights in 2014 is a very bad article, but why do you care so much? Simply because it's new? You're probably aware of the entrenched dug-in bias of Men's rights movement in India, which is studded with factoids like "X, a researcher at SIFF, has said that police don't take any action even if the suicide note of a man states that he was tortured by his wife and in-laws, but in case of a woman's suicide her husband's family is taken into custody without investigation". (No context, let alone contradiction, of the "researcher's" finding is mentioned.) Have you thought of trying to improve that one? I nearly stubbed it in anger when I came across it accidentally, but realised in time that I wouldn't be able to defend myself from the unreasonableness evinced there, because I'm not well armed with information about the Indian scene. But you are, HINT HINT. Can anything be done, do you think? Bishonen | talk 00:36, 13 January 2015 (UTC).

Wasn't aware of that India-related article, no. I'm sure it is poor because it is almost a perfect storm: a political subject and India is never likely to work out unless truly neutral people get involved. I try to drive out soapboxing and pov wherever I see it, most recently at David Ross (businessman). I'll take a look at the thing when I get out of hospital. - Sitush (talk) 00:40, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

BTW, the 2014 women's rights article has improved quite a lot in recent days. I'm not getting much thanks for driving that improvement but, hey, someone has to stick their head over the parapet when they see crap. - Sitush (talk) 00:55, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Best wishes

Hello Sitush,

I just saw a comment you made a couple of days ago that you had surgery and were in hospital. I just want to let you know that I hope you are feeling better. Take care. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:21, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Q 15

Hi, a question was asked at my RFA (question #15), that made me slightly emotional. I mentioned "you" in my response. You have already voted, so I am not really looking for your vote. If people oppose me for this answer, I'll accept those very happily. This has been a very serious issue to me so far. Regards. --Tito☸Dutta 22:56, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

SPI again

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Buddhakahika. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:15, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

[VERY IMPORTANT] I say, "Why not?" — Adminship

You told me that if you nom/co-nom my RFA, that would be a "kiss of death". You actively participated in my RFA, but nothing happened. All oppose votes and neutral votes were because of my own faults, you were not responsible at all.

So, I am interested once again to nominate your name for RFA. This time you must consider seriously. Regards. ---- Tito Dutta (talk) 10:50, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

• Seconded: I think you should run. You will easily pass RfA as I think only pov pushers, vandals, trolls etc. will oppose and as we know the closing Crat will not count there !votes. Jim Carter (from public cyber) 12:32, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks but (a) I'm a bit disenchanted right now precisely because of the POV pushers etc and (b) practically the entire membership of GGTF would probably turn up, as well as perhaps one or two contrarian people of the Inclusionist persuasion who will make much ado about nothing. - Sitush (talk) 18:05, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

You'd make a great admin Sitush but I'm not sure it is a good idea for Wikipedia. You'll find it much harder to edit in areas that you're interested in ("INVOLVED!", the shout will go around) and you'll probably end up bored and will drift away looking for something more interesting. --regentspark (comment) 21:53, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

• I think the best that can be said is that you'd probably do marginally better at RfA than I would, which isn't saying much. Eric Corbett 18:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

• If Eric ran he would be a long shot. But a Sitush candidacy is within reason, provided you were first willing to create a record of sober sensible editing, which I'm sure you could do. You could mediate some quarrels or show that you had talent for finding compromises. For example you could try being a WP:DRN volunteer. EdJohnston (talk) 18:39, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

• I've spent a fair amount of my time here mediating quarrels, trying to find compromises etc. I've spent even more of it sorting out POV pushers and others of similar disruptive ilk. Above all, I've spent time at the coalface dealing directly with content. You don't get respect and a reputation for fairness in India-related stuff by acting like a shrinking violet: it really is a war-zone of sorts and duke-ing it out is an almost default position. That I had gone so long in those circumstances without a block, and then get blocked for reacting to someone who was globally banned soon after, says a lot.

  Whenever I've got into a spot of bother, it has usually been because the other party has really rather little interest in content unless it accords with their pre-existing, off-wiki agenda. We shouldn't facilitate people with that mindset any longer than is absolutely necessary and in my experience they are usually not prepared to adjust. We give too much rope, allow too much AGF and then, as in the IAC case, wake up to a nightmare. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for the rest of the community to take longer to realise this but, I think, almost always it has ultimately come to the conclusion that I had reached. Of the latest example, which in many respects has the form of a meatfarm, I'm scarred, I'm weary and, frankly, appalled: it is POV-pushing at an extreme and for a political purpose, in many cases by people who are experienced contributors and should know better. The daft thing is, I get plenty of off-wiki correspondence from people who agree and are actually in a position to do something about it (present or former admins, arbs, CUs etc) but they don't want to be the focus of attention from a screaming mob. We are, often, our own worst enemy. - Sitush (talk) 19:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

And as an example of being our own worst enemy, which I've just noticed courtesy of a wmf-hosted mailing list, try User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch which is intended specifically to exclude 50 per cent or thereabouts of the world's population. If we tolerate it, as I suspect we will, then I envisage a host of exclusionary "soapbox"/"support" groups in no time at all. We'll have the men's rights nutters going at it, the Pakistanis and Indians creating their own "safe spaces" where they can launch nasty attacks with seeming impunity, the radical Muslims doing the same for the Jews (and vice versa), and so on. Dammit, there may even be one that bans City fans and another that bans United fans. These are not wikiprojects, they're practically invitation-only pseudo-Reddit subgroups. - Sitush (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

And the creator has already effectively broken her own pledge, ie: "I will not speak negatively about non-members (WP editors who are not members of the group) by name, initials, or other identifying characteristics." with the "testy men" comment here. It doesn't take a genius to work out who they are referring to, after all. - Sitush (talk) 23:17, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm definitely watchlisting User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch, thanks for highlighting it. It has every promise of being the most entertaining page on WP. Is it scripted by John Morton (writer)? There's certainly similarities with Twenty Twelve. I thought the line on creating a safe place "much as one might expect at a spa or a domestic violence shelter" is comedic genius. DeCausa (talk) 23:45, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Very Important article of Jyotirao Phule.

Hello Sitush, May peace and blessings be upon you. The content which you are reverting on Jyotirao Phule page is being edited by a blocked User Gollymolley who usually abused Wikipedia and is blocked for that. Even you reverted his edit over here [5]. Secondly he claimed in his edit that Satyashodhak Samaj is a part of Prarthana Samaj which is not true because Jyotirao Phule was against Vedas. So how can the movement he founded be a part of Prarthana Samaj? Please check that. Also please cite the sources in that article and please don't remove the whole content and please restore some of the content or if you cannot cite it then please place a tag of Citation needed.. May be you will accept my humble request. Thanks. Terabar (talk) 05:52, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I'll take another look at it in a few hours but I am not inclined to reinstate any content that was removed due to lack of sourcing. The article has been a hagiographic mess for a long time and we can't just let claim stand indefinitely. You are, of course, welcome to reinstate any material that has been removed if/when you do find a reliable source. I made myself a little reading list that might help develop the article at some point but it turns out that I cannot access much that was on it, so I'll need to get to a library or buy some books. - Sitush (talk) 05:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

No, I'm sorry but I am not going to revert myself. You were reinstating stuff that was tagged as unsourced from as far back as 2008 - that is way, way too long ago. Either source it or lose it. I also note that you say in one of your edit summaries that your brother has been blocked and that you support him, so I think you may need to read WP:MEAT as well as core policies such as WP:NPOV and WP:V. - Sitush (talk) 12:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Who is my brother? lol.No one is my real brother here who edits wikipedia. I called Johnathansammy as my brother who reverted my change. I usually call everyone my brother or sister. Anyway the only thing I removed was that Satyashodak Samaj was a part of Prarthana Samaj. I feel its too hard for you and me to cite the sources for that article. If you find some sources in the future than please cite it on that article. Thanks , Hugs and good-luck. Be happy ! :) Terabar (talk) 07:13, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Got you. Sorry about that: I took "brother" literally. - Sitush (talk) 15:24, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Appeal to anyone who can help

I've got a problem with WP:V, WP:RS, WP:COPYRIGHT and practically everything else you could think of, per [6]. They're moving the page rapidly from one title to another and it is getting to be very confusing. I'm pretty sure that this is not even a notable community but, regardless, we need to get a grip. Off to bed and, as my recent history shows, my activity at the moment is extremely skewed due to a very weird post-operative sleep pattern. I'll wake up ... some time. - Sitush (talk) 01:13, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

I've added page and move protection, admin edit only as the user is autoconfirmed. I haven't reverted any edits as I'm not sure what is what. Hmmm, I know this new admin that could help out editing the page. Bgwhite (talk) 01:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: Can you see my note on the article's talk page, please? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:30, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

We should move the article back to Bhale Sultan and delete all the redirects. The whole thing is a mess. --regentspark (comment) 01:31, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

NeilN I've reverted based on your talk page comment. Bgwhite (talk) 01:45, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I found the original source. [7] Copyright violation as Sitush suggested. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:50, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, all. I see that Bladesmulti has made some comments on the talk page. I'll do some digging and then leave some of my own but, obviously, the correct title should be Bhale Sultan, if the subject is notable at all. - Sitush (talk) 10:52, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

• I have warned the user too. --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Who made you King of Wikipedia?

King of Wikipedia

I do not accept your Royal 'we' You are no more important than I, just a normal human being, yet you hide your true identity whilst thing to be enigmatic 'in the interest of openness'. I wish to complain about your conduct as I believe a serious COI exists. PLEASE EXPLAIN IN DETAIL HOW I CAN MAKE A FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST YOU(Andcarr (talk) 09:48, 24 January 2015 (UTC))

I have opened a thread at ANI and you are welcome to comment there. I did notify you. - Sitush (talk) 09:51, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Stalwart

It is an honor to be called a "stalwart" BY a stalwart. Thank you. Buster Seven Talk 08:24, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

I like...

to make people laugh...or at least smile. It comes from my years as the grade school class clown. There is something I made today that I wanted @Eric Corbett: to see. But someone locked his door and I can't leave a message. I wonder if he will see it here. I can't give it to its intended recipient. That would be too bold. Thanks for letting me use your page as a message board. Buster Seven Talk 08:42, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

The David vs Goliath Honorary Medal

		The David vs Goliath Honorary Medal
		For using Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement to win a personal battle, you have been rewarded with this medal. Your diligence and tenacity in pursuing your prey is epic. Like David and Goliath (if David was a women and Goliath was a symbol of Male Oppression) you have retold the classic story of good over evil. Well...at least your version of the classic story of good over evil. Maybe if you repeat it often enough, other editors will begin to believe it. Buster Seven Talk 14:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

"Not keen on circumspection"?

User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 15:24, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Yep. Now please don't bring your POV here. - Sitush (talk) 15:54, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Lol. I really don't know when I have rubbed you the wrong way, but I must say that I was surprised that you apparently have taken such a dislike to me, since it is not mutual. My "Pov" in this case happens to be the mainstream scientific view, so I cannot leave that behind and still be a wikipedian. If by lacking circumspection you mean that I am not afraid of being confrontational, then it is true, if you meant to impute me that I am non-neutral or sloppy in my editing then I think you should look through my contributions and inform yourself. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 16:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Some friendliness.

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Beda people

I have thrown in a couple of hooks to try and get this DYK through the door. Illegitimi non carborundum. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for trying. I'm really not that fussed right now. - Sitush (talk) 01:01, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Copyvios

Hi, when you come across obvious crap like this, could you do me a favour and slap {{copyvio}} on it on Commons or just ping me? I've nuked that one on Commons. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:03, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell: I'm not sure what crap you are referring to but I do indeed usually nip over to tag at Commons, as my history there should demonstrate. Presumably this was an oversight/lack of time or, in my current mood, "couldn't give a crap any more". Someone needs to get a grip of the goings-on here. Until they do, I'm sorry but don't expect me to put myself out for a minute longer than is necessary if I'm already fuming about something: at present, when I spot something here that puts me in that mood, which is pretty much every visit thanks to WP:AE, Rationalobserver, Oranges, Knowledgekid etc, it is best that I just drift away for a while. Leaving something part-done is better in the long run than risking saying something that everyone will regret. - Sitush (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Apologies, I meant this edit. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Got you. That caught me at a bad time; times have gotten worse since. - Sitush (talk) 01:01, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

2014 Year In Review Awards

		The Epic Barnstar
		For your 2014 contributions to multiple history related articles you are hereby award this Epic Barnstar. Congratulations! For the Military history Wikiproject Coordinators, TomStar81 (Talk) 07:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure what this is for but thanks anyway. I tend to ask questions of the MILHIST project (and get great help from it) but I do not write much that relates to it. - Sitush (talk) 01:05, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Earlier in 2014 you had nominated the article William Beach Thomas for featured status, which it achieved. As we was a war correspondent, he is within the purview of the Military history Wikiproject, which in turn is why you received a barnstar from us. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:19, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

For the source you wanted

Hello, Sitush. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Silverseren^C 04:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

For some reason, the email didn't send properly and was returned to me. Is your email for your account set up right? Silverseren^C 19:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Hm, I cannot explain that, @Silver seren:. Everything seems to be fine with my email generally and the settings are correct. Perhaps a brief ISP blip at my end? Thanks for trying ... and what was the error code, if you still have the bounce message? - Sitush (talk) 01:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Error message is below. Would you be willing to send me an email so I can just send you the source as an attachment more directly?

"SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data: host mta7.am0.yahoodns.net [98.138.112.35]: 554 5.7.9 Message not accepted for policy reasons. See http://postmaster.yahoo.com/errors/postmaster-28.html" Silverseren^C 03:37, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I will mail you, SS. I have no idea why that happened - Yahoo are not even involved in my routing, as far as I am aware. Sorry about this. - Sitush (talk) 03:38, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Attachment sent. I hope it gets to you safely. Silverseren^C 04:03, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

RfC - Helper Script access

An RfC has been opened at RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script. You are invited to comment. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:29, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Beda people

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Ah. I thought this had been dumped around the time I was in hospital. Thanks to whoever picked up on it. - Sitush (talk) 12:18, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

IAC block evasion?

Given this apparent insider comment, and the same IP's edit to Aam Aadmi Party, I suspected more block evasion by India Against Corruption. Does anyone agree? Does anyone think it worth blocking, or is it an open proxy? - Sitush (talk) 13:03, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

admirenepal

Who it was?[8] How he is still editing with a new account? Bladesmulti (talk) 18:45, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

The range is too awkward to block, so he keeps coming back with new accounts. It creates a mountain of clean up every time unfortunately. The account you refer to is now blocked but there was a delay, apparently because I pinged Ponyo at the SPI case page but there is some sort of blip going on whereby pings there are not always being transmitted. - Sitush (talk) 13:06, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

I have the SPI on my watchlist, but was away for a few days while I battled an epic head cold. Hopefully the response time won't be so delayed next time (and you know there will be a next time). --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:26, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration amendment to a decision affecting you

Please note that the Arbitration Committee has made two amendments to the Interactions at GGTF case which amend the scope of the topic bans imposed in the case and the scope of discretionary sanctions the new scope is (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:39, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Samba

[9] It was unclear to me why the text was removed. The article had many good references. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Global Vision is a mirror. Some of the sources were primary. Others were obscure Raj sources that tend not to be reliable. The spelling of the name was changed throughout. There were other reasons, too, but I'm in a bit of a rush at the moment, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 12:24, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Only 1 ref is Global Vision. I see many solid references: e.g. Vettam Mani (1975). Puranic Encyclopaedia; Tourism Department, Government of Orissa; Baij Nath Puri. References like [10] are not considered primary, as they have commentaries. There are Raj sources from prominent Indologists like Lionel Barnett and Alexander Cunningham, which I will regard RS. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Fine, put it back. You're better at Hindu religious articles than I, although generally speaking we also try to avoid stuff from the Govt of Orissa because they're wacko pov-pushers also. - Sitush (talk) 17:07, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Caste edits review

Sitush, can you review my reverts (([11] and [12])) to Sisodia and Paramara pages ? The IP who made the original edits appears to be a typical caste-glorifier, and he changed some information that seemed to be sourced. On the other hand, the source he was citing by Kanaiyalal Maneklal Munshi may be acceptable (or may turn out to be another untrustworthy caste history). Your expertise would help! Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 17:20, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

I saw you do those reverts and I agree with them. It is quite common to see Gurjars trying to muscle in on Rajput articles - there doesn't seem to be much love lost between the two groups. Munshi was something of an all-rounder rather than a specialist: I'd rather see support from someone who has a relevant academic background and is unconnected to the subject matter. Ideally, someone whose work has been cited by other academics also, which (unsurprisingly) doesn't really seem to be the case for Munshi.

All of the above said, the two articles are currently sourced to this, which is at least as bad and probably even worse! I'll see what I can dig up in the way of decent sources. - Sitush (talk) 17:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the sanity check. The problem, as usual, with the caste articles is choosing between no sources, poor sources, and worse source. :) Abecedare (talk) 17:39, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Caste warrior

Hi Sitush, do you know this user? [13] Kautilya3 (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

I can't recall any dealings with them. Their notion that the District Gazetteers are reliable is not a good start, if only because of sanskritisation. Furthermore, in most cases the caste of a person simply is not relevant to their notability or even their life: it is almost always a form of fan-cruft and tittle-tattle. - Sitush (talk) 19:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

In this case, it might be a caste war. The Category:Chitpavan Brahmin seems to have been almost entirely populated today! Kautilya3 (talk) 19:51, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Brahmins and Rajputs are the worse for doing this. Perhaps not surprisingly, the "lower" castes tend not to advertise the fact unless there is some extreme glorification to be gained from it. Are you aware that the number of castes more than doubled over a period of 40 or so years (roughly 1900-1940) and has increased further since? That's sanskritisation for you. - Sitush (talk) 19:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Regardless, see User:Sitush/Common#Castecats. The entire sequence needs to be reversed. - Sitush (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

how dare you call KM Munshi to be unreliable and all slanderous names?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.69.77.227 (talk) 20:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Sisodia Rajputs

Hello Sitush donot delete facts from sisodia rajputs article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamburningdesire (talk • contribs) 06:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Mertia Rathore

Candidate for AFD? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:28, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Another mess: Satha Chaurasi --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:31, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I will have a dig around my books etc but things do not look hopeful on the face of it. - Sitush (talk) 15:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I can find only this in relation to the Mertia, and it really only refers to one person in passing. The exact same text appears in another book from the same publisher. There are plenty of passing mentions of the Ghanerao that it refers to but nothing that seems directly to discuss the clan. I suppose the article could be redirected to Rathore for now, since the clan clearly does exist. - Sitush (talk) 16:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I have tidied up Satha Chaurasi as best I can but I cannot do much about the Hindi sources and I suspect that the Indian rebellion section is really just local glorification. I think it is notable as a name for a region but it would be good if someone could specify the villages that are referred to by the term, thus turning the thing into a list with a short explanation of significance. - Sitush (talk) 17:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Sitush sir

Hi Sitush sir i am saryupareen brahmin from a village of name matiyara in Basti district of uttarpradesh. My village is nearer to bastion city just south east of city and 3 miles away from city. In basti district saryupareen brahmins and bhumihar brahmins marriage still happens from ancient time. and also their is mention about bhumihar or bhuinhar brahmins of kaashyap gotra in kanyakubj vanshavali , and those bhuinhar brahmins are kanyakubj brahmins this all is true god promise. if you don't believe see the matiyara village of basti and also their are 12 more villages: and also see kanyakubj vanshavali this don't destroy our bhumihar brahmin brothers we want to save them by telling the real truth. for god save them. they are unaware of these fact please sir donot delete it please sir please. you have to save the truth for god and for our bhumihar brahmin brothers— Preceding unsigned comment added by Manas tiwari (talk • contribs) 02:06, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

The campaign for recognition of the Bhumihar community as Brahmins has been conducted on Wikipedia for years. The problem is that we need reliable independent sources and in fact all we seem to get is repeated references to the work of Sahajanand Saraswati, who was the primary campaigner for being recognised as such and was himself a Bhumihar. Sanskritisation is the underlying problem here, sorry, and there is no point in trying to turn Wikipedia into another soapbox for that cause. We exist to reflect the sources, not to make history. - Sitush (talk) 17:30, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Aam Aadmi Party

Hello Sitush Sir, I am glad to know that you have given lot of relevant information to Wikipedia from over 7 years but please don't alter the regional name of Aam Aadmi Party i have edited in the mentioned article. The reasons behind that are Hindi is the common language among all Indians and Mr. Arvind Kejriwal, the founder of this party has addressed to the Delhi People in Hindi, All his manifestos and promises are almost in Hindi language — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumedh Tayade (talk • contribs) 17:56, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Hindi is not "the common language among all Indians". Plenty of them cannot read, write or speak it. In any event, please see WP:INDICSCRIPT. - Sitush (talk) 18:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Uncivil environment

You asked me to define a civil environment. I'll define what it isn't. A civil environment doesn't have people disrespecting each other, nor does it have people who intend to harm others or their work. Viriditas (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

That definition begs more questions than it answers. And that really was my point when I asked: people have different interpretations of civility, of what is or is not disrespectful and/or harmful, of what constitutes work that is valid for this project, etc. No-one disagrees with the gist but drawing the lines is nigh-on impossible.

So why bother? Instead, get back to doing something more useful, more likely to succeed and, yes, less disruptive than the constant clamour, stalking and so on that some aggressively authoritarian people seem mostly to live for here. In particular, the tendency of otherwise obviously intelligent people to favour what amounts in some respects to cultural imperialism is something that I find difficult to understand, especially when those people usually also quite obviously have thick skins when it suits them. If Wikipedia was intended to be first and foremost a social experiment, that should have been stated at the outset and should be prominent in welcome notices etc. - Sitush (talk) 21:50, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you view the complete rejection of civility as "cultural imperialism"? Aren't you trying to force your standard on everybody else? Wikipedia is by definition a social experiment, it need not be explicitly stated; i.e., all collaborations are social, and all new and developing communities are experimental. Rationalobserver (talk) 21:59, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I didn't advocate a "complete rejection" of civility, so I have no need to answer that. Mine is not a standard as such but rather a laissez-faire approach. I don't need or want a book of increasingly specious rules for so-called civility and, by and large, this place functions perfectly well without one, so live and let live. If anyone here is aiming for a Utopia then I'll give them the names of a few psychiatrists because that is where they need to look; if they want to sing Kum Ba Ya then I can direct them to a few churches.

I didn't see anyone taking a pop at HJ Mitchell for recently using words such as "fuck", "bollocks" etc but if, say, Eric Corbett uses such words then the vultures would descend. You need to recognise that the real issue is personalities, not civility, and that calling people misogynists (as I and others have been called) when the evidence clearly demonstrates otherwise is at least as potentially offensive as using some word that some arguably prudish sub-culture has deemed unacceptable. Some of the most "toxic personalities" on this project have never written anything here that would ever appear in a list of proscribed words.

Get over it and get back to improving the content, I say. You've got to see the big picture, and in that the occasional twat (use of, person who sometimes act like one) can be tolerated. - Sitush (talk) 22:52, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

But you are advocating a complete rejection of the civility policy, which is really what I meant above, not that you are never civil to anyone, just that you don't want a policy to dictate behavioral standards. When you suggested that I was part of a secret off-Wiki cabal, I said it was bullshit, and you asked me to not call you a liar. While I wasn't really calling you a liar, I was calling the claim a lie, you did indicate that it was unacceptable, which implied you do expect a certain level of civility, at least when it comes to you and your friends. Rationalobserver (talk) 23:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Rationalobserver, it's not "secret", I saw that you're referred to by name on a certain off-wiki mailing list. EChastain (talk) 23:35, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

EChastain, if I referred to you on an off-Wiki message board would you then be part of a conspiracy? I have had zero involvement in off-Wiki message boards, so I don't know what to tell you. I have communicated with three Wikipedians via email, but EC was not a subject of discussion. Rationalobserver (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are referring to here, Rationalobserver, regarding accusations about you. However, I have not and never would advocate a complete rejection of the civility policy. You are wrong, plain and simple, and I've said as much. - Sitush (talk) 23:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Point taken, but don't you remember our interaction at AE? Rationalobserver (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't remember many interactions. I would imagine that I said what I intended to say, although you may not have read it that way if this thread is anything to go by. Nonetheless, as a rule, I've got a pretty short memory for interactions and a fairly long one for articles. That helps to keep the personality issues in check (most of the time) and also explains why I am often so poor at digging out diffs. Unlike some people, and with one notable exception, I've never kept lists of diffs for future use. - Sitush (talk) 23:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't matter; I think I understand what you're trying to teach me, but even if I don't I appreciate your effort, so thanks! I could better explain why I thought you rejected WP:CIVILITY, but that's not important, and I would just be dragging stale diffs into it, which I agree is a distasteful time-sink. If I've misjudged you I sincerely apologize. I'll be more careful about that in the future. Rationalobserver (talk) 00:02, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Just noting that I chose those words carefully, not in anger. For example, in my conversation with Giano I was well aware that Giano wouldn't take offence at my use of the word "fuck", and some people respond better to brutal frankness than to verbose explanation. And if "bollocks" is even mildly offensive these days I'll apologise to anyone genuinely offended, but euphemisms would not have been sufficient to convey the stupidity of the remark I was responding to (not linking because it would be unfair to the person who made the remark; observers, please take my word for it). I'm not disagreeing wiht your point, but noting that Eric's reputation is not entirely unfair. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:04, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I am sure that you did choose them carefully, Harry. But one of the problems is that people get upset by proxy, ie: you might have known that Giano wouldn't mind but someone else could jump on that bandwagon. The day that someone blocks Jimbo for his repeated attacks etc is the day that I might consider criticisms of Eric to be at least in part justified. - Sitush (talk) 23:12, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

But that sounds like your issue is more with parity, not civility in general. After all, how can you criticize Jimbo for making personal attacks with one breath while condoning EC's attacks with another? Rationalobserver (talk) 23:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Really, I don't have an issue: the status quo regarding civility enforcement seems about right to me, ie: we know it exists but we accept that often it is subjective and/or not worth getting in a tizz. De facto, it is those campaigning for a more strict enforcement of civility who have the issue, and I'm really just pointing out the inconsistencies and illogicalities of it all. Like I said, most of the civility-related stuff here is really about personalities (and it is often long-held grudges etc). Hit the articles, forget the crap. Oh, and ask Jimbo to close down his talk page and/or redirect it to Meta, which for reasons of his role and systemic bias is probably where it should always have been. - Sitush (talk) 23:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

The "status quo" is rarely "right" about anything in my experience, so I must assume we are coming at the perception of reality using different paradigms. For example, you earlier referred to the laissez-faire approach, which seems par for the course when dealing with a disproportionate demographic of digital utopians and techno-libertarians. But that term refers to an economic system, not a social system, so I must object. If we had a social policy of nonintervention built from the ground up, then everyone would have access to admin tools or nobody would. If there was truly no interference, we wouldn't have noticeboards (and I remember when we didn't) and we wouldn't have block logs. We would have the strong ruling over the weak, dominating and harassing them with incivlity. Oh wait, that's exactly what we have now. I'm pretty skeptical when I hear someone say "laissez-faire" in a social context. It usually means, watch out, hold on to your wallet. Or in this case, "keep your head down and take the abuse, we have every right to treat you like the peon that you are". Sorry, but no. Viriditas (talk) 01:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Regarding laissez-faire, well, you may well be doing the same thing that people do with "fascist", I guess: the thing has a much wider, much less rigid context. However, twist my words however you wish. I didn't for example, say that the present system is "right", I said it was "about right": there were no absolutes.

I would rather live in a society that tolerated differences provided that the actions themselves are not persistently disrupting the raison d'être of that society. This stems perhaps in part because I am really quite different myself in many ways; most obviously, my freaky communication abilities for someone who was born profoundly deaf - I would have got nowhere in the UK education system etc had the prevailing dogma regarding that, erm, prevailed. But it turned out that the real-world policies actually had some flexibility when it came to practical usage, in the interests of the greater good. So too does WP's civility policy.

Your world, in so far as it applies to civility enforcement, seems distinctly overpowering and rigid, and likely to lead to even more rows than the present state of affairs as people would continue to refine it to cover every possible case. There are over four million trees in this wood and there is no need for anyone to go play hide-and-seek near to the trees frequented by Eric Corbett or me or whoever else might be perceived by some as occasionally troublesome. You can play there - no-one is stopping it - but if it all seems a bit dark and you find your playmates are a bit frightening and horrible then just go to an area that is less upsetting for you and let someone else try playing near those trees. You don't indeed have to play hide-and-seek at all. - Sitush (talk) 06:19, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not twisting your words, I'm telling you how I interpret them. And how is it inflexible and rigid to expect discourse based on mutual respect without any intent to harm the other party? I shouldn't have to tolerate disrespect or harmful speech because someone has a personality quirk. Nobody should. Viriditas (talk) 08:54, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

You do seem to be twisting my words. And you seem still to be unable to appreciate that your perception of respect, harm etc is not necessarily the only one, just as mine is not. We do not operate in a black-and-white world and in most cases there is no absolute right or wrong to a situation. At best, things are "about right" etc. - Sitush (talk) 09:12, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

An interpretation is the exact opposite of twisting words and a singular perception. It implies, in its usage, more than one way of seeing. I don't see the world in black and white, nor have I advocated anything having to do with right and wrong. What I've said, and what I'll continue to say, is that nobody should deserve, put up with, or accept being treated with disrespect or any intent to harm. That means that civility isn't an option, it's a requirement. One can argue, therefore, that effective communication necessitates civility as a medium for discussion. Viriditas (talk) 09:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm getting tired of this. You keep banging on about civility but you cannot define it in a rational non-subjective manner. That was my point at the outset, it has been my point for years and no-one, absolutely no-one, has ever come up with a proposal that would resolve it. If you cannot accept that then this has been a waste of pixels. You are going to have to be very much more specific because all I am getting here is hot air and it is tendentious, tiresome and pointless. Feel free to hold on to your belief but do not expect it to amount to anything practical beyond that which we already have. I've got a stack of books and papers to read here and my time would be better spent doing that than continuing to discuss something that will never amount to anything useful. - Sitush (talk) 09:50, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I've given you a negative definition of civility based on objective limits: civility is the absence of disrespect and harmful intent. This is neither irrational nor subjective. I suspect most people would agree with this specific, limited negative definition. A more general and expanded version would consist of a positive definition: respect, kindness, compassion, benevolence, understanding, and tolerance. Again, I think most people would agree with this positive definition. But I've already discussed my conception of civility in depth on the talk page of OrangesRyellow. At the end of the day, I concluded that civility depends on inner peace. Although we can try to enforce it externally, the current limitations of the Internet as a communication medium tend to exacerbate incivility in those who are not at peace with themselves and others. That doesn't mean we should stop enforcement, it just means that the responsibility for civil communication begins and ends with us. Nobody can make us act uncivil or rude. That's our choice. And in the same way, nobody can force us to act civil or polite. But we can still enforce civility like we do any other behavior. Viriditas (talk) 10:11, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

This is utterly pointless and not remotely objective. You still haven't managed to define disrespect, harm, rudeness etc, nor explained how we could better enforce "civility". I suggest that you drop this because you are making no sense where it matters and you are not going to convince me by repeatedly ignoring the crux of the problem. - Sitush (talk) 10:31, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't believe common words that most people understand and acknowledge require new definitions. I want to thank you, however, for not bringing Charlie Hebdo or the Pope into this. Viriditas (talk) 10:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean Viriditas, with this vision of yours that Wikipedia has what you call the "strong ruling over the weak"? Who are these "strong" rulers? Sandstein? Is it not more that some people come here obsessed, desperate to become admins so they can get what will probably be the only apparent power over others that will ever be their lot. People like that can cause a lot of grief to others, but they are certainly not strong people. Just inadequate people who have discovered they are supported by matching inadequacies in the system on Wikipedia, controlled at base by people like themselves. Wikipedia is largely built by genuine and dedicated content builders, users who are rarely admins and get little recognition or support for what they do, but just get on with the job because it seems like the right thing to do. Some other users, such as self-righteous civility networkers who want everyone who doesn't agree with them punished and banned, and those that are here because they want to personally appear important, are damaging and irrelevant to the positive development of Wikipedia. Anyway, the possibility of decent governance on Wikipedia has long since passed, and given the indifference displayed by the founder himself to the problems faced by genuine content builders, there is no longer any point in attempting to engage on such issues. Some of the people who put themselves forward and claim the credit for Wikipedia are anything but noble. But Wikipedia is still alive and is still a noble cause. And will remain so unless the ever-diminishing and endangered group of dedicated and genuine content builders are finally fully purged by "moral" campaigners. --Epipelagic (talk) 06:54, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I seriously hope this is satire. Did you just compare my concern with the lack of civility in interpersonal communication on Wikipedia with the goals of the PMRC? Really? Viriditas (talk) 08:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Not satire... just a faithful reflection of the reality --Epipelagic (talk) 21:53, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Facebook and FOSDEM

I would imagine that the attendees of FOSDEM are far, far from being a representative group. Nonetheless, a report from there seems to use opinions received to further promote the vague morphing into a Facebook-like environment, with all of the fluff that might entail - see this. I find it interesting that the comments ("Based on these and other conversations" - what other conversations? do they mean the cross-wiki shouting matches?) directly contradict the empirical experience of at least some people who have regularly been involved in edit-a-thons, who have said that they make no difference to recruitment/retention of women: they turn up, they edit on the day, they don't edit thereafter (there is a thread somewhere, either at GGTF or on the gendergap mailing list).

It strikes me that we need less anecdote and more hard fact, obtained through a series of well-defined surveys. Then, if anything needs to be done on the software side, we need to assign the task to competent developers. My fear is that the agenda is being driven in reverse: the desire for Facebook-isation exists as some sort of weird power-play at the highest levels or simply as a means of retaining and recruiting yet more software developers within the incestuous corporate structure. To meet their own desire, they need to find external reasons in support of it. If VisualEditor is anything to go by, any attempt at Facebook-isation will be a disaster but, happily (sic), will keep the WMF employment numbers rising. Too much money, too much vested interest; too little meaningful consultation, too little clue. - Sitush (talk) 04:36, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sumedh_Tayade_and_WP:INDICSCRIPT --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:02, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I have commented there. - Sitush (talk) 18:29, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

About Native Name

Dear Sitush, I am a new wikipedian but also i support the local language indication, i know that its english wikipedia but i assure you that i would never make any offensive name indication in the infoboxes which would be violating wikipedian rules, I will just add the native names which are truly recognised by the state government and Republic of India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumedh Tayade (talk • contribs) 17:08, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

STOP

Your recent editing history at Grewal shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Oh, go away. You are a caste warrior and you know it. - Sitush (talk) 02:14, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		You may not know me, but I've seen your work for years. Whether it's a view on a topic, or your defending those who are deserving; your thoughts and integrity often inspire me. I've also enjoyed your work on historical Indian culture, such as Paravar and Nair - but that's a different barnstar. Thanks for being here, and being you Sitush. — Ched :  ?  19:58, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

@Ched: thank you very much for your thoughts. I am not perfect, of course, and I often seem to be in the minority of late. Since I've pinged you and am about to go to bed yet again (I am unwell), perhaps you might take a look at Grewal? The edit summaries alone, with multiple references to "sabotage", make it obvious that something odd is afoot. You most likely will not understand the subject matter but various warnings have been issued to various users and I've also raised the sourcing issues and prior AfD outcome on the article talk page. My patience is at a low ebb but I'd stack a lot of money on this being a meat or sock case. - Sitush (talk) 02:10, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sitush. I'm just now getting online, and the "ping" never showed in my browser - I'm not sure why. I'm sorry I missed the bulk of the problems, although it seems to be better now. I've had a quick look, and it looks like this is finding a resolution. I'll watchlist both the editor and the dab for a bit, and if there's anything I can contribute I will. I do hope you're feeling better. At my age, I can relate more often than not. — Ched :  ?  21:10, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Ched, I think there were quite a few ping problems over the last day or so - I may have missed some myself but time will tell. No biggie.

Thanks for watchlisting the thing: RegentsPark clearly spotted what was going on and that removes the immediate disruption on the article itself. The rest, alas, is going to be yet another re-hash of the same arguments regarding reliable sources for this subject area. It is not a scenario that has ever gone against me but I really must write that essay one day because, frankly, it is extremely tedious having to deal with something like this pretty much every week. Since RP is, I think, still not as active as once they were, the extra set of admin eyes cannot be a bad thing. And the fact that you probably know nothing about the subject cements the uninvolved aspect.

I am 52: I should not be feeling like (sometimes worse than) my mother does! Right now I am managing only a couple of hours' sleep at a time and that issue alone hurts. Still, there are plenty in a worse predicament and "small mercies" applies :) - Sitush (talk) 01:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Urgent help needed on the article Kumhar

Respected Sir, A huge traffic of i.p. users is continuously tempering with the sourced contents of the page. Their intention is merely caste promotion to which they actually belong, and it can be well verified by their conversation on the talk page of this article. They are continuously adding the self opinion based, unsourced contents removing the sourced contents. The article is continuously being de-shaped. Immediate attention and needful action is needed to protect the page. Who can understand better than you that it takes a lot of efforts to build a fully sourced article and it is not good when it becomes victim of disruptive editing just for the sake of advertising or promoting caste based ideas. Please interfere, i humbly request.-- Mahensingha _{(Talk) "Thanx n Regards"} 14:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I see that someone semi-protected it before I got to the thing. I have tidied it up. - Sitush (talk) 16:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Sitush sir which evidence and proof you have given its not correct its showing

kindly remove untouchable word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachin8p (talk • contribs) 18:31, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Pandui raj

It is right.check history Singh Pranav Kumar 18:49, 19 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pranavtat09 (talk • contribs)

If it is in "history" then provide a reliable source that verifies it, please. You cannot just insert your own stuff into the middle of a sentence that has a citation. - Sitush (talk) 19:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Sir kindly check all this thing and update in pasi(caste) and also if you know hindi language so kindly visit ##www.pasi.in,you will get all real evidence and proof.

Paswan (pasi) are indian civilian and belong to majestic ancestors, Its very clear with live evidence in modern history they are primitive caste.

they lived in Faizabad, Barababki, Bahraich, Lucknow, Raibareli, Sita, Hardoi, Lakhimpurkhiri, Shahjahapur, Varanasi, Gazipur, Allahabad, Mirjapur, Kanpur, Jaunpur, Gorakhpur, Pratapgargh, Sultanpur, Hardoi, Deoria Fatehpur, Azamgargh, Unnao like Dalera, Kajand, Nut, Mahre, Chamar and Pasi.

In validation in world famous book Gazetteer of the province of Oudh.VOL. 2, till H to N, year 1877, Imperial Gazetteer of india vol. ii 1908, District Gazetteer Khiri-1979, Unnao District Gazetteer, UP District Gazetteer Volume 10101053.

It wrote on page 4 in Gazetteer Rampur 1974 k, Pasi are posterity of Ahar, Ahir, Barmar, Beria, Bhuihar, Chauhan(except rajput who is not rajput) Dalera, Khaujar, Nut, They cleaned forest and naked useful for human.

In 1996, famous English scholar " R.V. Russell " wrote in his book, "The tribes and cast of the central princes of the India " Pasi is a dravid cast.

they ruled large part of awadh/Oudh, after some time rajput they had destroyed to their dominate and they establish to rajput dominate.

R.V. Russell Belived, "Pasi are brave kaum" all details of R.V. Russell in book "Tribes and cast of the north western provinces and awadh/Oudh". wriiten by William Crooke.

Mr.William Crooke wrote they were Price or King and praised to their social, political, and economical power. they ruled in District Hardoi and Unnao, Khiri, Lucknow.

Their fort were in Ramkot Near (Bagarmau Kasba). last pasi king of ramgargh maharaja santhar (King of SatanKot) did not present any brush aside that's why they had finished relationship with contemporary king jaychand. After some time King Jaychand and alha udal combined force had finished to satan state.

In validation, in present available is "Satan Kot k kile"

U.P Govt reserved land for fort of Satan Kot Kila.

U.P Govt & Indian Central Govt has assigned three acre land for King Satan Pasi.

Sandila tehsil is located just near of Satan kote, earlier it was state which has been established by king Sandila and his another brother he has established to malihabad.

King Sandila state was around Sai River to Gomati River, last of 18th Century king of Delhi sultan Nasiruddin shah, he had attacked on Sandila and in this war sadila was filer.

Maharaja Bijli pasi he was one of the greatest king of biggest part of Awadh/Oudh.

famous English connoisseur Sir C Iliyat and R.V. Russell agreed with evidence ancient ruin, fortress, fort, primitive coin and primitive uninstalls, vestige after study to another thing Its clear that distric lakhimpur and arround it on all state till 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th pasies they had established so many state, In 12th & 13th century,pasi king they had faced some critical situation with their contemporary king. he had burnt to pasi sankriti and historical legacy.

"" may not be a fo far fetched theory to identify this period with the times in which pasis and other aboriginal tribes are said to have held this part of the country.No sign of pasi dominion have however survived which need not surprised us their possession have long been held by the descendants of rajput and muslim invaders.""

It has been describe on page of 20 in Gazetteer in year of 1979.

North east of dharhara lakhimpur khiri headquarter, pasi strength is higher in dhaurhara.

It was fort of vintage pasi king, In present you will get fort and so many thing which is saved by gov.

It wrote in District Gazetteer khiri publication 1979 on page 258 that dharhaura was capital of pasi.--Sachin8p (talk) 18:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I've undone this mess. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. That's the second article where they've done that sort of thing, IIRC. I'm getting hit from all sorts of different directions re: caste stuff today. - Sitush (talk) 19:17, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Like most Westerners, I thought there were only four or five castes in India. Sometimes I wish I didn't know better now. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Officially, there are a tad over 4600 now, which is well over twice the number that were recorded in 1901 or thereabouts. I am increasingly of the opinion that caste is essentially like a series of fractal images: the more you zoom in, the more the same patterns emerge. But, yeah, that Western perception is where the likes of H. H. Risley went wrong. At least, unlike him, you are not a scientific racist! - Sitush (talk) 19:32, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

need your help please on cleaning up vanniyar article

Referenced lines have been removed. some users are trying to push false information.

https://books.google.com/books?id=OcEM2IsnA1AC&pg=PA278&dq=palli+claim+kshatriya&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oXHlVLyKJMXvoASDk4GICA&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=palli%20claim%20kshatriya&f=false

Ritual, Caste, and Religion in Colonial South India

edited by Michael Bergunder, Heiko Frese

https://books.google.com/books?id=g5dHEQ6nWAcC&pg=PT8&dq=palli+claim+kshatriya&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oXHlVLyKJMXvoASDk4GICA&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=palli%20claim%20kshatriya&f=false

Castes and Tribes of Southern India, Volume VI of VII

By Edgar Thurston

Kindly revert the article to the earlier version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nambudiri 1961 (talk • contribs) 06:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I will take a look. Thurston is not reliable but Bergunder/Frese is ok if it is being accurately cited. - Sitush (talk) 06:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I have provided more references. Please take a look at the talk page in Vanniyar

Nambudiri 1961 (talk) 06:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC) Nambudiri 1961

Dated Feb19 Please accept my apology if I am not following Wikipedia policy.

I would like to respectfully make the following points.

1. The palli caste changed their name to Vanniyar only in the 19th century. There is no historical proof to link palli with vanniyar. Burton Stein just mentions about vanniyar. There is no mention that ancient vanniyars are Pallis.

In Peasant state and society in medieval South India Written by Burton Stein Oxford University Press, 1980 - History - 533 pages. Clearly mentions that Palli are peasants and also makes special reference as vanniyar of later times.

https://books.google.com/books?id=F-HSAAAAMAAJ&q=palli+vanniyar&dq=palli+vanniyar&hl=en&sa=X&ei=akTmVPraFInYoAS3w4LYDg&ved=0CBwQ6AEwADhu

More educational reference. The Modernity of Tradition: Political Development in India By Lloyd I. Rudolph. University of Chicago.

Please read from page 49

https://books.google.com/books?id=7guY1ut-0lwC&pg=PA51&dq=palli+social+status&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vkXmVID3B4HwoASlkoHQDg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwBjgU#v=onepage&q=palli%20social%20status&f=false

Lloyd I. Rudolph. University of Chicago clearly mentions that Palli are just trying to connect themselves to ancient vanniyars. Malayaman and Kadavas should be moved to article below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanniar_(Chieftain)

Also there is no page or link to Nooboru karashimas article. There is no referece which can be seen any where which clearly states that Pallis are the ancient vanniyars.

I kindly request senior editors and Sitush to move the malaiyaman and Kadava to below article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanniar_(Chieftain).

Nambudiri 1961 (talk) 21:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)Nambudiri 1961

Regarding List of Rajputs article

Thank you before for left message in my talk page. I think here is what i can provide as citation regarding Isa Khan. Im not included the link before because i think its not necessary because the primary sources which from Akbarnama, tertiary sources from the Chowdhury and tertiary sources from Banglapedia was already included in Isa Khan page:

“ According to Abul Fazl, a 16th-century historian and the author of Akbarnama:

“ Isa Khan's father was born in Bais Rajput clan. He revolted and was later killed in a battle against Islam Shah Suri. Isa and his brother Ismail were sold as slaves. After the death of Islam Shah Suri, Taj Khan Karrani came to rule Bengal. Qutubuddin, the paternal uncle of Isa Khan, consolidated his position under Taj Khan. Qutubuddin then brought the two brothers from Turan region. Isa Khan gradually solidified his position under the Karrani rulers. ”

The year Isa Khan's father was killed in the battle was 1548. He spent his childhood and youth in Bhati. Furthermore explained that Baghirath, Isa Khan's grandfather was belonged to the Rajput community who came to Bengal from Ayodhya, particularly as explained by Muhammad Abdur Rahim, author of Social and cultural history of Bengal noted he was from Kshatriya Rajputs, indicating his noble background. He took the job of diwan under the Sultan of Bengal Ghiyasuddin Mahmud Shah. His son was named Kalidas Gazdani, who inherit the post after Baghirath's death. Later, Kalidas convert to Islam and took the Muslim name Sulaiman. Sulaiman married the Sultan’s daughter Syeda Momena Khatun and got the Zamindari of Sarail

”

So do i must include those citations too?Ahendra (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

@Ahendra: thanks for this note and, as I said earlier, it is appreciated that you attempt to source your statements. The main problem was that there was a large-ish edit war going on at List of Rajputs and it involved a pretty substantial addition of names to the list that in many cases were not as well sourced as might first appear. I don't think you added those originally - that was the work of someone who has already had warnings - but you did reinstate them.

The treatment of caste identity is a particularly awkward issue on Wikipedia and I am hoping that you have now read User:Sitush/Common#Castelists. While there are people who will say that if the linked article is sourced then you do not need to repeat those sources in the lists, the reality is that there are so many instances of poor sourcing and even misrepresentation that it is in fact much better to make the list entries self-contained rather than reliant on the link, where the information quite likely will change anyway.

I can see some problems in the specific instance that you give above. The first is that the primary source (Akbarnama) is simply not acceptable, as I suspect you already know. I cannot read the Chowdury source but it is well-known that the quality of history writing in India can be pretty poor (not always, obviously) and we do not even have a publisher's name that might give us some confidence. I also cannot read one of the Banglapedia sources, while the other one doesn't seem even mention the word Rajput.

Rather than add a large number of entries in one go, it is probably better to add, say, five at a time and only then when you are absolutely sure. Wait for a while and see if anyone challenges, then add some more. Better still, if there is even a remote chance of doubt, just stick the person's name on the article talk page and list the sources that you have - almost certainly, you will get some responses and it will save a lot of unnecessary back-and-forth on the article itself. - Sitush (talk) 01:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay i'll wait for a while, regarding to re edit now. However i want to ask about the Sources. maybe the other secondary source from Michigan university which published by Superintendent government it contain same information about his rajputs origin could convince you:

https://books.google.com/books?ei=IlLXVObgNuXXmgWRtoGABw&id=gBTMAAAAMAAJ&dq=Final+report+of+the+settlement+operation+in+five+thanas+of+the+partially+excluded+area+of+Mymensingh,+1938-42&q=kalidas&redir_esc=yhttps://books.google.com/books?ei=IlLXVObgNuXXmgWRtoGABw&id=gBTMAAAAMAAJ&dq=Final+report+of+the+settlement+operation+in+five+thanas+of+the+partially+excluded+area+of+Mymensingh,+1938-42&q=kalidas&redir_esc=y Ahendra

about the tertiary source Banglapedia i forgot to tell there's english version of it. and here is the List of editors of Banglapedia which consisted from numerous Bangladesh University if you would care http://www.banglapedia.org/english/editors.htm

As for Akbar Nama i honestly dont really know the particular reason it deemed acceptable, Banglapedia themselves has cast some doubt regarding Akbar Nama for place name chronology but not for the historical figure like Isa Khan.

Please tell me if there's more doubt regarding Akbar Nama. as for the List of Rajputs page i think i will leave it for while, the Edit war seems cant be helped for now unless administrator step in http://www.banglapedia.org/HT/B_0531.htm

(talk) 11:47, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

@Ahendra:, we do not use the Raj era sources (which is what the Michigan University digitisation happens to be). I'm not aware of any problems relating to Banglapedia, although it is often inaccessible and I think was in fact taken down for a while. - Sitush (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I've checked the discussion about caste list of India which u mention it. that doesnt correlate with the general topic of Rajputs as historical identity, thats meaning talking Rajputs as a caste, not treating Rajputs as historical ethnicity like some historians linked in this page or Joshua project which also treat Rajputs in general treatment: as an ethnicity, not caste. very well if you feel that seems correlated with the topic of Historical racial identity regarding Rajputs i'd like to know.

I am sorry but I do not see the relevance of your remarks: the article concerns the broad caste group, as it defines. Please note also that the Joshua Project is not considered to be a reliable source. - Sitush (talk) 12:58, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I think you misunderstanding the point here by forcing the point of Reliability and definition of Rajputs as caste instead of Ethnical groupAhendra (talk) 02:45, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Pandui Raj

Pandui is a Village in Jehanabad Block in Jehanabad District of Bihar State, India. It belongs to Magadh Division . It is located 6 KM towards South from District head quarters Jehanabad. 5 KM from Jehanabad. 61 KM from State capital Patna %0A%0APandui Pin code is 804433 and postal head office is Pandooi . %0A%0AShahpur ( 2 KM ) , Amain ( 3 KM ) , Mandil ( 4 KM ) , Nerthua ( 5 KM ) , Kaswan ( 5 KM ) are the nearby Villages to Pandui. Pandui is surrounded by Kurtha Block towards South , Ratni Faridpur Block towards west , Makhdumpur Block towards South , Kako Block towards East . %0A%0AJehanabad , Makhdumpur , Masaurhi , Islampur are the nearby Cities to Pandui.%09%0A%0AThis Place is in the border of the Jehanabad District and Arwal District. Arwal District Kurtha is South towards this place . Also it is in the Border of other district Patna .%0A%0ADemographics of Pandui%0A%0AMagdhi is the Local Language here. %0AHOW TO REACH Pandui%0A%0ABy Rail%0A%0AJahanbad Court Rail Way Station , Mai Halt Rail Way Station are the very nearby railway stations to Pandui. How ever%09Gaya Jn Rail Way Station is major railway station 45 KM near to Pandui %0A%0A%0A%0ASchools in Pandui%0A%0AP.s.jamanbigha%0AAddress : pandui , jehanabad , jehanabad , Bihar . PIN- 804433 , Post - Pandooi%0A%0A%0AM.s.pandui%0AAddress : pandui , jehanabad , jehanabad , Bihar . PIN- 804433 , Post - Pandooi Singh Pranav Kumar 03:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pranavtat09 (talk • contribs)

Reboot

Seriously. I just politely pointed out that 26 edits were reverted and asked matter-of-factly for people to specify what is or isn't a problem.

You're not being helpful here at all.

Peter ^Isotalo 14:03, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

You are the one who is not being helpful. You are rebooting the same discussion that is already going on and which has already deteriorated. Why do you think the outcome will be any different this time round? Even admins cannot agree where the BRD cycle started on this one.

Look, I've had a lot of experience of dealing with big content disputes that involve lots of edits and reverts. Breaking the issues down into individual items invariably works better than lumping them all together and expecting people to pick them apart. Focus. - Sitush (talk) 14:07, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

If you have a problem with it, then you do the breaking apart. I'm not going to start addressing phantom arguments. I was specifically asking those who reverted to explain themselves regarding stuff that isn't coatracking and removal of pics. I mean, you did notice that there was more to it than that, right?

Peter ^Isotalo 14:16, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I am doing some of the breaking apart: there is a section immediately above the one that you just opened at Talk:Cleavage (breasts). Honestly, all you are demonstrating is a battleground mentality: instead of trying to call people to account, just try to move forward. If that means you have to address "phantom arguments" (I have no idea what you mean by that but it seems to be your subjective opinion given that you have no reply as yet) then so be it: address those arguments one at a time. - Sitush (talk) 14:20, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

There are no arguments to address. Period. The blanket reverts have been motivated as "removal of valuable material" or "status quo". That's it. No details. At the same time there were removals of WP:RS violations and misrepresentations of sources, all clearly stated in the edit summaries. Have you actually looked at the edits or are you actually expecting someone else to walk you through them?

Peter ^Isotalo 14:29, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I saw the reverts. You are arriving at the discussion with a preconceived opinion. It isn't the way forward. I'm not sure what is going on right now but I think you need to take a break: you've tried deleting stuff here and you have twice tried to do so in the article talk thread. When an experienced contributor like you starts behaving in a bizarre procedural manner, it doesn't bode well for the quality of their participation in any actual discussion. Go cool down. - Sitush (talk) 14:33, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

You don't seem to be paying attention, Sitush. I'm talking about the reverted edits themselves and their content. You know, actual article content. If someone reverts so much, I assume they'll be interested in motivating it. But your take on this is to get annoyed at me and imply that it's up to me to explain why I disagree with the unmotivated mass-reverts.

You're giving equal weight to arguments regardless of detail, cogency or attention to detail. It's an extremely frustrating approach to arbitration, or whatever it is you're doing. If you want to be a constructive force in this, mind that smugness instead of telling others not to get upset over it.

Peter ^Isotalo 15:03, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

So, not only are you mind-reading the reverter but you are also mind-reading me now? Are you familiar with WP:CONSENSUS as well as BRD? You made some changes, you were reverted, next you discuss. You have to explain your changes just as much as they have to explain their reasons for rejecting them, then we see how the land lies. It is pretty simple, really. You'll likely get your way simply because you've got the force of the outraged GGTF behind you but you've got to play the game. And, yes, often it is a game. I am certainly supportive of some of the changes but you'll note that I didn't just jump in there and make those changes in what are obviously circumstances where there is disagreement. - Sitush (talk) 15:13, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The only thing more frustrating than jaded comments about the inevitability of The Game is when those comments are coming from someone who is actively playing The Game for all its worth.

If you're serious about this, you'd be discussing content instead of letting out stuff about the "force of the outraged GGTF". It makes you seem like you're more concerned about acting like a political counterbalance than you are about getting articles up to snuff.

Peter ^Isotalo 15:27, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh, go away Peter. Come back when you're in a more rational mood. I've been discussing content all over that page. - Sitush (talk) 15:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

You're also trying to commandeer the page to conduct discussions the way you see fit, which seems to be focused on letting reverters off the hook when it comes to motivations. Your "you'll have your way eventually"-comment makes it al seem as if you're engaging in some sort of delaying tactic. None of this is particularly collegial.

Peter ^Isotalo 16:01, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I asked you to go away until such time as you are in a more rational mood. Thirty minutes later, you are back here and you seem still not to be rational. So, again, please go away. - Sitush (talk) 17:33, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Your opinion does not entitle you to remove Sitush's post. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:08, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Sheesh, yes! Now you are edit warring with me! Go grab a coffee and take a break. - Sitush (talk) 14:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

In fact, judging by your talk page, you are warring all over the shop at the moment. Dare I mention that in the current ANI thread? - Sitush (talk) 14:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Common Sense

[[14]] Was a well written and thoughtful posting. Good commonsense advice in my book. I'd dig you up a barnstar but I'm feeling lazy lol. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 15:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I am not even sure how I got there because I do not watch that page. In any event, with hindsight, it probably would have been best if I'd left it for someone else to say. I'm not going to look but I doubt very much that she will take it in the spirit that was intended, so it will likely have been a waste of my time and might even antagonise. Not one of my better decisions today. - Sitush (talk) 17:36, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Sitush please help me.. I am not able to understand,what document you have provided its not available so far.

"Census India 2001". Retrieved 2013-04-08.

Jump up ^ "Pasi Samaj, a Dalit sub-caste, demands more representation". Indian Express Newspaper. 2008-11-16. Retrieved 2013-04-08. Jump up ^ People of India Uttar Pradesh Volume XLII Part Three by K S Singh page 1133 Jump up ^ People of India Bihar Volume XVI Part Two edited by S Gopal & Hetukar Jha pages 759 to 765 Seagull Books

I am asking, why do you not asking proof of this caste by Uattar pradesh govt and india govt. State govt has so many proof of this caste which has not been putted over the internet.Please sitush, kindly remove UNTOUCHABLE word.

I do agree pasi are in schedule caste but they are not untouchable.

for better information of pasi kindly visit on www.pasi.in,if you know hindi language.in this website everything its clear.--Sachin8p (talk) 18:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The cited sources say that the community was considered untouchable; Dalit, as used in your examples, is just an official term for the same thing. The entire concept of untouchability is something that many of us probably deplore but that doesn't mean we should obfuscate or, even worse, deny it. - Sitush (talk) 18:07, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Citation Barnstar
	Thank you for all of your work in keeping our content reliable. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 18:58, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

ANI

I've brought up your behavior at talk:cleavage (breasts) at ANI. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive talkpage comments by Sitush.

Peter ^Isotalo 21:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Good luck with that. - Sitush (talk) 01:14, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

FYI

Your friends are no longer satisfied with occupying individual caste/history articles, and have decided to take over India's capital. The latest siege lasted almost 3 days. :) Abecedare (talk) 08:25, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Wow. Tomorrow, the world! - Sitush (talk) 08:39, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Downblouse

Per your concern about lack of discussion about my switching of images at downblouse, see talk:downblouse#Comment on new image. Just thought I'd notify.

Peter ^Isotalo 15:24, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I am not and never have been interested in that article. My comment related to your dodgy logic. - Sitush (talk) 10:36, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Boing

Sorry to hear that (had my hopes up - :)) - but thanks for letting us know. If you're in touch - please pass along my best wishes. — Ched :  ?  13:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Samra

I have posted well-researched material on the 'Samra' clan. You may have your issues with James Tod or Magasthenes or with H.L.Rose. It is time for you to re-assess whether your deletions of well-intentioned, well-sourced material justifies the free flow of information on the net. You may put a text/box regarding unreliability of these sources if you are so particular about it. I sincerely feel that we can have a ground where you won't delete even the material that has merit in historical research. By the strict standards of verifiability, thousands of pages on mainstream Indian history must be deleted. I don't know why you are hitting on this 'Samra' page on a god forsaken corner of the net. Kulveer (talk) 10:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Please see WP:RS. You've returned after an 18-month absence and immediately reinstated material about which you had previously been warned. - Sitush (talk) 10:36, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Sitush, I have provided reliable sources. I need your help in reviving the page that has been mercilessly deleted by you. I have cited british historians as well as other sources from the media. Please revert back the material you feel is worthy. And then we can discuss the other issues.Kulveer (talk) 10:44, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

See my comment on the article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 10:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

And even Magasthenes is unreliable? I however stand to challenge the stand of rejecting everything that British historians said. Historians even in modern India have their agendas; by this argument you must delete the entire wikipedia. Our job is to put the information there, about what a certain historian has said. I do not think you must delete everything that Rose said or Tod said. Or for that matter Magasthenes, or Outlook magazine. I was busy in my job for 18 months and did not have the time to discuss the issue. Sitush, I think you need to closely look at that page for a few minutes and re-assess your earlier stand. Kulveer (talk) 10:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Of course he (Megasthenes) is unreliable. Academics often cannot even agree regarding what he was writing about, where the places were etc. See James Tod for another example of unreliability. - Sitush (talk) 11:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

If your standards are applied universally across Wikipedia, how do we have pages on Mahabharata, Ramayana as history; or on Greek Gods, Roman and Nordic mythology. There are so many views on Aryan migration, but you can't debunk any view with a hundred percent certainty when the issue is open for debate. The issue is this. Your one-sided view on Tod (just because you have read a few people critical of Tod, writers who have their own baises like everything in History) have wreaked havoc on so many pages that were informative. There needs to be a re-think. I request you again to re-introduce text relevant to the issue.Kulveer (talk) 08:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

We cite (or, at least, should be citing) reliable secondary sources in our articles about the ancient epics and their writers etc. Just about the only people who favour Tod nowadays are caste warriors and hagiographers in Rajasthan. No surprise there, then, given that the place also still considers the likes of the Scindias to be royalty even though royalty was scrapped 40 or so years ago. (Also no surprise that the Scindias themselves promote such claims.) - Sitush (talk) 09:04, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Template talk:Talk page stalker.
Message added 15:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Fictional flags redux?

Possibly. Have to rush off at the moment, but can you (or your tpsers) take a look at

• File:Flag_of_the_Mughal_Empire_(triangular).svg,
• File:Flag of the Mughal Empire.svg

and many others currently used in Indian history related infoboxes (see the flags being added/replaced in recent edits by User:Pktlaurence). As previously, there probably are sourcing/OR/WP:INFOBOXFLAG issues with some of these flags, although I haven't checked thoroughly enough yet. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 21:15, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Abecedare: sorry for the delay in responding - I am somewhat despondent with this place right now, as I think you are aware. I'll certainly take a look at these issues but it might not be before the weekend. - Sitush (talk) 00:51, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

This whole area requires a deeper look. For example we have an article on Flag of the Mughal Empire which essentially cites/includes three sources:

• This image
• This image
• And this description (not a reliable source but at least roughly right): "Against a green field it displayed a rising sun, partially eclipsed by a body of a couching lion facing the hoist"

all of which are inconsistent with the flag-images I linked above showing a striding, as opposed to a couchant lion (see images here or here for more likely design(s)). So the flags being used on wikipedia are not only unsourced but also probably simply wrong, and wikipedia has helped spread this misinformation all over the web. And that's just a quick analysis of one flag; innumerable such fictional flags, dreamed up by a random wikipedian, are all over Indian history pages. Will devote some time this weekend to clan up some of the mess.

Also pinging @RegentsPark: for input, and wishing that User:Fowler&fowler were still active. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I doubt if there was such a thing as a 'flag of the mughal empire'. The empire spanned almost 400 years and there must have been numerous versions of the emperors battle standard, not to mention the temporal variety in the flags that the various armies (since the mughal empire relied heavily on vassal armies for its military ventures) must have carried. Frankly, we should just delete the whole lot. Perhaps just go around removing them with unsourced edit summaries and then starting a discussion if someone objects. --regentspark (comment) 21:58, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I have just removed the triangular Mughal flag from a small number of articles. Let's see what happens over the next 24 hours or so, and then perhaps remove another batch. - Sitush (talk) 13:07, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

This comes as a rude shock to me. While I joined here, I spent time reading/editing these related articles and remember noticing that flag in almost all infoboxes. I just took it for granted that it was legit. So the main flag is mainly based on kdpindia.com and is ...quite off the mark compared to cited sources. I just removed it from the main Mughal Empire. I'm moving this discussion to Talk:Flag of the Mughal Empire. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 19:05, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Away

I'm away for a few days, being rather fed up of the present displays of incompetence/unwillingness among the admin corps. Probably back Tuesday, possibly earlier in the unlikely event that the corps come to their collective senses and sanction Lightbreather. - Sitush (talk) 19:36, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

This community is enabling the wrong people. Please will someone email me when it comes to its senses. - Sitush (talk) 09:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Greets!

Happy Holi!!!......Happy Holi!!!

Hello , may you be surrounded by cheers, pleasure, peace, success and happiness on this Happy Holi and through out the year 2015. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy Holi, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Happy Holi 2015. Happy editing, -- Mahensingha (Talk) "Thanx n Regards" 06:55, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Rajput Princely States

Hi Sitush. Any thoughts on Rajput Princely States? Is the content verifiable? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:49, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I would be surprised if big chunks are not verifiable, although there will be some rubbish in there. I am trying to keep away from WP at the moment because there are things going on that make me want to explode. I've added it to my watchlist and that will trigger something, eventually. - Sitush (talk) 15:39, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

A new tree of articles growing day by day

The most repected Editor, May I draw your attention to the following- (1) You and others rescued the article Kumhar few days back. (2) The people are now seen over active on many articles created for the same caste namely Kumhar, Prajapati, Kadia Kumbhar, Gurjar Kshatriya Kadia, Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya, Maru (surname), Mistri caste, Chunara and Vatalia there are many more Kadias,..... (3) All claiming to be Rajputs or Kshatriya. Its OK (4) But, when I browsed the contents most of them are same. Most of the contents are unsourced or unreliably sourced. (5) As per my knowledge, I found that there may be only 2 possible groups 1. Kumhar proper (Potters) and 2. the upward mobile aspirants Kadia Kumhar (Masonries) declaring them Kadia (Mason) and accordingly I proposed merger. Please review Talk:Kadia_Kumbhar and Talk:Gurjar_Kshatriya_Kadia. I need your view and I with great hope forwarded the case to you. I dont say that What I say is right or be followed. I want whatever is truth shall only exist on wikipedia. Please give it your valuable time. Thanking you in anticipation.-- Mahensingha _{(Talk) "Thanx n Regards"} 19:48, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I think you are probably correct, Mahensingha, but I am not in a position to do much about it at the moment (see my reply to NeilN a couple of sections below this - "Rajput Princely States"). It might be worth raising the issue at WT:INB but, in any event, I'll bear your note in mind and take a look when my temper is less frayed.

Thanks very much for the Holi good wishes below. They are, of course, reciprocated! - Sitush (talk) 15:42, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I understand but still I requested. I have no ability to suggest you anything but I read somewhere and believe in the theory that one shall go his own way non stop. No matter, whether others understand it or not and at last the day certainly comes when everyone realise the true efforts and dedication put in selflessly. I am sorry, if I said something unpleasant, but truly speaking, Wikipedia is suffering.-- Mahensingha _{(Talk) "Thanx n Regards"} 19:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@Mahensingha: I am a little concerned that there might be a misunderstanding here. My current issues have nothing to do with things that you have said and done. I know that you mean well and I know that you do a lot of good work here. Believe me, it is appreciated and you have done nothing that requires an apology to me. - Sitush (talk) 23:57, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I am really pleased to listen it from you. Thanks.-- Mahensingha _{(Talk) "Thanx n Regards"} 09:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Revert - Arain

Hello,

On the page Arain you reverted the version back to the one holding an unreliable source per WP:RS. As we often see, many South Asian communities, clans, etc claim what-not foreign origins, but in 99% of the cases they are not supported by sources.

The person in question who wrote the blog is a political scientist. He is not a historian, a genetic researcher (that could comment on genetic admix, for example) or in general anyone remotely affiliated to the topic, namely foreign admix in a tribe he belongs himself to.

According WP:RS and WP:QUESTIONABLE, the source and statements therefor have to be removed. He, the person in question, "Ishtiaq Ahmed", is not an authority to talk about foreign admix or whatsoever. 84.241.212.217 (talk) 16:03, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Nope. He is an academic writing about the rather dubious claims of his own tribe. He is commenting on the doubtful nature of the tribal claim and that seems just fine to me. Especially since it is extremely common for tribes/clans to make completely puffed-up claims of origin, having someone from within the community who acknowledges that it is not an absolute truth seems to be useful. The Arain article has been subject to a lot of puffery over a long time, and removing the statement just makes for more puffery by omission. Wikipedia does not exist to glorify the claims of any particular group or idea.

Feel free to raise this on the article talk page if you wish to get more input from other people who are interested in the subject. - Sitush (talk) 17:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Suresh Gopi date of birth

Hello Sitush. I was hoping you may be able to assist with a question I have raised on the Talk:Suresh Gopi page. Would you be able to confirm if this video provides any meaningful biographical information, the date of birth in particular, or know of someone else who may? Regards, Yamaguchi先生 00:33, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Can't help with that one, sorry. I was born profoundly deaf and videos mean nothing to me, except for silent films etc. I suggest that you ask for help at WT:INB. - Sitush (talk) 01:48, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For common sense and tirelessly standing up to nincompoopery Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 03:00, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

IAC

My attention has been drawn to the WMF's successful claim at WIPO against Sarbajit Roy, honorary convenor of India Against Corruption. The detailed findings seem to politely suggest that Roy himself is corrupt, at least in the sense of being a liar. Quelle surprise. Much more of this and the IAC organisation might indeed become notable, albeit in a negative sort of manner. Has the decision been reported in Indian newspapers etc? - Sitush (talk) 18:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Makes for hilarious reading. My favorite part was the me-speak-no-English ruse. :) Abecedare (talk) 20:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Only 140 active users in India? That's not much. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I believe that is a reference to dues-paying members of the Wikimedia India Chapter (as an organization); not number of persons editing wikipedia from India. Abecedare (talk) 21:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

IAC seems to have serious governance issues if its CEO is wasting time on matters so peripheral to its core objectives and is so gullible as to be led into conflict by a money-off deal. Of course, that's assuming the CEO is answerable to anyone else. NebY (talk) 01:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

There have been numerous instances, both on WMF-hosted projects and elsewhere, where people have suggested that, at least in its online presence, IAC is in fact just Roy and thus he may be indeed answerable only to himself. WP:BEANS applies, I'm afraid. What is particularly astonishing is his repeated claims to be a prominent and knowledgeable exponent of "cyberlaw", when in fact it has long been evident that he understands it no more than the Average Joe.

I have done a fair amount of digging around this evening but, alas, it seems that the case has not yet hit the news media, so the notability is still negligible. Obviously, even if it had been reported, I am not the best-placed person to create or even contribute directly to an article about the IAC organisation, as opposed the the popular movement. When people have threatened you legally, have threatened you physically, and have taken actions that have affected you financially etc, you (ie: me) are prima facie not well positioned to be neutral. I could probably do a good job of it, actually, but it ain't worth the aggro. - Sitush (talk) 01:44, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

I doubt it will make the news in India (or anywhere else). Roy's foray into domain squatting/impersonation was one of hundreds WIPO deals with every year, involving far more famous businesses and corporations than the WMF. Unlike John Zuccarini and Dennis Toeppen, I fear Roy will remain only a legend in his lunchtime. Interestingly, WP doesn't have an article on Jeff Burgar the cyber squatter who lost his .com domains for Tom Cruise, Celine Dion, J. R. R. Tolkein, and... er... Albert Einstein, among many others. He ended up in the New York Times, but not in jail, unlike Toeppen and Zuccarini. What I find somewhat amazing was Roy's contention to WIPO that IAC's volunteers "include police officers, judges, journalists, activists, politicians, lawyers, accountants, doctors, engineers, and ex-servicemen". So how come he represented himself at WIPO with that hilarious 46 page "response" instead of one of the IAC's lawyers and judges? Voceditenore (talk) 09:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

46 pages plus at least 7 supplemental filings sent on an almost daily basis, one 13 pages long. Gosh. NebY (talk) 19:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Not worth it, indeed. Every time I've looked at this IAC I've found a fog of self-promotion but no substance. Personally, I'd go no further than adding a single sentence tagged onto the internal split section at the end of the movement article, to the effect that the IAC name is now used by Roy. I think that much is verifiable and might be helpful to anyone who stumbles across some of his IAC publicity and turns to Wikipedia - but I recognise too that that might be giving an inch and a bad one at that. Of course, his notability might change if those secret proceedings mentioned in the WIPO report do indeed proceed.... NebY (talk) 19:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

It would be worse than giving an inch because Roy claims that his organisation precedes the popular movement. From a verifiability point of view, the two IACs are different things, one being a media label and the other Roy's little group of socks etc. We have had this discussion several times at various places, with the outcome at best being "if Roy's organisation in notable then create an article and a dab". - Sitush (talk) 19:18, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I'd forgotten that claim of preceding. Sorry. NebY (talk) 19:33, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

No big deal: the background to this mess is, well, messy. Same with the AAP images etc, unfortunately. - Sitush (talk) 19:45, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I've gone far enough there too, given all my free advice and quite reached the limits of my knowledge re free use. Stepping away now. NebY (talk) 19:58, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Aam Aadmi Party's title moved

Moved without any page move discussion. Please do something about this incident. Fundarise (talk) 16:50, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

I have opened a new thread at WP:ANI. This person needs a topic ban. - Sitush (talk) 19:17, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Slim's archiving

I see that SlimVirgin has again archived something when it was not going the way that she wanted. This sort of thing, which she has also done at WT:GGTF needs to stop: she is archiving seemingly to protect the status quo. - Sitush (talk) 20:32, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

To clarify that particular circumstance, Slim created User:GGTF and then set about writing a user essay, apparently inviting certain people to contribute. Of course, "GGTF" is also the acronym for a wikiproject but by doing things in this manner (and arguably against username policy), she retains control of what goes on. Any such draft should really have been as a sub-page of the GGTF project space but, of course, that would mean she could not control. It seems to be another example of attempting to subvert process and ghettoise how this place works. - Sitush (talk) 20:41, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

WikiPedia En workshop and peer review

Hello,
I am thinking to propose a national-level En WP worksop and peer reviews to discuss and try to find solution of some of the most critical issues of the English Wikipedia,India section. Please let me know your opinion. --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Your removal of citation at Gahoi

Sitush:

You removed the citation at Gahoi: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gahoi&diff=539919425&oldid=539919314

You wrote:

(not a great source - need something better and am sure it is out there somewhere) (undo | thank)

Why is it not a "great source"? Can you suggest a better one? Malaiya (talk)

Sources from the Raj era are rarely reliable, in large part because of how they were affected by the theories of scientific racism and sanskritisation. I haven't found an alternate yet but I will keep looking: I have a very long list of things that I know need to be sourced but which stand a good chance of being verifiable. This book probably would help but I do not have a copy of it. - Sitush (talk) 07:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Sitush: The author of the book I had cited, Jwalaprasad Mishra, had nothing to do with the British Administration. Why do you think he would have modified the list of gotras or given a false list? What could have been his motivation?

I have seen several volumes published by Anthropological Survey of India. A large amount of information (perhaps most of it) in the Anthropological Survey of India volumes was lifted right from the "Raj" sources you refer to. Why do you think Kumar Suresh Singh's book is more reliable?

You are claiming that every single book published during 1858 (and earlier)-1947 is unreliable?

Malaiya (talk) 02:58, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

New Articles

Hi Sitush. Would you mind taking a look at List of Prime Ministerial trips made by Narendra Modi and Sushma Swaraj's tenure as External Affairs Minister which most likely do not qualify to be stand alone articles. — LeoFrank  ^Talk 14:47, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Utter trivia, but then most lists are. - Sitush (talk) 17:43, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Request for edits in vellala wiki page

Hi I need to add this content on vellala wiki page.

page 110 and 111 , Ancient to Medieval South Indian Society in Transition ,Noboru Karashima. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/ancient-to-medieval-south-indian-society-in-transition-9780198063124?cc=us&lang=en&

he says "The Second Point I wish to add here for future discussion concerns the caste system based on hierarchy .These Thirty or Fourty years Scholars have been discussing the issue of caste hierarchy,Concentrating their arguments on the question of which of the two,Brahmanas or the King(Kshatriya),occupied the pinnacle of the hierarchy , or which of the two, religion or politics ,played crucial role in maintaining social order in traditional India,by quoting A.M . Hocart and/or Louis Dumont , it seems to be more important ,however , To realize the independence of the two, Brahmana and King, or Religious and the Political , if we consider empirically the function of the so-called caste hierarchy.In the Long course of Indian History , the opposition between the allies of Brahmana and King(Kshtriyas or dominant caste) as rulers on the one hand,and the others groups(classified theoretically as Vaishya or sudra ) as the ruled on the other,has had much significance in society ,Though no communities properly called Kshatriyas have existed in south India, we are able to regard the Vellalas , Who were the dominant caste , as having played the role of Kshatriya in ancient and medieval Tamil Country, A good example of Brahmana/Vellala coordination can be seen in the Thirukkachchur incription, quoted above , contrasting the (good) behaviour of Brahmana and Vellala with the (lowly) behaviour of the lower jatis and missing the former . The best example of the conforntation between the Brahmanas/Vellalas allies and other communities organized as idankai and valankai may be found in the revolt inscriptions of the fifteenth century referred to above"

Request to wiki editor to add this info into wiki page of vellala — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.222.186.175 (talk) 15:44, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Observer access?

Sitush, do you have access to The Observer archives dating back to 1989, and in particular this article? Context. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Your talk page proved to be of value even in your absense, since User:NQ emailed me the article. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:46, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Listen Sitush

Hi sitush please donot edit reddy — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrSachinReddyapolo (talk • contribs) 05:52, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

A Request by helpless brahmin

Dear sitush sir please defend the truth i am a kaashyap gotra kanyakubj brahmin.its all true about bhooinhar brahmins.please sir use sense ,please defend the truth.yow are powerfull at wikipedia you can edit anyway.but you are playing with truth.i cannot do anything but for god please defend the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahultewaritewari (talk • contribs) 11:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

When you have some time?

Sitush, you were such a big help when I did my Blitzkid page. To be honest, if I knew then what I do now, I would've taken a path of less resistance to publishing in the first place! But because I met with those obstacles, and certainly in good part due to your support and knowledge, it got done and is a much better article for it.

I am trying to redeem an article by a similar band called The Cryptkeeper Five. It was a little stub that has been up for years (not mine originally) but has been nominated for deletion a few days ago. I am trying to help it b/c I believe the subject is notable (and naturally, I am a fan of them). So, since I jumped aboard I have messed it up in terms of NPOV, and have inserted some clumsy sections. But I hae a singular mission: to establish notability. I can improve its style and tone over time, but I have a week to establish notability if I've understood correctly.

So, if you have any pointers... I am aware of it's flaws (I have used some references that might be even dodgier than the previous article), but any advice is appreciated. :) Keithramone33 (talk) 23:12, 23 March 2015 (UTC)Keithramone33

I am not around here much at the moment and, as you know, I'm wary of sources for popular culture. I have just glanced at the article and there are a lot of blogs etc in there. I would suggest not adding any further blog type sources and instead concentrate on finding "hard" sources - maybe try newspapers.com or something like that for concert/record reviews?

I doubt that the article will be deleted because there are a few half-decent sources in there. But it does need work and that will likely take more than a week. If it is deleted then you could ask for the deleted version to be userfied so that you can try to improve it. Userfication means that the thing would be put into a subpage of your own userspace - it would not form a part of the public encyclopaedia but could be moved back into mainspace when you have resolved whatever the problems were that caused the deletion.

As previously, you need to tread carefully because of your fan status. - Sitush (talk) 07:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Sitush. I did find a small handful of newspapers and such, and have included them. I guess my thoughts on the weaker sources was that I am not using them to assert controversial details, or to form the basis of my notability argument, but rather, you know, to flesh out the article :)

I agree that it needs work! Thank you or your continued help.Keithramone33 (talk) 17:19, 24 March 2015 (UTC)Keithramone33

sitush sir

i have no references about it but i am kanyakubj brahmin.it is all true that ancestors of kaashyap gotra kanyakubj brahmins are Zamindar bhuinhar brahmins. we are also bhuinhar brahmins. not all kanyakubj brahmins but only kaashyap gotta kanyakubjs are bhuinhar brahmins — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahultewaritewari (talk • contribs) 06:08, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

See WP:V. I am afraid that we cannot accept statements that lack sources, except in the most elementary circumstances. And nothing related to caste communities is elementary other than that they are human beings. - Sitush (talk) 06:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

sir i am kaashayap gotra tri (three) pravar kanyakubj brahmin , Madhya nadi kuldev Vishnu ,,mul madarpur zamindar bhuinhar brahmin aspad tiwari

Jolly good for you. It makes no difference here, though. - Sitush (talk) 06:53, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Delhi

Delhi is capital of india — Preceding unsigned comment added by Controllergenralofdelhi (talk • contribs) 04:10, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Wedding in Lover's Point

Have a cup of coffee — Preceding unsigned comment added by Controllergenralofdelhi (talk • contribs) 04:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Golla caste

Dear sitush, why did you remove all of my newly added content regarding golla caste? 04:59, 27 March 2015 TCSadvocate

Someone who was editing while not logged into a user account had restored a very poor version of the article. You then amended that restoration with still more poor content. Wikipedia requires that pretty much every statement made here is verifiable by reference to reliable sources, which was not the case in this instance. - Sitush (talk) 07:46, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

you are again removing content

Please slow down — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohinisinghaliya (talk • contribs) 15:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Rohinisinghaliya: I am not the one who is rushing. You need to read WP:V and WP:RS, not to mention WP:COI and WP:NPOV. Carry on as you are doing and you will find yourself with an enforced break when you could read those things but it would be better if you did so now. - Sitush (talk) 15:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Sitush: but article was fully sorced you knowRohinisinghaliya (talk) 15:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

according to WP:V the articles had got enough sorces Rohinisinghaliya (talk) 15:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Has it fuck. Even the ones that are present are not reliable. - Sitush (talk) 16:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Here on Wikipedia, everyone is expected to be polite. Unfortunately, I noticed that a comment you posted wasn't very nice. You are allowed to criticize editors constructively, but please remember to still be friendly. Wikipedia would appreciate it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohinisinghaliya (talk • contribs) 16:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

"Has it fuck?" Not an ideal response to a question from another user about your edit. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:08, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) There is no question mark. - NQ (talk) 16:09, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Liz, you need to check the recent talk page history and, yes, NQ is correct. - Sitush (talk) 16:16, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rohinisinghaliya is a sign that this user isn't worth taking seriously... Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:28, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not taking them seriously but they are being disruptive and, as you are aware, I get this sort of crap day in, day out, both here and on article talk pages etc. I know that people say you have to have a thick hide to be an admin but there are an awful lot of admins who don't get the abuse etc to the extent I get it. I'm no saint: every now and again I lose my temper. It's just a wonder that it is quite so infrequent - comments such as that from Liz above don't exactly improve it. - Sitush (talk) 16:37, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• I'm aware of that Sitush, my comment was more aimed at some of the other editors whom apparently are taking them seriously. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:39, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• Got it. I need to find my one-gallon teapot. - Sitush (talk) 16:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't making a comment on the quality of the edit but on how you responded to their questions. I think you can be civil to any editor, even to a troll or sock. The material looked like it was sourced to me and I thought you would provide an explanation not a epithet. I don't see how a comment to be civil hurts the process of working with other editors. As for Bladesmulti, I'll chalk up your poor attitude to you having a bad day. I hope it gets better. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:05, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

That just shows how little you know, I guess. And if you thought that stuff was sourced then you perhaps should stay away from content work - much of it had no citation at all. Have you seen the abuse I get and generally ignore? - Sitush (talk) 18:10, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Liz: And did you see [15] or my comment at the article talk page? You ar eout of your depth here, Liz. Take a read of WP:PACT and spend a week editing in this subject area: some places on WP will never be pleasant to work in. - Sitush (talk) 18:17, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) If you ask me, Sitush sometimes AGF a lil too much. He is more than civil in his response to abuses like this. Even after pointing to the various edit summaries and an explanation on the talk page, the continued trolling does not merit a better response. - NQ (talk) 18:20, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• I have seen around, Liz is being a busybody on many talk pages. Sitush just don't care anymore now, just deny recognition, this Rohinisinghaliya is nothing but a sock of Ashutoshsinghkaulvalmiki, had spammed whole talk page of Vigyani with many of duck IPs and accounts with insults, just because he had told this disruptive user to read OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. They also required revision delete. Bladesmulti (talk) 16:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bladesmulti: Great! I just opened an SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Rohinisinghaliya. I'm not sure how to merge it with this one. Can you help? - NQ (talk) 17:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Never mind, both users blocked by Ponyo. - NQ (talk) 17:01, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Ponyo should merge that case to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Ashutoshsinghkaulvalmiki and this sock should be blocked forever. Rohinisinghaliya was repeating the version of Volt60x. Volt60x was the actual writer.[16][17][18] Bladesmulti (talk) 17:03, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Next meetups in North England

Hello. Would you be interested in attending one of the next wikimeets in the north of England? They will take place in:

• Leeds on 12th April 2015
• Manchester on 26th April 2015
• Liverpool on 24th May 2015

If you can make them, please sign up on the relevant wikimeet page!

If you want to receive future notifications about these wikimeets, then please add your name to the notification list (or remove it if you're already on the list and you don't want to receive future notifications!)

Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:21, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	It's just a Barnstar, in contrast to the real-life harrasment, but anyway, your efforts, and the shit you receive in return, are not unnoticed. Keep up the good work! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 22:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much. - Sitush (talk) 08:29, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

kuruba

Hi, I have been editing in Wikipedia since 2005, and I have been inactive for a while, but the article about Kurubas has been vandalised and I have reverted it to its original version and don't know what your problem is in this regard

I explained the reason at User talk:Ganesha1 long before you asked here. Please read your own talk page. - Sitush (talk) 13:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

respond

kindly respond [19] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Decentscholar (talk • contribs) 15:47, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Admin stalkers?

We seem to have a tag-team of anons edit warring at Template:Rajput Groups and Taoni in contravention of RS and V. I'm abot to go to bed but if any passing admin stalker would care to take a look ... - Sitush (talk) 20:23, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

• Template: semied 1 week, article: watchlisted. --Tito Dutta (talk) 00:37, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

• Ok, thanks. - Sitush (talk) 04:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Dhanwantari(Caste)

With refs listed as answer.com and the author, I have a feeling this one should be deleted. Bgwhite (talk) 08:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I know of the name as a legendary doctor or god (or maybe a god known for medicine?) but not as a caste. I'll have a dig around. - Sitush (talk) 08:28, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

It is not a caste but a surname, just like Vaidhya or Vaidhya used by a section of Bengali Hindus. these are all pointing to the same caste. Please also take a reference from Pal (Surname), they are akin of Kayastha, as both sometimes use the surname Pal.-- Mahensingha _{(Talk) "Thanx n Regards"} 09:23, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Mahensingha. I'm coming to that conclusion, too. I've found this, where footnote 12 could be used at Baidya but thus far nothing else. I've got a fair few books to trawl through offline and I need to spend some time searching through GBooks/JSTOR/Questia etc but, yes, my gut feeling is that the article has no place here under that title. Just (yet another) poor article about an Indian last name, of the type I am becoming tired of having to PROD. - Sitush (talk) 09:31, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

All I can find is this from the utterly hopeless H. H. Risley, who was so confused about caste that in the eyes of many people he is a big cause of the problems that exist today. Suggest PROD'ing the article, with a link to this discussion, although if there is scope for CSD then that would be quicker. - Sitush (talk) 12:32, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Sigh. My PROD was removed without explanation. I have sent it to AfD. - Sitush (talk) 04:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Dhanvantari means Ayurveda doctor dont delt page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panditharajulu (talk • contribs) 04:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

You can present your arguments at the deletion discussion, which is linked in the notice on the article page. I suggest that you read the comments above and also the WP:V and WP:RS policies before doing so. - Sitush (talk) 04:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Admirenepal

I think he's back as ‎Johnsmithsawr: [20]. Ogress _smash! 07:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I think so, yes. Best to take it to SPI and request a CU, though, because it is just possible that this is someone else. Ponyo has that SPI page watchlisted, so they will see the request and hopefully act on it. - Sitush (talk) 08:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Now reported at the Admirenepal SPI page. - Sitush (talk) 11:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

respond

please respond on my talk page! Decentscholar (talk) 09:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Done, although I'd rather than issues which specifically relate to content are dealt with on the article talk page. We're shutting people out unless we do so. - Sitush (talk) 11:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

threat

boss I dont know where in india you are from, but the current Kuruba article does not make sense, I have put in lot of effort and research into this srticle and you come along and stop this article from being published, Not only this but quite a few of my articles, I want tto take this higher up as you are being obstructive User talk:Ganesha1

@Ganesha1: if you want to "take this higher up as [I am] being obstructive" then feel free to do so. I wouldn't advise it, though. I've not had a trip to WP:ANI for a while but I doubt I would come off worse if you tried. - Sitush (talk) 11:46, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Isa Khan

Hi, please do not do this again. As was clearly stated in the edit summary where it was removed, see User:Sitush/Common#Castecats. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 03:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Pardon. but i do it for a very good reason, thanks for noticing the edit. sorry if i must revert your undo. Ahendra (talk) 16:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

you are so cute

you are so cute and lovely — Preceding unsigned comment added by Controllergenralofdelhi (talk • contribs) 03:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I can't wait to see how you respond to this. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:35, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Ditto. --AmritasyaPutra^T 05:01, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Tito --Tito Dutta (talk) 05:11, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

You should be banned for that bad pun Mr. Dutta. Hmmm, somebody obviously hasn't seen Sitush before. Tito is the one who looks dreamy, especially when dancing. mmmm..... Bgwhite (talk) 06:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Ah, unexpected Wiki-love... That's good! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:35, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Ohhhhhhhh....that's really cute. Jethwarp (talk) 17:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

@NeilN: I'm lost for words! - Sitush (talk) 09:08, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Message

you have one message on my talk page. please click hereEshwar.om^{Talk tome} 20:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Fools

Yes, there seem already to be a lot of them around on this project today. Pissed off with the childish idiocy. See you tomorrow. - Sitush (talk) 05:49, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

It's bad enough dealing with the regular junk but now we have editors who should know better disrupting articlespace. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:57, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Yep, including some admins who I already hold in very low regard. That said, it probably affects me more than the majority simply because of the length of my watchlist, which was lit up with the stuff. - Sitush (talk) 00:32, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

• As to the general concept: yep! — Ched :  ?  03:37, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Commnet from Pappuverma11

Hi Sitush,

Please reply for my below query. As you edited my update.

I want to know how etymology works. Can any word can be derived from anything with prejudices. How Kakaha (a flank or enclosure), or Karsha (a furrow), or Kachhna (term for collecting the opium pods of the poppy plant) or Kachhar (the low, rich alluvial lands by the river banks) became Kachhi. Is there any similarity among Kachhi and these words? By any Indian language grammar, this is not possible to derive Kachhi word for a person from kakaha, karsha, kachhna or kachhar. Language and residents of Kachchh (Katch) area of Gujrat is known as Kachhi. Is there is any etymology for this too. In Mahabharat Aadiparv, there is description of Kachchhap caste. What is meaning of Kachchhap. Why tortoise (Kachhua) is called Kachchh and Kurm. How these words derived. Actually in ancient Vedic-Buddhist era, there was tradition of keeping name of dynasty on the name of birds, animals and trees due their specific good attribute and there were many such examples in Indian history like Matsya (Fish), Nag (Cobra), Kachhi or Kachchh or Kachhap or Kachhwah (Tortoise), Shakya (Shak tree), Koliya (Kol tree), Maurya (Peacock), Vrishal (Bull), Kurmi or Kurm (Tortoise), Singh (Lion), Sachan (Eagle) etc. In any point of history, Kshatriya did not leave cultivation. In peace time or after fall of kingdom, they cultivated land only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pappuverma11 (talk • contribs) 09:15, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Pappuverma11, I'm afraid that I am no linguist. You'd need to talk with someone who understands the development of language. An additional problem here is that you are referring to words that are transliterated from their native language: all sorts of corruptions can go on, even without the headaches that transliteration can cause. - Sitush (talk) 14:25, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Baghal Rajput

Hi Sitush Please dont be unjust. Baghal Rajputs have nothing in comon with Baghal State or its rulers. You can understand there exist many names in common despite having nothing in common. Please remove the tag. Warm wishes and regards, Gulsaid Khan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gulsaid khan (talk • contribs) 17:02, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

That there is no connection is precisely my point at the deletion discussion. If you want to argue for keeping the article then you need to do it there, not here. - Sitush (talk) 17:25, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Deleting Jat articles

Why are you deleting articles and contents relating to Jats. It shows your bias. Kindly don't do this. burdak (talk) 05:09, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

What bias is that? Are you, too, engaging in an April Fool's lark, Burdak? - Sitush (talk) 03:40, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

What authority do you have over Jat matters? I do not find any where that you have added any content to Jat related articles. Then how do you judge whether such and such content is to be deleted. Simply this shows your racial bias in deleting Jat matters. I have observed that you have deleted content from articles relating Jats with reliable references without any discussion. What dou you mean by engaging in an April Fool's lark? burdak (talk) 04:45, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Burdak, I have deleted content from all sorts of caste articles. I've also added content to all sorts of them. There is no bias for or against any particular group, merely a better attempt to comply with Wikipedia's policies than you have ever managed. I'm not perfect but I am a damn sight nearer to perfection than you in this regard. You should know from notices on your own talk page that many articles which you created have been deleted in their entirety without my involvement.

If you want to contribute something useful and compliant then please do so. If your return is merely to snipe at me, please consider going away again. - Sitush (talk) 04:53, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @burdak Sitush's actions in removing unreferenced material are entirely in keeping with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Accusing another editor of bias without foundation is a personal attack, which is not permitted. Please refrain from making such comments in the future. Thanks.  Philg88 ^♦talk 05:15, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Just to clarify something: for those unfamiliar with Burdak, aside from general problems relating to pro-Jat pov-pushing, use of unreliable sources (or none at all) etc, this has been a major concern and is still largely unresolved, in part because Burdak hasn't co-operated and chose instead to take their tripe and republish it elsewhere. - Sitush (talk) 05:39, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Baghal Rajput

Sitush you have proposed my article "Baghal Rajput" for deletion on the ground that another article already exists under the name Bhagal State. I will try to draw a line in a very simple phonetic difference They are differnt in that one is "Baghaal RAJPUT" and the other is Bhaagal State. Both are poles apart and not common in any way. on id Baghaal other one is Baagal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gulsaid khan (talk • contribs) 16:50, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Please read WP:CIR. - Sitush (talk) 16:56, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Baghal Rajput

Hi Situ I have gone through the link you suggested. It seems to be about competence. In other words my edits should not mess up the templetes. I assure you that I will not make any edits whatsoever anywhere unless in learn it but please restore the article 'Baghal Rajput". There was nothing mala fide on my part and I also know that bonafide alone is no excuse. I am beginner. I will take due care but please restore it/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gulsaid khan (talk • contribs) 17:14, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

No idea

Sorry, but something very strange happened with my revert button.[21] No idea what it actually was. It had something to do with an attempt to make this edit, which was also slightly botched. (no edit comment).

I blame Java. Or the Internetz. Or Bish.

Peter ^Isotalo 18:50, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

IAC

Beckett would have been proud of this. Abecedare (talk) 18:57, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

"We are all born mad. Some remain so." - Sitush (talk) 19:13, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Need help

Hi Sitush, I am new here and I think that there is an edit on an article which I think is incorrect and I want to revert it how should I revert it appropriately so I get disruptive? Thanks! Gameroffun (talk) 11:58, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Do you mean revert in a way that is not disruptive? - Sitush (talk) 16:56, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes that is what I mean. 14:36, 4 April 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gameroffun (talk • contribs)

SAINI

you are not allowing me to delete hatnote which carries information based on the figments of imaginations of a group of people.

You said there is a valid reason for not removing it .

Kindly let me know that "VALID" reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vrgb123 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

We disambiguate where there is a possibility that the reader might be visiting the "wrong article", ie: there are similarly-named or similarly-focussed articles. I provided you with a link to WP:DAB and am not sure how I can improve on that. Perhaps one of my talk page watchers might have more clue than me. - Sitush (talk) 19:01, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

User:Human3015

This user has started supporting indic scripts and has said to me that wikipedia has a policy of indication of indic text in local language in initial then what is to be done with wp:indic scripts, Most of my edits has been devoted to remove indic scripts Ankush 89 (talk) 12:10, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

They seem to be adding them for places, which is an exception to the local consensus provided that they only add scripts in the official language of the place. Do you have examples where they have been doing it for, say, personal names? - Sitush (talk) 20:49, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Anti-Christian violence in India

Hi Sitush, do you watch the page Anti-Christian violence in India? It seems to be undergoing some serious surgery. Kautilya3 (talk) 16:05, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't. In fact, I cannot recall ever even looking at it. I think I've seen an edit summary or two flash by, so perhaps it has gone to one of the drama boards or an admin's talk page? My bet is the thing is and always will be a nightmare, probably involving some of the usual suspects. - Sitush (talk) 16:13, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Shakya caste

A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:Shakya caste, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

it was moved to make way for another move

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Gparyani (talk) 17:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Any admins around?

I've scoured by watchlist and can't see an active admin posting in the last hour or so, other than RegentsPark, who seemed to be on his way out.

Pappuverma11 is repeatedly deleting content from a small group of caste article and has at least twice moved Maurya caste, despite that article not even mentioning the alternate title that they've moved it to. (And despite it being plain wrong, but that's another story). The small group of articles are subject to repeated page protections precisely because of people like this. I've lost my rag particularly early on this occasion, I admit, but I know exactly where it is going to end up because of the long history behind the articles. Can someone please move Maurya caste back to where it should be and delete the various "Shakkya" and "Shakya" redirects. When I come off the ceiling, I'll try to explain WP:RM to Pappuverma11. - Sitush (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

I've moved Maurya caste back where it evidently belongs (or at least where it should be until a WP:RM discussion). I haven't deleted the redirect page Shakyya caste because... ok, I'll admit it, because I don't understand what is going on. If this redirect is harmless, let's leave it until the dust settles. if it is somehow harmful (like it is patently untrue or something) let me know. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:54, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. The Shakkya claim seems to be patently untrue. There may be confusion between the caste and the Mauryan Empire but if that is the supposed link then it is plain old Sanskritisation at work again. I do wish these people could spend their lives on something more important than bigging-up.

The problem with leaving redirects like that is they then point to them off-wiki as justification for the imagined connection, so we ourselves become a part of the myth creation. - Sitush (talk) 17:59, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

OK, redirect deleted pending a discussion of some kind. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:02, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks again, Floquenbeam. - Sitush (talk) 18:11, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Improvement suggestion for Esha Tewari Pande

Hello Sitush, how have you been?

I want to ask if you can help improving this article- Esha Pande. Or do you think its a notable personality? Shobhit Gosain ^Talk 18:32, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Shobhit, I really do not have time to take on another article at the moment - I'm trying to develop three or four right now, as well as holding the fort on a couple of thousand others. The Pande article clearly needs a lot of work (see WP:Citing sources for starters) but she looks likely to be notable. I don't like the fact that people like her pass our notability requirements but we live in a silly, short-attention span pop culture world and the community at large disagree with me. - Sitush (talk) 18:38, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Kushwaha Caste Information

Sitush,

Can you please read below materials and answer to me. In this article some ref. material and name are also included.

1. Kushwaha is khatriya community in vedic verna system among 4 versions (brahmin,kshatriya,vaishya sudra).
2. According to bodh granthas (specialy jatak) & puranic(specialy yayurveda,ramayan-valmiki & vishnu puran) kushwaha is brach of surya vansh in which lord Ram was born.
3. Last 1000 of year india faced many attack by turk,afghan,mughal,british,duche& purtagese country(India)(golden bird) ruined many times(burn temples,educational institution i e nalanda university…som nath ….takshashila etc ) others called kushwaha on their proffession- Also wrong pronunciation(uchharan) i e. Kachwaha ,kachhi,sagaberiya, sagarwanshi, morya,murao etc.
4. Islamic administrator were very cruel(unkind) so he started national language farsi(pesian) force fully n they were unable to use sanskrit pure so many variation found in many group.You all can see your registration of land (during mughal at your home rightt now in farsi) also called dakhil khariz…kewala….in village.

You must heard this proverb –(a)padhe farsi beche tel dekha ho karam ke khel Means-it is really surprise that he has studied farsi(persina) despite unable to get job in badshah darbar. (b)hath kangan ko arsi(mirror) kya padhe likhe ko farsi kya Means-if you are educated means profiencent in farsi else you not educated Indian culture got pain & worry again & again & forget past.

1. During dharma sudhar andolan(also sansktitization late 18 century) scholar search history on the basis of puranic(vedas, sastra,ramayan) & bodh granth n find Kushwah root in suryavansh via kusha(twin son of lord rama)
2. According to pandulipi(manuscript) of kasi/kachi (now varanasi) magadh (now patna) rohtas(sasaram) n gwalior etc it is proved success of same root …Some scholar of bhu(banaras hindu university) n dav(dayanand anglo vedic) with help of arya samaj formed organization that time called “kushwaha kshatriya mahasabha”(british-india)

1921 simon commision accepted root and ancestor history in suryavansh including 12 caste(100 gotra or sub caste i e koiery, kachhi, kachwaha,murao,magahiya guitar,kannojiya,bham, dangi,banafar,virdi,bhagat etc )

1. kushwaha again face many challenges by land settlement(also lacaly called sitlmati or chakbandi,
2. So finnaly The kushwaha including 12 caste & 100 gotra or sub caste in entire country …sanghe sakti kal yuge”lord budha”

Kachhi,--This is a caste which is originated from ShakyaVANSH or KUSH VANSH, known on the name of twin son of LORD RAMA(another being LAVA). After the Kalinga war, THE GREAT ASHOKA(58th line of KUSHA) decided no further war. After that many soldiers were unemployed and subsequently they had chosen agriculture (mainly vegetables) as their profession. The land use for the growth of vegetables is known as KORARD in local language (PALI, MAITHILI & MAGAHI) in the region. Thus, KOIRI OR KOERY are KUSHWAHA “KSHATRIYA SURYAVANSHI” via Maurya Vansh in the Indian caste system.

You can refer historian(a)James Tode (b)William Crooke (c) TH Hedley study of Indian caste system . Not only this you can see Yayurveda (Vanshvriksha) or VALMIKI RAMAYAN- UTTARKAND SARG-107. In RAJASTHAN & MP most of KUSHWAHA clan (Gotra OR Sub caste) taken due to his great leader “SAWAI JAY SINGH-II” he was also last king of KUSHWAHA from Jaipur”Jaynagar”(in 1948 Govt of India honor him RAJPRAMUKH due to peace fully merging of state). Pappuverma11 (talk) 21:58, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

@Pappuverma11: it looks to me as if you may not have read WP:RS as I suggested you should do on your talk page. Your first six points above certainly do not fit that policy. For those, you are relying on ancient primary sources and on spoken folklore etc, with the exception of the Simon Commission. Your next two points are quite simply not verifiable, or at least you do not provide anything that would help to verify the claims.

I know that James Tod and William Crooke are also not reliable sources. They have long been considered unsuitable for Wikipedia and, after some prompting from Abecedare, User:Sitush/CasteSources is being drafted to collate the numerous reasons why such British books simply will not suffice. I must admit ignorance of T. H. Hedley - I cannot recall ever seeing that name anywhere, let alone in relation to India, so it would help if you could provide a book title or a link to a webpage about him.

You are not the first person to claim that the Kushwaha etc caste articles are incorrect. The problem is, those articles do reflect what reliable sources say, ie: the works of modern academics. If the articles are wrong, in your opinion, then it may well be because they have hit the thorny issue of Wikipedia being about "verifiability, not truth". This does happen and I'm afraid there is no easy solution to it. - Sitush (talk) 06:15, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Essay

You really should have an essay on CasteSources. documenting the issues with Raj-era sources, and even sources like The people of India. Will save me some time and save you tons. If you give it a start, I can chip in linking or copy-pasting from past RSN discussions etc. Abecedare (talk) 20:05, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I keep meaning to write something but it just makes me feel bleurgh. It would need to be separate from my cheat sheet at User:Sitush/Common, I think.

BTW, I'm beginning to think that the latest PoI issue may have been headed off at the pass. Did you read the review that was cited? Just curious. - Sitush (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I speed-read through it. Not flattering.

And that would be the benefit of documenting the issues with these sources. If you or I say "these sources are problematic" even good-faith editors are likely to think of it as an "I don't like it opinion", especially for a source like The people of Inida with its governmental backing, academic authors, university press publisher etc. So if we can have a central repository of academic reviews of these sources that will save us (esp. you) effort and is more likely to convince the reader (at least the ones, who can be convinced).

I am thinking of something along the lines of the Gyan section of User:Sitush/Common with sections of Rose, the Gazetteers, People of India etc; and if possible, a listing of contemporary trustworthy journals/books/scholars. Abecedare (talk) 20:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Just for completeness: there was a more flattering review of The people of India in E&PW (IIRC, will dig up link later), but it focused more on the chief editor and the effort that was put in than the result. Abecedare (talk) 20:26, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I think I might have seen the E&PW article when I was writing our article.

Re: Rose, Risley etc, there would probably be no need for a section on each author because many were of the same ilk, representing the official reaction to the events of 1857: "if we know them better, we can control them better" (paraphrase). Obviously, the arguments for pre-1857 sources (Tod, Mill etc) are different and so too are oddball items such as Wikeley and PoI, although in those two specific cases the sheer amount of plagiarism of Rose etc makes it fairly simple. - Sitush (talk) 20:40, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I abused your user-space, not for the first time, and seeded the essay: see User:Sitush/CasteSources.

Clearly just a start, since I don't even mention the issues of ulterior motivations, plagiarism etc, and Tod had totally slipped my mind. Btw, I'd recommend relying mainly on recent reviews, and not using the authors own words to impeach them since the latter can be ragrded as WP:OR and more importantly is a technique that can often be abused to impeach even the best of the authors/scholars. In any case, I hope the seed-essay tempts you enough to expand and run with it (late mixed metaphor warning :) ) Cheers. .Abecedare (talk) 21:17, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

OK, no probs. I'll see what I can come up with and, obviously, some things will turn up as I go along. Ibbetson, for example, is a curious case and gained some limited plaudit from, IIRC, Bayly. My draft about the census - User:Sitush/sandbox3 - probably has some useful stuff in it also.

I'm afraid that familiarity breeds contempt: I'm so used to trotting out the reasons in shorthand that it's ages since I referred to a fair few of the sources that supported those reasons. This is going to take time. It would have been helpful if the likes of Qwryxian and Boing! were still around but, of course, the caste stuff is a graveyard for good contributors. - Sitush (talk) 22:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Nice work expanding the essay (just noticed it). Two other points that need to be covered with regards to colonial-era censuses, gazettes etc:

• The selection bias in terms of whom the British administrators interacted with.
• The observer effect on the caste system (which means that what was true then may not be true now)

Intended mainly as a memory aid for me/you. Am sure Jenkins and/or Bayly deal with both since those are the two sources I was browsing over the weekend. Will look up exact details and add sometime this week (when I am not busy with urotherapy!) Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 06:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• You're taking the piss, right? Sorry, Bad joke - I hope things go ok ; Yes, I have much more to add to the draft, of which selection bias is a particularly pressing point. Doubtless, once the thing looks like it is near completion, it will then need a massive trimming. I could write a lengthy chapter on the subject. - Sitush (talk) 06:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Only talking of this. Not otherwise my , uh, cup of tea ;-) Abecedare (talk) 07:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Kakatiya dynasty

Constant unexplained changes. Maybe revert back to a good version and the ask for semi-protection? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

That article has been a pain for years and very little good comes from the anons. I think it is a case for mop-wielding by The Blade of the Northern Lights. Blade doesn't mess around when things are as bad as this, while many who frequent RFPP tend to be more wary. Let's see if we get a response to the ping. - Sitush (talk) 14:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't see any good coming from leaving the article open to get more useless noise. Indefinitely semiprotected. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 18:43, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Blade. - Sitush (talk) 19:43, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Dear sitush, As i agree to most of the good work you've put in the article but you miss out on the contributor section adding Reddy and Velama completely ignoring the Brahmins who gave up Vedic practice and took on to Administration of the kingdom. for example Akkanna and Madanna and their forefathers and offsprings have put on a lot of work to rebuild Kakatiya Dynasty and administration under Islamic rule. They were of Niyogi subsect which till date have terms like Golconda Vyapari(Trader), Aruvela niyogi(6000 Niyogi) and Pradhama Sakha Niyogis. They were all administrators of the Kakatiya dynasty and kept its heritage alive. Please dont ignore their contributions and sacrifices. PS:Im not niyogi and have anything todo with Niyogi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psuedocode (talk • contribs) 00:32, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Rajput

I've no idea why you manipulated the source so much in this edit, nor why you added completely unsourced and rather inflammatory material. However, please don't do it again. - Sitush (talk) 14:11, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I am surprised that you think the material is inflammatory. Also why do say that the source was manipulated? In India, there is this romantic notion that the Rajput steadfastly stood for their independence, however, as my sources suggest most Rajput rulers got on well with the Mughals and rose to high positions in the imperial service. Yes, I agree that the text regrding Shivaji and Jai Singh was unsourced but I was going to add references soon. Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 18:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy: Rajput is a controversial article, so don't add any unsourced material. Gather your sources and cite them at the time of adding the statements. I'm aware of the sometimes insane posturing that quite a few Rajputs present on- and off-wiki but that doesn't give anyone the right to completely misrepresent a source, as you did. The misrepresentation was massively inflammatory and it seems from your message above that you are familiar with the problems. If you cannot see what the misrepresentation was then you should probably stay away from that article until you've gained more expertise in paraphrasing sources. - Sitush (talk) 18:26, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Message understood. Thanks. Regards.Jonathansammy (talk) 20:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Shakya

This edit to Shakya removed cited content. The edit summary was "(WP:INDICSCRIPT etc)". I'm afraid I don't know what that means. I'm going to go ahead and restore what was removed. Could you please comment on the article's talk page about your reasoning for removing it? – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 03:27, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

On further inspection, I see that you did not remove the footnote nor its citation, which is my main concern, so I'm not going to revert. I would still appreciate guidance on how the Sanskrit and Pali names should be presented. – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 03:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

They should not be presented. Did you read the link in my edit summary? - Sitush (talk) 05:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Greg Pandatshang: - see my response above. - Sitush (talk) 05:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I did, but I'm afraid I don't really "get" it. WP:INDICSCRIPT is itself quite terse and it links to an RfC page, which is quite verbose. Which articles are covered by this rule? Why would there be a rule against presenting information in a Wikipedia article? Why would the lede of Shakya be handled differently than any of the very large number of other Wikipedia articles that do present foreign scripts and transliterations? – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 03:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

The issue has been raised on numerous occasions, at numerous venues. I can't explain it any better than it says and I'm not getting into a lengthy debate about it here. Scripts in Indian articles have long been a nightmare (well, India-related articles have been, period!). There are 28 official languages in the country and numerous other accepted languages; pov-pushing, vandalism and other such disruptive behaviour are of epidemic proportions and getting worse in large part due to WMF policies in the region. Scripts have long been a subtle target for that sort of disruption, taking advantage of the ignorance of most of even our experienced contributors.

The only exception of which I am aware is for place-names, where the official local language(s) can be used. That all articles have not been cleaned up is just something that, well, applies to pretty much everything else also; for example, articles with CS1 citation errors or {{refimprove}} tags. I don't understand the long-standing "inherent notability of secondary schools" BS but I live with it because it ain't gonna change and there is no point flogging that dead horse. - Sitush (talk) 05:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Pssst

This and this would explain this edit summary. I assume you are right on the content (haven't bothered to check the sources myself); just explaining why it may look suspicious. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 08:25, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm just following the cited source but, if necessary, can provide others. In fact, some of the other sources that are already used in the article follow the Choda spelling. Not much I can do about issues of transliteration or words with multiple meanings, and I'd much rather not clutter the article with multiple cites unless there are several people contesting the point.

I'm feeling thirsty now. I've not consumed alcohol since some time around the start of January (my days of drinking faded quite significantly when the rugby-playing stopped!) but maybe today is going to be the day! - Sitush (talk) 08:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

From what I know of the region and the languages there - that cannot be the word. It unambiguously means what is linked by Abecedare and would not be used by a dynasty or its documentors. It might have crept in because of foreign language/pronunciation work. Nevertheless such sources should be less I believe. --AmritasyaPutra^T 08:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

IIRC, one of the sources that uses it is K. A. Nilakanta Sastri, who also uses Cola and Chola. Foreign? Hm. - Sitush (talk) 08:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I doubt that, and it might be one off printing mistake of an old books, iff you get it. --AmritasyaPutra^T 09:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I have opened a thread at Talk:Chola dynasty regarding this issue. Meanwhile, Eshwar.om has opened a thread at WT:INB that yet again seems to be accusing me of being drunk. Hic. - Sitush (talk) 12:04, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Thakur Sitaramdas Omkarnath

Hello Sitush, I would like to ask if you can help improving this article - Thakur Sitaramdas Omkarnath
Thank You Abhishek.bose2033 (talk) 21:00, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Abhishek.bose2033 (talk) 18:49, 9 April 2015 (UTC) Thank You Sitush. Spot on job!!