Here are some links I thought useful:
- Wikipedia:Help desk
- M:Foundation issues
- Wikipedia:Policy Library
- Wikipedia:Cite your sources
- Wikipedia:Conflict resolution
- Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
- Wikipedia:Pages needing attention
- Wikipedia:Peer review
- Wikipedia:Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
- Wikipedia:Brilliant prose
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures
- Wikipedia:Boilerplate text
- Wikipedia:Current polls
- Wikipedia:Mailing lists
- Wikipedia:IRC channel
Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. Wikipedia:About, Wikipedia:Help desk, and Wikipedia:Village pump are also a place to go for answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.
hi, i'm not sure if you need admin-ship for this or not, but why dont we try proposing a merger with Upanisads and see what the other users think? Then again, the Upanisads are distinctly a collection of writings while Vedanta is a school of thought based on those writings, I am busy at the moment and cant look into it extensively so if you could check that out it would be helpful.--Gozar 14:47, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
To rename an article, a move option is available for registered users, however this option was recently disabled for newly registered accounts due to high amounts of vandalism originating from new users. The article move feature becomes available after some time I understand though I'm not 100% sure on what requirements must be met.
- As an article already exists at Jowai, a merge of the two articles is suggested. May I ask does the existing content at Jowai have relevance to the district Jowai? I'll help make the change shortly once I confirm what's required from you. -- Longhair | Talk 10:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
- Hello Syiem. I've edited Jowal to redirect to Jowai. I also merged the content that was at Jowal into Jowai in case it has relevance. Feel free to edit the article to your liking, being mindful of the NPOV policy at Wikipedia at all times. See also, Wikipedia:Redirect for information on how to create redirections. Access to page moves are not required to create a redirect. I've created this one for you at Jowal. Let me know if you need any further advice in any way. -- Longhair | Talk 10:29, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Khalistan. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 05:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- He has not been vandalizing at all.Zafarnamah is the real vandal here.Netaji 07:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Attack on you from Zafarnamah
- User:Zafarnamah has attacked you by filing a 3RR violation report here. I suggest that you go there and tell them that all of your edits were not reverts. Admins can be very capricious and, unless you speak out, you could get unjustly blocked.Netaji 07:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I support you 100%. Its that you are not going the right way about reporting him (reporting in the wrong place on Wiki). I'm actually going on vacation so contact Netaji or User:Sukh (expert on Sikhism) or User:Nobleeagle to help you out.Bakaman Bakatalk 14:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Look you need diffs. Its the way wiki works. If you show diffs of Zafar and post them on WP:PAIN, then you are doing things the right way. I also dont want POV pushers taking over Wiki but one must go through proper channels to get them blocked/banned.Bakaman Bakatalk 14:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- The article is still rather unbalanced. The 'Peace Initiatives' section is too small. I believe that there was a Hindu-Sikh interfaith dialogue at about that time (I was very young, so don;t remember exactly). Plus, there is a lot of references to biased sources. They need to be qualified here.Thanks.Netaji 21:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- Plus, I suggest that references to the "Indian Government" doing this and "Indian Government" doing that be qualified with the "Indira Gandhi Administration" or the "Comgress(I)". Bear in mind that the Indira admin was not a typical Indian govt, so generic references are POV.Netaji 21:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Look at Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
- An edit war is brewing between Islamofascist users who are trying to load the article against Hindus by quoting from "Human Rights Watch", an unreliable source with a clear pattern of bias in favor of muslims (as evidenced by their anti-semitism : see the wikipedia article). I'm being swamped by multiple reverts from multiple users and would appreciate another pair of eyes into the matter. ThanksNetaji 00:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
my talk page
I'm not sure what you're getting at coming to my talk page with that attitude. You are not above the policies of Wikipedia regarding the WP:3RR and WP:CIVIL. Our editing here is a privilege, not a right. You'd do well to remember that.⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 05:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Edit wars from problem users
- There are edit wars brewing in Indian Nationalism where Haphar (I've had problems with his nasty and racist/anti-Semitic attitudes in the past for which he has been blocked) and he is deliberately deleting sourced statements.
- Plus, in the 2002 Gujarat violence/2006 revision, Geek1975 has been adding a lot of biased nonsense that are not there in the articles he cites, loading it against Hindus. I can't hold all their reverts back by myself. Thus, if you have the time, I'd appreciate your help there. Thanks.Netaji 11:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi! from RSudarshan
Hi! there, Syiem. As promised, I have signed up. I will only be editing off and on as I will be travelling extensively in the next few days. But I will keep watching my talk page and respond as and when I have time. RSudarshan 12:57, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism of Indian Nationalism
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. CiteCop 17:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- This bogus sockpuppet accusation has been cleared. You have been unblocked.Netaji 00:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I nominated this ridiculous nonsense article Neo-Brahmanism for speedy deletion
I cited reasons there. Can you offer a perspective (maybe on the talk page)?Also, could you put the article in your watchlist for developments (in cse you're interested, of course)? Thanks for your attention.Hkelkar 19:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- Article just got deleted. Wow Wikipedia sure is fast :).Hkelkar 19:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- Good edits to Cheema. I've been meaning to clean up the Islamist bias there. Might also want to look at the bin-Qasim section as it's all pilfered from the Chach Nama and is a partisan reference. Contact me as I plan to file a mediation request (or an RfA) on it and the Muhammad bin Qasim article.Hkelkar 03:59, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- You may have to battle several muslim guild users who will undoubtably mass-revert very soon.Plz put the article in your watchlist (I have) and, if a revert-war ensues, then we should jointly file a PRP and/or an RfA.Hkelkar 04:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- User:Street Scholar has been citing fake refs to push his POV in the article. I talked to wikipedia user on irc and one has agreed to intervene/mediate. I have summarized the issue on his talk page User Talk:CheNuevara on this diff / If you have anything you'd like to contribute please do so there as well as on Talk:Cheema. Thanks and have a nice day.Hkelkar 19:00, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
(Comment posted on Hkelkar's talk page) It does seem like the article needs a full re-write. It's not written in a very encyclopedic tone, and it still appears to not be written in a NPOV. I am considering a total re-write of the article, using various sources from the internet. I would personally request page protection, but I must abstain since I am one of the involved parties in editing the article. I also don't know whether the edits made by other users are considered vandalism or edit wars, which makes a big difference in this case. If it is indeed vandalism, then we can request page protection, but if it's edit wars, we cannot and we must try to resolve the issue. I have one major suggestion to the article that I really think would possibly downgrade all the "glorification vandalism" that has been going on lately. A "Legacy" section of the page which would indicate the views Sikhs have of Bhindranwale could possibly satisfy other editors who are only editing the article for the purpose of stating the Sikh POV of this man. Nishkid64 23:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Urgent. I need your opinion
User:TerryJ-Ho and user:BhaiSaab lost a mediation to me and are retaliating by demanding thatthe well-sourced article anti-Hindu be deleted. Please contribute to the AfD discussion. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Hindu.Hkelkar 01:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Please see my contribution
- Thanks.I'm not too worried about that AfD now as the votes are overwhelmingly to keep.Hkelkar 05:12, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
What vandalism is not
- There seems to be an anon POV pusher who has been vandalizing the article once every 12 hours or so from multiple ip addresses from the same domain.I am sick to death of keeping this guy at bay and do not wish for a protracted edit war and would prefer that the article be sprotected.However, I am loathe to put in a request as I am afraid that capricious admins will pounce upon me so I request that you put up a request for sprotection or try to help out in any way that you can in the article.Thanks.Hkelkar 08:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- Please watch that article closely. User:Fowler&fowler wants it put that the British exclusively abolished Sati whereas I contend (with refs supplied in the Talk Page) that Raja Ram Mohan Roy lobbied the British into doing it. The Bengal presidency ba prior to Roy is irrelevant as other bigger parts of India (like the Maratha Confederacy) had also banned Sati centuries ago.Hkelkar 07:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 12:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Buddhism in modern India
- As you might be aware that Pkulkarni (talk · contribs) and his/her socks have been blocked (see Talk:Dalit Buddhist movement). User:Pkulkarni (with his sock accounts) was the only person opposed to an article with the title Dalit Buddhist movement or Ambedkarite Buddhism. Other involved parties such as User:Hkelkar, User:AMbroodEY, Nat Krause, and NinaEliza support for separate article about Dalit Buddhist movement. So, I've moved the article to Dalit Buddhist movement. The content about non-Ambedkarite Buddhism has been removed and addded to Buddhism in India. Sorry for all the confusion. I hope I'm finally fixing this. Thanks. utcursch | talk 15:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
This case is now closed and the results have been posted above.
- is banned for one year.
- editing under any name or anonymous ip is banned from Wikipedia for one year.
- is banned for a year for personal attacks, disruptive comments, edit-warring and incivility.
- BhaiSaab is placed on probation for an indefinite period. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.
- Hkelkar and socks is placed on probation for an indefinite period. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.
- TerryJ-Ho is placed on probation for an indefinite period. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.