User talk:Bakasuprman

Please click here for my DYK collection. Current count = 61.

/Majorcontributors

Archives

1-2-3- 4-5-6-7-8-9 -10-11-12-13 -14-15-16-[[17

I give myself the authority to remove bogus warning templates from my page Bakaman _Bakatalk 04:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Please Stop

Please abstain from abusing sock accounts for editing on Babri Mosque page, also please own up the accounts [User: Dishivlatavish],[User:Dunkerya],[User:Last1in],[User:Stripwaves],[User:Giveover] that you have edited with in favour of your favourite version of the aticle Terminador 05:00, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Suspected biased editing

Honourable Sir, While I appreciate your continued contributions to WP, Sir, some of your edits on controversial articles seem to be adding bias rather than removing them like respected Sir, you will see below:

You recently added to the 2002 Gujarat violence article:

[According to testifying witnesses, Muslims in the Amraiwadi area unfurled the Pakistani flag and raised pro-Pakistan slogans ten days after the Godhra riots. There were continued claims of Hindus being attacked in the area .This was accompanied by cries demanding that "Kaffirs" be killed and their houses emptied, said Ashok Patel, a BJP member and municipal corporator. He further claimed that riots were triggered after Muslims instigated them "with an intention of spreading fear". http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=2002_Gujarat_violence&diff=prev&oldid=143868353] While Sir you have very conviniently igmored the following lines from the same [publication: http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/sep/18godh.htm]

Another witness told the commission that "Hindu outfits like VHP Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal, under political pressure, had made concerted efforts to vitiate the atmosphere of communal amity prevailing in Ramol by organising public rallies and inflammatory speeches."

Rashid Multani, a member of the Ramol gram panchayat and social worker, said, "Even Muslims had attended the cremation ceremony of those from the area killed in Godhra. There was no communal tension there and amity prevailed between the two communities till February 28." ' But on March 1, after instigation by the VHP and Bajrang Dal, widespread riots broke out in Ramol-Jantanagar and a mob of 50,000 pelted stones at and burnt shops, houses and other properties of Muslims, he said. One Muslim was killed and five or six were injured in the violence. "Though police reached the spot," he said, "their strength was very less compared to the number of miscreants."

I would call upon you Sir, to be circumspect while adding such biases in controversial articles - while dear sir, I see this whole article has been edited in such a way as to present the point of view of belligerent Hindu nationalist parties - 80% of the article shows how all the different orgainsations and fact finding missions have been presenting their bias against the Hindus against the whole body of artiles and reports from established newspapers and magazines..

Hilaly

The cats are for people from the city and includes people who moved there I think...I don't think it excludes non-natives. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 28	9 July 2007	About the Signpost

Seven administrators request promotion to bureaucrat status	Board election series: Elections closed, results pending
Wikimedia Foundation hires consultant, general counsel	Newspaper obituary plagiarizes Japanese Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Ann Coulter"	News and notes: FA stats, top information site, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Zoroastrianism and Hinduism

has ben prodded 17:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Please stop

Many of your recent popup reverts do not make sense. Please stop and discuss soon or I will block. —Wknight94 (talk) 00:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Very bad idea. Please examine the changes first. Your reverting legitimate talk page edits and other edits that look acceptable to me. Now I need to revert some of your reverting because I can't determine why you reverted. —Wknight94 (talk) 00:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Like this edit where you re-introduced vandalism. Please be careful. —Wknight94 (talk) 00:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:POINT. Reverting IP edits without even examining them just because you don't like anonymous users is a very bad idea. —Wknight94 (talk) 00:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Your recent reverts

..on various pages were, as noted above, made indiscriminately, and in some cases made without reference to the original reason for exclusion, namely that those categories were populated without the necessary references. If you wish to repopulate those categories, please find appropriate references that meet the standards of WP:BLP, which the ArbCom has reiterated are quite strict. Future mass, undiscussed reversions in open violation of BLP might lead to a request for your re-blocking.

Please do not respond to this message. Hornplease 04:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2

This arbitration case has closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The parties to the case are strongly encouraged to enter into mediation arrangements regarding any disputes over article content that may still be outstanding. All parties are reminded in the strongest possible terms that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a forum for conspiracy, personal attacks, nor the continuation of ethnic disputes by other means. "Parties who continue such behaviour, and parties who consider it their moral duty to call out such behaviour, will be hit on the head with sticks until the situation improves."

Rama's Arrow (talk · contribs) is desysopped, but is welcome to apply for reinstatement at RfA at any time. As always, administrators should not use their administrative powers in conflicts or disagreements they are involved in. Administrators who are parties to this case are reminded that they should find an uninvolved admin to determine if blocks or other actions against any other parties to the case are appropriate, and should under no circumstances take such actions themselves. Any party that violates the ban on admin actions imposed in this case will be summarily desysopped once the violation is brought to the attention of the Arbitration Committee.

This notice is given by a clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. Newyorkbrad 15:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hindu views on monotheism

Thanks, Baka for your views and for citing Hindu views on monotheism. I substantially wrote that article and I am glad that I am not the only one believing those views.

Raj2004 01:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Why Hindus drink cow piss :)

Well, I suppose it is because Hinduism is a tribal polytheistic cult that encourages animal-worship. As someone has already pointed out to you, we also worship snakes and rats. The rat and cow gods protect us from the horrible monotheists and their piss gives us good luck. Gizza^{Discuss ©} 01:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Your comments on User talk:Dbachmann

Since you were a party in the recent ArbCom case Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar_2, this ruling applies to you. Of note is the explanation later given by one of the arbitrators, here, "Yes, our goal is to stop the stalking of edits and admin action between the parties..." As far as I can see, you have not been involved in editing Surya Siddhanta, and therefore your remarks about Dbachmann's editing on that page could be easily construed as "stalking his edits", and your implication that he violated the ArbCom ruling could easily be seen as a veiled threat. In case you're wondering, I have Dbachmann's talk page on my watchlist, so I noticed your post. I've also made a note of this at WP:AN. --Akhilleus (talk) 02:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Several points. One, using the rollback tool as opposed to actually editing a previous version of the page to remove commentary more suited to the user talk namespace is not by any stretch of the imagination an abuse of admin tools. I do not believe Dbackmann violated the ArbCom restrictions, but you may ask for clarification from the Arbitrators on this point at requests for arbitration. Two, the decision says that parties should cease stalking eachother's edits. Let Dbachmann be, and I'm sure he will be willing to do the same for you. Third and finally, you say that Dbachmann was "undoing legitimate edits (every edit the anon made prior to July 10), and then protecting the page." This would appear to be untrue, as he actually protected the page to prevent 59.94.47.127 (talk · contribs) from continually adding messages that do not belong in an encyclopedia article, not to lock it out from engaging in content-related edits. Hope this helps. Picaroon (Talk) 04:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

guys, that page is not even remotely connected to the Hkelkar case. Bakaman knows perfectly well I have done nothing wrong, he is just trying very hard to construct some case against me. He has shown again and again that he is not afraid to make a fool of himself in the process. He does not want to listen to reason, or remember what Wikipedia is about. dab (𒁳) 07:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Goa Inquisition

Who says I'm a mediator on that article? I've edited that article, and plan on doing so in the future, when I can spare some time to read through Priolkar completely. As for "stalking" you, I don't pay any attention to you unless you edit pages on my watchlist (e.g. Goa Inquisition, Dbachmann's talk page. When I posted on ANI about you & Anwar, it was because I noticed that you two were edit warring on Goa Inquisition--after that I looked at both of your contribs, sure. But normally I go for weeks without even noticing your activity, and I hope that's the case in the future. By the way, you seem to forget that I wasn't a party to the ArbCom case. If you think I'm on Anwar's "side" (whatever that means), well, go ahead. --Akhilleus (talk) 21:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the medal. Though, I am not very active on DYKs nowadays. Will be back active on that some time soon, hopefully. Thanks - KNM ^Talk 22:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 29	16 July 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Filling in with a new feature
Möller, Walsh retain seats; Brioschi elected	British agency cites Wikipedia in denying F1 trademark
Two new bureaucrats promoted	Wikipedian bloggers launch "article rescue" effort
Book review: The Cult of the Amateur	WikiWorld comic: "Charles Lane"
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 19:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 18 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dima Halim Daoga, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 15:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Forgive me

I have deprecated Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Bangladesh and made it Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladesh/History Workgroup. I also have mass migrated the participants from the former project to the new workgroup. May be I was a little too bold here. Forgive me for doing this without consultation. The move was a part of the effort to rehash the entire Bangladesh project. If you and other participants agree, the next step should be deleting the previous page. Hopefully, The new workgroup would improve the level of activity related to coordinating our efforts. Please, respond to my talk page. Aditya ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

pak studies

Looks like Pakistan studies have found a new hero.[1]. A noble cause bringing them together. deja vu??? But I still couldnt understand why he reported himself as a "Professor of South Asia Studies at Harvard." Is he ashamed of being a prof. of Sanskrit??? God knows.--nids(♂) 10:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Michael Madhusudan Dutt isn't a Bengali Christian?

Hi! I saw that you removed the category "Bengali Christian" from the Michael Madhusudan Dutt article. But, er, isn't he a Bengali Christian? The article seems to say that he is. --Kuaichik 06:25, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Template:Did you know/Next update

Hi do you add your articles there? how come not the suggestions? --Vonones 03:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure? I never seen this rule written. --Vonones 17:24, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Seeking opinion from regular editors on reference pattern

References: Notes and citations section; change in reference and notes temporarily ceased; WP:FOOT says I am not doing wrong; Separate Notes and Citation sections

Opinion is sought from regular editors of the article Hinduism regarding the splitting of Notes and references section. This is a short gist of the discussions going on in the above mentioned talk links: Having a separate "Notes" (for explanatory remarks) and "Citations" (for direct citations), although permitted, is relatively rare in Wikipedia, and also in academic journals. The main rationale behind doing this is to distinguish a series of explanatory remarks from the series of citations (please see Rabindranath Tagore, Demosthenes for examples).

This sandbox gives a glimpse of how the article would look if we split the sections (the sandbox is under work, so may not be perfect). This link shows how the article looks with combined section. This may give an idea how it looked when I started working on references. I converted many references to Harvard format, apart from splitting the sections.

Opinion for regular editors are sought regarding the application of splitting of two section for this article. Please do so in Talk:Hinduism in the section Talk:Hinduism#Seeking_opinion_from_regular_editors_on_reference_pattern. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Bhudev Mukhopadhyay

On 22 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bhudev Mukhopadhyay, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 09:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 30	23 July 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "World domination"	News and notes: "The Wikipedia Story", visa ruling, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Svadhyay

Baka, I could use your help in figuring out what to do regarding Svadhyay, which at the moment is blatant advertising for some guru. The content of the page with regard to the historical role of scriptural study is, as far as I can tell, patent nonsense. Svadhyaya, in the basic meaning of scriptural study, is such an old practice it is mentioned as a key discipline in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras. What I think should be done is to get rid of the redirect so that the article is titled Svadhyaya, which is a simple romanization of the Sanskrit rather than the Hindi version, and then I will apply academic references to clean up the content. I notice that you were involved with one edit to the page when it was a stub, and therefore am checking with you to see if you agree with this approach. What do you think? Buddhipriya 01:56, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Fan

Ambroodey, you and I seem to have a common fan :-) Abecedare 02:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have noticed the semi-regular vandalism on your page. I wonder if the vandals truly believe that they achieve anything by such juvenile edits - more amusing, than troubling. Cheers. Abecedare 17:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hi... I don't know if you still remember me. I was out of wikipedia due to personal engagements for about 9 months now... good to see the progress everyone has been making. Just messaging to say "Hi" and to say that I am back and ready to create a splash. Take care Antorjal 17:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Although I wasn't regular for the last few months (as I completed my studies and got married), wikipedia and you guys have both been in my mind. A lot has gone on, so I might ask you to fill me in from time to time. It's good to be back now though, and hopefully I can contribute to my prior levels before personal engagements precluded my participation. Take care! Antorjal 14:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 31 July, 2007, a fact from the article Colonial Assam, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 23:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Did you know? was updated. On August 1, 2007, a fact from the article James H. Davis (congressman), which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

On August 1, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dang Hang Nirartha, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Did you know? was updated. On August 3, 2007, a fact from the article Pinhole camera model, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Please stop

Please stop using popups for edit warring, as you have done on 2002 Gujarat violence. Popups are for vandalism, spam, trolling, and newbie tests, not edit warring. You've been a Wikipedian for quite a while, surely you should know this already. I'd prefer it if you stopped edit-warring in general, actually, but sometimes that's too much to hope for. Picaroon (t) 00:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.

Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 31	30 July 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Another experiment and Wikimania
Report on Citizendium	Response: News from Citizendium
User resigns admin status amid allegations of sock puppetry	WikiWorld comic: "Mr. Bean"
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 23:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)