User talk:Sitush/Archive 29

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Sitush. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 25

←

Archive 27

→

WP:CASTE

Hey Sitush, I am not sure if you will be able to answer this but I had a question on WP:CASTE and noticed you were one of the editors involved in the community discussions on it. From my understanding of this, we do not explicitly mention caste or social groups of individuals on their biographical pages. Is this valid only for WP:BLP or extensible to all biographical pages. Another related question is how is a caste/social group defined as in terms of Wikipedia. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

It is a tricky area. For living people, we certainly do not mention it unless there is a source showing that they self-identify. More generally, I take the view that unless their caste is relevant to their notability then it really has no bearing. To take an extreme analogy of "tribal" insignificance, imagine us mentioning that someone was a supporter of, say, Manchester United football club but whose notability has nothing to do with football - it amounts to trivia. However, I don't think there is consensus on this issue.

Regarding the definition of caste/social group, well, I think it is usually obvious when one sees it. Can you give me an example where it may be troubling you? - Sitush (talk) 00:03, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sitush, As far as wikipedia rules are concerned, I understand we do allow caste mention for dead notables. In India, caste is almost like race and it helps identify the background. So I respectfully disagree with the football analogy. For example, we mention castes of almost all dead politicians , when it has absolutely no bearing on their notability. For example, Ambedkar's notability is certainly from his caste. But the castes of Bal Thackeray, Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi have absolutely no bearing on their notability. So why mention it for some and prohibit it for others? Basically, I think it is not prohibited - is that correct?Thanks -Acharya63 (talk) 00:52, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware that you think differently to me. I did say that not everyone agrees with me. It doesn't alter the fact that (a) it is usually irrelevant to anything they did; and (b) that some articles do mention it is not a reason for more articles to mention it. I don't think many people would disagree with me in thinking that caste is an abomination in modern society and that perpetuating unnecessary references to it is not usually A Good Thing. - Sitush (talk) 01:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I agree with you on that. But would it be fair to keep it for some and not others - how do we decide? Why not just follow one rule for all to avoid edit wars and in the interest for fairness? Thanks-Acharya63 (talk) 01:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

The nature of Wikipedia is that consensus can change and also that bold edits mean that consensus may not even exist in the early iterations of any particular aspect of an article or topic area. We also have no deadline, including in relation to "fixing" articles that may deviate from current consensus. Thus, there are always likely to be anomalies and especially so in areas which are under-patrolled or regarding which experienced contributors have poor understanding. It is not really about fairness but rather about what is or is not encyclopaedic. Certainly, there are some situations where a person's caste is relevant, as I said above, but in most cases it is nothing more than trivia/fancruft etc. - Sitush (talk) 01:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

If I am understanding you correctly - it is not prohibited by wikipedia - although it might be trivia in 99% cases - to add it(in general ). Here is how I look at it(advantage): If I am doing research on a community like the Chitpawan for example, and writing an article on them, I will search wikipedia for the word "Chitpawan" to get a list of all people this community produced (assuming some names have been missed in the caste list). Thanks-Acharya63 (talk) 01:45, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I think there is an emerging consensus that it is usually unnecessary but that the consensus is not yet firm. I also think that your rationale for inclusion (to enable production of lists) is somewhat circular: if the thing is trivia then their inclusion in the list would be trivial, too. Indeed, most of the lists are little more than puff pieces and they consume an inordinate amount of maintenance effort. - Sitush (talk) 01:47, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

On which page are such issues discussed ? Please can you point me to them so I can take part in them? I think some western editors ( not generalizing) are missing the fact that caste is relevant in India - even today. Newspapers in India mention it(caste of notables). Interracial marriages in US are more common than inter-caste marriages in India. Caste is part of a family background as it tells how a person was brought up. It is like an extended family. For example: I have lived in America but do not want to separate from the Deshastha background although I do not associate with any Deshastha groups, forums etc (I am not even aware if they exist). My white friends will not identify as "anglo-saxon" etc. but Indians will still identify as "Iyers" etc. Removing such information from wikipedia (and not following one rule for all articles) will surely damage wikipedia fairness and credibility on India articles in my humble opinion. As well as usefulness. And people will start moving to private caste blogs looking for information. In any case, you are a high level editor - I am a low level editor - so your opinion counts. To be specific the cases as to why this issue came up - Ratan Tata, Arun Shridhar Vaidya, Bal_Thackeray. I think we should have caste mentions on all three as it is part of their family background. Only the last one has a caste mention - which is not fair in my opinion. The last guy was a hated politician (by many) and his caste had nothing to do with his politics. The second guy is a war hero. They both belong to the same community. I don't think we should selectively choose to mention caste of one and not the other. The Parsi heritage of Tata should also be mentioned IMHO. Acharya63 (talk) 02:20, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm not trawling for examples of past discussions, sorry. I've been here a long time and there have been several of them over that time. As I said, it isn't a firm consensus yet anyway and so there would need to be another discussion. I take your point that some Indian people place great store by caste but if it isn't relevant then it isn't encyclopaedic, period. We are not a collection of random facts and it is worth bearing in mind that a lot of Indians (although perhaps not the majority) actually try to hide their caste, especially in the south. I can accept that the occupational background of a person's parents might have some bearing but caste goes far beyond that and, as I am sure you have seen, mentions of caste are frequently abused here. It is easier, safer, less disruptive and usually no less encyclopaedic simply to omit it. - Sitush (talk) 02:28, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Sitush I am in the same boat as you in this one. We have had a lot of disruption (especially from experience in Indian military biographical profiles) with people pushing one caste over the other. What prompted me asking this question was the recent edits on Arun Shridhar Vaidya by Acharya63 which place him in a particular caste. I am yet to ascertain how this is helpful in adding information about him than trivia and will only lead to more issues later on (this is based on my experience prior to WP:INDICSCRIPTS with languages). I think one should be added if indeed there is show by an editor that the caste of a person has direct bearing on a biographical article. Another similar case is that of Ratan Tata and him being a Parsi. Now strictly speaking Parsi is not a caste but a social group, which in my mind, is synonymous to being a Punjabi or a Bengali. But in this case, I don't understand how does this have direct bearing on his biographical article. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 02:49, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

TO Adamgerber80 : You win in the Arun Shridhar Vaidya and the Ratan Tata case. I lose. Let us deny the Parsis to feel proud of their notables. Please know that my objection is more to the unfairness and I would not have any objection if we were following the same rule for all articles. But the issue here is selective judgement - is my communication skill so bad that no one is able to see it? Unless a community is practicing fairness the morale of the members goes down - that is true not only in real life but also on wikipedia. So the way I look at it - we are keeping caste for a marathi hindu politician who has been called a hindu terrorist by some (and used as a tool to hate marathi hindus and marathi brahmins also (because he was a so called high caste) - all over the world - not to mention his super tiny community of a few hundred thousand that can be easily identified by last names) but not a marathi hindu war hero(vaidya) from the exactly the same community who was assassinated by terrorists. Sounds very fair. I predict that editors(such as myself) who believe in perfect non-partiality and neutrality - will get disgusted by this unfairness - stop editing eventually and wikipedia India section will be irrelevant in a few years - due to unfairness and random policies across articles ( even animals hate unfairness - never mind humans). People will start referring to other websites including blogs. There should have been a simple answer like "yes it is allowed although it is trivia" or "NOT not allowed on any article unless it is directly relevant so delete it from all Politicans and actor webpages. No selectivity". BTW, caste is encyclopedic nature in India -it tells a lot about the family background - some people, especially non-Indians just don't get it. Govt of India recognizes caste for reservation. It is not like your sun sign or gotra which is trivia and irrelevant. Most people come up in life simply because they belong to a caste - that is why in Raj times you see a large proportion of "high caste" intellectuals as notables but not of the lower castes. Also different castes belong to different races is a fact - they even look different - but maybe my communication skills are bad and I am not able to explain it well. A sense of justice has to prevail in wikipedia and I am sorry that I don't see it here. This is not an argument(as I have already accepted defeat) just a dump of my thoughts. Sitush, I honestly admire your editing skills and your command over English. Also, my sincere prayers and good wishes for your recovery(you mentioned something about a biopsy). So to sum up - Adamgerber80, the verdict is that we leave out caste for Vaidya and Tata. I will end the discussion about this on my side although I strongly disagree with the verdict and I am afraid we are setting a bad precedent with this ambiguous and unfair decision. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 04:21, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

As I have said above, fairness does not come into it. You are thinking that Wikipedia is a perfect environment and I'm afraid it is not. There are all sorts of anomalies across all sorts of articles, and that will continue because we have over 5 million articles to maintain but a relatively small number of active contributors. Equally, if it can be shown that a person's caste is directly relevant to what they do/did etc then, again as I've said above, it is likely to be encyclopaedic. But without a direct relevance, it is not. The same applies to religion etc. - Sitush (talk) 04:25, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I did say that my previous reply was final but felt compelled to add why I felt strongly about this. This(your comment) is very subjective and will result in edit wars, I am afraid. More importantly, caste mentions are already common all over. For example, if someone tries to remove Mahatma Gandhi's Gujarati Bania heritage - the Gujarati people -irrespective of caste- are doing to react. And the removers simply have to point to this discussion. Senior editors should make things easier for new comers not confuse them further so that they run away. Unfairness is confusing and demoralizing and you have the power to minimize it on Wikipedia - I don't. Adamgerber80's persistent reverts of harmless information were unnecessary and counterproductive. 99% percent of caste on wikipedia mentions are not relevant to the notability - so there was no need to crucify these two notables in particular. No one had objected so far. The only exceptions are Ambedkar , Phule etc where caste is relevant to notability. But there is no point reverting harmless one word information - even if considered trivia by some - maybe others consider it important. I agree with you that currently there is no fairness on wikipedia India articles and it is quite demoralizing to hear that from you. This will also be a weapon used to demonize communities by simply keeping the caste information for bad people and removing it for good people from that caste. Both (Tata, Vaidya) were born before independence and hence had they been from low castes they would have most probably gone nowhere. Given that caste mentions are very common on wikipedia even for modern actresses like Madhuri Dixit, I think a fair verdict would have been to allow it for these two. Very disappointing. As I said, this will result in wikipedia India being less important. We can discuss this 10 years from now and I will show I was right when the number of hits on wikipedia India articles continue to decrease as competitors pop up. Because it is a fact that people do search for castes of notables. There was some news article about this mentality too - I am not saying it is right- just that it is a fact. Adamgerber80 selectively disassociated two people from their communities although there are rampant caste mentions of dancers and actresses on wiki where caste has almost nothing to do with their notability. Even pornstars - see Sunny Leone where their caste/religion is mentioned. Also, there are Caucasian (white) notables where their partial German, partial English, etc. heritage is mentioned - which is completely irrelevant but no one objects to it. I need a break for a couple of weeks and will decide if I want to be a part of this editors community or not. Maybe unfairness is one of the reasons why good editors are getting repelled by wikipedia. Acharya63 (talk) 07:54, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Mentions of caste on Wikipedia always provoke reaction anyway. How many times do I have to tell you that the caste of a person can be included if it is relevant to their notability/achievements etc? It doesn't matter whether the person is a serial murderer or the president of the country, so the idea that it will be used to demonise is nonsense. As it happens, it is currently almost always used to glorify. - Sitush (talk) 07:59, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I clearly understood it the first time you mentioned it. Also, I never objected to adding caste for any serial killer. As I said, caste IS family background and says a million things about a person. It is not like his sun sign. It is definitely NOT trivia - otherwise the Govt of India would not have recognized it. Anyway, that aside, let us assume it is trivia. Even then, my main point was caste IS currently being mentioned EVEN in cases(usually politicians) where it is absolutely irrelevant. This selective mention EVEN IN IRRELEVANT CASES (if the action of the person has nothing to do with caste) demonizes a community if only bad people are selected. That is why I gave specific examples. I feel I am banging my head against a brick wall...sigh..There was a personal experience my family(parents) and I had to go through with a Pakistani cab driver in Chicago - related to demonizing a community (marathi hindus in that case)- that made me so emotional in this issue. Kind request please - let us close this topic. I will take up this issue with the Admin board later because I am unable to explain it to you (for which I blame my communication skills). This is nothing personal - in fact, I have highest respect for your skills. I just need for a general consensus to clear my own confusion and get guidance and in the interest of long term fainess, justice, honesty and integrity of wikipedia (this is a general comment for the future, not intended against any editor). Kind Regards, Acharya63 (talk) 22:47, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom case

Dear Sitush, you have nagged me a second time on this. I shall not part from what I said. It's too late for me to be of much use. --Prüm (talk) 10:35, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

It was not my intention to nag and I do not believe that I did. I was merely trying to fix a problem that you had created and then, when your reply suggested that you did not understand, I posted a longer explanation. - Sitush (talk) 11:21, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Battle of Chiniot etc

Hallo Sitush, I see you've interacted a couple of times with the editor who creates articles like Battle of Chiniot: they don't seem to understand referencing, keep using {{sfnp}} without giving full references, and it looks as if the material might be copied from elsewhere though I can't see where. Not my subject area - you might like to have a look? Are they a walled garden of dubious articles inadequately sourced? I've just left a note on their talk page asking them to give proper references. Could wait to see if that has any effect ... ? PamD 21:56, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Did you notice that Punjabi-Mughal War, which you turned into a redirect, was reverted back to being a full article? I note also that it was created in the editor's first ever edit, complete with infobox - though of course editors might have edited as IPs before getting an editor name, WP:AGF. Hmmm. PamD 22:00, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, of course you noticed ... just looked at the talk page. PamD 22:02, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting this. I am not around much at the moment but have restored the Punjabi-Mughal War redirect and again highlighted the issues on that talk page. I suspect that pretty much everything that particular contributor has done will need to be reverted because there appear to be numerous problems of a fairly irretrievable variety. - Sitush (talk) 23:12, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

@PamD: look at Talk:Battle of Pindi Bhattian. I've been trying to tidy up after the contributor but it really isn't looking great - lots of enthusiasm but little regard for accuracy and the sources are practically fake refs in some instances. - Sitush (talk) 00:46, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

And then after your edit ... I've reverted the revert. A mess. Keep up your excellent work! PamD 05:31, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sitush and Hi PamD, I have created the articles Punjabi-Mughal War, Battle of Pindi Bhattian and Battle of Chiniot. All three articles are well sources and have been reviewed and been approved. I don't understand why It should be redirected when eveything is correct. I understand your points that I keep removing the redirect. And I appoligize. But Please let these three articles stay because they are Accurate, Sourced and have been reviewed by others. Kindy, AhdBhat. AhdBhat (talk) 16:11, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Udayar caste

Hi Sitush, i wanted to add some content in udayar caste page. Already the content has been posted in udayar talk page. Request you to give edit permission to update the same in wiki page. Aravindkrishna088 (talk) 16:26, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

I couldn't give you permission if I wanted to but I am not even prepared to add the information because you are yet again misrepresenting sources. There is a reason why that article has been put under protection and your misguided efforts, plus those of Udayar.nathaman (talk · contribs), with whom I suspect you have some sort of connection, merely reinforce why that should be so. - Sitush (talk) 03:21, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Devendra kula Vellalar

-they were in bc(backward community before 1935) and they were known as Devendra thirukulla pallars this should be in their page -they correctly formed the pandiyan army -they are found chiefly in the pandiya country -their subcaste are supposed to be mention Devendra Kula Vellalar -kudumbar -moopan -Devendra kulathan -Pannadi -Pallar -Kalladi -Kadaiyar -vathiriyar -they also belong to the kurmi Kshatriyas

For all this I have evidence in the form of images,which is frm books Moopan Devendra Kula Vellalar (talk) 06:37, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Pallar/Pallan also means king ,the original name of Bihar was Pallan.Palla also means protector &ruler(pg 110,the open secrets of India,Israel, Mexico -from genesis to revelations! Moopan Devendra Kula Vellalar (talk) 06:39, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Devendra Kula Vellalar community is given first respect in almost every ancient temple,the festival only begins after they have been given first respect and temple chariot procession only starts when the Dkv touches the chariot Moopan Devendra Kula Vellalar (talk) 06:40, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

You would need to provide reliable sources for your claims before they could be added to articles. Please see WP:V. - Sitush (talk) 03:29, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

159

Are you working through a particular list? I'll happily lend a hand. Kind regards, Cesdeva ^(talk) 17:00, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

No. I just stick "onefivenine" in the search box and beaver away. I usually find myself doing a bit of copyediting, removing Indic scripts and other dodgy sources at the same time. - Sitush (talk) 17:04, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Cesdeva ^(talk) 17:09, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Questions. Would you take the axe to this statement: "The village is administrated by a Sarpanch who is an elected representative of village as per the constitution of India". I see it cropping up all the time and find it pointless.

Also what's the consensus on calculating percentages using census data? I'm of the opinion that it's OR and prone to human error.

I tend to only include population (and sometimes literacy) in demographics sections. Would you agree that information beyond that stretches into statsbook territory? Cesdeva ^(talk) 19:13, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

The sarpanch thing does crop up a lot. It is valid information in my opinion, although I bin the "of village as per the constitution of India" because the article is linked anyway.

Simple calcs, such as percentages, are usually considered acceptable despite the potential for error. I've never really seen the point (sic) in calculating to two decimal places etc, as many of the articles do. Just round up/down.

Things like the number of people working usually seems like statsbook stuff but I have seen some instances where the outcome was striking, eg: 300+ male workers and 2 female. I suspect if you start removing such stuff then you may get objections. Eg: child sex ratios are significant in some places due to the effects of infanticide, and while the number of children aged 6 or less seems a rather arbitrary bar, I think it must have some significance that escapes me. - Sitush (talk) 19:19, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I think perhaps the 0-6 range gives an indication of the increase/decrease of births between censuses, and to a lesser extent a rough indication of early childhood mortality.

Sometimes I feel that one day an automated bot will plough through hundreds of thousands of Indian village articles in a matter of minutes, dealing with all the issues; while the young programmer who crafted the code sits back in his chair and crunches through a packet of cheesy wotsits.

Anyways... Thanks for your sound advice, I'll bear it in mind. Cesdeva ^(talk) 21:02, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Page move

Do we need to delete the redirect page Mannanars (Thiyya Dynasty)--regentspark (comment) 20:24, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Ideally, yes. - Sitush (talk) 05:38, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Sitush Stop Demonizing and disrupting origins of living people

This is regarding List of Yadavs, can you quote one reliable source which states that non Yadavs are adopting Yadav last name? All those Yadavs with Yadav last name are members of the All India Yadav Mahasabha which urged Yadavs to use Yadav Surname. Whenever a non Yadav uses Yadav in his/her name press releases are issued, same was issued against Yadav Singh who is not a Yadav. Yadav Singh and Yadav Pandit are using Yadav as first name and not as last name, rest all who have been mentioned are using Yadav as last name. Don't create cruft version of people's origins, and please brush up your English skills, when you write that some members of which "may" be part of the Yadav caste you mean to say they can or can not be Yadavs. Please do you research on Yadavs mentioned out there, and you will find that they are indeed Yadavs. Please maintain dignity and neutrality on Wikipedia. Learn how to behave, and do mention which caste you belong to. As you caste may be the reason for your biased nature towards Yadavs. Try to remove your own caste from your own head, and respect other people's origins. Shantanusingh10 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:59, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

I have explained this already on your own talk page. You are breaching WP:BLP and numerous other things. Now stop it. - Sitush (talk) 10:05, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Instead of issuing threats, start talking sense, and learn how to engage in an intellectual conversation. I asked you can you quote one reliable source which state that non-Yadavs are using Yadav surname? talk to the point instead of threatening, I have sent an email to Jimmy Wales regarding this again, first one sent on March 27th, so your threats are not going to work on this. Learn how to be professional and to the point, and don't divulge the topic by issuing threats. Quote one reliable source which asked members of Non-Yadav caste to use Yadav last name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shantanusingh10 (talk • contribs) 10:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

The burden is on you to prove that they are members of the caste, not on me to prove that they are not. Look, you haven't made many edits and you've already got yourself into problems with me and with C.Fred. We've both given you explanations for our respective points, which relate to different articles. Clearing out your talk page does not negate those explanations, nor the formal alerts and warnings. I think perhaps you need to take things much slower than you are doing because all of this antagonistic commentary etc from you isn't going to achieve anything except perhaps topic bans and blocks. - Sitush (talk) 11:45, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Looks like the latter has come to pass, and indefinitely, to this user. —C.Fred (talk) 13:10, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes. I can't say that I am surprised - Yadav related stuff has a long history of attracting POV warriors etc. - Sitush (talk) 13:22, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Punjabi-Mughal War

Hi Sitush, I made an article called Punjabi-Mughal War and also made an article Battle of Pindi Bhattian. Both of them are actual wars, with references to them. Please kindly allow my article.

AhdBhat (talk) 00:38, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

I am too unwell to deal with this at the moment but you are edit warring, ignoring talk page comments, and providing fake references etc. I see PamD has also been reverting you. I'm going to leave a templated note on your talk page because you are drifting into behaviour that is likely to lead to you being sanctioned in some way. You need to discuss the issues on the relevant article talk pages, although I do not hold out much hope for you gaining consensus for your actions. - Sitush (talk) 07:08, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

I am discussing the matters on my page. AhdBhat (talk) 15:59, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Okay dude. Lets change the name to Bhatti Rebllion. Atleast thats reliable name. But dude honestly, I don't care, You've just been annoying me this whole time. I make an article, with sourced research. And you come in and start to treat the article like its yours. Well done man. Theres a simple term, "mind your own business." AhdBhat (talk) 04:29, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Raj Darbhanga

Hi Sitush. Could you please take a look at Raj Darbhanga page? Thanks. — Jakichandan (talk) 12:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

@Jakichandan: sorry for the late response. You appear to have dealt with the disruption. Please note that centered should be spelled centred, per WP:MOSTIES. - Sitush (talk) 00:05, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

@Sitush: Done. Thanks. Apologies for late reply. —Jakichandan (talk) 05:29, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Sita

Hi @Sitush, Ponyo, Bbb23, and SpacemanSpiff:. Please take a look at Sita page. Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 14:11, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Mahanati Savithri

File:Foo:jpg,

NVS Praveen (talk) 23:13, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Accidental thanks

Just dozed off while finger was over the button - horrible bit of interface design! PamD 11:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC) PamD 11:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) OTOH, Sitush's edits nearly always do deserve thanks! Bishonen | talk 21:29, 14 May 2018 (UTC).

Thanks. <g> - Sitush (talk) 21:31, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Stephen Tompkinson wikipedia

Hi, I made a video in regards to the changes on the Stephen Tompkinson wikipedia page where I explain everything and so you can see it's really me haha, I'd appreciate it if you gave it a watch: https://youtube.com/NTLpEH2lLn4 Daisyet17 (talk) 19:21, 7 May 2018 (UTC)Daisyet17

Hi, the link does not work and probably would not have been suitable anyway. I had already explained the issues on your talk page and also given a possible solution. - Sitush (talk) 02:57, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, apologies since I didn't notice this until after I'd made the changes- sorry the link doesn't work! This one definitely does :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTLpEH2lLn4&feature=youtu.be Daisyet17 (talk) 21:52, 10 May 2018 (UTC)Daisyet17

Yes, it does. It is useless to me because I am deaf but it is also useless to Wikipedia. How do we know that the person in the video is Tompkinson's daughter? I've explained what the solution to this issue may be but for some reason it doesn't appear to be sinking in. Surely he has an agent? - Sitush (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

You mentioned the issue of bad blood in the question you posted on someone else's talk page regarding me as the product of a failed marriage, which is true. However I've been living with my dad (which I'm pretty sure he's stated in interviews before) for nearly five years now after falling out with my mum, who I was living with before. I've stated this several times in responses to people asking similar questions on my twitter @daisyet17 . My dad and I follow each other on Twitter and his fan page @TompkinsonFans know who I am, if that supports my case any further (which I doubt it will given the response to everything else I've tried haha) Daisyet17 (talk) 20:26, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Daisyet17

Well, someone else has now reverted you. You are way past WP:3RR, as I have already noted on your talk page. - Sitush (talk) 01:11, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Page SAVITRI add Parents with SURNAME NISSANKARARAO & remove Chowdhury caste title of venkatramayya her uncle

Open main menu Wikipedia Search Wikipedia my notifications

We ask you, humbly, to help. To all our editors in India: This Sunday we need your help. We rely on you to write Wikipedia, but we are missing many articles in languages spoken in India. Please help translate or write missing articles in your languages. Together, we can keep Wikipedia in India independent and thriving. Thank you. — Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia Founder

Get started Edit this pageStop watching Read in another language Savitri (actress) For other uses, see Savitri. Savitri (4 January 1936 – 26 December 1981) was an Indian film actress, playback singer, dancer, director and producer. She appeared mainly in Telugu and Tamil language films but also in Kannada, Malayalam and Hindi language films.

Savitri సావిత్రి కొమ్మారెడ్డి -Yesteryear's leading actress savithri.jpg Savitri as Sasirekha in Mayabazar Born 4 January 1936 Chirravuru, Guntur district, Madras Presidency, (present-day Andhra Pradesh, India Died 26 December 1981 (aged 45) Madras, Tamil Nadu, India Nationality Indian Other names Mahanati Savitri Nadigaiyar Thilagam Spouse(s) Gemini Ganesan (1952–1981) Children 2 Awards Rashtrapati Award Nandi Award Savitri's first significant role was in the 1952 Telugu film Pelli Chesi Choodu. In 1960, she received the Rashtrapati Award for her performance in the Telugu film Chivaraku Migiledi. In 1968, she produced and directed the Telugu film Chinnari Papalu, for which she received the state Nandi Award for Best Feature Film (Silver). She was honoured among "women in cinema" at the 30th International Film Festival of India.

She is best known for her work in award-winning films such as Ardhangi (1955), Thodi Kodallu (1957), Mayabazaar (1957), Mangalya Balam (1958), Chivaraku Migiledi (1960), Mooga Manasulu (1963), Doctor Chakravarthy (1964), and Varakatnam (1968).

Her Tamil work includes Kalathur Kannamma (1959), Pasamalar (1961), Pava Mannippu (1961), Paarthal Pasi Theerum (1962), Karpagam (1963), Karnan (1963), Kai Koduttha Dheivam, Navarathri (1964), and Thiruvilaiyadal (1965).

Savitri's later career, from the late 1960s, tumbled into a spiral of financial problems and alcoholism that necessitated her taking on film roles of little merit.

Early life Career Main article: Savitri filmography Savitri in Shanthi A promotional poster of the film Shanthi in 1952 Savitri acted in dance dramas as a child, including some work with a theatre company run by Kongara Jaggaiah. She made an unsuccessful speculative trip to find film work in Madras at the age of 12, when she was deemed to be too young to play heroine roles, but in 1950 was cast as the female lead in Samsaram. That role did not become actuality because she became too excited, necessitating numerous retakes and eventually her replacement in the part by Lakshmi Kantham. She was given a minor speaking role in the film and in the next year had two more minor roles, in Roopavati and Patala Bhairavi, before getting her big break as second heroine in Pelli Chesi Choodu.[1]

Savriti was known for her hospitality, philanthropic gestures, and her love of buying property and jewellery, but she kept little control of her spending. Ganesan continued to philander and she was susceptible to favouring hangers-on with her largesse. Her career took a downturn in the late 1960s. Her properties were seized by tax officials and she turned to acting in any film that would have her, while sycophants encouraged her to direct and produce films that were unsuccessful and financially draining. Among her few supporters during her financial difficulties was Dasari Narayana Rao, who used her in most of his films, such as Gorintaku (1979), and specifically made Devadasu Malli Puttadu (1978) as a movie for her.[1]

Her only Malayalam film was the unsuccessful Chuzi (1973).[3]

Bollywood Savitri acted in a few Hindi films such as Bahut Din Huwe, Ghar Basake Dekho, Balaram Shri Krishna and Ganga Ki Lahren

Kannada cinema Savitri starred in a few Kannada films such as Thayige Thakka Maga, Ravichandra, and Chandanada Gombe.

Playback singing She is known for playback singing, and some of her works are "Sundari Neevanti" from Mayabazar, "Rangu Rangula Sila" from Navarathri (1966) and Neevevaro from Annapurna (1960), in which she gave voice for actress Girija.

Direction Savitri has directed films such as Chinnari Papalu, Chiranjeevi, Maathru Devatha, Vintha Samsaram, Kuzhanthai Ullam and Praptham.

Death Savitri died on 26 December 1981, at the age of 45 and after being in a coma for 19 months. She had been an alcoholic for many years, having begun drinking heavily in 1969, and developed diabetes and high blood pressure.[1][4]

Awards and recognition Savriti received several awards, including the Rashtrapati Award[1], Nandi Award and the Kalaimamani.[5] She was noted at the 30th International Film Festival of India.[6]

The Government of India issued a postage stamp in commemoration of Savitri.[citation needed] In May 2018, a bilingual biopic, titled Mahanati, was released. Directed by Nag Ashwin, it featured Keerthy Suresh as Savitri.

References

Kalyanam, Rajesshwari (22 December 2013). "Drama In Real Life". The Hans India. Retrieved 23 March 2018.
"Star and a versatile actor". Chennai, India: The Hindu. 15 August 2003. Retrieved 11 July 2011.
Vijayakumar, B. (12 October 2014). "Chuzhi: 1973". The Hindu. Retrieved 2018-03-01.
Adivi, Sashidhar (26 April 2017). "I never watched amma's films: Vijaya Chamundeswari". Deccan Chronicle. Retrieved 2018-03-01.
"Drama in real life". The Hans India. Retrieved 2018-05-04.
Devipriya (January 1999). "Savitri: A Moon Among Stars" (PDF). 30th International Film Festival of India '99. Directorate of Film Festivals. p. 150. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 January 2013. Retrieved 23 March 2018.

Crawford ce

Should I maybe take Lucy out altogether? I was just trying to make the chain of events a bit clearer. Deb (talk) 11:10, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

@Deb: that would work but I'm not sure that the gender gap people would be happy to see her removed from the lead, however brief the mention. I've had my fingers burned there and am wary: PC mob mentality has that effect on me! - Sitush (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Mob of one, I suspect... :-) Deb (talk) 11:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Slightly more than one, although definitely at least one less than it once was because of the death of Kevin G (much missed, I am sure, by many). - Sitush (talk) 04:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Didn't know about that, sorry. Deb (talk) 07:45, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Antan O 10:35, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Good luck with that. - Sitush (talk) 10:36, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Lo!—It did not come to pass, and there was much rejoicing...

Referencing Comment

You mentioned some reference errors on HoP. Can you be more specific on what I could do to fix these types of errors in general? BreadBuddy (talk) 18:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

You may be able to work it out from my recent edits there. In addition, Linghzi did explain on your talk page how to use the error-detecting script but it looks like you didn't bother with it.

If there is anything in my recent edits to citations that isn't clear then just point me to it and I will try to explain. - Sitush (talk) 19:02, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok thank you. I'll take a look and try to figure it out. BreadBuddy (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thirsty business, that job of work you did on the Crawfords. Great stuff! —SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap shit room} 11:30, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Serial Number 54129. It started with a heated discussion that eventually got me banned from the creator's talk page (I'm still not sure why Deb escaped a similar fate but the general problems seem to still be happpening). It is one of quite a few articles that I probably should nominate for GA. - Sitush (talk) 04:03, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Banned, huh? I don't know how you sleep at night 👌 yep, definite GA I'd say. What others were you thinking? —SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap shit room} 09:28, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

I often don't sleep much at night but that's a health thing, not a Wikipedia one! Walter Whitehead is a possible, along with a couple of shorter but nonetheless "complete" articles about other Mancunian medics. I think Malcolm Lyall Darling will get there but I need to finish writing up what I've researched. There will be others: I only occasionally engage with the FA/GA processes because they're not my primary focus and, well, being an arrogant so-and-so, I know in my own mind whether they're ok or not. As I am sure applies to most people, it is easy to please myself :) - Sitush (talk) 09:58, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion

You have always been a Wiki-trainer to me, I am looking for some suggestion here. How to go ahead, and solve the issue? --Titodutta (talk) 18:58, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

There isn't really anything I can add to the discussion, sorry. I don't have a lot of involvement in movie articles and it looks like you have agreed that the sources mentioned are problematic. They just need to be cleaned up, which is likely to be tedious unless some bright spark can figure out how to deploy AWB or similar. - Sitush (talk) 02:55, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

You are altering the Facts abt "Idiga" Pls stop doing it Harsha Kadamba (talk) 08:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

You-know-who

Don't let him goad you. I thought of replying but he's so obviously wrong that he's just digging himself a hole. You know the old saying about enough rope. Deb (talk) 15:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Too late. I've replied before seeing this. Still, it was a considered reply in the face of such ridiculous accusations. I'd be happy to see them try to back it up. - Sitush (talk) 18:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Page edit request

Hi Sitush, i wanted to add some content with sources in Yadav page. Request you to give edit permission to update the same in wiki. Ravi58649 (talk) 08:38, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Propose your changes at Talk:Yadav. Include reliable sources to support those changes and don't bother trying to claim that they are an elite group until you have read all of the other discussions on that talk page. The issue has been discussed to death over many years and every source offered thus far to support the claims of pov-pushers from the community has been found wanting. Please also note that the article does not say that all Yadav people are/were "non-elite". - Sitush (talk) 08:41, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

You are right Lacy is not notable

Thankyou for standing up to the film article cabal. They have essentially turned Wikipedia into a copy of IMDb with more and more articles that tell us nothing except birth, death and filmography.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:09, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I fear my comments will make no difference. The argument might be that, well, I've seen his/her name in the credits and want to find out more, even if it is just d.o.b. and other films etc. Ironically, in this case even the dates are unverifiable and at least one of the films is apparently lost. - Sitush (talk) 06:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Crawford family of the White Mountains

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Crawford family of the White Mountains you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Auntieruth55 -- Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:21, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Constantine Beschi

You have said "You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Constanzo Beschi." I would like to point out YOU are the one removing my credible source and adding 'dubious' there. There are no other editors in this page. You may have a problem with Ananda Vikatan magazine as a source. But what is your justification for removing the source to the original book written by Beschi in 1891 (Thonnool Vilakkam). It is a book preserved by the govt of Tamil Nadu in the Connemara Public library, one of the four National Depository Libraries in India. "Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page" - There is no preferred version here. The version mentioned is a historical FACT with the original book still preserved. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount- so kindly stop removing proper sources to suit your views. --Ophelia S (talk) 11:48, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Your point has no weight. There is a book in the main library at the University of Cambridge called something like Albert and the Conquest of Maidenhead, published around the time that Queen Victoria married Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. (Maidenhead is a pun: he landed at the town of Maidenhead when arriving in the country for the marriage, and the same word also refers to virginity/the hymen, being a reference to the virginal state of Victoria). It is an extremely rare copy, held in one of the very few copyright libraries in the UK, ie: a library of at least similar standing to Connemara. It is a scurrilous, xenophobic, obscene and immensely funny parody that was, if I remember correctly, treated as being an act of treason although the writer was never traced. We would never use it as a source just because it is in the holdings of a top-class library. Similarly, many university libraries hold copies of the works of people such as David Irving but such books have limited value as sources on Wikipedia. - Sitush (talk) 12:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Walter M. Digges

Nice job improving Walter M. Digges!–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:03, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks but it would be difficult for anyone not to be able to improve articles as poor as that. I went through a phase of cleaning up the mess, gave up for a while after sorting out Crawford family of the White Mountains (which had horrendous errors in it while a stub), and am now being accused of stalking when I address other horrendous errors. It is going to end badly, and not for me. - Sitush (talk) 03:05, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Wow, really great job on that article!

Yep, I see your point. I have worked on several articles, too.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:11, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

CaroleHenson can you do anything with John J. Fruin? I'm not finding much. - Sitush (talk) 04:27, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Yep, I will take a look at it.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:41, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I can see lots of brief mentions - quotes from his work etc - but nothing much about him as a person. - Sitush (talk) 04:48, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I see you've been digging in... I went to find out how you knew where he lived (for the category addition) and found this article. I knew the blind woman in the story. Spooky. I'll come back to the article after a bit... you seem to be on a good roll!–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:04, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

If you're not in the mood, no worries, I'll kick in when you stop (for a bit tonight, then off to bed, and pick up in the a.m.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:16, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

I've stopped, Carole. Have been awake all night here and my meds are driving me daft (dafter?) Thanks for taking a look at it. - Sitush (talk) 05:18, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok, feel better!–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:19, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

What do you think of the John J. Fruin at this point (e.g., far enough along as a start, etc.)?–CaroleHenson (talk) 14:22, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, great thanks. Good work. At least their c. 10% deletion rate for articles created won't be adversely affected by this one. - Sitush (talk) 14:28, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok, great. Thanks! And, thanks for your edits.–CaroleHenson (talk) 14:36, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

I see that you are joining the long list of frustrated contributors, alas. FloridaArmy, I think things are becoming untenable: you are pissing off an awful lot of people with your attitude and your article creations. Since Carole left her last note on your talk page I see that someone else has draftified three more of your efforts and I don't think that is someone with whom you have had a past involvement, so the list of irritated people has risen by another one. There is a limit to everyone's patience, you know. Sooner or later, you will either have to take on board some of the many criticisms etc of your efforts or you will find yourself limited in what you can edit (eg: a ban on creating new articles might be proposed). I don't think anyone is under the impression that your intentions are anything other than good but your implementations are creating a phenomenal amount of work for others. - Sitush (talk) 05:20, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Enough, now. I know it's tempting, but showing restraint will be more effective than pursuing a witch-hunt in the long run. I would suggest you make sure all comments are calm and measured. Deb (talk) 12:01, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Crawford family of the White Mountains

The article Crawford family of the White Mountains you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Crawford family of the White Mountains for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Auntieruth55 -- Auntieruth55 (talk) 15:01, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

@Auntieruth55: thanks very much for your time and comments. Much appreciated. - Sitush (talk) 15:03, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Rope

I saw your recent comment about a problem user and WP:ROPE. As an FYI, I have just started this. It's a work-in-progress. I agree with where things are headed. Feel free to add it / change it / etc. I will be working on it today. I am going to work on it by guidelines, staring with COATRACK instances, since that really got me going for some reason.

I want to keep the verbiage brief, though, so it doesn't get bogged down in the process. What do you think?–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:58, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

I am on a short course of meds that I know mess with my head, Carole, so I am trying to keep away for a few days. Nothing wrong with what you are doing but if it drags on for, say, a fortnight then consider drafting it off-wiki because some people get mithered about such things being attack pages. I doubt it will need a fortnight, though, because their attitude is indeed self-destructive and that is easily demonstrated. - Sitush (talk) 20:13, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Good points. I am thinking it will be done within the next day or two. I hope you are having some enjoyable time on your wiki slow-down.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:19, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Pushpaka Brahmins

Please improve. Don't delete wholly. -Padmanabhanunnips (talk) 06:56, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I have explained this before on your talk page. You are very close to being topic banned, I think. - Sitush (talk) 07:05, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your warning

Sir, You have sent me a warning that you will ban me from wikipedia. Go ahead, i here by issue a warning to you that if you do not remove your false information from kurukkals, i will be forced to act against you leagally. I have all the evidences with me to prove that you are wrong, and for your kind information may i let you know that i belong to this community. I , as the Vice President of Pradeshika Sabha have sent a letter to the All India Brahmin Fedaration to issue a notice to Wikipedia. I here by warn you never to include any false information about this cast ever in your life again.

With warmest regards
 Sreehari Sharma                 Sreehari sharma (talk) 08:21, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

See WP:NLT. - Sitush (talk) 08:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Threat of legal action withdrawn, see this diff. Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:23, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Well, yeah, Yunshui. Unfortunately, they've already passed the buck to another organisation and any action is out of their hands now. I'd say that was a clever move on their part, except I don't think they actually have the wherewithal to concoct such a strategy. - Sitush (talk) 05:32, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

H

I am a Ranghar.( Muslim Rajput) and I know more than you.. who I am.. MUDDASSIR BHATI (talk) 08:34, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

See WP:V. Looks like it is going to be one of those days. - Sitush (talk) 08:37, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Hope it gets better! You get an interesting cast of characters on your talk page.–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:06, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I do! Bishonen once created a rather good "clueless complaints generator" based on their remarks. It is due a revival, I think. - Sitush (talk) 05:33, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Sounds like it!–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:00, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Notability: shipyourenemiesglitter.com

Anyone out there. I've just seen shipyourenemiesglitter.com. Is there an equivalent to WP:BLP1E for companies/organisations/websites? It seems ridiculous to me. We do require ongoing coverage, I think. There is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shipyourenemiesglitter.com but I'm surprised. - Sitush (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

My Lord

Thank you for your comment on the arbitrary sanctions page. It looks suspicious to me. I've never had any interaction with My Lord before yet this user turns out of nowhere and files this against me. Any idea who it could be? That report might have been filed on behalf of someone else?--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 18:25, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) This isn't a new user, it's a renamed user. I don't know if I should be disclosing their previous username, but they have certainly interacted with you before: see [1]. Vanamonde (talk) 18:33, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

No problem. I don't prefer one "side" over another: I just say it as I see it.

I think if an editor changes their username and is not making a clean start (which would require them abandoning previously edited articles etc) then they surely have to state their past usernames. Are there exceptions to that requirement? Prima facie, failure to disclose seems like giving them an advantage in situations such as this. - Sitush (talk) 00:50, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Your thoughts, NeilN, Bishonen? - Sitush (talk) 01:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Their contribution history easily reveals who they were as does this. There's no requirement to list older user names. WP:CHU simply has: "You may wish to inform others of previous username(s) via a simple statement on your user page, or use of {{user previous account}}." --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:36, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

That's interesting, thanks. About the non-requirement, that is. I could've sworn somewhere it said you should list them. No worries, though: that's why you get paid the big bucks. - Sitush (talk) 01:43, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

As can be checked over here by inputting the new name.The requirement to list other user-names comes into play, iff you are using multiple legit-sock-puppets. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 08:53, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

PRODings

I've started going through Category:Indian castes alphabetically, looking for scopes of potential improvement and have dispatched several articles for soft-deletion, whence no sources other than Raj-era ones or those that derive from, were located.Feel free to de-prod, if you manage to find any reliable source on any of them......Best,~ Winged Blades^Godric 09:15, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

On a side-note, any ideas on the reliability of this book?~ Winged Blades^Godric 14:15, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Raj era. Might be ok for a few things but best to avoid. - Sitush (talk) 11:56, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Sources

As you suggested I am adding sources. Why are you deleting? Padmanabhanunnips (talk) 07:14, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

You are topic banned. Hiding the notification of that ban, as you did on your talk page, does not alter its effect. I didn't even look at what you said with these edits because you were not supposed to make them. You had your chance. In fact, you had many chances. - Sitush (talk) 07:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Why you are removing my content on Yaduvanshi Kshatriya.

On Yaduvanshi Kshatriya i have reference links also. Yaduvanshi Kshatriya is divided into three parts :

Yaduvanshi Rajput
Nandvanshi Yadav
Gwalvanshi Yadav Radavking (talk) 04:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

The citations do not support what you are claiming - see WP:V - and you appear to be synthesising things in order to push towards a conclusion that suits your opinion. You have been warned previously about such disruptive edits, compounded on this occasion by your undiscussed page move, and you were also told that you would be sanctioned under the special regime that exists for such articles if you persisted. I suspect that sanctioning is now going to happen. - Sitush (talk) 05:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Paswan

The information I'm providing about paswan are true and realible. So please dont revert my changes. SiddharthArya123210 (talk) 08:18, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

SiddharthArya123210 - Your edits did not cite any references or sources. Hence, Sitush was absolutely correct in reverting your edits to the article. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:20, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Pushpaka Brahmins

I was not hiding the ban. I just wanted to see it in my talk page, so I archived. I didn't delete. I think I have the freedom to do so. Please don't take this as a a personal blame. You are continuously reverting the article to single line article of no use. Instead of keeping the articles as single line articles of no use, it will be better to delete them wholly. However, I tried in all the ways to add sources as you suggested. As you think, I was unable to provide sources in English that can be verified by you in online. But I was trying my level best to improve those articles, at-least to make them a little bit useful to the readers. Please try to keep a democratic attitude. I am not getting your attitude. I am not so experienced in Wikipedia. But I am trying to improve the topics which I am being involved to by adding the facts. But you are deleting the content almost wholly, making it single line article of no use to the readers. I have seen much articles in Wikipedia which are erroneous and factually incorrect. None of them are being attended by you and getting corrected. Even large contents are there without any sources. Even if I am trying to add sources (not so easy, as the topics are not related to the English world) in the articles which I edit, you are reverting it continuously. I am providing correct information and try to expand the article. If you feel them wrong, you can discuss in the talk page na... What should I do..Should I stop and leave the articles to their fate? Please tell me.-Padmanabhanunnips (talk) 06:39, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, you should leave the articles to their fate. Just writing about them anywhere on Wikipedia, such as here, is a breach of your topic ban. There is no deadline. - Sitush (talk) 06:41, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. --Padmanabhanunnips (talk) 08:38, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

@Padmanabhanunnips: there are over five million articles on Wikipedia, of which only a small number relate to castes etc. The ban does not prevent you from contributing to the remainder. Just try to follow the basic policies, such as WP:V, WP:RS and WP:NPOV. No-one expects a relatively new contributor to understand all of the policies and guidelines here, and people are generally willing to advise you of them in a productive way provided that you are prepared to accept such advice in the manner that is intended. - Sitush (talk) 08:43, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)There's always Adopt-a-user to find someone to help navigate the guidelines and write better articles.–CaroleHenson (talk) 14:35, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

WikiData

Hi Sitush. Re your comment here, I couldn't agree more. There is a cross-wiki LTA, globally blocked for creating hoax articles or articles with claims from fabricated sources and still editing via socks and IPs, who is a prolific contributor to WikiData. I tried to alert them to this and got zero response [2]. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:04, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I doubt those at WikiData give a stuff: they're obsessive to their cause and need links to Wikipedia etc to justify it. One theory recently propounded by someone who works on both projects was that having links to it from here would encourage people to fix things there, which is a truly barmy rationale.

You may now have seen that I have blown my top in the thread to which you link. I've been pretty polite with RAN right the way through the process, over several weeks, and I am really p'd off with Carrite's lack of AGF etc in the last hour. I need to calm down otherwise I'll be in NPA territory. - Sitush (talk) 15:09, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Ignore him. Sometimes the patently absurd and aggressive hyperbole from editors like that speaks far more eloquently about them than anything anyone else could say. Besides, it's not going to change the outcome. At least, I hope not, even if it would be... er... "one of the most disgusting moments of Wikipedia history."

Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:29, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

It is cultural imperialism which, if you know anything about Carrite at Wikipediocracy, is something he has often opposed. - Sitush (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

(Fortunately) I don't know anything about his views at Wikipediocracy. However, I have watched the mutual (and occasionally nasty) sniping here over "cultural imperialism". UK and US editors (mostly male) have been going at each other over it for years. In my view, it's an over-inflated issue in the great scheme of things, but an obviously important one to the participants. My personal advice would be never to use it as an argument in debates. But maybe that's just me, an American woman who has lived in UK for almost 50 years. Voceditenore (talk) 08:59, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

When someone with his experience gets upset that someone in the UK wasn't aware of a holiday in the US and thinks that things should be posted at a time convenient to the US people, that is going too far. Perhaps we should ban all drama board reports on days when a significant holiday occurs in some country or another. Which basically means every day of the year given the number of Hindu festivals. It would, at least, reduce the drama! - Sitush (talk) 12:16, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

"wishy-washy pseudo-religious stuff"

Hey Sitush,

Nice to meet you. I saw your edit fly by on my watchlist. I don't mind the edit (I think it makes it less nice to read, but am not bothered either way) but is a comment like that really necessary in an edit summary? I don't think it's particularly encouraging :) I would greatly appreciate it if you could consider rephrasing that a bit in the future. Thanks for considering! effeietsanders 00:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Why? I get fed up of seeing it. WP:EUPHEMISM is clear on the point: don't go round the houses. - Sitush (talk) 00:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

We disagree on what is common and natural to use - fine. Again, I don't mind the edit as much. If you so strongly prefer 'died' over 'passed away', by all means: go ahead. I don't see how it has anything to do with religion (or pseudo-religion), it is just whatever you're used to. And if you get 'fed up' by something, that doesn't mean you have to abreact like this. It is unpleasant, not very encouraging and simply unnecessary. effeietsanders 19:36, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

It comes from the idea of passing over to the "other side". - Sitush (talk) 19:49, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thanks for all your edits! I hope and pray you succeed greatly in your life. Surge_Elec (talk) 21:24, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Surreal Barnstar
	Thanks for all your edits! I hope and pray you succeed greatly in your life. Surge_Elec (talk) 21:31, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Grewal

Hi, I understand the edits you made to the Grewal page, removing the uncited additions. However, would you please explain your reasoning for removing the large portion I had added regarding Grewal history, and Distribution? I will undo the change for now until you reply. While leaving the other changes you made.

Thank you

SSaphan (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi SSaphan, thefullwiki is a mirror of Wikipedia. We do not use mirrors. - Sitush (talk) 03:23, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast reply, would I be able to restore those edits I made if I cite the sources thefullwiki used? As opposed to citing the wiki itself? SSaphan (talk) 03:24, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Unlikely because thefullwiki will be using an old version of our article and we have already determined that version to be unacceptable. In any event, the article is about a surname, not a caste. - Sitush (talk) 03:26, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Priya Prakash Varrier

i am creating a artical related to her Besteditor (talk) 04:40, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

I have explained on your talk page why it is you are wasting your time. - Sitush (talk) 04:41, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Malik

Please see the former version of the page.

The page has never seriously informed about the clan. You may alway create such page.Xx236 (talk) 10:54, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

There are that many former versions, and all the stuff at Malik (disambiguation) which relates to various clans etc. It isn't a clear cut issue. - Sitush (talk) 10:56, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

@Xx236: in case you are not watching - it would have been easier to reply to my comment on your talk page rather than bring a non sequitor here, I think. - Sitush (talk) 10:58, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

And...

User:Ewitch51 might be an interesting read:)∯WBG^converse 05:23, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

More WMF bollocks :) Not too well at the moment but I doubt they'll be speaking with me anyway! - Sitush (talk) 06:30, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

DRN Notice for Edits on Bhanushali Page

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic [3]. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Checkmate87 (talk) 20:09, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Your message

Regarding your message: It would be helpful if you would tell me which parts are illusion and why, preferably with reference to reliable sources that support what you are saying. James500 (talk) 21:03, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I am not wasting any more time on you because I think there is little difference between what you are saying and what a troll might say, sorry. Better things to do, both here and in the real world. - Sitush (talk) 06:52, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Don't remove any topic from the notable people content in Sangli. Best Vinayak9192 (talk) 23:06, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day

Happy First Edit Day, Sitush', from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! User:Kpgjhpjm (talk) 16:06, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:HISTRS

Hi Sitush, please see

It seems to me that we need to get this straighten this out now to avoid tons of head-aches in future. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:47, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

If straighten this out means more eyes and minds to help build a better essay / propose to broader consensus policy, it would be fabbu. Fifelfoo (talk) 06:15, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

I see no great need in the Indian context. More generally, that particular pot has been boiling for years and I doubt it will advance from an essay to a guideline. Further, neither essays nor guidelines are actually binding and therefore anyone with half a brain and a desire to get their own POV into an article could challenge it. So it would be a bit of a waste of my time, I think. I'm not even terribly active at the moment anyway due to health issues. - Sitush (talk) 14:11, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Well, I have been told loads of times that WP:HISTRS is "just an essay". The label kind of makes it sound like somebody's opinion. A "content guideline" would at least imply that it has the consensus of the community. In the Indian/South Asian context, I see these problems:

Plenty of Raj era sources, written by civil servants, military commanders, English teachers and what not, masquerading as scholarly sources.
Contemporary writers with some rudimentary knowledge of Sanskrit or Persian, wanting to tell us what Hinduism or ancient India was "truly" like or what "really" happened under the Muslim rulers.
In the political sphere, commentators, analysts and even political scientists with PhD's, basically passing off speculations and opinions as "history". This is especially rife with regard to Kashmir issues or Balochistan issues.

The recent mass topic ban of ARBIPA was precipitated almost entirely by sourcing issues. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:51, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Paravar

If you have the time/energy, can you review the recent edits to this article? See my note at the editor's talk page for the issue with the ones I reverted (the edit cited to this book had similar problem afaict), but there are a bunch of previous ones, including removal of content that cited Bayly and addition of a bunch of quotes from a colonian era source, that you are better positioned to evaluate. Abecedare (talk) 19:03, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I will try when my head is less fuzzy but that doesn't look like a new contributor to me. Might be worth checking the history of some of the articles to which they have contributed. Good to see you back in action, however brief it may be. - Sitush (talk) 20:06, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Third world war :-) going on between some users at the Acharya page

Hi Sitush, Although I am not involved in this and frankly have no personal opinion on this but the Acharya page was on my watchlist. For more than a week an edit war has been going on. Please see history at [4]. It is unlikely that the editors will resolve this. How are such events dealt with? Can we report it somewhere? Thanks, Acharya63 (talk) 02:22, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Arora

Can you revisit Arora ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.30.143.137 (talk) 03:39, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Is this OK ?

Kindly go through the living biography Manish Yadav. A University Professor having no significant achievements. Most of the sources are websites of the Universities for which he has been/is working or the books written by himself.--MahenSingha (Talk) 19:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Deshastha Brahmin

Hi. I was wondering if you were ready to close Talk:Deshastha Brahmin/GA4. AIRcorn (talk) 10:05, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

It needs to be closed as a delisted GA but I'm not in a fit state to do all of the admin at present. Either someone else will have to do it or it will have to wait until I am a bit less ill. - Sitush (talk) 10:24, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, missed the reply. I have delisted it for you. Hope you are feeling better. AIRcorn (talk) 10:08, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Sitush, thank you so much for all your good work. Hope to see you here again soon: all the best. Drmies (talk) 19:47, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. I hope you are on the mend and you're off having a good time somewhere.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:02, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. Highly deserved. It is impossible to understand how one person can manage so much content so efficiently.-Acharya63 (talk) 05:24, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Third world war :-) going on between some users at the Acharya page

Hi Sitush, Although I am not involved in this and frankly have no personal opinion on this but the Acharya page was on my watchlist. For more than a week an edit war has been going on. Please see history at [5]. It is unlikely that the editors will resolve this. How are such events dealt with? Can we report it somewhere? Thanks, Acharya63 (talk) 02:22, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Acharya63 Just so you don't think you're being ignored, I think that Sitush is on a wikibreak right now. Can you work with someone else on this?–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:24, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, CaroleHenson. I appreciate this. Will work with someone else. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 05:26, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I've extended confirmed protected it but pinging @Bishonen: who probably has a better understanding of the whole caste thing in case there is a better solution. --regentspark (comment) 13:20, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Me? Ha, no, all I do is pretend. But extended confirmed seems just right to me. Bishonen | talk 16:13, 27 July 2018 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort closed

An arbitration case regarding German war effort articles has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

For engaging in harassment of other users, LargelyRecyclable is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia under any account.
Cinderella157 is topic banned from the history of Germany from 1932 to 1945, broadly construed. This topic ban may be appealed after six months have elapsed and every six months thereafter.
Auntieruth55 is reminded that project coordinators have no special roles in a content dispute, and that featured articles are not immune to sourcing problems.
Editors are reminded that consensus-building is key to the purpose and development of Wikipedia. The most reliable sources should be used instead of questionable sourcing whenever possible, especially when dealing with sensitive topics. Long-term disagreement over local consensus in a topic area should be resolved through soliciting comments from the wider community, instead of being re-litigated persistently at the local level.
While certain specific user-conduct issues have been identified in this decision, for the most part the underlying issue is a content dispute as to how, for example, the military records of World War II-era German military officers can be presented to the same extent as military records of officers from other periods, while placing their records and actions in the appropriate overall historical context. For better or worse, the Arbitration Committee is neither authorized nor qualified to resolve this content dispute, beyond enforcing general precepts such as those requiring reliable sourcing, due weighting, and avoidance of personal attacks. Nor does Wikipedia have any other editorial body authorized to dictate precisely how the articles should read outside the ordinary editing process. Knowledgeable editors who have not previously been involved in these disputes are urged to participate in helping to resolve them. Further instances of uncollegial behavior in this topic-area will not be tolerated and, if this occurs, may result in this Committee's accepting a request for clarification and amendment to consider imposition of further remedies, including topic-bans or discretionary sanctions.

For the Arbitration Committee,

-Cameron11598^(Talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:32, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Satyendra Prasanno Sinha.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Satyendra Prasanno Sinha.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Can some stalker check this? I have reverted the replacement of the image at the article because the substituted image has been uploaded to Commons with an invalid license. My head is too fuddled to work out the implications for non-free etc. - Sitush (talk) 10:28, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I don't think there's much more to do here; the FUR depended on it being used in an article, which it now is, so I've simply removed the template. If a valid replacement is placed at commons, we can switch it in, and the bot will do the rest. Vanamonde (talk) 10:59, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

where are you? Hope all is well.

Hi Sitush, How are you? Heard that you were not feeling well. Wishes for a quick recovery. Regards Acharya63 (talk) 07:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Sadly, some people have been taking advantage of Sitush's absence. For example see :https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chandel_(Rajput_clan)&action=history Edits that were reverted by Sitush multiple times with explanations were added back again by the same person. Unfortunately, I do not focus much on non-Marathi groups but will help as much as I can to prevent un-sourced edits. Hope you feel better soon, Sitush. Your absence on Wikipedia is very noticeable and there is a saying I heard somewhere(rephrasing) "you realize an object's worth when you have it with you but you realize a person's real worth when he/she is not with you." Please get well soon. Acharya63 (talk) 10:06, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

To all: I am occasionally doing very small amounts of work on what is (hopefully) non-controversial stuff. I really can't handle anything more at the moment but thanks for the thoughts. - Sitush (talk) 00:19, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Get better, Sitush. Acharya63, thank you for watching out for the article. I have given Shivam S Chandel a final warning. A block comes next. Bishonen | talk 01:16, 19 August 2018 (UTC).

Greetings

I see you popped in for a bit a few days ago and, hopefully, that means you're doing well. All the best and hope to see you back here soon!--regentspark (comment) 19:09, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Sitush, were talking about you here. Hope you are doing ok, and will be returning to wikipedia soon. Abecedare (talk) 18:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Sitush, literally smiled on seeing you on my watchlist. And no, no ask. Edit as you will and feel free to send caste-IPA warriors/edit-requests in Bishonen's, Vananmonde's, RegentsPark's and my direction ... in that order ;-). Welcome back. Abecedare (talk) 01:54, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Abecedare, you have been promoted :) See Talk:James Tod and the recent article history. I am out of here for a bit but it seems that I have reverted a professor. -Sitush (talk) 02:45, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Guess I had that coming.

Will take a look and chime in on article talk page. Btw, I believe I have briefly interacted with the editor or his wife before (or maybe, just read their work) regarding history of Ayurveda, since they are published scholars on that subject. So we should be starting with some common vocab. and perspective, unlike the usual editors in this topic area. Abecedare (talk) 03:34, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

FYI. Not asking you to get involved, but let me know if I made some (to you) obvious error in this edit. Abecedare (talk) 21:51, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

I wasn't sure of the meaning of reified, which may suggest some alternative phrasing might be better. I actually thought it had something to do with elevating to the status of monarch, which shows how little I know! Having consulted the dictionary, what you say appears to be correct according to my knowledge. I have read the Mines stuff some time in the past.

I am hoping to get back into editing properly soon but have at least three hospital appointments coming up in the next month, so don't bank on it. - Sitush (talk) 05:25, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Ah reify. I remember exactly where I learned that word. Will try to think of something less jargon-y to replace it with at the Mukkulathor page, but may be some while since I really am supposed to be otherwise occupied. :) Abecedare (talk) 14:05, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Buddhism and rulership listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Buddhism and rulership. Since you had some involvement with the Buddhism and rulership redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Thryduulf (talk) 17:34, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

I often

wonder how did these articles manage to evade any scrutiny for so long! 'Walled-gardens' seems to come in all forms:-) ∯WBG^converse 13:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

query on edits

Hii Sitush happy to connect with you! Recently I made changes to wikipedia article of 'Mayank Gandhi' to which you response was that it looks like fan article.Can you point which specific points you think are under violation so that I can correct it. Thank you!

I am taking the liberty to respond without Sitush's permission. Sitush is recovering from some temporary health issues right now. I had no clue who Mayank Gandhi was but after reviewing your edits that Sitush reverted - it did look like a fan article before the revert. For example, you had added "Many people often describe Mayank as a rare combination of a man who thinks on his feet while feeling with his heart.He has been constantly striving to build a better India through his projects such as Global Parli,Nation First and Via 70.". Also, many of the edits were not sourced. ThanksAcharya63 (talk) 18:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Pallar edits

Hi Sir, I've added the former version before you completely restored a very old version. I'd like to thank you for your service. I find the template, bullet points of history etc. suiting more to a complete article. I would like to challenge all the edits I've made which are considered unreliable resp. poorly sourced. Hope you don't think I'm edit-warring or something like that. I know to value your precious time, however, I find that all good things ;) should be stay and bad things should be removed. I'm trying my best to improve the articles I've been involved if something seems to be not good please let me know that. I hope you've time to work with me or let me know which kind of statement irks you. --Luigi Boy ルアイヂボイ^talk 13:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I do think you are edit warring. I also think you are reinstating crap that is poorly phrased, poorly sourced, not reflective of sources and guidelines etc. I already indicated some examples of those issues in my edit summaries - please self-revert and open a discussion at the article talk page. We've got enough crap going on at caste articles already. - Sitush (talk) 15:48, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by crap. I mean I've looked for the old versions which might be true and I looked for any kind of sources on Google Books and Archive.org. I'm only trying to get the article on the same basis like the others (same layout, template etc.). If you say there are issues then let's challenge that instead of reverting everything. And I mean this version hasn't many differences compared to the old version of article. --Luigi Boy ルアイヂボイ^talk 09:26, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you!

I am happy you are still here. I'm having a beer ("Trimtab", a local brand), and I wish I could have it with you. Drmies (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Still breathing, yes! Trying to avoid stress and, alas, presently must avoid imbibing alcohol. I had bottles of Harry Sparrow ready for refreshment after mowing the grass around my obstacle course of fruit tress and still have :( Thanks for the note. - Sitush (talk) 04:55, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Take care my friend. Drmies (talk) 01:04, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Julian F. Everett

It appears as though this was transferred from draft to article space by User:RoySmith. With that level of approval, it is difficult to argue that it shouldn't have been created. Personally, I think it just about makes the standard. Any concerns I may have that the creator is still producing many draft articles that bear all the same hallmarks as his previous efforts are outweighed by the fact that they remain in draft until someone thinks they are good enough for article space. Sure, a lot of people are having to waste time on this, but they are at least stopping the worst of the flow from getting through.Deb (talk) 11:50, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. The article was full of trivia, tangential stuff and outright errors of fact. It is a timesink even post-AfC. - Sitush (talk) 12:07, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm, I missed the beginning of this conversation, but I can guess the gist of it. Looking at the revision I accepted, and the flowchart, I think this passed all the tests. I'm not 100% sure what encyclopedic is supposed to be, but an architect who designed several buildings on the National Register of Historic Places seems to fit. Notability seemed to be established by a number of WP:RS. All the other tests were obvious passes. Compared to most of the total crap that comes through AfC, this was actually not bad. I'm reasonably sure it would survive AfD. Could it be improved? For sure. But, the bar for AfC acceptances isn't terribly high. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi RoySmith, the notability vs inherited issue was the least of the concerns expressed by myself and RegentsPark. The problems lie much deeper and without the reviewer doing fact checks (which cannot be expected of them), the problems remain just as they were when the creator was reported to ANI and restricted to creations via the AfC process. Their lack of care is astounding and often significantly affects what the articles depict. In other words, the restriction isn't necessarily stopping the problems. - Sitush (talk) 14:17, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

RoySmith, I'm not really that concerned about notability, though I question the assumption that a building being present on the NRHP automatically makes the architect notable. Rather, it is the general sloppiness of the research - the OR leaps, the random collection of facts, the many mistakes, the inability to even read a reference correctly, that are troublesome. This particular editor apparently creates many articles and, in all likelihood, all of them contain these sorts of problems. Most of them, like Everett, are barely, if at all, notable. I get that problems can be fixed but the reality is that we end up with crappy articles full of erroneous information on barely notable people that no one ever fixes. And that's not a good thing. --regentspark (comment) 15:41, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

We're talking about User:FloridaArmy, right? Yes, I'm familiar with the history. His work has improved over time. But I agree, I'd like to see him spend (much) more effort writing (much) higher quality articles, with more careful and painstaking research. As opposed to writing a larger number of articles of dubious quality. If you think the problem is bad enough, bring the discussion (back) to WP:ANI. I'm not sure what value there is to this particular thread, however. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:50, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I am seeing the improvement but I don't particularly keep track of what they're up to and indeed I am supposed to be avoiding Wikipedia at the moment, despite my edits of the last couple of days suggesting otherwise.

Out of interest, I have just looked at Draft:L.R._Burleigh because that appears to be one that is currently being developed. There is definitely one misreading of a source in there because it was Burleigh's grandfather who was principal of the Academy, not his father. And that entire sentence is fairly pointless anyway. If someone like Fram were to get involved in reviewing the creations, I suspect FloridaArmy would be toast but, as things stand, I am just incredibly frustrated that at least from my perspective things seem to be as sloppy etc as ever they were. - Sitush (talk) 16:04, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

FWIW, the Burleigh error I spotted has been fixed now, probably because of the ping here. - Sitush (talk) 16:36, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

TIL about...

Template:Reflist-talk. I'd never seen that before. Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:46, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

No probs. I don't think it is particularly well-known. Cue someone showing millions of links to it! - Sitush (talk) 23:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Banglapedia and Namasudra

Hi, I just dropped by to say that I have added a section in the talk page about including information from the Banglapedia article in the Namasudra page. If you could kindly look into it it would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pratik Maitra (talk • contribs) 16:40, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

It seems some additions have been made to the article. I appreciate the speedy response. Pratik Maitra (talk) 23:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)Pratik Maitra

@Pratik Maitra: the recent changes were nothing to do with me and I haven't looked at them because I am unwell at the moment. I do know that the article has been contentious for many years and that the person who made the recent changes is a respected contributor to such articles. I appreciate your note and also that you raised your concerns on the article's talk page because caste-related stuff often leads to disputes etc here. You've taken the correct route and I applaud you for that. - Sitush (talk) 00:01, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

I hope you get well soon. I am currently have a hectic job schedule and have little time to edit pages. So I mostly plan to use the talk section and provide sources/material rather than adding the stuff myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pratik Maitra (talk • contribs) 01:06, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Opinion

Hi Sitush. What's your opinion about the article Annual passenger earnings details of railway stations in Kerala? I honestly think it needs to be AfD'd. — LeoFrank ^Talk 14:20, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Shodhganga

Hi Sitush, Hope you are doing well on the health front. Is Shodhganga considered a reliable resource? Most articles contain a lot of information(including translations of quotes from some marathi books) and almost every point seems to be sourced but the quality of English is very poor. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 19:07, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Since Sitush is offline, I'll add my 2c:

Shodhganga is a repository (of theses), so it does not contribute much to the judgment of reliability by itself since the quality of material it archives varies greatly in quality;
That said, the use of thesis as sources has been discussed at WP:RSN numerous times and the general opinion (in my reading) is that if they are to be used at all they should be used in exceptional circumstances and then too with care (example of an exceptional case would be a notable thesis that is oft-cited for its contributions).

In general, I would advice against using theses deposited at Shodhganga as citable sources; instead use them as an entry-point for a literature survey of the area and look up the published works cited by those theses and/or peer-reviewed publications of the theses' authors. Hope that helps. Abecedare (talk) 19:25, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Abecedare . Acharya63 (talk) 19:41, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

I use Shodhganga quite a bit, because it is available online and the theses often summarise other relevant literature that is either unavailable to us or might be out of our knowledge. But we should be wary of using the judgements of PhD students, unless they did their theses at top Universities under well-recognised supervisors. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Indian Govt Gazeteers

Hi All(Sorry I did not know where else to post this message except on Sitush's page). If I remember correctly, govt of India gazetteers are not reliable sources for opinions on caste issues (since they are often heavily politicized and plagiarized by govt employees who are not historians). I remember some discussion on this but cannot find a link. Am I mistaken? Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 10:26, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

part of Nadeem-Shravan

What is it?Xx236 (talk) 11:42, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

No idea what you are referring to, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 11:50, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Saifi Xx236 (talk) 11:53, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea. Feel free to remove it but I suggest that you check the linked article first to see if that provides an explanation. - Sitush (talk) 11:56, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Your recent vandalism

This is loopy trolling: claims I have reverted them but says they have never edited the article. WP:DENY. - Sitush (talk) 07:47, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

It is fairly obvious that you and that other editor User:Ramesh8888 have conspired and colluded to revert my stable edits to 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement under cover of some non-existent edit war. WP:BRD is not an official policy and I don't intend to abide by what is admittedly a practice simply because you say so. The WP:BURDEN is always on you to justify the merits of why you undid all my edits without discussion. 06:55, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Bollocks. All I have done recently is revert Ramesh8888. This sort of inane, crazily obfuscated accusation is typical of the stuff that people listed on WP:LTA/IAC used to do. I have no idea who you are but, yes, it would seem that you are not new to Wikipedia and thus have edited the article under some other IP address or account in the past. Could you please indicate where/when that was if you wish me to consider the position at the time of your "stable edits". - Sitush (talk) 07:01, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

This diff show that you reverted all my stable edits recently without any explanation to me. For the rest of it, you seem to be sick. Get well soon.103.30.142.163 (talk) 07:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Sitush, WP:DENY. Abecedare (talk) 07:40, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

FWIW I have never edited that article in the past. WP:PROVEIT. 103.30.142.163 (talk) 07:44, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Bind caste

अरे भाई ये बिन्द कास्ट में चाई या चटाई क्यों लिख रहे हो

बिन्द जाति को केवट /निषाद के रुप में जाना जाता है

आदरणीय भाई साहब कृपया करके इसे संशोधित करे

धनंजय बिन्द (talk) 08:31, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Please use English everywhere in the English Wikipedia. Bishonen | talk 09:16, 6 October 2018 (UTC).

I agree with Bishonen but on this occasion I think I have worked out what is being said using Google Translate. The reason why Chai etc are being shown as synonyms at Bind (caste) is because that is what is said in the source that is cited there. Please see the information at WP:V. - Sitush (talk) 10:01, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Grand ideas....

You might wish to see (and chime in) at this t/p thread.I was planning to leave a note, as to the amount of potential disruption, it can unfurl in the volatile scenario of Indian castes and communities, with every POV pusher trying to exploit the to-be-added arguments but later decided upon you, as one who can hit the nail on the head, much more precisely:-) Also if my memory serves correctly, you have aired your views on this particular locus, previously.
P.S.--For a particularly interesting example, you might wish to see this, a piece of work that was vetted by a bunch of WIR regulars (the major-editor of the article seems to be the most devoted to pushing across the changes over the afore-mentioned thread) as sufficiently passing the notability guidelines and later, my nomination which got me branded as a vindictive stalker gathered the sole contrarian !votes from the chamber, itself.Frankly, I am half-inclined to keep a copy of the to-be-deleted article in my user-space, as an example of acute reference-spamming
P.P.S--As to Namasudra, I've got hold of the three remaining chapters of Sekhar's book and will add the final bunch of content, by tomorrow.Pending that, I will indulge in tidying the overall article and copy-editing to establish a coherent and smooth reading experience.I have scanned chapters of every book, (that has been used) and shall you need it, please drop an email;-)∯WBG^converse 18:34, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

What? The entire thread that queries white male perspective etc? It's probably the usual stuff, ie: some people who have a hobbyhorse and struggle to get it through the finish line so suggest that we should change the policies so that they succeed. Next thing we know, Mr and Mrs Bloggs, their cousin third removed and her cat will all have articles and the entire project will implode. I'll try to read it but my concentration isn't great today. - Sitush (talk) 18:45, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

not you, the other guy

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 00:06, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

All done, I see. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 07:14, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

A now blocked editor pinged me requesting me to 'deal with you' see here. They perhaps don't know that you are one of my favourite Wikipedia editors. Thanks. Jakichandan (talk) 08:19, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, it's nice to know that someone appreciates me! They had some agenda relating to Bihar going on that I do not understand. That said, I am not always right and you should speak up whenever you think I am wrong. - Sitush (talk) 08:30, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of C. Anbarasan

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on C. Anbarasan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "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 deleted 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. Suman chowdhury 22 (talk) 17:09, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Wow. And it got deleted, despite him being a Tamil Nadu MLA and the article saying such, with sources. Must be a mistake. - Sitush (talk) 18:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I've undeleted it, it's beyond belief that this would be tagged A7, and then deleted! —SpacemanSpiff 18:27, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. The tagging was wrong, as I have explained to the tagger, but the deletion was well weird. - Sitush (talk) 18:31, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

It was a serious mistake on my part to tag a Tamil Nadu MLA for proposed deletion under A7. I confused "notability" with "importance". Sorry for my behavior and for unnecessary waste of time. I hope that both of you will forgive my naivety. Suman chowdhury 22 (talk) 07:14, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

No worries. It is a common mistake. I was more surprised that the admin actually deleted the thing because, well, they should know better. Perhaps they were tired or something. - Sitush (talk) 07:55, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

New watchlist design - slow?

Is it just me or have things really slowed down when watchlists load since the new look was introduced? I am finding it very frustrating and keep misclicking things, thinking that it has fully loaded and then discovering that it has not. Is there a way to switch to the old interface or summat? - Sitush (talk) 08:03, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Under Preferences -> Watchlist -> opt out of improvements, click on the box next to "Hide the improved version of the Watchlist". Nikkimaria (talk) 13:19, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for that. I have done as you said and will see how things go. - Sitush (talk) 13:24, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Satyendra Prasanno Sinha.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Satyendra Prasanno Sinha.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

History of Mithila Region

Please take a look at the recent edits to the History of Mithila Region page. Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 09:09, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Gahlot

Gahlots are one of the many groups of Rajputs, but they are different from the Guhils or Guhilots of Mewar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.215.123.235 (talk) 13:21, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

I have opened a discussion at Talk:Gahlot. That is the best place to get your message across. - Sitush (talk) 14:46, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Bhonsle

Hey Sitush et alia, this article still has one of those homemade infoboxes. Can you stick in the proper one? You can do in two minutes what would take me twenty. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:55, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Not sure about me being any quicker - I dislike infoboxes and doubt I've ever set one up. But I'll do a copy/paste job. - Sitush (talk) 15:15, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Why more Wikiquote?

Has anyone got any idea why we suddenly seem to be getting more links inserted to Wikiquote? When I click through, they usually turn out to be utterly random commentary/opinion and mostly about rather than by. Or is it just me? - Sitush (talk) 06:58, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Regarding removing of names

Hi Sitush, what's your problem. Why are you removing names from List of Deshastha Brahmins - MRRaja001 (talk) - 8:09 AM Monday, 15 October 2018 (UTC) MRRaja001 (talk) 08:10, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

See the talk page. - Sitush (talk) 08:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Regarding removing of names

Hi Sitush, what is the problem. I undo the Sudhanoti District Notable people some name deleted why I Know people name he was the great people in Sudhanoti District — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sardar Jay Khan (talk • contribs) 13:39, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

See the talk page. - Sitush (talk) 14:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Your Gurjar Pratihar confusion

Just search in google -

"gurjar samrat mihir bhoj PARK"

And

"gurjar samrat mihir bhoj MARG"

Its in Delhi and Noida that clearly states Gurjar-Prathihar empire relates to Gujjar \ Gurjar tribe only, and the empire king Mihir Bhoj was Gujjar.

work on ground level my dear.

Just writing a book does not create a history. It is mentioned all over the stones and stuff found from the historcal sites.

That is why govt of india / delhi and uttar pradesh Noida made the Park and Marg (Highway) on Gurjar Tribe name.

And stop creating myth or confusion over web, because on ground level it is clear.

If still you have any doubt, then let me know why Indian Govt made that PARK and MARG on Gurjar Tribe name ?? MaverickDelhi (talk) 14:30, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

On Wikipedia we work off reliable sources, which generally means books and other published material. But not all sources are reliable, eg: ancient inscriptions are primary sources and have limited use. The issue of the G-P origins has been discussed in depth in modern reliable academic works etc, who are doubtless familiar with the inscriptions and will have included them in their assessment of what happened way back then. You cannot discount such sources just because your interpretation of the veracity and meaning of the inscriptions differs. - Sitush (talk) 14:34, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

your msg.

I have seen what you have written about me on my page. I must remind you that certain pages such as Charan today exist because the most of the sources have been provided by me. And you tried your level best not to allow them to exist though you are neither a scholar on the subject nor you belong to the culture. All your action are prejudiced and you are actually removed them without even thoroughly examining them. And you are actually misusing your ppwers as Administrator. I will not spare you. And I will provide all the authentic sourcea as I have done in the past. I will also make sure that you get removed from the priviledges you enjoy as wiki admin since you dont deserve to be the one. Give me some time and then I will sue you. Lalit Jugtawat (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I am not an admin, and threatening to sue is just going to get you blocked per WP:NLT. - Sitush (talk) 14:30, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I am not afraid of getting blocked for writing the truth and exposing people like you who misuse their powers. If you are a genuine person why dont you reveal your identity. So that I can send you a legal notice. But since you very well know that it is not possible you are again misusing it as an excuse to get me blocked. I will take up the matter before the other administrators. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lalit Jugtawat (talk • contribs) 14:38, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) User is blocked. — LeoFrank ^Talk 14:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. They've had a fair few warnings in the past but seem not to be understanding. - Sitush (talk) 14:51, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Dhusia

Could you weigh in on the blanking in Dhusia earlier today, please? Sam Sailor 14:44, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Done. - Sitush (talk) 15:12, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Dummy edit

For obvious reasons. Vanamonde (talk) 03:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Re: Yashpal

No edit war!, just some comments/questions.

1.) Notable? Vidyalankar appears to be relevant to the article, so what more is required?

2.) Frustrated? Anyone who clicks on that link should know it's interlanguage. They should also know, or be able to guess, that "hi" stands for Hindi, and translation is very simple and easy. Why is Hindi different than, say, Spanish, German or Russian?

3.) Poor article? I don't know Hindi, but I did translate it and, you're right, it's not a very good article...but since when did an article need to be judged worthy of having a link? Maybe that will help encourage someone to improve it. (you?)

Oh, and my sympathies. I'm truly sorry to hear that Hindi Wikipedia has such low standards. WQUlrich (talk) 19:28, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

There are doubts about notabilty, translation is not easy for many, inter-language links are arcane for non-Wikipedia editors, and I never said Hindi was different to Spanish etc, just that the Hindi Wikipedia standards are different to ours. And that is why not all inter-language links are worthy. I've fixed the problem in the more traditional way, ie: doing some research. We have to think of the readers, not the contributors.

And that you have replied here says it all, really, rather than at the article talk. You're not thinking it through. - Sitush (talk) 19:42, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I replied here because you left a message on my talk page. Duh. WQUlrich (talk) 19:54, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

The message was to let you know of the thread on the article talk and the note at WT:INB. In any event, most people keep user talk page threads in one place, so if I start at your page then you reply there. Duh. - Sitush (talk) 20:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

And doing this now doesn't help, {{|WQUlrich}}, does it? In fact, it seems pointy. - Sitush (talk) 20:44, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

WQUlrich - fix ping. - Sitush (talk) 20:45, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

That wasn't me. I don't edit anonymously or from a cell phone. WQUlrich (talk) 18:48, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps not. Weird that their edits are to articles that you have edited, not just that one, but there we go. Strange things happen. Doesn't matter - I reverted it as a clueless tag. - Sitush (talk) 20:25, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Neglected AfD

If anyone fancies weighing in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nizamani (2nd nomination) then it might be helpful. It suffered from low participation when someone else nominated it some time ago, and the same seems to be happening now that I have nominated it. - Sitush (talk) 03:06, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Re: Gopinath Mohanty

Wow! I agree with most of your edits there (although you might have wielded a scalpel instead of a hatchet), but I am a bit troubled by the idea that you may be following me to make sure I "behave" according to YOUR standards. So, I have two choices: stop editing articles about people from India (at least until you lose interest), or complain to the administrators that you're stalking me...which is totally unacceptable behavior. I don't like conflict, so I will follow the former course. None of what I'm doing has to be done right now. WQUlrich (talk) 20:02, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, the only person I can see who is consistently following you around, and thus at least effectively stalking, even if not distressing you, is 207.55.226.158, whom you say cannot be you. Since you appear to generally agree with the outcome of my edits at that article and theirs elsewhere, and since you are clearly not familiar with my interests here over the last 10 years or so, I do not know what the problem is. Why is what I did any more worrisome than what the IP has been doing consistently for ages, on and off? Pretty much all that IP has ever done is follow you to articles. - Sitush (talk) 02:18, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Ha! I just got logged out twice in a minute, despite not clicking the log-out link. - Sitush (talk) 02:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Think what you please, as long as every edit with my name isn't followed by one with yours...and I hope you don't think that I have the power to log you out. WQUlrich (talk) 03:28, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Oh, go away. Better things to do than debate someone I find it difficult to trust. - Sitush (talk) 03:32, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Wasn't trying to impugn you

Hey there, as I mentioned at talk, my concerns about canvassing have to do with the volume of pings going on here. I don't know we've really crossed paths before much so I wasn't concerned about your involvement per say so much as an editor with a pretty clear POV calling in a whole bunch of other editors who aren't in the edit history for this article talk by name. I spotted this article off the WP:3RR board, and honestly my curiosity was piqued by the whole "ritual cannibalism" claim, which seemed rather extraordinary. I'm... not overly impressed... by the quality of the sources being used to support this as more than hearsay, but I'm also not overly impressed by the general combativeness of either party here.

Anyhow, in the spirit of WP:AGF I thought I'd drop you a line and provide a bit more explanation than really belongs at article talk. I've taken two of the sources to WP:RS/N for review, including the most sensational of them, a book about royal ritual that appears to have been written by an expert on car races from Ireland, and I've provided some notes on the other sources that have been provided. I don't think the edit that was removed should go up, with those sources, as it was. In particular, I don't think it provided proper context surrounding the ritual, it ignored the regular mention that the "eating of flesh" is probably about as real as the Eucharist, and it was far too general. In addition I do have some WP:DUE concerns about a ritual that's conducted less than once a decade getting a rather sensationalist paragraph in an article that describes either an entire caste, an entire ethnicity or a caste-subset of a specific ethnicity. Once we've hammered out the sources, I hope you'll support me in having a civil discussion of these issues so that we can build appropriate and due language for this interesting ritual practice. Simonm223 (talk) 17:45, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

No problem. I didn't think you were impugning me. I don't have much to do with Nepali stuff, although it bears a lot of similarities with things I am more involved with. I only glanced at the discussion and article because, as I said, I'm unlikely to be able to do much before Monday anyway. Thanks for the note. - Sitush (talk) 04:20, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Digital copy of Bihar Puravid Parishad

I have a digital copy of the Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad that goes into detail about Gandhawaria Rajputs that verifies some of the claims made in the article. I can either email it to you or somehow upload a copy here. Good Puppy Heaven (talk) 10:59, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Megan Boyd.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:23, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Oiniwar Dynasty

Hi Sitush Why are you removing other references from Oiniwar dynasty . I see you have removed Geneome Mapping , SN Singh History of Tirhut , Recasting the Brahmin in Medieval Mithila: Origins of Caste Identity among the Maithil Brahmins of North Bihar by Anshuman Pandey

You have made the page dependent on only one book thats not Ideal . Please revert your changes and use the authentic reference like History of Tirhut etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:500B:164B:B961:E230:6CED:C38A (talk) 11:51, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

The explanations will be in my edit summaries or in the recent discussions on the article talk page, which is where this conversation should be taking place. - Sitush (talk) 11:57, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

As an example, see the summary for this edit. - Sitush (talk) 12:11, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

THat's Burbak up there, Jakichandan can you check where else there's been contribution/disruption? —SpacemanSpiff 13:22, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: Please take a look at 2409:4064:386:7414:0:0:19E3:A8AD (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 13:27, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

2405:204:C004:BA24:0:0:C58:18A5 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) also. Thanks. —Jakichandan (talk) 13:30, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

2409:4064:40C:A8D3:0:0:2A05:E8A0 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) too. MADHEPURA2018 also seems to be linked. Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 13:37, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

2001:630:E4:42E0:150B:FFB1:6C:E22E (talk · contribs · WHOIS) may also be. Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 13:41, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Ah, is this the Bihari nationalist thing? MADEHEPURA2018 was indef blocked for constant disruption and claims of racism. NB: Damien2016 was a self-admitted sock of Burbak (long since blocked). I know that there has been a lot of problems relating to Maithila stuff but never made the connection. How much crap have they got away with? - Sitush (talk) 15:22, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Is this "Jha, Makhan (1997). Anthropology of Ancient Hindu Kingdoms: A Study in Civilizational Perspective. M.D. Publications Pvt. Ltd." even remotely reliable? The article leans a lot on that one reference. --regentspark (comment) 15:35, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

And is Suyasham, the creator of the article, possibly related to MADEHEPURA2018?--regentspark (comment) 15:39, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Makhan is very poor. I've said so in my edit summaries and at Talk:Oiniwar Dynasty. I' now cleaning out Gajendra Thakur which is just fancruft. There are masses of this type of thing in the Maithili topic area. - Sitush (talk) 15:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@Sitush and RegentsPark: Jha might not be highly reliable but he is reliable to a certain extent. Some other authors also seem to cite his books in their own books. For example this. Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Also Burbak sockfarm seems to be related with Mithila regionalism, on the other hand, MADHEPURA2018 seems to be pushing Bihar regionalism (i.e. pushing POV on both Mithila and Magadha related articles). Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 16:08, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: I think Burbak is again block evading as Gandhawaria Rajput. Thanks. —Jakichandan (talk) 06:45, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't know if it's the same, but I'll let better minds such as Ponyo be the judge of that, I've blocked as NOTHERE based on some of the edit summaries and content changes. —SpacemanSpiff 11:08, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Actually, on deeper look, I think this needs Ponyo's attention, there's the puppy from down below on this page as well as that Glory account, all of which have been created in the past few days and are adept at edit warring. —SpacemanSpiff 11:14, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: Thank you. That puppy account (Good Puppy Heaven) looks almost certain. I am not too sure about the Glory one (I guess you are talking about Suyasham). But as you say we should let Ponyo decide on these. Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 11:41, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

I am more than happy for the admins to investigate me but I find it odd that anyone who takes an interest in the history of Bihar is automatically assumed to be a sock. Can you please give reasons as to why you suspect that I am a sock account? Bare in mind that I have barely 10 edits. Good Puppy Heaven (talk) 11:53, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Bbb23 has blocked some socks including Good Puppy Heaven. Thanks. —Jakichandan (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

There are two sock farms at play here, one is Burbak (talk · contribs · logs), the other is Barthateslisa (talk · contribs · logs). If someone can spend time on comparing the edits then we can match the socks easily. The two farms have a long history of edit warring with each other. —SpacemanSpiff 01:18, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff and Bbb23: I am also thinking that there may be two sockfarms and 2405:205:A047:4F6E:0:0:DF3:50AD (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is almost certainly a part of one of them. Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 12:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@GeneralizationsAreBad and RegentsPark: may also like to help. Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 16:48, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: Please take a look at 2405:205:A0E1:5B7D:0:0:8DC:8B0 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) also. Thanks. —Jakichandan (talk) 09:38, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: Thank you for page protection of Mithila (region) and History of Mithila Region pages. I think Raj Darbhanga and Oiniwar Dynasty pages are also in urgent need of protection. Thanks. —Jakichandan (talk) 16:50, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Re "looks like someone has copy/paste this tripe": Well, yeah... along with the rest of the EB1911 article that served as the basis for the WP one =P

I noticed your edit comment "/* Biographies */ links (looks like someone has copy/paste this tripe)". The line in question ("The letters between Gibson and Mrs Henry Sandbach, granddaughter of Mr Roscoe, and a sketch of his life that lady induced him to write, furnish the chief materials for his biography. See his Life, edited by Lady Eastlake"), along with all of the initial version of the Wikipedia article (as with many articles on pre-20th C. figures), was copied from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica (in this case from a 19th Century article article by the same Elizabeth, Lady Eastlake.) The 19th C. source also accounts for the much more subjective language throughout the article than is encouraged in Wikipedia. It's good, of course, that you modernized and linked the names. But copy/pasted, outdated wording is hardly surprising, given the common practice on WP of copying EB1911 articles straight-in to start an article, so I wouldn't get too outraged when coming across things like "Mrs. [Husband Name]". :-P

Btw, cute cleanup spoof at the top of this talk page. :) —Undomelin (talk) 22:12, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Ambattar

Ambattar is in the back of the NPP queue, could you review it? Thanks, Sam Sailor 19:25, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Happy Dipawali

Happy Dipawali Sitush

-Gazal world (talk) 11:05, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Satyendra Prasanno Sinha.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Satyendra Prasanno Sinha.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:03, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Sitush. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Durgvanshi

Hello Sitush, as you have been a regular editor to clean up this article (thank you), just a quick note: I have nominated this article for deletion due to notability concerns. With lots of experience regarding this article, your feedback in the deletion discussion would be appreciated - no matter how. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 18:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Dona Bertarelli biography update

Hello Sitush, I think you've been a regular editor of Dona Bertarelli's biography and I have proposed some updates as it seems it's been quite some time since the page was updated. I work for Mrs Bertarelli as you can see from my user profile and am also a new user, so hope very much that I'm doing things in the right way. Would you be able to have a review of my comments and updates and let me have any feedback? Thanks so much, Mia

MiaNorcaro(talk)MiaNorcaro (talk) 16:43, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy Saturnalia

		Happy Saturnalia
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:08, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Hello Sitush: From high in the Canadian Arctic I hope you enjoy the holiday season, the Winter or Summer solstice, Quviahugvik, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah or even the Saturnalia, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 09:04, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Adapted from {{Season's Greetings}}

Ambalavasi

As you suggested the content have been moved to talk page of the article. Please add comments. पुष्पकः (talk) 19:40, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Indian village stubs again

Hey there Sitush,

After a bit of a hiatus I'm starting to remove the 159 stuff from Indian village stubs again. I've got a question about naming. A few times I've come across villages with names like D.Velampalli, with no space after the period. Is that an error, or is there some kind of naming convention for the space to be omitted? If it's wrong, I'll start doing page moves as well.

Cheers, Reyk _YO! 09:04, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Reyk: sorry, I was not editing much for a couple of months. The spacing issue has cropped up from time to time at WT:INB. Some sources use it, some do not, some use both on the same page! That's Indian official sources etc, so it is a bit of a mess. I think the consensus was to add the space, mainly for reasons of legibility and because when the abbreviation is used it does in fact refer to a longer word that, if fully written, would definitely be spaced.

And before you ask, we're not always sure what the longer word should be! - Sitush (talk) 13:21, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Reliability?

If Periya Puranam is not reliable and Thurston is not reliable , Mangalore university is not reliable. Who is reliable? A thousand lies won’t cover a truth. Grow up man Chekaun (talk) 12:37, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Periya is an ancient primary source; Edgar Thurston is not reliable per longstanding consensus of the Wikipedia community - he is one of the worst examples of amateur ethnologists of the Raj era. Not sure what your "Mangalore University" is referring to. - Sitush (talk) 12:43, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

All the historical things are realized only from ancient works, inscriptions and materials collected by archaeological excavations. Periya Puranam was written by Sekkizhar a minister of Chola Empire. You cannot say it is rubbish. Chekaun (talk) 13:56, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Read WP:PRIMARY. It isn't me that says it is unreliable, it is the Wikipedia community in general. - Sitush (talk) 14:50, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Edit war

It is applicable to you also. WP:DISENGAGE WP:CONTENT-DISPUTE Chekaun (talk) 15:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I haven't reverted you again but you've still not justified reinstating that material and there is absolutely no way that you can justify it in a manner which complies with our policies and guidelines. So I suggest you self-revert and try to find acceptable sources. - Sitush (talk) 15:46, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism in Channar (surname)

Hello, I'm Chekaun. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Channar(surname) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Chekaun (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Do read Periya Puranam and learn some Tamil before editing unnecessarily Chekaun (talk) 13:08, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

See my reply to you above. And please do not call my edits vandalism, as you did in your revert. See WP:NOTVANDALISM. - Sitush (talk) 13:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Channar (surname). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Chekaun (talk) 13:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Read Periya Puranam. Get an English copy if you don’t know Tamil Chekaun (talk) 13:27, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

How many more times do I have to tell you that an ancient primary source such as the Periya is not reliable - I even linked to the reason why this is so in the preceding section here. You've just reverted me yet again and you're going to end up blocked and probably topic banned if you keep this up. You have made barely one edit worth retaining since you turned up and you're argumentative style here is not going to help matters. - Sitush (talk) 14:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

You have reinstated the Lulu Press book in that article, too, and that is something I've also explained on your talk page. Please read WP:SPS. At least one of the other sources that you have reinstated doesn't even mention the term - I gave my rationales in the edit summaries and, frankly, for someone who only started editing a couple of weeks ago, you seem to have a fairly decent grasp of templates etc and thus I suspect must know how edit summaries work (you have even used them yourself). - Sitush (talk) 14:48, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

WP:DRN Chekaun (talk) 15:38, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Chekaun, please do not use {} in places where [] are needed. see, wP:WIKILINK--DBig Xrayᗙ 15:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

User:Chekaun - Do not waste my time or that of Sitush by Yelling Vandalism. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:02, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Pataudi subject(s)

Hey mate, thank you for correcting my edits. I definitely need to learn more about the scripts and all. Not doubting you but genuinely curious, why is Lethbridge considered unreliable? - Best, Unexpected Historian (talk) 16:26, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

There is a longstanding consensus that we avoid Raj era sources, notably for matters of history and ethnography. There have been discussions about it at WP:RSN and WT:INB in the past, as well as at numerous article talk pages. As a more general rule, see WP:HISTRS for some discussion. - Sitush (talk) 16:41, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the links, I guess I should read up if I am to make edits of this kind. So do we avoid the Imperial Gazetteer as well since it was first published in the Raj-era? If not, then left is a 19th century book which is definitely Raj-era which mentions this info. I tried to find a copy of Sher Ali Pataudi's The Elite Minority, which according to the Hindu article contains information about the family and is likely the source of their info on Pataudi family, but there isn't one, print or online. Please advise. Always best - Unexpected Historian (talk) 17:03, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, as a general rule avoid the Gazetteer also. There are limited circumstances where even sources such as this may be valid but you'd need to judge carefully. For example, the Gazetteer's statistics for the area of a princely state might be valid, provided that you stipulated the year to which the figure applied, but in any event there are much more recent books concerning those states and so we should prefer those. - Sitush (talk) 17:11, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Another quick point about the Gazetteer that perhaps illustrates the issue is in relation to the 1857 rebellion. While that obviously happened fairly close to the time of printing rather than centuries ago, there is no way that an account in the Gazetteer could be considered reliable given the prejudices of its imperial writers and the purpose that it was intended to serve. - Sitush (talk) 17:14, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Understood, I will avoid The Gazetteer. I've changed the start date of the family to 1804 as per the The Hindu article; same date is mentioned in a couple other sources I could find. I will look for more reliable sources.

A point about the bias, in accepting the The Hindu article, which likely uses information from Sher Ali Pataudi's book, as reliable, we're choosing the Pataudis' own bias against that of the Imperial writers. The reliability of either, to me, seems arbitrary. I will go with the consensus since this is Wikipedia. Happy to be in correspondence with you, Unexpected Historian (talk) 17:35, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Periya Puranam

It is a biography written by Sekkizhar- a vellala about 63 nayannar saints belonging to different clans. I think it is a secondary source because these nayannars lived before Sekkizhar. What do you think? Chekaun (talk) 18:23, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

No. I've told you this before. It dates from the 12th century. Find a modern source. - Sitush (talk) 18:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

BanPhie

Dear Sitush, the word BanPhie is found on ancient Tai-Ahom scripts, are using by All Assam Phuralong Society. It is also known as Satsana Phi in Tai folk religion in the Thai language. The ex-president of All Assam Phuralong Society Chow Nagen Hazarika ACS[Retd.] has written a book [ISBN-9788193175654] on it, check it, Although I will use it for further improvement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chow Mridu Pawan (talk • contribs) 08:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Please do not. Read the article talk page and note that both Hazarika and, I think, yourself have a conflict of interest. You and others have gone on a spree in the last couple of months trying to promote the Society here, on blogs, at Commons, Facebook etc but the fact remains that it has almost zero independent coverage. Wikipedia does not exist to promote your campaign. - Sitush (talk) 08:14, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Nagen Hazarika ACS[Retd] is neither my relative nor my impression, Also, I am not a member or part of All Assam Phuralong Society, I am not going to propagate promote the society I am just providing the pieces of information about Assam and Ahom community. If you have a problem [ie C.O.I] I am leaving this page, I will not do further edits, collect and improve yourself or whatever you want to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chow Mridu Pawan (talk • contribs) 08:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, sorry, but you seem to be attempting to promote it and the promotion elsewhere by others is obvious. What is more, you are writing nonsense: we can fix your malformed citations, overlinks etc fairly simply but fixing your numerous misrepresentations of the sources, as in this edit, is something that many people would not spot. Nowhere does that source give an etymology for the word, and you've made similar false claims elsewhere in the article. - Sitush (talk) 08:43, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of contents

Why did you delete what I took from Samuel Matteer book? You didn’t give a reason Chekaun (talk) 01:42, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Why did you blank the article? Drmies (talk) 01:44, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

I gave a reason. - Sitush (talk) 07:45, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Actually, you need to be blocked. You're nothing but a POV-ridden nuisance, as demonstrated on your talk page, eg: this section. - Sitush (talk) 08:53, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

rajput page revert

those pages that I removed on Rajput article were deleted and no longer relevant to the see more section. I am not sure why you reverted me.ChuckAlor (talk) 12:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Because your edit summary said you were adding things when in fact you seemed to be removing far more than you added. Feel free to fix it. - Sitush (talk) 12:43, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Mutharaiyar

Please permit me create the Mutharaiyar page.Because Muthuraja or Muthu Raja are Tamil Caste Found around Trichy in TamilNadu.Mutharaiyar is a royal Dynastry around Tanjore,Trichy and Pudhukoattai region in Tamil Nadu in AD600- AD900 Jkalaiarasan86 (talk) 11:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

@Jkalaiarasan86: there is nothing to stop you creating an article for Mutharaiyar without moving Muthuraja, as you have just tried to do. The complication is that the former redirects to the latter. It is easy for that to be changed and I am happy to help you do this but you will need to provide some reliable sources. Please note that books from the British Raj era are not reliable.

Perhaps just list some sources here, I will take a quick read and then set up the page for you if it seems like it is viable. - Sitush (talk) 12:09, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Oh, and note also that the Muthuraja article already refers to a dynasty. You will need to show that the one you are speaking of is not that one. - Sitush (talk) 12:10, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Thankyou sir Jkalaiarasan86 (talk) 12:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Sitush:, I do not quite understand what Jkalaiarasan86 (talk · contribs) intentions are. He seems to have copied my edits from the Muthuraja article to Mutharaiyar Dynastry. He has also redirected the disamb page to the new article [6]. This page is necessary as the word Muttaraiyar is used both as a title by persons belonging to communities other than Muthuraja and also by the people of Muthuraja caste. If the aim is to create a "Main article" page for Muttaraiyar chiefs who ruled Tanjore during the medieval period then it is alright otherwise if it is an attempt to differentiate between Muthuraja and Muttaraiyar kings then it is not that trivial as some sources state that the former are descendants of the latter [7]. Nittawinoda (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Sounds like they're getting confused. I'll try to take a look later if no-one else beats me to it. - Sitush (talk) 15:26, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Please Explain

Please Explain difference between ruler and Royal Dynastry Jkalaiarasan86 (talk) 09:17, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Why are you asking this here? I have already told you what you need to do. - Sitush (talk) 09:18, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Muthuraja image using my friend blog.There is an cannot cause Copyright violation Jkalaiarasan86 (talk) 14:06, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Why are you responding here? Respond on your own talk page and note that the image is indeed a violation of our policies, if not of copyright then because you haven't shown the correct permissions. Your friend will have to contact Commons to give permission, and will have to state that it is their own work (which I doubt it is). - Sitush (talk) 14:08, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Varna system

varna system only follow the North Indians but User:Nittawinoda add simultaneously many of the caste in Kshatriya varna only royal family.ex [8],Udaiyar caste etc.so unedidance source kindly delete the varna system 106.203.6.59 (talk) 10:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. Happy New Year Sitush! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:52, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Oiniwar Dynasty

Hey Sitush

I saw you reverted my changes on Oiniwar Dynasty page stating to avoid Raj era sources . I have put references of standard text , Journals of Bihar and Orissa research Society along with other research. Understand there could be problem with formatting however those contents are very valid and endorsed through Multiple sources . Can you plesse have that reinstated ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suyasham (talk • contribs) 04:49, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

I've never thought much of the B & O society (and recent Orissa government history publications are known to be dodgy), but since I've never tested the point by referring it to the community, I suppose any of their publications after about 1950 would be Ok to use per the rationale given at WP:HISTRS. That would put it in line with acceptable use of the Royal Asiatic Society journals. At least until I do get round to asking for wider input! - Sitush (talk)

Thanks Sitush , History of Tirhut by S N Singh and Mithila Ka itihas ( History of Mithila) by Upendra Thakur is very authentic book on Mithila yes S. N Singh have published his book in 1924 but its again got reprinted in 2012 due to its authenticity (https://www.telegraphindia.com/states/bihar/rare-tirhut-history-text-gets-new-life-maharajadhiraja-kameshwar-singh-kalyani-foundation-reprints-book-of-1922/cid/349791) . I would go ahead and reinstate my edits hope that fine with you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suyasham (talk • contribs) 13:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Please check the page status of yesterday Muthurajapage Jkalaiarasan86 (talk) 07:53, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

sorry for an my edits but some of the IP address person delete the page relovent content so you are finaly check all revisions and edit the page as well as protect the page Jkalaiarasan86 (talk) 07:58, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

I think you're as bad as one another, hence some other regular contributors have been reverting you in recent weeks also. You've had a sanctions notice and still went on edit warring. You're going to be blocked and you'll be lucky not to get a topic ban if you continue in this vein. You really, really need to discuss your changes on the relevant article talk page. A lot of which appear to be fairly dubious and some of them definitely were (eg: the Vettuva Gounder situation I mentioned on your talk page). - Sitush (talk) 08:52, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Adding caste names to people

Category 1 : People who are dead. the caste of such people can be added to the biography if the information is from a reliable source. please read User:Sitush/Common#Castelists . so on the basis of this fact i am going to attach caste names to those who are dead. i hope i am right?

category 2: caste is not equivalent to sexual orientation where a person can be gender fluid. caste is also not equivalent to religious belief which can change upon his/her wish. caste is an identity by birth which is unique for which there is no guidelines. also caste is not a private matter of an individual since it is used at nearly all places including jobs, marriage etc. hence mentioning caste identity of an individual from a reliable source is right and and fair. also please read Sitush/Common#Castelists in the article regarding amitabh bachaan there is no mention that he wants to hide his caste identity. the article talks about those surnames which do not indicate any particular caste and he has one such surname. so, i dont think that it is against wikipedia policy to mention caste of those individuals who are living and for which i have reliable sources. correct me if i am wrong. is there any wikipedia policy which specifically talks about "caste identity" which i should know about because Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons does not mention anything about caste. caste is an important identity to an individual and if there is a reliable source i believe it should be mentioned. please reply soon. NikhilPatelReal (talk) 15:27, 2 January 2019 (UTC)NikhilPatelReal

You are correct regarding (1), provided the source is referring to the person in question and not to a relative etc and provided it does say they were a member, not that they were a patron of some organisation or similar. Regarding (2), I think you will find that there are links at User:Sitush/Common#Castelists that take you to various discussions where consensus was formed. The chances of you overturning that consensus are pretty much zero and, indeed, that page gives a classic example of why your logic above is not acceptable, ie: Amitabh Bachchan, who refuses to accept being classified by the caste that was attributed to other members of his family. You're not going to get your way because BLP does indeed deal with how people self-identify.

To be honest, I would advise you to find something else to do. These attributions of caste to people are rarely important to them or to any encyclopaedic description of the caste, and they're an absolute graveyard for new contributors who insist on warring over the issue. Most people couldn't care less. - Sitush (talk) 15:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I will add that if your username reflects your real identity (please do not tell me) then you really should probably avoid articles such as those for Kurmi, Kunbi, Patidar and Patel. In my experience, at least, members of castes are utterly incapable of following Wikipedia's guidelines when it comes to writing about their own communities and affiliated groups. You may, of course, prove to be an exception to the rule but they are very few indeed. - Sitush (talk) 20:21, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

is indiatvnews.com a reliable source to be used in wikipedia? if no then why? NikhilPatelReal (talk) 15:26, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Ask that question at WP:RSN where you would need to provide text that is proposed for an article with links to the article and the source. That is, the question should be whether a certain source is reliable for certain text in a certain article. Johnuniq (talk) 23:44, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

opinon needed

Please assess this discussion and advise. User_talk:Dlohcierekim#Jagdish_Tytler-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:08, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Dlohcierekim: I have left a comment at that talk page, but in brief; most of the content being warred over is a genuine content dispute, that needs talk page resolution; the paragraph I just removed should remain removed per BLP, because it is an allegation as yet unsubstantiated by reliable sources, of the sort that is unfortunately common in South Asian politics, but parts of it are being presented in Wikipedia's voice. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:27, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

@Vanamonde: Many thanks.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:10, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Caste system in India

Hello Sitush,

I notice that you have removed the following edit of mine from wiki citing that it's mentioned somewhere else in the article. Please let me know which section talks about it. I want to make a reference to that section from the Jati main article...because atleast in tamilnadu, jati is used to refer to english-word caste.

Thanks

FYI: Here is the line that edited out in this version https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Caste_system_in_India&oldid=843350218 In day-today usage of the term jati in modern india, it does refer to caste. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barunskumar (talk • contribs) 21:31, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

I think you are referring to this removal from May 2018. If you read the article, you will see that it contains an entire section explaining the jati concept and that the opening (lead) section mentions it, too. The relationship between use of the terms jati, varna, caste etc is complex and they are not necessarily interchangeable terms. But it is, and indeed was last May, already mentioned in the article. You may be right that jati is always used instead of caste in Tamil Nadu ... but I am pretty sure you are wrong and in any event you would need a reliable source for that. Plenty of South Indian newspapers, for example, refer to caste, so I suspect you are engaging in original research. - Sitush (talk) 05:42, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Eyes

over Khant (caste), please:-) Meats/socks all around. ∯WBG^converse 12:43, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. Looks like off-wiki co-ordination. Perhaps someone has posted a note on a Khant community forum/Facebook page etc bemoaning the stable version. - Sitush (talk) 13:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: I see that one of those recent contributors has made a lot of changes to numerous other articles in the last few hours. I suspect they will need checking - see their contributions. - Sitush (talk) 15:23, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Sigh.....Will have a look:-) ∯WBG^converse 16:32, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I was wondering whether installing an edit-notice over the Category of Indian castes (which's quite easy), proclaiming the unreliability of Raj era sources and/or the State Series (with links to discussions and all that....) would help in any manner. Any thoughts? ∯WBG^converse 16:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I doubt people would look at it but if the folks at WP:INB are happy with it then fair enough. What usually happens when someone inserts Raj stuff etc and are reverted is that they either war until blocked, shout on the article talk page until blocked, or shout here until blocked. I'd say at least 80% of them end up being blocked for disruption/breach of topic ban etc, some more cease (or leave) when topic banned, and a very small number accept it and collaborate. - Sitush (talk) 16:53, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

You seem to have a soft-spot for Punjabi “tribes”.

I have noticed that you remove and delete articles relating to other states (rightfully so if unsourced) but you retain unsourced claims for Punjabi groups and even go out of your way to expand them. Why is this? Does this relate to the traditional British favourite in the Raj era towards Punjab? Not throwing accusations, just noting my suspicion. Why don’t you expand articles from caste groups in UP, Bihar, MP? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.251.2 (talk) 17:29, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I replied to your initial question at Talk:Ratial. You can think what you like of me. - Sitush (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes Sitush, and can I likewise accuse you of restarting The Great Game... ;) ——SerialNumber54129 18:01, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, it is the usual bollocks, isn't it? Apparently I retain unsourced claims for Punjabi groups and even go out of your way to expand them. Shock, horror! I expand articles - someone hit me now! And they've clearly not seen how many articles I've sent through the CSD/PROD/AfD processes which relate to the alleged Punjab tribes and castes. Selectively removing Rajput but leaving Jat at various articles that anon has edited in the last couple of hours may be ok in the sense that Rajput wasn't sourced, but then neither was Jat. I'm sorry but I think this is in part another example of the ongoing, tedious wiki-warfare between Jats and Rajputs regarding who claims what identity/king/dynasty/state. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hm. That is at least three different IPs the anon has used this afternoon. I'm getting fed up now. - Sitush (talk) 19:21, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) What are the other IPs, please? I bet any range used is too big to block, but still. Bishonen | talk 19:36, 22 January 2019 (UTC).

They say it is static but that makes no sense. Anyway, the one above, the one in << that message and 213.205.242.130 - Sitush (talk) 20:09, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. No, I don't know what "static" is supposed to mean for these IPs. Biggish range. Pity. But there's a lot of disruption from it across the board, certainly considerably more than constructive editing. I'll compromise and block 213.205.192.0/18 for one week. ... Oh, I see Oshwah placed exactly such a block on January 13, 2018, and some earlier blocks, too.[9] Hmm. That makes me change my mind: blocking the range for two weeks. Bishonen | talk 20:35, 22 January 2019 (UTC).

Ta. I will never understand range block calculation. In Bish we trust. - Sitush (talk) 20:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't understand it either, you know. I trust in my son, who has created a little tool for dummies (on my computer, not on the internet) where I can feed in the IPs I have, and a range pops out and tells me how many IPs it represents. :-) Bishonen | talk 22:13, 22 January 2019 (UTC).

Ha. I bet you never thought at his birth that your son would be helping you out with an online encyclopaedia in your older age. Kids do have their unanticipated uses! - Sitush (talk) 04:54, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Sudhan

Please see this. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I had a suspicion it might be a sock but I am usually pretty useless at identifying masters. - Sitush (talk) 03:48, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Please help clean up Vanniyar article

Please review the vanniyar article. A constant attempt is being made to glorify using false information. A clear POV Sangitha rani111 (talk) 02:10, 25 January 2019 (UTC)Sangitha rani111

It is on my watchlist. I'm am months behind in reviewing changes due to a couple of lengthy absences. I'll get there. - Sitush (talk) 03:49, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Sitush, eagerly waiting for your feedback and edits Sangitha rani111 (talk) 03:55, 25 January 2019 (UTC)Sangitha rani111

Thanks for cleaning up the article Sangitha rani111 (talk) 05:22, 25 January 2019 (UTC) Sangitha rani111

Please also see continued discussion of Oppert at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Is Gustav Solomon Oppert work a reliable source ?. EdJohnston (talk) 18:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, EdJ. Suspect ours posts crossed 'twixt there and here. - Sitush (talk) 19:02, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Thirubuvanai

Firstly, good to see you back, I hope you are feeling better
I know almost nothing about the former French India, but an editor has been making mass additions of unsourced information to Thirubuvanai. I did one rollback, which caught numerous earlier edits, before realizing the true extent of the problem. I am not sure how much, if anything, is worth saving, or whether it is a case for WP:TNT - any observations/assistance welcome - Arjayay (talk) 10:27, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

All recent additions deleted by User:JJMC89 since my initial post - Arjayay (talk) 11:07, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Muthuraja

What's wrong in the photo I've added.Mutharaiyarinfo29 (talk) 11:05, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Did you ...

... mean to remove the infobox as well from Kashmir? Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:24, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

I took a look due to a post at WT:INB this morning by DBigXray re Indic scripts. It looked to me as if someone added/expanded it and I know in my gut it will be a source of trouble. A couple of people then thanked me for doing it. I left a note at the talk page but if I have got it wrong then please revert. - Sitush (talk) 12:27, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Any comment on this article?

Hi, Sitush! Could you take a look at the article Churaman Ahir? I just declined a request for speedy deletion as a "hoax," which I thought was unlikely because the article was created by a respected long-time user and has been edited by many other people including you. I notice that you removed categories relating to the caste Ahir, and at the time you edited it, his name was given as "Churman or Churaman Ahir (चूरमन अहीर) ". Now it is given as "Churman Ahir, also spelled Churaman Ahir". Is that really likely to be his name, or is it a name plus a caste designation? Is the article correctly titled? Thanks. -- MelanieN (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

@MelanieN: he definitely existed, although he is quite often called Rao Churaman, which is likely also to be the name of umpteen other jagirdars (holders of estate/land grants). Note Churaman is already taken. Sources also say he was an Ahir and it is quite common to compound caste name, as that is, with given name. I suppose it could be moved to something like Churaman (Ahir jagirdar) but I think that would be a little pedantic until something else turns up that requires dab.

My issue with the article would really be notability, since the sources I've seen have tended to be from the Raj era and we don't like using them and often they copy from each other. In fact, I think they all have been Raj sources otherwise I might have had a go at improving the article.

I can do another search sometime but useful sources are likely not to be in English. I'd be inclined to drop a note with the creator and tag for GNG - just being granted a jagir is not grounds for any SNG of which I am aware, eg: NPOL, even though it does imply being favoured by the Mughal emperors for services rendered to them, be that political shenanigans, assisting with raising armies/quelling rebellion or even "providing" (awful word) a daughter in marriage. - Sitush (talk) 20:36, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

I've left a note on the article talk page and on that of the creator. I haven't actually tagged it but probably will before long. - Sitush (talk) 21:58, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much! It's good to have an expert here. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:21, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

No probs. But expertise is mostly relative :) - Sitush (talk) 21:03, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

About Cockermouth United Reformed Church

Hi Sitush,
Is this article about a branch of a specific local congregation of the Congregational church whose place of worship ended up in this building, or about the building itself?
Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:27, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Both, similar to Bank Street Unitarian Chapel. I need to create two redirects to it, from the Independent name and the Congregational one. Not sure about the independents but the move from congregational to URC involved pretty much every congregational, erm congregation in the country so there would be massive overlap if we had separate articles. - Sitush (talk) 09:31, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

@Shirt58: ... but I think I have messed up at Wymondley College, where the religious academy bit forms only 30 years of a near-300 year-old building's life. I think the stuff about the building in that case probably should be split out to the present redirect at Wymondley House, leaving the college article to be just about the 30 year period. The building article will probably never be of much length but the college one could be quite extensive. - Sitush (talk) 19:45, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

The Scream

Are there any stalkers/watchers who care to say something at Talk:Maravar#Robbers? I'm getting very frustrated. I don't need help sourcing etc, that's easy, but there's help needed on attitudes. Perhaps it is mine that is wrong. - Sitush (talk) 17:34, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Sitush I am trying to find some sources for the discussion.. The article is heading in a wrong direction. Thanks

Sangitha rani111 (talk) 17:22, 3 February 2019 (UTC)Sangitha rani111

I've got sources. I just can't seem to explain myself in a way that they understand. - Sitush (talk) 17:33, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

I have added my comments in talk section which state clearly that the maravar sustained using thievery and robbery, would like your feedback as well Sangitha rani111 (talk) 17:48, 3 February 2019 (UTC) Sangitha rani111

Dear Sitush Thanks very much, Your attitude is perfect and keeps up with the good spirit of editing

Sangitha rani111 (talk) 16:17, 4 February 2019 (UTC)Sangitha rani111

Please check Sunar. You missed some important information

Please check my comments in Sunar. You missed some important information Knowledgepool09 (talk) 13:13, 5 February 2019 (UTC)