User talk:GLChr001

GLChr001, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi GLChr001! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Keelan (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  regentspark (comment) 18:58, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

GLChr001 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I may not be here to build an encyclopedia, but I am here to make sure the articles I care about are written in the right way and reflect facts, many of the articles I care about have errors and I need the permission to correct them , some articles written with a malicious intent have been disturbing me since 2007, thanks GLChr001 (talk) 02:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)GLChr001

Decline reason:

If you do not intend to help build our encyclopedia, then I see no reason to unblock you. You seem to be here to focus on caste/ethnic issues, with an agenda, which is not constructive. If you were to be unblocked, you would likely not be allowed to edit ethnic and caste issues, your next unblock request should address what you'd do in that case. I also expect any unblock request to deal with the personal attacks you've made against other editors. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 06:32, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Malicious act by people in the current Governmet of India

The entire grouping in the 2011 census for native speakers for banjara 4.9 million [[ Lambadi(3.2 million), banjari and others in the banjara group(4.9 million - 3.2 million), total native speakers under the banjara (lambadi, banjari and all others was (4.9 million) ], the current government changed the data and changed the grouping of the communities and put lambadi under hindi in 2020 may/june after the data in the article was referenced by the lambadi language wikipedia page, why this should not be done was explained by ronald trail in 1968 itself

this is a malicious act by people under the present government, if the government of india is targeting individuals and communities with the intent to mislead , then as an individual there is little an individual can do " this source reference created by the previous governments in 2011 was change in may/june 2020 by the present government , I suspect malicious intent from people connected to the current Government regarding this community

here is what I want

the correct representation of the Lambadi/Gor community -population (3.2 million)

the DNA/Genetic/origin information in the american journal of Genetics in 2002nclearly specifying that the lambadi DNA had a majorly a european component sufficient to place them between western and southern europeans, but they are wrongly misrepresenting the community and continuously defaming them

the quote "Furthermore, the high frequency of M269 in the Lambadis positions them away from Indians and between the southern and western European populations, among whom this marker is more commonly found (Cruciani et al. 2002)." GLChr001 (talk) 04:22, 30 June 2020 (UTC)GLChr001

References

I suspect malicious intent from people connected to the current Government regarding this community Like who? Not me, surely? And you've already been told that we do not use genetics papers/books in articles about specific castes. You've even been provided on the article talk page with a generic link to past discussions about this. - Sitush (talk) 08:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I was talking about the census data in the government site,I did not mean you unless you have access to change 2011 government census data, it clearly grouped lambadi under the banjara section and the total census 2011 population was 4.9 million(for lambadi,banjari , and all others under banjara) if total indian banjara population for all groups, was 4.9 million in 2011 , how did it become 7 million for MP alone in 2020 can you explain? and , somebody in the government changed the census data, but the census for lambadi remains at 3.2 million which needs to be mentioned in the article

please go through the census link and explain which all groups have how much population and come up with the total for 2011, please use census data only to state the population

the statement in the genetic paper also talks about possible placement of people and you have an origin section, so you can mention about this

you never had a written policy of not including past genetic information , why did you make up one now? it is important as this community is under constant defamation, and as it is my community , I was affected by it immensely, I am currently disturbed by the wrong population figures which are made up with no backup and no proof GLChr001 (talk) 10:19, 30 June 2020 (UTC)GLChr001

The policy is WP:CONSENSUS. I am not going to work out the mysteries of the India census system - it has always been problematic, right back to Census of India prior to independence. We work off reliable secondary sources, and WP:PRIMARY applies to the census which, as you rightly suggest, would require our interpretation. - Sitush (talk) 11:45, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I wish to know where that newspaper sourced the data from where it stated 7 million for MP banjara population, I am sure it is wrong, census data is a lot more reliable than a newspaper statement, but I suspect malice in the census data

GLChr001 (talk) 12:35, 30 June 2020 (UTC)GLChr001

• GLChr001, please read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. Repeatedly alleging malice in sources is not helping your case and continuing the discussion in this manner here will likely lead to your talk page privileges being revoked. If you're serious about continuing to edit on Wikipedia, you need to read the guide linked above very carefully, review our policies (particularly the ones connected to sourcing, and then file a serious unblock request. --regentspark (comment) 13:09, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

They changed the grouping of the communities as mentioned in 2011, somebody among the government officials changed the data put by the previous government in 2011 , the current government changed the grouping of communities done by the previous government which was sourced for the Lambadi language page, they put Lambadi under Hindi which is not correct , they changed the 2011 data in 2020 may/june , so I have strong reasons to suspect malice, the census data clearly showed a population of 4.9 million totally in all of india for all the communities under the banjara umbrella, so how can they change 2011 data in 2020, is there not reason to suspect malice , I hope you understand what I am talking about, if you remove me for the wrong reasons it is not my fault

please put up the sources for your MP banjara population apart from the news paper statement, a news paper cannot pull population figures out of thin air, and you putting that data here is wrong

total ST Population of telengana for all tribnes 31.78 Lakhs(~3.1 million) (for lambadi in telengana, lets give upper cut and say the population is 2.5 million

andhra pradesh (for Sugalis(also under banjara, called sugali in andhra pradesh) are numerically the largest ST with a population of 2,077,947 constituting 41.4 per cent of the state’s ST population. ~2 million

the total is still 4.5 million only, you need to explain how it becomes higher than 7 million , read the statements properly GLChr001 (talk) 13:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)GLChr001

in the article it says the following " B. G. Halbar says they appear to be of mixed ethnicity, possibly originating in north-central India.[2] " but the DNA data for lambadi put in 2002 says something else rite (which you removed) and my communmity is wrong, I seriously wish to take a DNA test, sorry there are too many inconstitencies. Please correct in non public mode and put consistent correct information after which you can display it to public, I have been disturbed by wikipedia since 2007/2008 prior to which I did not bother so much about caste/community, I only got intense passion after the abrupt lies on wikipedia since 2007/2008

I know my culture pretty well and Gors (who are called lambadis/sugali/banjara ) hated mixing with any of the other communities irrespective of their status or who they were, there is extensive vocabulary embeded in the language for mixing , mixed people and non gor people. GLChr001 (talk) 14:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)GLChr001

Personal attacks

Calling another editor a "lowlife", as you did in this edit [1], is unacceptable. Personal attacks against other editors are not allowed for any reason. Civil behaviour and rational, polite discussion isn't just nice to have - it's Wikipedia policy. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 06:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

my apologies for personal insult GLChr001 (talk) 08:38, 30 June 2020 (UTC)GLChr001

malicious story telling to put the community down

malicious story telling by Sitush with hatred towards the community, this is the clear intention as I read this article story telling, misrepresentation, defamation, withholding verified positive information, wrongly trying to glorify other communities while putting the community talked about down GLChr001 (talk) 23:56, 30 June 2020 (UTC)GLChr001 GLChr001 (talk) 23:59, 30 June 2020 (UTC)GLChr01 GLChr001 (talk) 00:06, 1 July 2020 (UTC)Glchr001

I've removed your access to your talk page since you're clearly not interested in consensus based editing. Please see WP:UTRS for unblocking options. --regentspark (comment) 01:34, 1 July 2020 (UTC)