User talk:Bill william compton/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Netball reprise

After I offered to jump in on the GA review, User:KnowIG posted a comprehensive review before I could post my concerns. He subsequently became emersed in editing the article himself. I have posted a comment on the GA1 page suggesting that I be the one to close out the review, although I will defer to you if you are still interested. Apparently, we have now developed a nomenclature problem. The article says that in 1968, "women's basketball" ceased to be an accepted term for "netball." In fact, New Zealand had a women's basketball team compete in the 2008 Summer Olympics. Its victory against the Mali team drew favorable press attention. However, the nominator insists that any suggestion or comment that I make using the phrase "women's basketball" be refractored as ambiguous or intended to be read as "netball." What is your preference, as the ball is in your court? Racepacket (talk) 03:05, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not getting why this nomenclature is even an issue because after 1968 (or more precisely 1970) "Women's Basketball" and "Netball" are two completely different terms, and i guess its now globally accepted, whether it is U.S., U.K., Australia or South Asia. What's the point of ambiguity, anyone who's advocating that using both "Women's Basketball" and "Netball" together is generating some kind of ambiguity than they should provide some valid proof, the proof which should mention that still in Commonwealth Nations term Women's Basketball is treated as Netball. For me you're the only reviewer of the article if User:KnowIG doing your job, than it is his choice. I think it would be better if you do it by your own way. If you need any of my assistance than i'd be pleased to help you. Tell me if you need any help. Bill william compton^Talk 11:15, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I could use a bit of help. Perhaps you could place a paragraph on the Netball/GA1 page under the "GA procedures" heading indicating that you are designating me, unless you want to do it yourself. I am very tollerant of people disagreeing with me, of using typographical errors in communicating with me, or even using British spelling and vocabulary. However, I have never before seen a Wikipedia editor try to avoid difficult quesitons by changing the subject to ask why I am using American spellings or wiki-mark-up language to communicate with her. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 11:25, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll do it now, i thought it was clear to all that you would be the only reviewer of the article. Racepacket, this is the same problem i was facing with her, she was just trumpeting that she couldn't understand me, i'm less communicative, she's unable to understand mine language, i'm Indian, etc. It was the first time that somebody blamed my language as obstacle for comprehensive communication and KnowIG supported her because he's British, well it doesn't matter to me now. Perhaps my note will clear some sort of misunderstanding about you position in the procedure of this article review. Bill william compton^Talk 12:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Now why would I do that. Racepackets American and so is Laura and Laura also lives in Aus. The only one being racist is you Bill. And if you know anything about GB, USA and Aus we have a rather common rivalery. Since I have worked with many nations on here its a bit rich you saying I supported her cause I'm British. i'm disgusting by your comments. see Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts KnowIG (talk) 19:03, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Me Racist, is it some kind of malicious joke, i'm Indian we even don't know what is Racism (its a metaphor). You're misinterpreting my comment, i was trying to tell that you supported Laura because you're British and both use same language (Laura at least using now). The actual racist here is you, who are repeatedly slanging me. And you even can't imagine how much i know about U.S. and U.K. and i've nothing to do with your common rivalry. I didn't use a single abusive word against you, and you're saying you'll appeal to an admin, actually i'll go to admin for your such misbehavior against me if you won't stop. Bill william compton^Talk 20:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

And i'm ment to believe that your english is that poor. You have not been misinterpreted, but have been called for exactly what you ment. And you know exactly what racism is as well. KnowIG (talk) 20:15, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

At least my English is well good that i don't have to correct my spellings repeatedly, and i didn't say that i don't know what racism is, it was a metaphor (if you know what it is in spite of slanging). And i'm not going to give you any proof, but you're just misinterpreting mine comment.Bill william compton^Talk 20:38, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Another accusation. Wow, keep it up, I maybe able to write a book on you. Firstly your saying your not racist. What a load of tosh. Whatever definition you have is bollocks. Racism is any negative comment towards one race from another doesn't matter if your black white, or halfcast or a different nation. So your comments are definatly racist. Secondly i am not misinterpeting you because as soon as I commented you tried to retract it by hiding behind the fact that your Indian and your English is poor, which I don't believe one second. Your English is fine, hence your name Bill william compton which comes from a book. You knew what you said and your trying anyway to duck. KnowIG (talk) 20:43, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I didn't accuse you of anything, you're just so obnoxious about my comments that you're even not trying to understand my point. Word "British" used by me means a person who uses British dialect, i've nothing to do with your nationality. And now you've problem with my name, now tell me who's using racial comments?Bill william compton^Talk 12:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

• The last time I looked, I don't speak British. Since British is not a language. KnowIG (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Dear Friend Hitler movie

Reply: Dear Bill, Please refer to the following links. This link clarifies that the only the first look/promo was screened at Berlin. [1] . Also, refer to the movies official website [www.dearfriendhitlerthefilm.com] for the real story. Both these links clarify that the movie does not show "Hitler's love for India" or Glorify Hitler. I would appreciate if you remove the controversy section, as its based on an article which is not written on reliable information or facts and this is even clarified in this article : [2]

Thanks,

Gaurav Gauravmendiratta (talk) 06:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)--Gauravmendiratta (talk) 06:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Gaurav, didn't you notice that there was a note - which clearly says This is an archive of past discussions. 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, so keep it in mind that whatever you want to discuss, you've to do it on my current talk page (because if you leave anything on my archive than Wiki software doesn't notify me about new message).

Now comes to your problem, as you see your link itself saying that "A first look of the controversial Bollywood film Dear Friend Hitler", so how can i remove the controversy section of the article, and why ain't you digesting this point that its a completely neutral section which is mentioning the two different views (one of media and other of film-makers). This section is for showing Wiki's viewers that "yes there were some controversies", it doesn't support that "these controversies were genuine", i'm again saying this article doesn't say that The Guardian was right about the movie but whether right or wrong we just can't ignore its point; yes i can do one thing that if you'll provide me some other reliable sources (which support your point of view) than i can add their points also, which may give weightage to film-makers view.Bill william compton^Talk 10:09, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply: Dear Bill, I appreciate your response, but I do not see any changes made. Infact you have reverted all changes I made, which reflected that only the movie's promo has been showcased and not the film. If you cannot make these amendments , I would request you to guide me on how to get this page removed. This movie and the title is our intellectual property and the producer does not want this page on wikipedia.

Thanks,

Gaurav210.18.133.152 (talk) 12:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)--210.18.133.152 (talk) 12:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Gaurav, how many times I've to tell you that don't discuss anything on my archive, thats not a my current talk page, do discussions here only. And on your appeal i've changed the context on the intro of article to "but its promo was screened at the 61st Berlin International Film Festival where it received positive reviews", is it OK to you? and i reverted you edits because you just did copy-paste from the official website of the film which is strictly prohibited on Wikipedia, but i removed the sentences which were depicting that "film glorifies the Hitler", what else you want?Bill william compton^Talk 14:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Bill,

Apologies,The last message I posted was a comment. I missed your last response and did not notice the note in the Archive section.

The first para of the page , makes the statement : "the film's subject caused worldwide controversy, ". May I ask, why is this quoted? If an article appears in the Guardian , does it become a 'worldwide' issue? A neutral article should not make defamatory statements about the producers or the subject, but this page does, like in the Controversy section "declared the film to be profoundly misguided and to show a shocking ignorance of history". Just the mere use of strong words by Media to promote there own readership does not mean that an independent and fair resource like wikipedia should support it. The following article does not use the 'controversy' word at all [3], shouldn't that nullify some of the articles? In your eyes, the page might be neutral, but for us , the page is defaming for the above mentioned reasons.

I even tried to make changes to the credits section, which were reverted. I am sorry but we do not want our movie's page to be on Wikipedia. The movie's title and the movie is Amrapali's property and on behalf of them, I would humbly request you to help me delete the page from wikipedia.

Thanks,

GauravGauravmendiratta (talk) 07:42, 23 March 2011 (UTC)--Gauravmendiratta (talk) 07:42, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply: I agree with your view on "worldwide controversy" and will remove worldwide word and will amend the article accordingly. But remember, Wikipedia doesn't work on your personal interests, were you able to convince these plenty of newspapers and other medias to remove such wordings about your movie? no you weren't because this is what we call freedom of media. Second, i don't know what changes you want at credit section, as this section's cast part is completely based on your production house's website check here, if you're thinking that portion of "Anupam Kher's withdrawal from film" should be removed than it's not going to happen at all, as it is well referenced and removal of it will be the violation of Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. You quoted out that controversy section talks about The Guardian's view. I still don't understand why ain't you getting this point that this context is not supported by Wikipedia, actually Wikipedia never support such thing on its articles, they are external reliable sources which support them. And keep it mind that Wikipedia is not your personal advertisement site, you're happy to include your producers explanation on film but dying to remove the view of international media. So, remember this article will never be deleted, yes changes can be made to it (if they are supported by reliable sources), if that changes follow all the guidelines of Wikipedia. If you want to make changes or some additions than you may discuss and i'll work on it. thanks Bill william compton^Talk 07:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Bharat Institute of Technology

Hi, you recently added a multiple issues tag to this article. I have since then wikified the content. Though the article needs a lot of work, I think some of the maintainance tags could be removed. Suggestions for imrovement are welcome. Thanks.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 17:59, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply:I've removed tags which are now no longer applicable, and propose some suggestions on the talk page of the article, if you need any kind of my assistance than i'm happy to help, good day. Bill william compton^Talk 21:16, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. They're quite helpful. Will try to follow them all.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 01:48, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Anytime, happy to help. Bill william compton^Talk 01:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

keep your gob shut

There was no need for this. It was reviewed days ago. Ever heard of working together. Thought not. No need to stick a template on when Race had already announced his intensions and 2 of the 3 contributors had also commented and asked you to comment under that section. Sort your conduct out, all you needed to do was comment where that was not stick a template on. But considering your earlier comments maybe you just don't like me, so don't start being pathetic. KnowIG (talk) 19:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply: I don't wanna to be in any type of conflict with you because its very much clear that what kind of slate you have on Wikipedia, but i'm warning you this is your limit; after this if you shall ever use any British slang term against me than there won't be good consequences for that and i really mean it. I placed that note (template) because User:Racepacket asked me to do so. And who gave you position to threaten me that i should away from Netball or any article's review. If user Racepacket didn't wanna me to place that note there than he could just remove it by himself.Bill william compton^Talk 20:21, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no rule against slag stop talking out of your arse. Secondly it might help if you follow Racepackets comments He didn't tell you to put it there did he. Also didn't tell you to use a template. I get you don't like me but being rude (towards others) and racist and then saying you don't know what it means and making rules up ain't getting you anywhere sunshine. Behave. KnowIG (talk) 20:24, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Don't know about your living environment, but slanging is very much offensive in my culture. If he didn't tell me to put that note there than why he didn't replace it by himself. I used template for better readability because that page had aggregated with thousands of words, if you had any problem with that, than you could just tell me to remove the template and to relocate the note, what was the need of this argument? and with whom i become rude? for my conversation with Laura i apologized to her and believe me there is no such thing that i don't like you, i don't have such a little heart. Please don't call me racist, these things are far behind to racism. I'm not making any rule and don't want any sunshine; i didn't know slanging is the part of conversation on Wikipedia (at least i didn't experience it before you), i'll confirm with any senior wikipedian about it. I still purpose a hand of friendship, i'm here on Wikipedia to serve the community not to fall in such conflicts and arguments. I take your threat and will never interrupt your and others' work on Netball article (which i actually wasn't doing at all, if Racepacket didn't ask me to place a note i'd never go there). I'm again saying Wikipedia is a community which serves the world and we should stay away from this type of arguments. Bill william compton^Talk 21:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Right as a token I shall go and withdraw my complaint about you. Secondly I don't go looking for trouble, you started accusing me because infairness you don't understand the western culture of slang etc. I suggest that you don't take it too heart but not everything or everyone you deal with is going to be how you like it. Nor do we understand/am aware of what is and is not offensive to you. If someone uses slang they are not being offensive although they might be. The trick is not to over react. There is no rule on wiki against slang words on talk page, but there are rules about not writing in English. So since slang would be English you would have to lump it. Thirdly I don't see why i have to justify myself when you were given specific instructions. From my dealings with you, you and me had a bit of needle and when you did the notice it seemed very much attacking towards me. I over reacted I understand you now. Sorry. Fourthly you are more than welcome to do GA and edit netball. Just don't go through and use every MOS thing cause you can implment it and its tedious. If you want to do GA reviews then ask me or racepack and we'll let you do one and then jump in if we feel your going OTT with it/or not going far enough. :) KnowIG (talk) 21:26, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Bill, I am sorry that you have experienced this. You can read KnowIG's last comment as an appology and move forward or you can leave a complaint at WP:ANI where administrators take actions against editors that use abusive slurs. It is up to you, but I doubt that KnowIG will repeat such conduct in the future. As you can see from the block log he was blocked indefinitely on February 22, but was allowed back on March 1 on the condition that if he ever got into a disagreement, he would "just walk away." So, it is up to you to accept his appology or leave a note on WP:ANI, which will result in his permanent block. Racepacket (talk) 22:01, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Technically this is not a disagreement so don't think that would happen racepacket. By all means come and slap a warning on. But I think it would be rather two faced for someone to stick the boot in now TBH Race. KnowIG (talk) 22:09, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

KnowIG, first let me clear you one thing, wherever you want to complaint against me, you're free to do so; but i bet you there won't be any fruitful result of that, as you've already tried here and we both know what feedback you got, let me summarize for you - incivility from the person filing the complaint and just lots of obnoxious language from KnowIG; but if i go there than picture will be completely different, but i won't do that as i respect Racepacket and his advice. Second, don't think that i apologized to you because i felt worse after mine comments, i did so because i respect Wikipedia and its working environment and thought it would be better if i finish this argument. Thirdly, i completely understand western culture, but slanging is not a part of it; you're saying "There is no rule on wiki against slang words on talk page", i don't know about you but very first thing i learnt on Wikipedia was to be nice with your fellow Wikipedians, may be you don't know about AGF, because if you knew than perhaps you never had been blocked; you're saying i've to lump slang, but let me tell you one thing i'm from the land of Gandhi and Buddha, we people believe in peace and brotherhood and never use nor bear abusing/slanging, don't know about your particularly unique culture because i'm friend of many British and Americans and they're very much decent; even on Wikipedia i've interacted with many editors of different nationalities, but none of them was like you, who even hid his fault by declaring matter of conflict as part of his culture. May god bless you with wisdom and some decency.Bill william compton^Talk 14:09, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

• Warning don't start ping mud if you can't take it back. And let me tell you Ghandi India including Bangladesh and Pakistan were not peaceful places and some Indian bastad shot him. So I come from india therefore peace and tolerence etc what a load of bull. KnowIG (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I can't blame your knowledge of history, but for your information Gandhi's India doesn't include Bangladesh and Pakistan, on his time they were also the part of India. After partition they have nothing to do with him or his teachings and he's the "father of nation" in India and an "enemy figure" in Pakistan. And i used names of Gandhi and Buddha because i wanna to tell you about my culture as you questioned "what is and is not offensive to me", so just to give you instance that what kind of language you should use at least with Indians, as we people don't prefer to use slang language like of yours.Bill william compton^Talk 20:38, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

facepalm: that's what I ment with the indication of Ghandi's india meaning before the split. I think you'll find I am very clued on it. Yes Ghandi said be peaceful and protest and win. But do you ,(I mean all of India here) no. We get frequent reports of fighting between Pakistani's and Indian's mainly over disputed land and the fact that Gandhi in his wisdom created separate areas and made people move out of the area they were living in still creating a sore point. Secondly in the past few months I have seen crowds been beaten just for queing for tickets to a cricket match and have heard reports of beggers being removed just because they bring down the image of the place whilst a world event took place. All very B/S when you try to claim peace etc. You've lot to learn I think in generalising here. KnowIG (talk) 20:48, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Plethora of misinterpretations; i never said whole 1,500,000,000+ population is following preachings of Gandhi (the word, which is so difficult that you even can't spell it correctly!). How many times i've to tell you that i used their names because i wanna to give instance of a common Indian mentality (and i'm taking about in general, with majority). I don't like to use disgusting words against other countries, if i could than for your case these examples gave by you would look absurd. You even don't know the ground reality of Ind-Pak conflict, so don't go there. I'll advice before reaching any conclusion you first try to understand different perspectives of it.Bill william compton^Talk 21:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

But your only 19 so I don't think you know enough about the world or India's history TBH to be making bold claims about what the country is like as a whole and what the past was like. Or comparing of Gandhi, since you were never alive when he was around. You can't fool me into thing India is perfect or everyone is genrally peacefull. As it's the same in Britian nothing special, nothing different. Anyway this is the last I'm commenting so i suggest you try not to leave a baiting comment as we both have better things to be doing :) KnowIG (talk) 21:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok i won't make any comment which may frustrate you, but it would be wise if you don't go on my age (if you observed my user page so deeply than may be you've also noticed Union Flag and St George's Cross, believe me they have some significance there, i didn't use them just for ornamental purpose); remember knowledge never been measured by age its only experience which add up with it. I don't expect you to believe that but the person whom you're telling a 19 year old teen is a national level quiz competitor, so don't even think how much i know about Indian or British history. I never said India is perfect but if in future you get chance to visit this nation than you'll know the reality and solidness of mine claim and if you really get this opportunity than visit me or if you can, than tell me about yourself and may be i'll meet you within four months than you'll see how much i know and what kind of nature i have. I agree with you on this that we both have better things to do, so goodbye, namaste!! Bill william compton^Talk 22:32, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

• News and notes: NPG copyright irony; Citizendium's finances; Credo accounts donated; brief news

• In the news: Ward Cunningham's rich child; Indian donations; data mining Wikipedia; brief news

• WikiProject report: Medicpedia — WikiProject Medicine

• Features and admins: Best of the week

• Arbitration report: One closed case, one suspended case, and two other cases

• Technology report: What is: localisation?; the proposed "personal image filter" explained; and more in brief

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

How Can We Block a Page

Dear Bill, There are some mistakes in the Dear Friend Hitler page and the information provided is not entirely correct. It talks about controversies which was not the case. Also the cast and information regarding the movie is not correct. Can we block this page so that we can create a new page which has the correct information about the movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dearfriendnyoo (talk • contribs) 08:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Dear Friend Hitler

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:04, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Change of name

Hello Sir,

I am talking in reference to the wikipedia page of Deen Dayal Upadhyaya College, Uni. of Delhi. Now sir the problem is that the wikipedia page is named 'Deen Dayal Upadhyay College' instead of ' Deen Dayal Upadhyaya College'. Kindly suggest me a mechanism to correct the same.

Devesh Lalwani — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deveshlalwani9 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply: I've changed the name of the article as you said. The procedure is - any Autoconfirmed user can change the article's name by using "Move" option available on the upper-right side of the page and don't forget to follow the instructions generated after that, also whenever you leave a message for any user on his talk page than you should sign by using four tilde (~), Thanks Bill william compton^Talk 13:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply by Devesh Lalwani: Sir, Thanks for your prompt response, but then as of now there exists two copies of the same.

One at : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deen_Dayal_Upadhayay_College and the other at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deen_Dayal_Upadhayaya_College

Kindly delete the first one to avoid duplication.

Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deveshlalwani9 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Devesh, article will be deleted within a short time. Bill william compton^Talk 17:36, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I have now done a history merge, so we no longer keep the incorrectly named version. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:29, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the RfC/U and ANI

The RfC/U guidelines are pretty clear on how to handle the formatting. "Other users can endorse a view, by adding their signature to the list after that view. Along with their signature, they may wish to offer a clarifying comment of one or two sentences, for example if they agree with all but one particular part of the view. Longer responses than that should probably go into their own "View" section". Imzadi 1979 → 19:31, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello Imzadi and thanx for telling me these guidelines, but I already know them. I extended "my view" in response to Laura's. I still don't understand, why my second view was removed to talk page, but didn't of Laura's which is still there, is it some kind of partiality. As you're much senior than me in terms of Wiki experience, may be you can tell me. Bill william compton^Talk 21:08,

25 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm staying out of the netball drama itself. Laura has now been chased away by Racepacket. Discussion initiated by him over on meta (meta:Foundation wiki feedback#Foundation fellow needs guidance) has pushed her to redact her comments from the RfC/U and its talk page. TBH, all of the netball-related commentary should be moved to a separate RfC/U, even if it is contemporary and related to some of the same issues the original parties have. As far as I can tell, her second section was just combined with the first, and your section is still there. The page history is all messy, and half of the additional stuff has nothing to do with half of the original stuff. (The netball GAN is similar to the situtation with the US 223 GAN, but it has nothing to do with Racepacket's edits to other's comments on talk pages, making personal attacks, tagging and retagging articles to prove a point against consensus to the contrary, etc.) Imzadi 1979 → 21:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Bill william compton. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Rschen7754 10:22, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

• News and notes: Berlin conference highlights relation between chapters and Foundation; annual report; brief news

• In the news: Sue Gardner interviewed; Imperial College student society launched; Indian languages; brief news

• WikiProject report: Linking with WikiProject Wikify

• Features and admins: Featured list milestone

• Arbitration report: New case opens; Monty Hall problem case closes – what does the decision tell us?

• Technology report: UploadWizard release; code review – should MediaWiki move to Git?; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:31, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10