User talk:RegentsPark/Archive 32

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25 ← Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33 Archive 34 Archive 35

India

@RegentsPark: It seems like only the second paragraph in the lead is still in dispute. I need your assistance to mediate it. However, please let me know if I can reinstate the remaining edits on this version. There isn't anyone disputing the rest, or does not seem serious (except the industrialization part of the edits; but it seems like it is more of a personal opinion of F&F rather than a serious concern) here. Let me know. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 04:52, 2 January 2019 (UTC))

India images

Hey Regent, what happened? We clearly built consensus on the talkpage and suddenly this guys comes in and destroys all the hard-work claiming that "he was away". He clearly needs to build consensus now before reverting these images. One cannot simply plead ignorance after weeks and then simply come in and start edit-warring. The article is protected now, so I can't make any changes. --King Zebu (talk) 04:29, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Please see my post Talk:India#Images_on_FA_India:_how_they_were_selected_in_2011_and_2012. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:30, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
@King Zebu: The reason for the revert was mainly the images added, possibly in good faith, by Highpeaks35 (and a few other changes). As far as I'm concerned, your image changes have consensus and should be made to the article. Perhaps once it is unprotected? I'm unfortunately busy in RL till the end of January or else I'd have tried to figure out the right revert point in the article. --regentspark (comment) 22:59, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Rightinfo20

Hi RP. Thanks for blocking this user. Could you take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Trueinfo19, it is like both are socks. — LeoFrank  Talk 14:58, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

ANI

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive editing by two Wikipedians. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:26, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Kashmir conflict

Hi RP, the Kashmir conflict article seems to have come off all protection now. We had agreed that the edit restrictions on the page don't make sense without also having semi-protection at least. Can you please reinstate it? Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 06:25, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Buddhakahika sock

[1] Buddhakahika again editing as Structure of Sentences. He's been very busy socking. Doug Weller talk 09:46, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

They have a very distinctive citation style for books and if it is seen on Indian caste/religion-based articles it is almost a default action to remove, even if the stuff has been there for years. But there more recent incarnations have been citing news websites etc and the style isn't obvious because there is no page number involved. - Sitush (talk) 09:54, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
I thought they looked familiar. --regentspark (comment) 12:19, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Unnithan

I've just redirected Unnithan because Arunnambeesan (talk · contribs) moved it back from draft to mainspace but the thing was still unsourced. It really should go back to draft but I don't seem to have the permissions to do it, despite my page mover rights, probably because they have created it as a new article. Can you oblige? I've given Arunnambeesan a sanctions alert because they've done some other poor stuff in the last hour, too. The draftifying of the previous Unnithan article was explained on their talk page some time ago by another editor. - Sitush (talk) 08:07, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

There is already a draft at Unnithan. Do you want me to delete that one and replace it by this one? They aren't that different. Or should I just delete this one?--regentspark (comment) 12:17, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
I've just done some back-and-forth with copy/pastes to provide an audit trail in the draft version. The mainspace version can now just be deleted. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 12:25, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

February 2019

  • One of your recent contribution to the page of Eddie Vedder appears to be disruptive. Please note that if you revert someone's edit then state the reason otherwise you can be charged for vandalism. You reverted a constructive edit and didn't state the reason. If you notice a problem in edits then try to fix it rather than reverting. Take care from next time.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:A505:C7B0:35EA:AEA1:8EAD:6AB8 (talk) 15:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:A505:C7B0:35EA:AEA1:8EAD:6AB8 (talk) 15:20, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Indian Rebellion of 1857

Regarding my edit which was undone by you, I had included all the causes. Certainly, the page already has the causes but they did not include many major ones such as 'economic expliotation of India by the British". I am a BA history student and i know that it was the most important of the causes. Therefore it would be better if my edits are saved and not undone. Trojan 74 (talk) 04:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)trojan74

Awadh

You edited in the part where Akbar is mentioned under ancient history? When did the 1620s become ancient history? The ancient history revolves around Rama. You editing that out is like, me editing Jesus part from the history of Jerusalem or prophet from mecca. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trojan 74 (talk • contribs) 13:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Trojan 74: I'm sorry but I don't understand what you're talking about. You can make edits to the Awadh page, just make sure that they are reliably sourced. --regentspark (comment) 17:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Hello, RegentsPark. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#WP:INCOTM.
Message added 19:23, 27 February 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Titodutta (talk) 19:23, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

User:Rohit Sharma14

Can you review the editing history of this SPA and the warnings/advice they have received on their talkpage over a span of 3 months? Abecedare (talk) 07:02, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Clearly an SPA, possibly with some connection to the person they're interested in. Loads of unsourced edits. I'd say escalating blocks is probably the best if they persist. I've watchlisted the page but have family issues that are keeping me distracted. --regentspark (comment) 12:22, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Hope the family issues are resolved soon (and that's not for wikipedia's sake!). Abecedare (talk) 13:20, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Request for assistance

Greetings User:RegentsPark. I wish I could tell you when if ever we've met here. I thought we had, but a quick search of over a decade of my Talk page archives doesn't turn it up; perhaps at your page, or at an article's. Or perhaps I merely observed your actions as an administrator somewhere and was impressed enough at your conscientiousness and impartiality that I stowed your name away in my sandbox many long years ago for a day like today.

I need help. Just moseying about - I'm basically a "drive-by" editor, who makes changes as I run into a perceived need for them as I'm reading articles in the encyclopedia, though I have created close to 100 content pages on a variety of subjects - I've found myself drawn into a protracted and intractable slow-motion edit war with another user on two pages in particular, Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom and Imperial State Crown. It is exasperating, I have no dog in the fight, and will end up nowhere good without some kind of intervention. I read up some on Dispute Resolution, but I would rather have all my teeth slowly pulled without anesthetic than go through such a grueling tribulation, and have at times walked away from Wikipedia entirely for a year or more when faced like a situation, a mire, like the current one. I just don't have the time or wherewithal to devote to it...I have a life. Point number 20[1] of the hilarious and diabolically accurate guide to editing Wikipedia you link to on your User page applies here all too well, both to the topic and editor on the other end.

I've done my best to just restore valid edits and references, and improve any that have been criticized in the ongoing pas de deux, but the bastinado I'm being put through by someone revealing themselves to be a thorough jobsworth shows no signs of ending. The net of it is that the other editor (who has made over 400 edits to the Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom page alone) is determined (among other things) to enforce their own reading of history, which they have laid out for Wikipedia and directed me to here to school me on it, to the extent that they characterize sources provided on the matters at issue such as the The National Archives of the United Kingdom and the The Royal Family itself as (I quote verbatim) "garbage".

This, I dare say, is not in the spirit of this encyclopedia. Neither the obsessive mincing nor the self-appointed authoritarianism.

I will be happy to supply you with convenient links to posts at each of our respective Talk pages and anywhere else for you to weigh the accuracy of my account. I confess in advance I have, in thorough exasperation at being subjected to various taunting edit summaries, ad hominem insults, knowingly demeaning posts on my Talk page, etc., been guilty of small but pointed barbs in what is clearly a war of attrition being waged - Oh, there goes the little red notice again, another edit reverted - in annoying confidence I will just give up and go away. I am trying my best to maintain WP:Civility, but I am human, imperfect, always edit in good faith, and don't want to be forced to turn my back on the encyclopedia for another year or two. But that is what I am being driven to. Can you please help before it gets to that point? Thank you. Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 16:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Wikiuser100. I took a look at the crown jewels page. The reality is that Firebrace has added almost all the material on the article (see [2]) and that probably means that they they feel responsible for the content. This often leads to ownership issues which, though mildly frowned upon, is not in and of itself a bad thing because a large chunk of Wikipedia's content has been developed by editors who take ownership of articles. Generally, when you see good faith ownership issues, the best way forward is to use the talk page to explain your edits and I noticed that you haven't used the talk page at all. That way you start a dialogue and may also attract other eyes to the issue (using only edit summaries to explain yourself is never a good idea when you're getting push back on your edits!). If you don't get traction on the talk page, and continue to believe that you're right, then you can seek some sort of dispute resolution. WP:3O is probably the simplest for contention over sources and you can also seek help at WP:RSN, but you should only seek these after you've attempted to resolve issues on the talk page. I hope this helps. I've added both pages to my watch list but, if you take to the talk page, you'll most likely find that you don't need any help. --regentspark (comment) 01:44, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Uh, did you read the edit summaries at those pages? Did you look at our respective Talk pages? There was plenty of back and forth, and absolutely WP:WikiBullying and WP:Own issues in naked view. Did you read my post above? Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 14:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
My point is that you need to use the article talk page. Edit summaries are a very bad way of dealing with content pushback. User talk pages are not a good way to resolve a dispute and user talk pages are not a good way to resolve content disputes. You need to make your case on the article talk page (which you have absolutely not done) before seeking other forms of dispute resolution. At the heart, this is a fairly simple matter of determining whether what the royal websites and national archives say are correct or not, and that can be resolved by getting more eyes on the issue. --regentspark (comment) 01:51, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

kashmir valley "administered" up again

hello

I have had the page in my watchlist and i saw recently an edit by an unregistered IP address changing the wording "administered by india" to a state of india. i reversed that change because as the talk page extensively mentions how you accepted that wording back in 2016. I sided with the page that was already written and not some recent edit. Apparently another user got ahead and reversed my edit stating how i was "politicizing" the issue and that in their "opinion" the edit was justified. I would love to have you come into the discussion because i believe the initial edit was vandalism because no one wanted that change and it was already established to keep the word. I am asking for a civil discussion, then we could do a sitewide rfc or dispute resolution... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Valley Mhveinvp (talk) 13:59, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

I've just read through the discussion on the talk page and it doesn't seem that there was consensus on whether or not to use the term "administered". Unfortunately, that means you'll have to discuss this on the article talk page. --regentspark (comment) 02:02, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Ekana Cricket Stadium

Name of stadium is still Ekana Cricket Stadium. Official website[2] and official Facebook page [3] are still using Ekana Cricket Stadium. Do not change name until a name change at official website or at any verified social media accounts of the stadium. Please till then use only Ekana Cricket Stadium. ~Jpsorts (talk) 08:23, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I think you're telling this to the wrong person. --regentspark (comment) 14:48, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert

Just saw the discretionary sanctions alert on India/AfPak content and BLPs. Thanks for alerting me on the same. I will keep this in mind when contributing. Just to present my side, I started actively contributing to wiki recently and realized that its easier to contribute actively and extensively on topics I am knowledgeable about. Another area I feel BLPs have new updates because they are currently a part of the present and the near future which has notable turn of events. I also attribute all my contributions with reliable citations. Do guide me in case there are any other areas of wiki editing I need to be careful about. Look forward to contributing to the knowledge base. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indological (talk • contribs) 14:31, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Indological: No worries. The purpose of the alert is only to make you aware that these sanctions exist. Be careful around BLPs in particular because we're talking about real people and need to be extra careful what we say about them. Best wishes. --regentspark (comment) 15:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

About goud saraswat Brahmins page

Since after long discussion the food habit page has been created separately with perfect citation.But now keeping this new content may once again create vandalism coz this page contains community with both pure veg and pisco veg . Waiting for reply... Joshi punekar (talk) 12:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

1.Duplication or redundant data since we have a page which mentions food habit of this community separately and perfectly. 2.All the mentioned citations are general statements and some are from news page.Not from any study or research papers.So do revert,if required i am answerable with required citations. Thank you Joshi punekar (talk) 12:18, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

  • @Joshi punekar: when you find yourself being reverted, you should take the discussion to the talk page. I have no idea whether what you're saying is right or wrong. --regentspark (comment) 12:22, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Dear regent, Please go through the history of that page.This is not the first time this discussion is coming.Please search “saraswat cuisine” page.Here we have clearly mentioned the division of people based on cuisine.So if we give generalised statement if will not be a protocol. In above given references none of them mentions Goud saraswat Brahmins directly.Hoping for solution. Joshi punekar (talk) 12:28, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I see you've explained on the talk page so that's all good. --regentspark (comment) 15:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Wikipedia's processes favor pathological obsessiveness over rationality. A reasonable person will, at some point, decide that they have better things to do than argue with a pathological obsessive.[Or, as my father told me when I was young, "Only a dumb-ass argues with a dumb-ass."] Wikipedia's content reflects this reality, most acutely in its coverage of topics favored by pathological obsessives."
  2. ^ http://ekana.com/cricket-stadium
  3. ^ https://facebook.com/Ekanacricketstadium/

Mail

Hello, RegentsPark. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

- LouisAragon (talk) 19:59, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Search helper

Hi, could you check this script User:Titodutta/scripts/SearchHelper.js, I am looking for a couple of feedback before I add more options such as jstor. You need to to add this script in your Special:MyPage/common.js (or m:Special:MyPage/global.js at Meta for a global change). Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 21:20, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@Titodutta:. Added. Will let you know how it works out.--regentspark (comment) 14:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
 Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Centralized discussion

Hi, RegentsPark. I'm wondering if you would be able to remove semi-protection from {{Centralized discussion}} as it appears that the edit war necessitating its semi-protection is long over. Thanks, 142.160.89.97 (talk) 03:22, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I just restored those protections. @Primefac: applied them originally. Best. --regentspark (comment) 14:53, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
The semi-protection was not due to an edit war, but because it's a template transcluded in over 4000 locations. At about 1 IP edit/edit request per year since implementing the protection, and zero IP edits as far back as 2013, I'm not overly inclined to completely remove this protection. Primefac (talk) 18:46, 13 May 2019 (UTC) (please ping on reply)

Jim Morrison

This content was removed by a now blocked user, blocked for unexplained content removal. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:15, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Also see [3]. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:17, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I got that. But then they copied the content under Artistic influences and pasted it under a new section called "Artistry". I've merely removed that duplicated portion. --regentspark (comment) 21:18, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanation. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:21, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Pragya Singh Thakur

Hi RP, according to Christophe Jaffrelot, Pragya Singh Thakur has become the "symbol" of the 2019 general election. The page needs serious work, but it is practically impossible to even maintain it in the presence of dozens of drive by mobile edits everyday. We face glee of accomplishment on one side and total shock and dismay on the other. Can you put it under semi-protection, discretionary sanctions etc.? Pinging Winged Blades of Godric, DBigXray, Vanamonde93 for their views. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:45, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done--regentspark (comment) 13:59, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
And while you are considering the legitimisation of people once considered to be at one pole or another, I would be interested in your thoughts on the thread here. - Sitush (talk) 10:40, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
This requires a deeper look and I can't till later today. Perhaps Vanamonde93 or Abecedare or I'll take a look in the evening. --regentspark (comment) 14:01, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't think they're going to do it again, for reasons I'll not say here, but the wider issue remains. Someone is dumping swathes of Koenraad Elst books into numerous articles on Wikiquote and then, unwittingly, they're being promoted via sister links from our articles here. I'm not saying it is necessarily unreasonable for Elst to have some sort of presence at Wikiquote but the manner in which it is happening has significant consequences for our own concept of NPOV etc because we seem to be acting as a conduit to a significant propaganda exercise. If the selection of quotes is typical for WQ then, sure, I think that project has a major problem but that in itself is a matter for them and I have no idea what their selection criteria may be. - Sitush (talk) 09:26, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
No clue what wikiquote is all about but I took a look at his page and it does seem overblown. I guess all we can do is to keep the quotes from entering en.wikipedia. Most other wikis are a bit like the wild west anyway. --regentspark (comment) 14:17, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Ongoing Discussion

You are requested to report at the talk page of Ritchie333 for the sake of an ongoing discussion regarding your recent edit which protected the page of Petr Cech. Kindly report their as soon as you come active again. Regards 117.225.127.108 (talk) 05:33, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Too fast?

This doesn't really seem fair. An appeal requires a consensus of uninvolved admins to overturn, but if the first admin to see the appeal denies it, there's no way for a consensus to even form. An AE action doesn't require consensus; but surely an appeal of an AE action needs discussion? No opinion on the merits of the appeal itself. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

I thought Sandstein's close was very reasonable but p'raps you're right. Undone and commented instead. --regentspark (comment) 23:27, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. As penance for perhaps wasting everyone's time, I'll agree to spend the time to review and comment myself in the near future. I didn't look at the reasonableness of the appeal, just the timing. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:32, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Discussion on Kamma Article

Hi regentspark would you mind taking a look at the discussion on the Kamma caste article about the Musunuri Nayaks and giving your two cents as your are an administrator with a history of editing on Indic topics. Moreover, if you could look over the page and make changes as you see fit to anything that violates Wikipedia rules, overglorifies, or anything of that sort, that would be helpful. Callofduty259 (talk) 20:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Unfortunately I have a few personal issues that are distracting enough that I can only make trivial edits for now. Will look in detail if things get better over the next few days. Best wishes. --regentspark (comment) 23:13, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

You might be interested in this SPI

[4] - LouisAragon (talk) 22:31, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Disruption at Chamar article

Hello, Regentspark. The Chamar article is being subjected to a non-stop disruption for the last few months. There are even accounts which are seemingly impersonating me and Sitush: NitiMalk & Silush. They are creating disruption and confusion simultaneously. Even I have to look very carefully to segregate my edits at Chamar from that of NitiMalk. They are confusing other talk page watchers as well: [5]. So it will save a lot of time of multiple productive editors if you could place some sort of proteciton at that page. BTW, I have filed a relevant SPI, but the Chamar article needs protection anyway. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 02:01, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I've ECP-ed it under the February ruling. That should take care of it. --regentspark (comment) 16:23, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
👌 NitinMlk (talk) 21:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

WT:IN

Hi Regents, since you raise a good point here about the discussion being too complicated, do you mind if I move your comment into a new Straw poll section, just so we can get a little more focused? I didn't want to do that without asking you. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:27, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Sure. That sounds like a good idea. --regentspark (comment) 14:45, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, and thanks for weighing in. It's been a real time-suck for no good reason. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:19, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

You are welcome sir.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:07, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Separatist movements of India mass deletions

Hi Admin I just saw the above article had information deleted based on flimsy reasoning such as "separate article exists" that could be said of separatist movements of Pakistan and the Balochistan section please do keep a eye out and as an admin explain why it's necessary to summarise on an article specifically created to explain these movements in India otherwise the same reasoning should apply to the Pakistani article. 82.132.218.83 (talk) 05:48, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

added to my watchlist. thanks for the note.--regentspark (comment) 07:46, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Recent image additions

Sir, is this type of addition of image is OK. It looks kinda harmless, but the text within the image [6] seems like a propaganda. It says "...In the end, the politicians of Indian and Pakistan betrayed us and mocked our sacrifices" - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:19, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Definitely not ok as Fowler&fowler has pointed out. I've warned the user and will block if disruption continues. --regentspark (comment) 17:09, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:21, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for taking the time to participate in my RfA. To have an editor take the time to read the questions I answered and to then write out a support as you did is definitely meaningful to me - please know I'm grateful for it. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:24, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Edwin W. Clark

Hey RegentsPark! First off, thank you for adding a voice of civility and reason to some recent discussions. I appreciate it. Honestly though, that's unrelated to why I'm posting here. I'm mostly just curious, why list Edwin W. Clark on your user page? If you are being purposefully mysterious, my apologies. I've been trying to figure it out, and I'm stumped. Thanks! --Elephanthunter (talk) 19:47, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

No mystery. I'm hoping to clean up that page when I get some time from RL (which probably won't happen for a while). --regentspark (comment) 22:43, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Gurgaon

I did not added unsourced material. I added the source and reference.

In the language section of Gurgaon, there are 2 present sources which I did not added and both of those sources mention Ahirwati as one of the regional language of Gurgaon, so why based on those already present sources, I cannot say Ahirwati is one of regional language in Gurgaon distric, which is a common language in Haryana. In fact those 2 sources does not say Haryanvi, punjabi etc are spoken in gurgaon as regional language but still those languages are mention, but those sources say ahirweati is spoken, but I am not allowed to mention the name..how is that fair?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunnywonderful (talk • contribs) 10:47, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

If I am not allowed to add new sources and references, its ok..but at least I am allowed to make changes based on sources and references that are already present or that too is banned? I am editing based on present sources in the language section and posting information from the sources only...if same sources can be used to say Mewati etc are languages of Gurgaon, why can't I I make edit based same sources be used to say Ahirwati is also one of the language as mentioned in the sources present...Gurgaon district is part of Ahirwal region..it is a common knowledge in haryana...I neevr said other languages are not spoke..I only Ahirwati is one of the languages spoken in gurgaon... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunnywonderful (talk • contribs) 10:56, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

The problem with the material that I reverted is that the sources are not reliable sources and most don't even support what you were adding. Find good sources and you will not have a problem. --regentspark (comment) 15:49, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

May-be

indef our NRI w/o a brain? Obviously, up-to no good. ∯WBGconverse 14:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Also, eyes at Varadaraja V. Raman, please. ∯WBGconverse 14:57, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Amusing talk page!--regentspark (comment) 15:04, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
I'll drop them a sanctions notification as a first step. --regentspark (comment) 15:02, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Please note

Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Draft:Lodhi_Rajput_(Lodh-Lodha_Kshatriya)#Draft:Lodhi_Rajput_(Lodh-Lodha_Kshatriya) - Sitush (talk) 03:08, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Clint Eastwood in the 1950s

Hi there. When I looked at the G6 for Clint Eastwood in the 1950s I found no evidence that the merge requested in the close had been completed. Did you find evidence it had been? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:45, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Ah, I wasn't paying enough attention. No, I did not look for evidence of the merge so feel free to undelete if that hasn't happened. Best. --regentspark (comment) 16:49, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Manipuri cuisine

@RegentsPark: Hi there! I think this page history is same as that of Irom Chanu Sharmila User@Wakowako put copyright tag. Can you look in these page also. Awangba Mangang (talk) 15:58, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Fixed that as well. The text was in the history long before the alleged copyvio texts. --regentspark (comment) 16:06, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject India

Namaste, RegentsPark. We would like to inform you about the recent changes to the WikiProject. As you may know, the old newsletter for WikiProject India ceased circulation in 2010. Now we have re-launched the newsletter in a new way. As a member, you are cordially invited to subscribe to the newsletter. Thank you.



Sent by Path slopu on behalf of WikiProject India. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Diwali

Since you didn't like mine, please add citation to a reliable source for those dates. Otherwise I will have to remove the Diwali listing from WP:Selected anniversaries/October 25. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 20:19, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

You should probably post this on the diwali talk page. --regentspark (comment) 20:45, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
I'm asking you, since you obviously care about the article. —howcheng {chat} 23:20, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
I care about the quality of sources. That's why you're better off posting your request on the article talk page. --regentspark (comment) 01:11, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
It seems to me that the source I used should be considered reliable. Their About Us page indicates that those in charge were formerly editors at respected publications. —howcheng {chat} 17:49, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Ok. Go ahead and add it back. Apologies for the confusion. --regentspark (comment) 18:15, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Arbcom

Have you ran for it in past ? If not, I do hope that you would consider it at some point of time. --DBigXrayᗙ 08:07, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I have. Twice. But am not eager to try again! --regentspark (comment) 14:46, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
I See. Sorry, I was not aware as I was on a hiatus then. You will have my support whenever you change your mind to give it another try.--DBigXrayᗙ 07:30, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Though unlikely, thanks. --regentspark (comment) 14:29, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice you have left on my talk page! Gumshoe97 (talk) 19:56, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

pending edit approval at Amartya Sen

Hi - you accepted this edit by an anon IP which was actually a reversion of an earlier IP edit I had reverted. The first IP had added an honorary doctorate to the list of awards, I reverted this because at the top of the list of Sen's awards it states Sen has received 90 honorary doctorates; the anon IP added a honorary doctorate from a minor Spanish university; I reverted precisely because why should this honorary doctorate be promoted over and above the other (unlisted) 90...? --Goldsztajn (talk) 20:08, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Further to this point, see Sen's CV - which includes the 2004 honorary doctorate added by the IP ... along with the other 90... by what criteria should this minor Spanish university trump far more prestigious universities such as Cambridge, University College Dublin, JNU (Delhi)? Just to be clear, my point is that there's no point in mentioning any of the honoroary doctorates specifically. --Goldsztajn (talk) 20:16, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Removed that. And another one from Pavia. --regentspark (comment) 21:25, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter – October 2019

WikiProject India
News
Miscellaneous
Events
Events that occoured on October.
Sent by CAPTAIN MEDUSA on behalf of WikiProject India. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:20, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Missing userright or missing ability?

Regarding your query on WP:PERM, are you actually lacking the right or lacking the ability?

I, for example, have no userrights other than my sysop and my global OTRS (as its not a sysop ability) - I was told I could remove them immediately after my RfA, as the ability is already covered by the admin userright. But obviously if you're lacking the ability that would be a concern Nosebagbear (talk) 19:40, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

@Nosebagbear: I do appear to have the permission now but did not when I tried reviewing a pending edit yesterday. Perhaps just a software glitch of some sort? --regentspark (comment) 21:23, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Very odd - could have been caused by a conflict with another editor, or just the system being stroppy (you can almost tell I'm not a Dev in my off time) Nosebagbear (talk) 21:34, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Let's see if it recurs. I'll screenshot it if it does. --regentspark (comment) 21:38, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Relax RP. That was just WMF servers fucking with you. Even I had some problems during the time when you asked this right, So I think there is nothing wrong with your mop. --DBigXrayᗙ 11:10, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks! --regentspark (comment) 13:54, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Protect Article Arjuna & block user "Dinesh2069"

Sir, a week ago, a user named "Dinesh2069" started editing Article Arjuna. He is intentionally creating vandalism. Once see his edits sir. But no admin is bothering him. I request you to look into this sir. I also request to you to warn him or protect article Arjuna as you protected article Karna Karna fan club (talk) 15:43, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

I have no clue about what is right or wrong in this article except that the article is shockingly ungrammatical. @Ms Sarah Welch: for input. --regentspark (comment) 15:53, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
The Arjuna article is and has been in a bad shape indeed. This talk page comment by the new account Dinesh2069 suggests the editor needs a welcome note with links to our content guidelines (which I just did on their talk page), some feedback and perhaps a cautionary note from an admin. I will leave a reply on the Karna talk page. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:17, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
The Karna article is equally a mess. MSW, do let me know if anything needs to be done. In the meantime, I'm going to drop a sanctions notification on Dinesh2069's talk, for the record. --regentspark (comment) 22:16, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
RP: Karna is okay now. It used to be a big mess. Abecedare and I had looked at it a while ago. We didn't fix the Arjuna article at that time, nor has anyone else since then, unfortunately. I will add Arjuna and his brothers to my to-do list, but it will probably be 3-6 months wait. Other than giving a nudge and feedback to Dinesh2069, I don't think we need to do anything more at this time. If something crops up in future, will let you know. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:09, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Golden Temple article

is seeing some serious vandalism lately (see the infobox etc). May need a watch / protection if it continues. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 02:08, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Added to my watchlist. Looks like @Fylindfotberserk: is watching as well so it should be under control. --regentspark (comment) 09:06, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Yeah I've this in my watchlist. Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:45, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Tban

Inclined to believe that Rioter 1 merits a TBan from all articles about Indian politics and historiography, broadly construed. There's not a single major edit over the course of the last few months in this domain, that has not been reverted by some longstanding editor. ∯WBGconverse 06:29, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Doesn't look good at all. I'm a little busy in RL so perhaps @SpacemanSpiff: of @Vanamonde93: can look into it? If not, I'll be back online sometime next week.--regentspark (comment) 09:22, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
I'll take a look, but every time (over the past 3-4 days since I got back) I look at my watchlist, there's either editorial or admin action required, and instead of doing something, I just let someone else deal with it! In this case, I think his ARBIPA warning is valid until Nov 21. Let me look at any new contributions over the next couple of days, but no objection to someone else dealing with this before I get a chance. My delay shouldn't be mistaken for time spent evaluating! —SpacemanSpiff 14:02, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
I've had content disagreements with him, I'm afraid, and cannot act in an admin capacity. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:23, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

I'm thankful for all the good work RP has done. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:24, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Gerda. You and Fowler both do amazing work on Wikipedia! --regentspark (comment) 16:15, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter – November 2019

WikiProject India
Created by Sahibdin and nominated for Featured Media by TheMandarin
News
  • A significant number of the new articles received each day are about South Asian topics, mainly biographies and cultural themes, along with the usual spam for companies. There is a huge backlog at the NewPagesFeed and more editors with experience and knowledge of Indian subjects are urgently needed to patrol the pages. If you are already a New Page Reviewer, please help out as much as you can. If you are not, please check out WP:NPP, then take a look at the requirements at WP:NPR and if you feel up to it, apply for the New Page Reviewer right at WP:PERM.
  • Kalapani territory has been a subject of edit warring by multiple editors. Kalapani is a disputed area between Nepal and India. The page was fully protected from 10 to 17 November. You're welcomed to patrol the page and keep your eyes on the new editors. Makes sure to assume good faith while editing the page.
  • An editor is pushing too high Jain POV in Jainism related articles. Join the conversation about the user at the noticeboard
  • India Search Result is a bot-generated page that tracks newly created articles related to India. It is a place to look out for new page pages. The page is updated daily and make sure to add it to your watchlist.
Miscellaneous
Sent by CAPTAIN MEDUSA on behalf of WikiProject India. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:34, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

New message from DBigXray

Hello, RegentsPark. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#Keep_eye_on_this_user.
Message added 18:49, 28 November 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DBigXrayᗙ 18:49, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Problematic account

Can you keep a look on Amicable_always. Has 3 DS warnings, 2 last year, 1 today. Promotional account around Asaram. I warned first last year when I was adminning the Asaram related pages, but then there wasn't any fresh activity and I forgot about it. Subsequently DBigXray seems to have warned too for the same reason. Unfortunately, I did some redirection of another spammy article yesterday so I got WP:Involved now. The earlier warning seems to have expired, so I issued a fresh one today. Can you and Vanamonde93 keep a watch on this? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:49, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

I can see that the account is problematic (never heard of Asaram, learn something on wikipedia every day). Am mostly off rather than on but will keep an eye out. --regentspark (comment) 22:53, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
I am very aware of this Godman. His arrest and conviction came as a shock to many in India and some of them still believe that he is innocent and wrongly framed. Blind devotion probably. Accordingly his followers and his admin team members keep attacking the article. I am watching the article and hence often revert these nonsensical edits. I will be happy to help if you need any help related to the content on this topic. regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 23:04, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Jammu and Kashmir

Hello RP and other admins, it looks like the protection for Jammu and Kashmir has expire, people started filling it in. Can you reinstate the protection? Thanks. Kautilya3 (talk) 10:38, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, the protection hasn't expired. But, since it only under EP-protection, our friendly editors have taken liberties with it. Both of them had been notified of the ARBIPA sanctions previously. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:56, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
I've fully protected it for a month. Hopefully the discussion will be closed by then. --regentspark (comment) 13:04, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RegentsPark/Archive_32&oldid=1211813832"