User talk:Shiva's Trident/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reminders to self after block has been lifted

Replace (and monitor) tag 'blatantvandal' on Anwar saadat's talk page (which he clears periodically)
Check all articles for vandalism by Anwar saadat
Check all edits made by Anwar saadat in the last few days. Any of his standard terrorist-sympathetic POV must be reported either as vandalism, or reported to Nobleeagle as such.
Monitor and police Anwar saadat's edits indefinitely into the future. It seems he wants to engage in Jihad on wikipedia. How boring.
Watch for edits from WikiSceptic also
Monitor articles on Bal Thackeray , revert saadat's POV changes in Manu Smriti.
Add the following link as proof of Arundhati roy's lies on the 2002 Gujarat Violence article
http://www.hvk.org/specialrepo/guild/13.html. Back up 'hindutva' POV website with :  : ::[1]
PRESENTLY REVERTED BY &*@&@*&. MONITOR.
Another reminder. The following articles should be added to Wikipedia Shiv Sena article once the block on the article has been lifted.
http://www.banglalive.com/news/NonLeadNewsDetail437_7_2006.asp
http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/01072002/0107200274.htm
http://in.rediff.com/election/2004/apr/23espec3.htm
http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?type=NEWS&id=1069646264
Add links balancing the anti-Hindu POV on he calif. Hindu ontroversy atricle.

(Netaji 01:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC))

The following goes in the article on hindutva

http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/nov/19joshi.htm

Anwar saadat , classic vandal

Hi,

Sorry to bother you again, but user Anwar saadat has vandalized my user page again and provided no legitimate reason. He has provided no legitimate justification for removing all of my information from my user talk page, just something vague about tags, which he has evidently manufactured as an excuse. Please look into the matter. Just because I have been blocked does not give a user the liscence to attack my user page.

Thanks, Regards, SB (Netaji 22:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC))

Welcome!

Hello, Shiva's Trident, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  {{unblock}} My ip address is 66.68.106.162

Your request to be unblocked has been denied for the following reason(s):

Personal attacks

Request handled by: Pilotguy (roger that) 17:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Do not remove this template from your page.

Hello, Shiva's Trident/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! I am CTSWyneken. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Again, welcome! And if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask. --CTSWyneken 03:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism

Why don't you join Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism? There's plenty for you to do. --Dangerous-Boy 20:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll see. I am an amateur scholar only as far as the details of Hinduism (as a religion) is concerned, and it's damn near impossible to find unbiased non-racist literature on Hinduism here in the American Academia. What I can do is write about Hindu/Indian history, of which I know a bit. Most wikipedia articles on Hindu History (not Hindu religion) are pretty okay, though. [[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 08:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC)]
A great book on Hinduism is Classical Hindu Thought: An Introduction by Arvind Sharma (Oxford University Press, 2000). It's a very thorough introduction on Hinduism written by a Hindu. Dr. Sharma is also a Professor of Comparative Religion at McGill University in Montreal, Canada. Also, I would read any books on Hinduism you can find by Prof. Ariel Glucklich. I've studied under him and he's also an excellent scholar on Hinduism. --Hnsampat 16:59, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

some for you

Links for Wikipedians interested in India content

Welcome kit

Register

Network

Contribute content 

--Dangerous-Boy 21:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


Basawala

Please read my "user etymology" section on my userpage, if that would help. Basawala 00:21, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Hindutva

You might want to take a look at this. Nobleeagle (Talk) 02:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, already knew most of the content of the article. I'm quite a fan of Subhash babu. Even saw the place where he grew up in Cuttack. Most Indians are completely ignorant of Subhash babu beyond his name and a vague idea of his role. Only in Bengal (and to some extent, in Orissa) is he well-known.(Netaji 04:55, 2 July 2006 (UTC))

Changes to Babri Masjid

You have deleted the following - which is necessary for understanding the context:

Muslim claims over the site are largely represented by the All India Babri Masjid Action Committee, demanding the restoration of the site and the mosque. It also holds that the case should be decided by the courts and if it is proved that a Hindu Temple existed at the spot the same will be handed over to the Hindu party; while the Hindu parties have been asking the minority Muslims to show magnanimity by handing over the land for the construction of the temple.

Trusted Media Sources

You have made changes to the timeline.I propose to use http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1844930.stm as a balanced news source.If you make changes based on Sangh Parivar based texts - dont make them appear as though coming from neutral media.They are parties to the dispute.

Rushdie 10:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks and incivility

Hello. I'm afraid that this off-topic inflammatory rant ([2]), this inference that another user is a terrorist ([3]), and again here telling a user to join Hezbollah, again claiming terrorism ([4]), is completely unacceptable, so in accordance with WP:NPA you have been blocked, for a week. Please stick to debating the contents of the article as you seem to have good knowledge of this without making grave insults to other users. Blnguyen | rant-line 02:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Why haven't you restricted the users who added anti-Hindu hate-speech to the article in question? Please let me know. (Netaji 02:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC))
    • Can you show me which parts. It certainly seems like there are POV problems in the article, but I can't see anyone using the article to incite hatred? Blnguyen | rant-line 03:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
    • I apologize for all that silly stuff I typed. I don't suffer fools easily I'm afraid. Nonetheless, here are the anti-Hindu hate-speeches that were in the article (now that I can't edit it, it is sure to come back):
      • "They say that it prove that the Hindu militants believe in "bloodshed and manslaughter" as a means to achieve their goals"
      • is unsubstantiated. Hindutva charter clearly states "Harm no creature, but if they attack you, fight back"
      • "since the killing of Sikhs after the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi"
      • Is irrelevant, since the Sikh riots were perpetrated by Congress sympathizers, and has nothing to do with the VHP.
      • "gangs of karsevaks"
      • Is biased, kar-sevaks don't form gangs. How'd you like it if someone said "gangs of Hamas members"? :"shouting 'Jai Shri Ram'"
      • Is irrelevant. So they were shouting stuff. Not unlike "Allahu-Akbar", is it?
      • These communities speak of how the Muslims of the town supplied the wood used to build the temples of the Hindus and grew flowers to string around the necks of the gods and goddesses (Dutas and Devis)."
      • Yeah, right. And I'm a 23000-year old Buddhist Vampire. Show proof.
      • "Secondly, this idea of relocating could be considered only in the case of grave necessity and not the whims and fancies of any community that has hegemonous mentality and claims from three to thirty thousands more mosques as being built on destroyed Hindu temples."
      • Is obvious POV
      • "fantasize on other Muslim heritage coming up with a story on birth of their dieties, places of their marriage or their death and claim those Muslim monuments as their own."
      • Bad grammar. I prefer grammatically correct hate-speech, don't you? There is absolutely no proof of this allegation specifically. Maybe in a general sense, but the specificity is wrong, POV, biased, and hate-speech against Hindus. Notice that there is no hate-speech against muslims in my edits.
Plus, earlier versions of the article (see history) denounce Hindus as nazis and such. Those inflammatory tirades are sure to return, as this article ranks #1 on google for search of "Babri mosque", and given the overwhelming number of muslims editing the article, presenting a violent reactionary anti-Hindu POV. Once they know I have been blocked, their euphoria will prompt them to restore the hate-speech I have so meticulously deleted (without compromising the muslim POV). I request you to let me edit the page. You may monitor the talk page for anything inappropriate. If I see anything inflammatory myself, I'll forward a notice to you.

Thank you.(Netaji 03:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC))

I'm looking into the conduct of the others. I'm rather concerned by the strong sentiments expressed on the userpage, as they are generally recommended against. In the meantime I have asked User:Nobleeagle, User:Rama's Arrow and User:Bharatveer to keep an eye on it as they seem to be interested in these matters. If you would like another admin to review the block, please use {{unblock}} .Blnguyen | rant-line 06:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I contact you because I'm still a blocked user on wikipedia and since you were the architect behind my censure. I wish to point out that the article on the Hindu Rashtra has been mercilessly vandalized by miscreants. The following section:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Rashtra#External_Links

has several links (some defunct) that point to content irrelevant to the article, and are part of a deliberate ploy of defamation when taken out of context. If you concur, then kindly see to it that these links are removed. I also recommend that you (or a designated user) monitor the article for further acts of vandalism. These acts of vandalism have been committed by user [Anirudh777] who has been repeatedly censored for vandalism and has even been blocked. 

Thank You,

(Netaji 09:25, 9 July 2006 (UTC))

User page

Wikipedia is not a political battleground. Please work on editing articles, not on inciting political movements here. Please read Wikipedia:User page guidelines. `'mikka (t) 17:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Unblocking

I am unblocking you now hoping that your knowledge will be valuable for wikipedia.

Please remember very seriously one thing: do not attack other wikipedians regardless their behavior. Personal attacks is the main reason of many editors to become permanently banned from editing wikipedia. Even creation of new accounts does not help. `'mikka (t) 18:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Please extend the same courtesy to wikipedians using it as a podium for anti-Hindu hate-speech. Particluarly user Anwaar Sadat (see history) who has been filling wikipedia articles with anti-Hindu POV and Islamic Fundamentalist hate-speech, where the criterion for hate-speech is as defined by the anti-Defamation league of B'Nai B'Rith (not a hindu org)(Netaji 23:46, 8 July 2006 (UTC)).
Please make specific complaints. As you may have noticed, I don't edit Hindu-related articles at all. And there is no user:Anwaar Sadat. If you want me to help you, please make my life easy by providing easy reference to everything you are talking about. `'mikka (t) 02:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Mea culpa. The Chap I was talking about is login:Anwar Saadat Anwar Saadat. He has written the following statement on the article of Babri Mosque:

"They rightly claim that if Hindus succeed in snatching away Babri Masjid from Muslims, it will be made a precedent to extend the agitation to every other place of religious importance to the Muslims in India"

The tone is highly biased (particularly the adverb 'rightly') and a well known anti-Hindu canard. Plus, he has vandalised the article by removing citations I had posted.(Netaji 03:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC))

In addition, he has added irrelevant links to the article on the HIndu Rashtra that are out of context. These irrelevant links are posted below:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060602/wl_sthasia_afp/afplifestyleindiasocietysnakemarriageoffbeat;_ylt=AiW7ZHtynWjQXrCLVupDk6JvaA8F;_ylu=X3oDMTA0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM - Charmed woman marries Cobra Story on Yahoo News on a Hindu Woman marrying a Snake! (June 2006) http://in.news.yahoo.com/060606/139/64tsy.html -Jain saints' nude march evokes strong resentment in Tamil Nadu Story on Yahoo News about Hindu women anger against nude Jains (May 2006)

I am extremely disappointed with the bias in moderator such as yourself when anti-Hindus vandalize articles and get away with it, and I try to report the facts and get banned. If you do not allow reporting the truth then wikipedia is no different from a supermarket rag. (Netaji 09:04, 9 July 2006 (UTC))

You have been unblocked and it does not work? What is your IP address. I'll see if I can fix that.Blnguyen | rant-line 04:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

66.68.106.162 is my modem's ip (I'm behind a router is that matters, it shouldn't) (Netaji 04:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

Have a try now??Blnguyen | rant-line 04:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. I still seem to be blocked.

See Screenshot http://www.flickr.com/photos/68825726@N00/186136831/ (Netaji 04:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

Anti Hindu Propaganda

He Netaji! congrats for your remarkable posts on wikipedia. A lot of anti hindu and anti India propoganda going on on Khalistan. There seems to be a revert war going on right now. I removed some anti hindu edits myself. Thought you might want to have a look. 203.197.216.5 03:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm presently blocked from editing, so keep up the good work, I should be up-and-running in a few days. (Netaji 04:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC))
One other thing. Please monitor the following articles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Rashtra http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_violence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Californian_Hindu_textbook_controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_invasion_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bal_Thackeray http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._J._Witzel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arranged_marriage These are prime watering holes for muslims and socialists.(Netaji 04:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)) And get a login. It helps (Netaji 04:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

Oh, and one important thing. Be sure to weed out any anti-Sikh propaganda in the article also. Do not offend Sikh sensibilities. Sikhs are a valuable ally against muslims.(Netaji 16:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

Hinduism

Welcome to WikiProject Hinduism

WikiProject Hinduism — a collaborative effort to improve articles about Hinduism

Discussion board — a page for centralised Hinduism-related discussion

Notice board — contains the latest Hinduism-related announcements

Hindu Wikipedians — Wikipedians who have identified themselves as Hindus

Portal — a portal linking to key Hinduism-related articles, images, and categories

Workgroups — projects with a more specific scopes

For more links, go to the project's navigation template.

--D-Boy 05:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

==Request Admin to look up sockpuppet of Netaji== + Netaji seems to be using a sockpuppet [5], and the language and tone remains aggressive. From the strong opinion earlier expressed on user page, abusive language, sockpuppery and continued abusive language it does not seem this candidate should be allowed online. Haphar 14:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

More proof of sockpuppetry

More proof , as edits to Netaji's user page have been under the sockpuppet Pusyamitra Sunga id [6]. Haphar 14:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Why don't you stop harassing my poor brother Pusyamitra and pick on someone else? WE HAVE DIFFERENT IP's and are NOT THE SAME USER!Learn to accept the simple fact of life.(Netaji 14:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

Request to Admin- User Netaji deleting comments left on talk page showing sockpuppetry

Deleting stuff on the talk page ? Not done sir. Everyone please look at history of page for sockpuppetry proofs. Haphar 14:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Well if you want to create problems I don't suppose I can stop you. We are different people, though. That is a fact. And I am perfectly within my rights to remove vandalism from my talk page. Baseless accusations are vandalism. Plus, our ip addresses are from entirely different domains (we are in different places and communicate by IM). There are no proxy servers allowed on wikipedia, so it can;t be that. ALORS!!! You have no alternatives to suggest how I have pulled off this dastardly deed. Sorry.(Netaji 14:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC))
How about a home pc and an office/ college pc? :-) That was easy ! Also there are basis for the accusations , given in the mail. So it is not vandalism.
At the same time? We were simultaneously editing (check logs). That would be some feat indeed, wouldn't it? I must be the god Shiva himself, to violate the laws of causality and zip to my office in zero time :).(Netaji 05:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC))
No two networks at the same location is a more logical ( and less Godlike) solution to that one. As it has now been proved that you were doing it [7]it's time to cease the charade . Haphar 08:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

==Request Admin to look up sockpuppet of Netaji== + Netaji seems to be using a sockpuppet [8], and the language and tone remains aggressive. From the strong opinion earlier expressed on user page [9], abusive language, sockpuppery and continued abusive language it does not seem this candidate should be allowed online. Haphar 14:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Putting back comments deleted by Netaji/Pusyamitra. Haphar 14:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

More proof

An attempt to cover the tracks by changing an edit [10] Haphar 14:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Attempt to hide aggressive language

Another attempt to cover the tracks by editing his own comments [11] Haphar 15:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Anwar

Myself (who is not Indian) and all the Indian editors are well aware. Blnguyen | rant-line 05:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks you. Why has action not been taken against this fellow?(Netaji 05:32, 11 July 2006 (UTC))
Well, me has been blocked twice, the second by Nichalp, and he has raised the of many Indian admins (check his talk archive) and see Talk:Ajith Kumar. There isn't any policy about being banned for POV editing; If a user keeps on being disruptive and edits in an aggressive way against consensus and won't stop then they will be taken to Arbitration Committee for remedying and likely punishment. There was a problem at Ajith Kumar but Anwar eventually gave up against ten of us, and so that was the end of the matter. Actually, he then went around doing protests, eg at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Blnguyen, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ganeshk, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rama's Arrow, among others, but many people have done this before and nothing happened. Also, he went to a a lot of Indian-related featured article candidates and opposed them all - eg Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Chief_Ministers_of_Tamil_Nadu, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Indian Institutes of Technology/archive2, etc
However, the quickest way to get into trouble is personal attacks. Much easier than any other. If you behaved like him then nothing would happen as long as you steer clear of personal attacks. The only reason that anything would happen is if one went against agreed consensus and persistently caused disruption. Blnguyen | rant-line 05:47, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. Please understand that I was not making any personal attacks, just polemical ones. Too generic to be directed at any one person. Nonetheless, it's childish. I agree. It's hard not to take the bait that attackers like user WikiSceptic here, where he has attacked a Wikipedia admin. He has carried out ad-hominem attacks against my own humble self on the same page.(Netaji 06:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC))


blocked again

Seeing as you immediately resumed attack at Talk:Shiv Sena, I have had to block you again for a week. WikiSceptic has copped ten days as he has been around for a long time and gotten incivil before. Blnguyen | rant-line 08:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

So does this mean the block expires on 08:07, July 18th 2006? Thanks for being fair.(Netaji 08:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC))
Yes.Blnguyen | rant-line 08:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Still homesick?

The street reality is that muslims just slaughtered ~200 mumbaikars. Go cheer with them.(Netaji 03:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC))
Why are you implying that I am a Muslim? If someone doesn't support criminal fanatics like Shiv Sena, does not not remain Hindu? --Wikindian 17:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
The fact remains that people who make baseless accusations against SS usually are usually anti-Hindua or self-hating Hindus. SS is a DECISIVE political party and people like you are just afraid of the truth.Francois Gautier points this out most succintly in his writings...(Netaji 21:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC))
That is nonsense, I am neither a anti-Hindu nor self-hating Hindu. I just don't support a party which goes on rampage, and obtains its goals by illegal, and criminal violence on the street. You need to take out this "to be pro-Sena means to be a perfect Hindu" ghost out of your head.--Wikindian 23:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
So you're against Hamas, Fatah, Lashkar-e-Toiba,Hezbollah, D-Company, Christian Identity Movement, Irgun, Lehy,Meir Kahane, The Russian Mafia in New York,Yasser Arafat? I'll bet not. I'll bet you love at least some of these goons. Anything to defame Hindus with balls, right?(Netaji 11:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC))
Wow, I wasn't expecting that. I don't understand your logic, I am against all of these terrorist or semi-terrorist groups. Are you just doing it for the sake of fun? --Wikindian 20:46, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
My point is that you (presumably an Indian) lambast and demonize Hindu activists who fight for the rights of Hindus against the aggression of Islam and the duplicity of Christianity, try to protect our society and culture , preserve our identity , heritage and values, fight for our right to a Hindu India, and speak out against the most heinous atrocities committed against Hindus all over the subcontinent and elsewhere while the liberal socialist Indian government and Indian media fawn over in praise of muslim terrorists and muslim gangsters and espouse hatred for their own people. Yet I'm sure you don't have any problems with terrorists who attack Hindus with boulders and bombs. I'll bet you've been dancing on the streets of Allahabad together with muslims after they bombed our trains, right? You're the classic example of the self-hating Indian; who consorts with alien Mohammedians who'd cheerfully slit your throat at a moment's notice if their local mullah orders them to do so. Think about THAT and hang your head in shame! Netaji 20:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Netaji, you are seriously mistaken. Are there no criminal-free means of preserving Hindu culture? Why do have to use criminal aggression and Hitlerian ethos in the name of preserving culture? Personally, I don't understand how the regionalism and Hindutva go together. And, believe it or not, I was not dancing on the streets of Allahabad when the bomblasts happened. You seriously need to control your wild imagination.--Wikindian 22:49, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
I was being melodramatic in order to illustrate a point. You need to take a long term view of this situation instead of a myopic one. Remember that the United States and Australia were founded by 'criminal elements' and 'thugs' and now they are among the world's most advanced countries. Sometimes, there's nothing like some good-old fashioned aggression to rid us of a viral element.(Netaji 22:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC))
The Sena has no right to achieve its aims by violence, even in the name of preserving morals. Instead, the Sena should target the root of Indian society's moral decay, violence will not solve anything. But the most abominable legacy of Shiv-Sena is its attempts to divide the country by targeting Non-Maharashtrian communities. What good has the Sena done for Maharashtra? It has only defamed the name of the Marathi people. Being Marathi, I am personally ashamed that Marathi people can go to such extents in the name of regionalism. Who is being myopic here?--Wikindian 23:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
The SS dumped it's whole 'maharashtra is for marathas' nonsense decades ago. Move with the times. SS is a nationalist party, advocating Indian Patriotism. Sure, they can be a bit overzealous at times. I'm surprised that you, as a maratha, don't seem to understand the fundamentals of Maratha romanticism. The SS are a romantic party, and exhibit the romantic passion that comes with it. As for criminality, bear in mind the irony of being criminalized by a liberal socialist congress-UPA. Socialism is the biggest crime in human history! The SS has provided Marathas with a strong vioce and a hardlined stance. They are the first, last and pretty much the only line of defense against muslim gangs like D-Company and their terrorist buddies. It is only after UPA defanged them that these terrorist attacks happened. Netaji 23:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much, I don't want to swallow the "Maratha-romanticism" alcohol. I am amused by how you could say such things. How has the SS provided a "strong voice" for Marathi people? It has simply made them appear as short-sighted regionalists. And you are saying that the SS dumped its "son of the soil" campaign years ago. Then how come Thackeray attacked UPites in Mumbai recently? And in contrast to protecting Hindus, the SS has made them more vulnerable to hateful attacks from the Muslims.--Wikindian 23:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
I can't comment on Thackeray's alleged attacks on UP'ites because I haven't heard of it. Provide me with a reference to a news item and I'll read it. I'm not saying that the SS is perfect. Many of their actions are worthy of intense criticism. However, to use a few isolated incidents quoted out of context in order to defame and denigrate a party with a (basically) sound foundational ideology is being terribly biased in my opinion. Also, in case you have forgotten history, 'short-sighted maratha regionalists' like the first Chatrapati Shivaji Raje Bhonsle was responsible for creating the first modern confederacy in India and resisting the barbaric Mohammadean hordes from the Mughal Empire. 'Short Sighted Maratha regionalists' like Laxmibai put up the last significant resistance to British Imperial aggression in the region. I'm sure that Afzal Khan, Shahista Khan and Siddi Jauhar thought of Shivaji as you think of Thackeray, and look what that got them! What about that? Do you think his enemies would think so ill of him after the fact. History will judge SS and Thackeray, not you. Netaji 23:45, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and 'Hitlerian'????? What's with this Godwin's law crap? Hitlerian! Last time I checked, there were no concentration camps in Maharashtra. so he said that he admires Hitler. So does Arnold Schwartzenegger, governor of California and of Austrian birth. What's your point anyway. Don't make hyperbolic statements Netaji 00:02, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Shivaji was not a short-sighted regionalist, he never championed Maratha regionalism, he never attacked people from other regions living in Maharashtra. And I am sure that history will spit on Thackeray and the SS, even if I don't get mentioned. As for the reference, I will provide it soon. --Wikindian 00:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


There are many historians who have lambasted Shivaji as you have Thackeray. I don't remember specifics, but I believe there was an incident with an anti-Shivaji book and the Sambhaji Brigade in Pune. I await your reference with bated breath Netaji 00:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I was referring to the reference about Thackeray targetting UPites. I never lambasted Shivaji, you somehow assumed I did. Yes, Thackeray certainly hasn't opened concentration camps, but the way he tries to project the superiority of a particular ethnic group over other, and tries to drive out others, certainly resembles Hitler. Finally, you have overgeneralized. I never said that all Marathi people are short-sighted regionalists, but those who support the SS certainly are. --Wikindian 18:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I never said that YOU lambasted the Chhatrapati. Don't put words in my mouth. I said that your screed against Thackeray mirrors that against Shivaji made by many white historians as part of a Macauley-ist agenda of racial and cultural defamation. Shivaji was 'just another random thug' to them, as Thackeray seems to be to you. Bear in mind that Balasaheb Thackeray is widely admired in Maharashtra. Plus, I wasn't aware that Thackeray made any comments that pointed to a belief in any 'inherent ethnic superiority' of Maharashtrians like Hitler , Hess or Rosenberg did with regards to their 'Herrenvolk'. The difference between them and Balasaheb is that Balasaheb spoke out in defense of Hindus against Islamic atrocities. At worst, Thackeray's previous stance against non-Maharashtrians (which I believe he has abandoned) can be called 'nativist', which is drastically different from 'Fascist' or 'Hitlerian'. Thackeray's ideology is that of defending our right to a Hindu Rashtra. In that sense, he is more like Ariel Sharon than Hitler, as Ariel Sharon defends the Jewish right to a Jewish State in Israel. Significant difference, see? Netaji 18:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Here's a reference to the Shiv Sena attacks on people of UP/Bihar origin, and it's not "decades" ago. [12], also check all these writeups on mostly the same issue [13] Haphar 20:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Ok guru. Here's what the problem with this article is:

You implicitly claim that they attacked UP/Bihar'ites because of their ethnicity or because of an inherent belief that they have about Maratha superiority. But the article does not indicate that any such belief system was behind these altercations. The claim of the SS is quite legitimate, that they want preferential representation for local Marathas in Railway positions in Maharashtra. Granted, their TACTICS are a bit questionable, bit their IDEOLOGY is still legitimate and sound. There is no logic behind your going on a polemical rant accusing SS of Fascism since nothing in their ideology reflects any Fascism. Like I said, the best criticism of their ideology is NATIVIST, NOT FASCIST OR HITLERIAN!!!!! Shivsena is not anti non-Maratha but it does support Marathas, albeit a bit aggressively. Everyone should understand the difference between these two. Shivsena did not assault Biharis because of their ethnicity but they advocated for Marathas. To save the Marathas it was necessary to send Beharis back. If the government, in a fit of gutter multiculturalism, chooses to short-change the Marathas, then the Marathas need to respond actively. You are looking at SS from a left-wing liberal lens, marred by self-loathing and negationist pacifism. On the face of it their actions looks very abnormal but if you see the situation from the point of view of working-class Maratha sentimentality then you would perhaps sympathize with their methods. Besides, these are just minor spats that eventually blow over. a compromise is reached and all is well. I've lived in Mumbai for the better part of 15 years and I can assure you that the SS is not the roving gang of maniacal skinhead-esque thugs that the sensationalist media portrays it to be. Netaji 22:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

  1. I have not gone on any "polemical rant accusing SS of Fascism since nothing in their ideology reflects any Fascism". I have just shown you some links as you said you do not know of Shiv Sena attacking UP/Bihari's. Also to look at what fits into my description of rant pleae look at your own post above.
  2. By your logic Hitler was not anti Jew, he just wanted living space for "Aryan Germans". So if you see things from the point of view of "Aryan Germans" Hitler was ok in his ideaology though he went to "some" extremes. And as per that he was not anti Jew, just pro Aryan.
  3. As per your above "discourse" it's OK to attack people from other nationalities/regions to protect your own jobs. So looking from that perspective you would sympathise with U.S.A guys attacking non U.S people working ( or studying) in the U.S of A.
  4. How come you are criticising Fox news ? It's part of the "right wing state" of the U.S that you so admire and quite a part of the right wing elements of which you want implemented in India.
  5. Shiv Sena is more divisive than nationalist. Nativist or not it is right wing and built on "exclusion" more than inclusion and preys on us vs them mentality, non Maratha, non Hindu- it takes on different targets but is "right wing" and believes in using "force and violence" as a policy- both of which are very fascist traits. Till the Nazi party did not rule at the Germany it did not open concenteration camps either, that did not make them less fascist.
  6. The governament is not short charging anyone, the Marathas can go to Patna and give the zonal exam there, the government is allowing people to apply anywhere in the country, it is an enterance exam, and qualification is not based on ethnicity but clearing an exam.
  7. U.S.A was started by Thugs ? Australia yes but USA was not a penal colony, people from various churches that were persecuted in Europe moved to the U.S, so would have some criminals on the run, but the "original" settlers ( try looking up Plymouth rock and Mayfair ) were not thugs.
  8. You also say that "You are looking at SS from a left-wing liberal lens, marred by self-loathing and negationist pacifism". I think your dislike for people with other points of view causes you to try and use big words and accuse people. Specially when logic does not suit you there seems to be a tendency to attack the other. You tend to imagine/ assume things about the other. I think you need to be much more polite to be taken more seriously.Arguments (specially the written one's) are not won by going for hyperbole and acusations.
  9. Having chosen to abandon the country for their own economic gains there is a huge diaspora that takes full advantage of the liberalism abroad and preaches right wing xenophobia for home. It is not any different from parts of the Muslim diaspora that supports or sympathises with islamic fundamentalists.I think you need to watch out and not fall into that camp.

Haphar 05:32, 21 July 2006 (UTC)


  1. As far as your claims of Hitler are concerned, bear in mind that the Lehy (Stern Gang) group in Israel had provided an interesting interpretation. According to them, Hitler was NOT an enemy of the Jewish people but merely one who hated Jews.
  2. North America WAS colonized by 'thugs'. The Mayflower pilgrims were 'thugs' by your definition. They wanted to practice a religious philosophy that's much much worse than Hindutva. It was totally intolerant and exclusivist.

'Having chosen to abandon the country for their own economic gains' Because the left-wing congress made it impossible to make any economic gains in an society of Indian-branded Marxism. CAPITALISM, mein freund. THAT's what works. Socialism is a great failure. 'takes full advantage of the liberalism abroad and preaches right wing xenophobia for home.' Nein mein freund. US is a Christian right-wing country, and will remain so in the forseeable future. They have a soverign right to help India develop into a modern Hindu Rashtra, which they have been doing.'Right Wing' xenophobia is better then left-wing Marxist oppression , censorship. 'parts of the Muslim diaspora' PARTS?!?!??! Try bloody almost ALL of the muslim diaspora. Ever heard of C.A.I.R http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3437,http://www.danielpipes.org/article/394? Plus there is no such thing as Islamic 'fundamentalism'. The claim of Islamic 'fundamentalism' gives rise to the illusion that there is a 'non-fundamental' kind of Islam. There is only one kind of Islam. The kind that blows things up. Netaji 12:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

  1. The Stern gang is not an organisation known for history professors
  2. Please put the comments on the Mayflower pilgrims on the Mayflower page in wikipedia. Let's see what happens to your claim then. It easy to call people names, specially when you do not bother to give the proof for it. It's really rich to compare the American founders with the British prisoners who started Australia.
  3. If the U.S was a Chrisitian right wing country, you would have been hounded out for half the stuff you have said against Christians on your userpage. It is a liberal country and within their country they have a "party" in power that has right wing backings. Does not make the whole country Christian right wing. When it started it was overtly Chrisitian, but that was over 200 hundred years ago. It is less Christian than a country like Germany. It has in it's union a state that does not allow the 10 commandments sculpture in it's court ( guess the state- you should know) or a country that does not teach religion in school. There is no 'state" religion. Churches being on government land is more an issue of it's 1700's british origin than current policy.
  4. After studying in a college that the "socialist governement" subsidised, and getting a qualification that would get an a good job in the currently "booming Indian economy, if someone still moves it's greed rather than need. ( And not quite gratitude).
  5. The "Right wing Christian" nation helping India develop into a modern "Hindu Rashtra" (pipe dreams) just signed a nuclear deal with guess what " a left wing socialist marxist Congress government". Mere Putt (allow me a bit of Punjabi as I do not know German) Ae tay bauti jaada dukh di gull hegi.
  6. I think your last statement is extremely insensitive but then why are you upset about fundamentalism in Islam ? Since you advocate the same approach in Hinduism. ( You called Saudi Arabia a great place to live in - a model for a Hindu religious state that you want for India).

Haphar 14:00, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

  1. and Indian history professors are all saints, right brother? Call your doctor, your intravenous drip needs adjusting, then read Arun Shourie's book on Indian historians.
  1. lol now I'm enjoying your twisting my words to suit your agenda. I wasn't talking about the US government doing anything for India, but the Indian diaspora itself (ever hear of USINPAC?). And yes, my friend, we have many sympathizers in the US political landscape. Neoconservatives being only the first. Now allow me to quote my native Bengali 'Amaar Shonar chele shomajbader shopno dekho raate aar diner bala bhikke koro rastaye'.Maharashtra and Gujarat are the most prosperous states in Indi (run by the right) where left-wing beggars from Calcutta come bowl in hand for jobs.
  1. Not Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is a feudal dump. I'm talking about Israel. The Jewish State is the ideal model for a Hindu Rashtra.
  1. I'm not upset about fundamentalism in Islam because there is no fundamentalism in Islam. Islam ITSELF is 'fundamentalist', in the sense of Intolerance, Slaughter, Looting, Arson, Molestation of women, ie I-S-L-A-M. The very word 'ISLAM' means 'submission to God'. Well I, for one, refuse to submit to their god through the UPA government. Samartha Bharat! Netaji 15:57, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey..stop using this rubbish language against my religion.If you dont know how to speak with civilty go and edit your own blogs. Mustafa Bhai 19:27, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Your brothers don't seem to have a probelem defaming my religion in talk pages as well as articles. Why shouldn't I your's? Netaji 19:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
At least they are history professors and not terrorists. Further to quote you "All this, combined with the fact that India is a stinking hellhole of a country compared to America, Israel, or even SAUDI ARABIA (wtf!)". Talk about self hatred, ( after accusing the world of it). You have been claiming that you do not attack islam but protect Hinduism from attacks. The language above is very much attacking Islam. But then you have claimed one thing and ended up saying another before too. To quote in Punjabi- "Khoti chadi khujoor tey, utto suttay umb" Haphar 20:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
"The best defense is a good offense", there is another quote for you. Historically, Hindus dod not attack muslims first (in fact, nobody has ever attacked muslims first). They attacked us. Plus, lehy are not terrorists. They attacked British. British were a legitimate target in Israel because they were alien occupiers and did not belong there."Let no man in the world live in delusion", wanna guess who said that? That's right bubba, GURU NANAK!Netaji 21:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
The full quote please- for a portion of a quote does not bring out the actual meaning conveyed by the quote- "Let no man in the world live in delusion. Without a Guru none can cross over to the other shore."

Going forward try logic, it might work better than truncated quotes, rhetoric ,abuses and attempts to needle. If you are going to use quotes your "strong" opinions make the Dirty Harry quote very relevant. The one that refers to the sphincter in the gluteus maximus. I understand being a student away from your land might lead to economic hardships and being called bubba, but try not to take it out on others.Haphar 23:22, 21 July 2006 (UTC) Haphar 23:22, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Economically I'm doing just fine. Just keep the POV edits out.Netaji 23:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Abusing others who do not agre with your POV is more of POV pushing. So tone your POV down before asking others to do so. Haphar 22:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Netaji, the way you try to portray non-Marathi people in Mumbai is biased, and short-sighted. You are implying that the local Marathi people have lost jobs not due to the lack of entrepreneurial skills, or economic complacency (satisfaction with clerical jobs in general), but due to the black tactics of people coming from other states. Personally, I think that most of the industry and business in Maharashtra has been developed mostly by non-Maharashtrians, correct me if I am wrong. But that is certainly how it is in Mumbai. "To save Marathas it was necessary to send the Biharis back": Why shouldn't the Biharis be hired if they have better work ethic? (again, correct me if I am wrong) They are some of the most hardworking people out there. Similarly with South Indians and Gujaratis: why should they not settle in Mumbai and make their skills useful? Shouldn't the most qualified individual get the job? Is this what you call gutter multiculturalism? Clearly, you are intolerant and biased against non-Marathi people. People like you have tried to divide the Indian people along lines of language and ethnicity. "Working-class Maratha sentimentality" Is this really peculiar to Marathas? The working class is always frustrated with the business class, it seems to me. In case of Mumbai, it is very safe to say Marathi people disproportionately constitute the working class, again, because of the lack of entrepreneurial skills in general compared to Gujaratis and Marwaris. It is the same in Nagpur, where I am from. "Self-loathing and negationist pacifism": Yes, I am not a Maratha fanatic, if that is what you wanted to say. I am not afraid of criticizing the weaknesses of Marathi people, and I hope they will overcome them eventually, or there will be different versions of the Sena in every city in Maharashtra. And about the Thackeray analogy: I never said that Thackeray is Hitler, the two men are very different. But they do share a few points in common, even if Hitler was vastly more evil: fiery oratory designed to blind the populace, a hatred of different cultures, and advocation of criminal violence. So, give up your rhino-skinned Maratha-con-Sena regionalism, and try to cultivate a more balanced view.--Wikindian 16:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Er, I am not a Maratha (I'm Bengali), so I'm not biased in favor of them at all.Nor am I a 'maratha-con-sena' regionalist. Marathas who wish nativism are a large group with no voice here. Wikipedia is supposed to 'reflect the world', right (see a post above or below)? What abut the world of the maratha? While I would not want a Shiv Sainik in my back yard, I do admire their resolve and their core ideology. Plus, why shouldn't the Marathas get preferential treatment in Maharashtra when Texan residents in Texas get preferential treatment in universities (less tuition) over non Texan residents. There is a lot of preference for in-state people wrt jobs in the US over out-of-state people, even though a majority of the top people in Austin are non-Texans. SS wants the same thing in Maharashtra, that's all.Netaji 16:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Frankly, I am shocked that you are a Bengali who is so pro-SS.

No, jobs should be given only to the most qualified individuals. And about preferential tutition: don't other states also have them, besides Texas? And there will always be in-state preference, and the Marathi people will benefit from that because they know their own state better than say, people from Manipur. They speak the same language. That is how it is in Texas; Texans want people who know how Texas is, I see nothing wrong in it. Austin, Dallas, and Houston are exceptions. Austin is a hub for the tech industry, which attracts a lot of people from outside Texas. Business always attracts a more diverse populace. The same thing with Mumbai, I am sure that most of the government clerical jobs in Mumbai are filled with Marathi people. The real problem is fierce job competetion due to lack of sufficient job opportunities in India, and the Marathi people in general loose out. Once the economy catches up, the Sena should either change 180 degrees, or crumble. --Wikindian 17:05, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, all states do have them. All US states prioritize their residents in jobs and fees over non-residents. That is what SS wants for Maharashtra. Let other parties in other states implement the same laws. SS is concerned only with Maharashtra bcoz they are a Maratha party. Just because I'm a Bengali you automatically assume I'm a rabid commie who hates SS is an example of your stereotyping. You have no idea how much I intelsely loath CPI(M),WB government in general and that fool Buddadeb Bhattacharya. Your last post is rather incoherent I'm afraid. It does not legitimately refute my points but deflects the argument with irrelevant information.Netaji 17:13, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I am interested in why you are so much against the left (I also don't like them). But they claim that they have benefitted the common people, especially the farmers, eventhough there is huge fraud in some government schemes like ration cards. And again, you need to subdue your preposterous imagination: I never assumed that you were some rabid commie. I thought you must be Marathi because of your intensely pro-SS views.

The prioritization occurs mostly in government-level jobs. I am sure that there is less prioritization in jobs in a multinational company like Microsoft. The Sena is not trying to advocate this. The Sena wants all non-Marathi people to get out of Maharashtra. Is there a difference between the two? --Wikindian 17:27, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I am against the left simply because they have dragged our country into the mud and have destroyed our economy with 5-year plans and cooperative industry. They are trying to eradicate Hindus and create an Islamic theocracy by mollycoddling the muslim vote bank.
The Sena can advocate non-Marathas to leave Maharashtra all they want. Never gonna happen. Their advocating it is therefore irrelevant. Their workable ideology is to create a Hindu Rashtra, which IS going to happen. Either that, or India will be further partitioned.Netaji 18:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
"Delusions of Grandeur" and " Pipe dreams". ( Pot in the pipe perhaps) Haphar 22:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
The liberal left does drugs,not I. Plus, the whole world has turned away from ecularism. Secularism is a failure. India will naturally follow suit. The question is, will we be an Islamic theocracy or a Hindu Rashtra. The latter is the lesser of the two evils, given the dangerous nature of Islamic Theocraries like Iran and Saudi Arabia.Netaji 23:28, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
With 14% of the population being islamic the islamic theocracy is not quite happening in India, even if all of the 14 % wants it. Who has turned away from secularism, U.S A ? Canada ? U.K ? Brazil ? who in the whole world has turned "away" from secularism ? Haphar 18:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
14 % now. 10% a century ago. Maybe 50% next century. Muslims practice polygamy. Maybe your grandson gets his hand chopped off, or your granddaughter is forced to wear a naqaab.USA is a Christian country. There are Christian Laws. There is state preference to Christians. Canada is part of British Crown. Britain is a Christian Country with Christian Law. The PArliament is ordained by God. Brazil is RABID Christian Theocracy.Netaji 19:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
100 years ago Pakistan and Bangladesh were a part of India, Muslim as a % of our population was much higher not lower. Since Independence the minorities combined have been 20% of the population. The increase in Muslims in India is in a few decimal points for Muslims,. There was a study done and projections made after the last census, at the current differing growth rates 500 years from now things might reach 50 -50 in terms of Hindus and Muslims in India. Might- and I am not going to fret over 500 years from now, the here and now is more important. Maybe my grandson or grandaughter would be burnt with tyres around their necks for being a minority in a religious State sponsored riot ? That's more of a reality seeing what the Shiv Sena, the VHP and the BJP do when in power. The threat of Muslims taking over this nation is like Scotland taking over Britain, or Texas seceding from the union. After partition it has become a threat in the past and not the present. Hindus are 80 % of the nation, they dominate the nation and will continue to do so. Nothing is going to change that for the next few centuries and most probably even more. It has been an iclusive religion that has helped it survive. It has some almost stone age religions as a part of it's inclusion ( Shiva and Shiva linga puja as per some anthropologists was prevalent In India long before Indus valley civilisation).Hinduism has withstood many religions and survived, Buddhism evolved, Islam ( name another nation where islam ruled for centuries and the nation is still not muslim majority ? Spain thanks to Christian invasion- an example incidentally of Muslims being attacked- Crusades is another) and even Christian rule ( Britain, when it was openly Christian ). I would call Hindusim the world's oldest surviving religion.If it becomes right wing and rabid it would lose much of what has helped keep it alive a long after it's contemperory religions have died away ( who worships the Greek or Roman gods today ? despite Greeks or Romans ruling much of the known world at one time.) Christianity at it's rigid best lead to the dark ages. Islam is going through it's dark age now, it would come out of it but not in our lifetime. Hindusim has seen all this and evolved, Hindusim was said to be rigid when Buddhism came and dominated, Hinduism learned and came back. The last century has seen it evolve positively after another rigid state , but the last 2 decades of right wing revivalsim are undoing all the gains.

Polygamy does not mean ( despite the RSS attempts) that all Muslims are polygamous or that all Polygamy leds to population increase. A man with 4 wives would have to have 6 children to be at a higher than replacement of population rate. Economic conditions of muslims in India being what it is 4 wives and 6 children is a rarity. USA has no state preference to Christians, their new office buildings do not have a priest coming to do rites ( unlike India) of purification. Their text books are not full of relgious writing ( unlike NCERT Hindi text books) and state/ governement schools do not start with hymns to gods ( unlike India). State governement oaths are taken in times decided by pandits and locations decided by vasttu. So despite being secular on paper there is more "religion" ( and mostly Hindu)involved in government activities in India than in the U.S. Lula of Brazil is a leftist. The nation might be Christian, the government is not. The biggest issue in India is the Maoists in the Naxal areas, if the movement continues we would see a huge urban rural divide that would tear the nation apart. There are enough divisive challenges the nation faces and the Hindu right wingers add to it and weaken it. If a Hindu rashtra becomes reality, Goa,J&K- Kerala, the North East and Punjab would see movements for seperation. U.P, West Bengal and Bihar would see huge problems and so would parts of the Deccan. It would set the whole nation ( or group of nations if it evolves to that) back by a few centuries, this when we might be coming out of a hole after 500 years.Haphar 08:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandal of various Hinduism/India pages

I've noticed the overt and unapologetic vandalism on the Bal Thackeray page and on the Manu-smriti page by an anonymous user. He continues to revert what he calls "Hindu fundamentalist propaganda" while adding gross vandalism and extremely POV material. (I haven't studied all of his edits in-depth, but so far it seems like he's deleting relatively NPOV material and then falsely calling it "propaganda.") I've noticed that he's also done some vandalism of your talk page as well. This is inexcusable.

I'll continue to monitor some of these pages. I also suggest that, since you've been watching him this whole time, that you strongly consider asking an administrator to protect the vandalized pages, as this is recurring vandalism.

You and I have our differences. (For example, I agree with Danianjan above that one can strongly oppose Bal Thackeray and the Shiv Sena and still be a proud Hindu.) However, I agree with you that this kind of recurring indignant vandalism by this anonymous user simply cannot stand. --Hnsampat 00:45, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

please see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Anwar saadat.Blnguyen | rant-line 01:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

As of now, all three articles Manu Smriti,Bal Thackeray & RamJanmabhoomi are protected it seems. Good. Now we can begin civilized discussion. Please see talk page of manusmriti article. (Netaji 11:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC))

Santals

No unfortunately I don't actually know much about Santals! I was mostly editing the format, and not so much the content. As a linguist, I know only the most basic information about Santali, and even less about the script. However, if I come across any information about it, I'll make sure I add it. --SameerKhan 01:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Civility

Subhash, you've imporove your conduct a lot, which is good, but it would be better to avoid excessively rhetorical flourishes which may seem unnecessarily confrontational. I simply don't know enough (or anything) to mediate the actual content. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 01:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Please mention specifically what part of my typings can be interpreted as 'unnecessarily confrontational'. You must understand that a certain measure of rhetoric and hyperbole are standard methods of discourse among Indians (long story why, probably something to do with the weather, or maybe we picked it up from the Persians, dunno exactly). Just look at the hyperbole in the dialogue of a typical Hindi movie and you'll see for yourself... Netaji 01:28, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I'd have to say that this rhetorical inference, is not appropraite at all. ([14]). and possibly some more. I'm not sure how they help to prove that your information is correct, but may give the opposite impression that you have lost the argument? Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 01:44, 20 July 2006 (UTC).
I completely agree with Blnguyen here. This edit is utterly uncivil & can also be classified as a personal attack. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a forum to debate about socio-religious issues. Please refrain from making such statements in future otherwise you may be blocked for incivility & making personal attacks. Thanks --Srikeit (Talk | Email) 06:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I was just coming to say the same thing. Whether you find a user obnoxious or not or whether you believe they are fundamentalist or not doesn't really matter when you are discussing content. Please refrain from insulting or accusing others. I myself have been accused of Hindu fundamentalism and fascism. But its better not to insult back or it makes you no better than the original insulters. Become a good editor as opposed to one who is constantly warned for civility. Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:31, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Lkadvani

As I said earlier, I am not knowledgable enough to moderate the content of the articles. It seems best that both sides stay calm and not get blocked for personal attacks, as otherwise there definitely will be one-way traffic. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 03:06, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I haven't attacked LKAdvani personally. He, however, has made slanderous insinuations against my humble self. Plus, you do not have to be an erudite scholar of South Asian politics to see bias when it's there. I have been scrupulous in making sure that my edits are fair and balanced, whereas LKAdvani's edits are as just about as "Fair and Balanced" as FOX News! Netaji 03:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

A few quick points

Subhash:

Let me start by saying I truly admire your energy. You have been around for a limited amount of time, and have been blocked for some of that, and yet you have made a very large number of edits. I've been on WP for almost two years, and I've made barely a few thousand edits in that time. That being said, I think you should note a few things. I wouldnt have said anything, except I read the message on my talk page and that worried me.

Here's the point: your approach is all wrong. Lets analyse this two ways. First, we'll assume good faith; in this case, that means that we assume that you actually want to make the articles NPOV, and that you think there is a bias. Now here's the crucual thing: NPOV means that WP is a reflection of the world around us. If there is a bias in the world, then there is a bias in WP. Every editor must realise - and most experienced editors do, in time, realise - that even if there's a truth out there, but hidden because of bias, then WP is not the place where that bias can be corrected. By all means, report that there are alternative points of view; but those points of view can be neither the majority, or most prominent, even if they are true unless they are also the majority, or most prominent, in the world. Hence, for example, regardless of the truth of the Ram Janmabhoomi issue, an NPOV WP article on it would say both that there is a long standing tradition that a temple stood on the spot originally, which is the dominant view, and also that most mainstream historians disagree, which is also true. That article is not the place to discuss how a cabal of JNU historians may or may not stifle alternate views. (Something about which I may agree, though not from quite the same perspective.) The fact is that (a) not only JNU historians believe that and (b) like it or not, they are the mainstream, and WP deserves that their views be quoted more fully than the others.

Now, lets stop assuming good faith. Lets instead assume that you are making edits to WP with an agenda, and that agenda is what others might call POV-pushing, and you might view as the correction of anti-Hindu bias in the world at large. The fascinating thing is that you're still going about it the wrong way. Why? Well, as you know, people arent stupid. If they are searching for an article on the Gujarat violence - which is the only other article on which I have run into you - they already know its a controversial topic. What will you hope to achieve? Say that you wish to correct the anti-Modi bias that you think the English-language media or human rights orgs display. Who do you think will believe you if you claim that there's a bias in angry, confrontational language, or by claiming that all those who criticise it are leftwing radicals? Who will not read that part, notice the NPOV tag on top, say, andt think "some fanatic has put that in"? Definitely not anyone you want to win over to your point of view. Instead, if you reasonably document instances where Human Rights Watch or whoever is quoted elsewhere int he article has got things certifiably wrong, people will think "aha, they must be biased", which is precisely the reaction you want.

Finally, if you just want to act out your own anger, and try and change this small set of things you have control over because you cant change the fact that there's a bias in the world outside, you are , I suppose doing the right thing. But it cant last; I've had to deal with people before who've done things like that, and it never works for long; they always disappear when it doesnt make them feel better.

That's all I had to say about your recent editing. One more point though: try not to concentrate only on controversial topics or on things related to India, say. There;s a reason for this. Going to the RFC boards, looking at how other diputes are settled, even, sometimes, contributing to settling a dispute that you feel no emotional investment in, gives you a clear idea of how you can settled disputes that you perhaps do feel emotionally or intellectually invested in. Finally, if you do that, or start new articles, or operate on New Page Patrol, other wikipedians will trust your edits more, as they will begin to feel that you aren't a single-issue guy. This has been a little long, but the reason is that I truly think that you are capable of making major contributions to WP if you just realise a few simple points about anything else.

Hornplease 19:32, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your points

The thing is that online sources of information like wikipedia are the petri dish for bias. There are people *cough muslims *cough who are using wikipedia to PROPAGATE bias, rather than report IN A BIASED WAY. You addressed the latter issue in your post, but not the former! There is a difference, see?

If you go to any muslim terrorist hate-site on the internet, you'll see countless references to wikipedia articles on India. These are sites that otherwise neutral people see, and lead them to wikipedia articles that these people edited prior to posting them on said hate sites. Wikipedia has adequately marketed itself as a site that presents the complete and objective truth, though they never say so, and nothing could be more wrong. The anarchist nature of wikipedia is hidden away in tabs on article pages. Wikipedia presents a facade to the casual reader. Thus, the viewer sees a wikipedia article and forms a preconceived bias that was not there before. This is precisely the objective of an anti-Hindu propagandist, to create a preconceived bias subliminally in the reader's mind. This is the sort of thing that led the world (and especially INDIA itself) to turn a blind eye when Hindus got massacred in Bangladesh and Kashmir. After all, if wikipedia articles imply that we are less than human (which they do), then why should anybody care if our entire civilization is wiped out?

WP does reflect the world around us, a world that hates Hindus because our very existence points out the flaws in their ideologies. Wikipedia DOES NOT MARKET ITSELF as an encyclopedia that reflects the world around us! It market's itself as a site that presents the scholarly truth.

If wikipedia was honest about it's anarchist nature I wouldn't worry about muslims spreading hate on it. After all, if they are policed here, then they'd merely go somewhere else and do it, right?

As long as wikipedia markets itself as a source of objective truth, I will continue to edit articles in order to present all legitimate points of view. The day that wikipedia's facade is appropriately exposed, I will stop.

Plus, in the case of Hindus vs Indian muslims, Indian Hindus ARE the majority, and there are hundreds fo millions of Hindus with no voice here who would disagree with the findings of the historians. Thus, bu your own logic of wikipedia reflecting 'the world around us', the opinions of some 800 million hindus would carry preference over those of 130 million Indian muslims.

Netaji 20:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Subhash, thank you for reading my post.
You are right, there are people that wish to propagate bias on WP. Unfortunately, unless you very carefully balance informed views in a manner suitable for an encyclopaedia, you will not be able to counter them, you will instead become one of them. Believe me, not a single observer who comes to a page with an NPOV tag on it will assume from your edits that you are being more balanced than the people you wish to counter. It will be the old plague again; you may not remember this, but for years, any mention of India in the media here in the West was coupled with a mention of Pakistan. This was because by engaging in discourse at the same level as what was then (and, of course, is again) a military dictatorship, India was causing people who merely knew there was a dispute to give opinions from both sources equal weight. IF you are serious about contesting what you see as 'pro-Muslim' bias (and I hesitate to say it, but I strongly suggest that you not make any assumptions about the religion or religiosity of anyone on WP, merely taking their arguments as arriving in a vacuum) then the thing you need to do is make edits that do not automatically revert what they say, but attempt to discern what they are trying to say, and present it in the article in a scrupulously fair, non-confrontational manner.
Finally, I dont understand the last part of your post. I cant imagine that anyone can claim that all 800 plus Hindus in India think identically, or 130 m Muslims do. If that was the case, the Samajwadi Party and the Left Front and the BSP and all these other parties wouldnt exist. I know, you think they operate on deception and so on, but all I am saying is that we can make guesses about how the vast majority of people think, but on WP we have to only look at verifiable information; and that means, if the majority of the Indian press is biased, the majority of the academy is biased, the majority of authors are biased, that is unfortunately the way things should be on WP. About the Ram Janmabhoomi issue, once again, as I siad, WP should report that there is a strong tradition of the earlier demolition of a temple. But that does not mean that scholarly analysis should be biased away from what the mainstream is, because that belittles the article, and casts doubt on the rest of it. By all means mention BB Lal, or the other bunch of archaelogists from ICHR who are investigating the site, (I dont remember the details); but if you give more prominence to the views of Dr Elst, who is, after all, vastly outnumbered, it will not only not stand in the long run, but it will also cause people to look askance at all the other evidence provided in the article.
Consider again the Narayanan vs Punj issue. As I said, the fact is that Narayanan was the President of India. Under the "inform consent and advise" tradition, he was 'in the loop' about Gujarat. He had the opportunity to make a difference in asking the central govt for an explanation. His quote is informative. However, he is a former Congressman, and one who is a well-known member of the Scheduled Castes. His opinion might be biased by those facts and if you think so, feel free to mention them, in a restrained manner. Punj, however, is simply a BJP MP who happens to write a column. His opinion, in any reasonalbe article, is not as important as is Narayanan's or Modi's or Vajpayee's or Advani's. And in general, when ARundhati Roy is not even mentioned in the article, why spend time impugning her? How should you go about removing a bias here? Well, focus on the things that are important enough to be in the article, and then locate quotes from verifiable sources indicating that those things are being viewed through an anti-Hindu prism.
Finally, the whole point of the NPOV/weasel tag is to alert readers to the fact that the page they are reading is NOT stable or blanced, and is therefore useless for propagandists. (Do you really think that 'otherwise neutral' people would be convinced by things they see are linked on terrorost hate sites? I dont.) So I wouldnt worry about that too much. IF you truly worry about that, your job should be editing only pages without those tags, so that people are not taken in by a facade of objectivity.
Hornplease 22:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Response

I have made a response to your "coincidence" message on the talk page concerning Sikhism and Hinduism. It is just under your message. Sandeep S K 11:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Accident

I did not take away that information on purpose. I added a reference where it was requested and everything under it was deleted. Sandeep S K 22:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shiva%27s_Trident/Archive_1&oldid=1136717643"