This is an archive of past discussions about User:Tariqabjotu. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Is this in the article yet ? If so, please revert my edit on ITN. I'm working on shortening DYK at the moment. Thanks. --PFHLai06:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
The only admission of anything I could find in the article was about his signing a cooperation statement with the secret police in 1978. It's not clear to me if he has admitted to anything else the newspapers have reported. If that's good enough for you as the same as "admitting he worked with Poland's Służba Bezpieczeństwa ...", okay, I trust your judgement. --PFHLai07:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
common images
I know the process, but forgot to copy the rest of the image info because I was in a hurry. I thought I'd gotten it because I was looking at the commons version of the image in another browser window. Thanks for fixing it. Savidan20:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
It wasn't the image info that was the problem; it was that the image was not uploaded locally in the place of the image taken directly from Commons. -- tariqabjotu20:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Tariqabjotu. Just wondering. Why did you fully protect Rush Limbaugh? I didnt know anyone had requested it, and all things considered, the recent editing (last day or so) is a little less contentious than usual. Not that I mind. I could use a few days off from having to defend it from vandals, but I am curious. Caper1321:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
The editing dispute you referenced on WP:RFP is a revert war involving the addition of a 5-word sentence-- protection is an overreaction. As Caper13 said, things are a bit less contentious than usual, and while he may appreciate the protection to take a 'few days off,' I, for one, would like to continue to try to improve it. (He can rest assured knowing that I'll protect it from vandals! :-) I've consequently relisted it for unprotection or a return to semi-protection. Though you should know. 72.128.82.8804:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for giving Infinity on High Protection but there is one problem
The current information on the page is false and was put there by a IP spammer right before you protected the page. Is there a way that you can put the proper information in and then reprotect it. The proper information is provided in the Talk page for the article. Thanks a lot. --Russ is the sex22:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
This template has never been vandalized, and has been undergoing edits and improvements. Please do not pre-emptively full-protect pages; it infringes on the fundamental free editing nature of Wikipedia. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 04:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
It's used on over two thousand pages and with the recent template vandalism (perhaps you have not heard about it?), pre-emptively protecting a rarely-edited, high-use template, despite no history of vandalism, is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. You can request an edit using {{editprotected}} or, if you feel compelled, take the issue to WP:RPP. -- tariqabjotu05:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot07:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
S-Protect of AVR Butterfly
Thanks you for agreeing to semi-protect AVR Butterfly. When will this take effect? As I mentioned in the RfSP the same user/links have been added to the Atmel AVR. So far the unregistered user has resorted in insults on the accompnying talk page. I am trying to create aa discussion about the matter. I would like to request Semi-Protection for Atmel AVR as well. Would you be able to do that or shoudl I post my request on the Wikipedia Request for Protection page. --Rehnn83 13:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Please don't make selective warnings to one side of the dispute. I know the rules, but thanks for reminding me. --Mardavich16:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I was going to say the same thing as Mardavich above actually :) I know the rules, but thanks for reminding me. I also know what 3RR is, and none of my edits were disruptive. I left notes on the talk page as well. But again, thanks for reminding me the rules. Cheers! Baristarim16:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Response
I accept what you are saying, but I think that Persian nationalism is preventing the legitimate inclusion of the commonly accepted alternative name for the Gulf - the Arabian Gulf - in the Persian Gulf article (in fact, in some Arab states it is illegal to refer to the Gulf as the Persian Gulf). Please take a look at the talk page.
Also, after stating my point on Talk:Persian Gulf, User:Mardavich and User:Behaafarid appeared to track back on all my recent contributions - namely to Ethnic minorities in Iran and Arvand Free Zone - and reverted any changes I made, including updated wikilinks, fact tags and NPOV adjustments (nothing substantial, just small edits here and there). It is notable that they have not ever edited these article before, so the only reason for reverting was to stalk and vandalise my work. This is disruptive, but is the common experience Wikipedia users have when confronted by nationalists.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz16:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
That attitude does not help one bit. Stop the excessive reverting and stop throwing accusations of nationalism. Your above statement embodies exactly why the Persian Gulf article has faced numerous issues. -- tariqabjotu16:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
So it's my fault? I bring it on myself? I asked you to look at the constant reversion of my edits by stalkers and you claim I am throwing around accusations. Yes, I am accusing and with good reason.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz16:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Unprotect
Hi, can you tell me whether I filed the request on Anti-Zionism wrong, or was it an inappropriate request? I'm not very familiar with the procedure. Thanks, Mackan7916:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. It looks like just Chussid against the group to me (though I they were clearly revert warring as well), so I don't see the point in blocking the entire page. In any case, I was just curious for a second opinion. Thanks, Mackan7917:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I not provoking anyone, I am simply discussing content and citing Wikipedia policies, which is entirely within my rights as a user, and user:Ahwaz responds by saying "you are a liar, as well as a stalker and a bully" [5] or that "I can't read English" [6] and you come and warn me? You're an administrator, you should know the WP:NPA policy better than me. Are such comments acceptable to you? If not, then why isn't user:Ahwaz being warned? --Mardavich23:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
No, I do not believe Ahwaz's comments are acceptable. And yes, I am familiar with WP:NPA, which in part says Frequently, the best way to respond to an isolated personal attack is not to respond at all. I understand it's not just a lone personal attack, but the guy is blocked... there isn't much harm he can do since his talk page is the only place he can post comments. If you stop posting on his talk page, it is very likely he will stop responding. It's as if you're sticking your hand into a lion's cage; you keep doing it even though you know you'll get bitten and even though you can just leave it alone. -- tariqabjotu23:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I had given up already. But my intention was never to provoke him, but rather to open up some sort of dialogue with him and explain to him the reliable sources policy (WP:RS), since I saw him complaining that nobody is interested in a debate or discussion with him. Unfortunately, he doesn't want to assume good faith and he's only interested in personal accusations and attacks, which is why I gave up a few hours ago. Anyways, your intentions seem noble, sorry for my earlier reaction, I am just touchy and tired because of all that verbal abuse. --Mardavich00:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
People born in Jerusalem
Hi,
I've noticed you was the editor who added the split request to the Jerusalem article. Was that list moved to somewhere or was it simply deleted by the anonymous user who edited it at 17:24, 9 January 2007? I noticed this quite accidentally (I was searching for that section of the article in the page history because I need the template that arranged the list into nice columns), and now I don't know whether I stumbled upon unnoticed vandalism or the list is safely moved to somewhere. – Alenshatalk15:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
To be honest, I'm not sure what happened to it either. I saw the list had suddenly disappeared, but not moved to another article. I just didn't say anything about it because I didn't think it was necessary for the article anyway and surmised that someone else had agreed with me on that point. -- tariqabjotu15:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't know whether it's important for the article or not but lots of cities have similar sections and apparently it was important for those who compiled the list (and how would it look if that anonymous someone's edit was the final say in the matter :) anyway, I'll mention it on the talk page and if someone cares, they can move it wherever they want. – Alenshatalk16:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
For future reference, when reporting IP addresses on WP:AIV, use the {{ipvandal}} template instead, since it has important WHOIS links. For instance, in the past half-hour I saw that two reported IP vandals came from the BBC (not blocked) and the U.S. House of Representatives (blocked) due to the WHOIS links. -- tariqabjotu22:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm using VandalProof to automatically report the IPs. Any idea on how to change the template in VP? Corpx22:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
There probably is a way already, but I'm not familiar enough with the program to know. You should get your answer anyway. -- tariqabjotu22:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
WP:ADOPT
Hi there,
Looking through our Archives I saw that you took an interest in the Adopt-a-user program during its formation and development. Well this is just a quick message to tell you the program is well and truly lifted off, with over 200 users involved in the program, 50+ active Adopters and approx. 150 Adoptees, and always expanding. If your still interested please pop by WP:ADOPT, have a look around and ask any questions you want on our talk page. Look forward to seeing you there. Cheers Lethaniol15:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I find some similarities between the two accounts, but a request for checkuser reveals that it is unlikely they're maintained by the same person. Regardless, please do not levy attacks against Indian people; those kinds of comments do not lend to civil discussion. -- tariqabjotu01:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Understandable,If you think this was a bad choice of words, apologies.But as we are well aware HKelkar has been a very difficult sockpupeteer, and has been fooling around and hiding behind technology.It is very likely, he is using a proxy or a home internet connection this time.Can we tag this account as a suspect 87.74.29.23209:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Please look more carefully, it was my work on Jerusalem that has been reverted by User:Amoruso and User:Okedem simply because of their blatant POV, you can check where they come from.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot06:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Ararat Arev
Well, since my AN/I post, he's edited under two more IP addresses (both blocked now) and keeps stalking me about changing the article. Nishkid6401:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay; I'm officially retracting that comment on WP:ANI; a week is perfectly fine, and a further extension could soon be in order if he doesn't stop. -- tariqabjotu01:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Your name
Nice name, Tariq means a star Tariqa is the feminine version of the name bjotu what does that mean? Was just curious ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗ10:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
