Loading AI tools
DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.
This archive page covers approximately the dates between 14 February 2006 and 26 February 2006.
Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.
Please add new archivals to User talk:Gurubrahma/Archive10. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. --Gurubrahma 10:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
I have requested for a change in username... as I dont want to use my real name. --Aravind Parvatikar 07:46, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know about the DYK piece on Charles Nqakula. What I think is much more interesting about Nqakula is his announcement on February 9, 2006 that the inquiry into the aircrash 20 years ago – in which President Samora Machel of Mozambique was killed – is to be reopened. See the heading "Unfinished business" on Charles Nqakula.Phase1 12:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
He has changed it from overs to balls. Whether it was needed is questionable but certainly not vandalism. Tintin (talk) 17:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
When an image has a previous edit history, the summary in the upload form is not automatically displayed on the image page. As you can see, the page still has edit history from July 13, 2005. Apparently, Ghirlandajo, who first uploaded it to the Commons, decided for some reason to leave a short note on the Wikipedia end, pointing to a another image (that has apparently since been deleted). So, I just added c-uploaded to the image page manually.--Pharos 18:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
THIS IS NOT NONSENSE! THIS IS AN ACCURATE AND CORRECT DEFINITION OF A REPUBLIC (CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC) IN THE USA. STOP REMOVING IT FOR I WILL NOT CEASE TO ADD IT IF YOU DELETE IT!
Dion Wood —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.27.138 (talk • contribs)
It's great that you provided a rationale for your removal. I think it's better to explain your reasons on template talk than remove entries en masse and without explanations. Please keep up the good work, Ghirla | talk 18:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I have visited many Cricketers' pages on wiki which have balls bowled because the reference used on cricinfo also has the data in balls. Is there anything wrong then we should change the pages which has balls bowled has as a data. Thanks User:Urshyam|User_talk:Urshyam
Hello Gurubrahma, There was nothing to hurt me whatever you written there. Yes, you have good suggestion for using Edit summary. I will try to use it in future. But you are saying it was still remained as overs rather than balls... i think you are wrong at this point. Thank you.
Hi, I think you didn't notice an edit "balls = true |" that converts overs into balls bowled. Thanks Shyam
 |
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Arbit Choudhury, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
--Gurubrahma 05:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, thanx for your justification. Could you help me out for licensing an image. I downloaded some images from sites but i don't know that are they actually licensed or not. If not, then what is the criteria for licensing. The things written on GNU-Free Documentation is quite complex. Thanks Shyam
Hi Gurubrahma - I thank you for alerting me on problems, but I disagree with your observations:
- I'm using edit summaries regularly, and the 10+ edits you speak of - on February 13, 14 and 15, it involved fighting vandalism, removing images w/o copyright (no FA is supposed to have them) and a bit of reformatting. Its the usual traffic on the MG article. This article has not seen major changes in 3 days, and I haven't been properly active all this week.
- Pournami's lead opener was confusing and in bad grammar. It gave the impression that Gandhi was a political leader on one side and a religious leader on the other - quite incorrect. The Lead was cited as a major problem - it need to be re-formatted, more comprehensive. In undertaking that process, I corrected a grammar error and something that didn't convey an accurate meaning.
- I did not apologize for adding information to the article, but doing it in an FA when I had no idea of Wikipedia rules. And the reason I added a boatload of new info is becoz I found it missing from the article then elevated to FA status. Considering the care I'm taking to follow FA rules and write properly, I wish you would stop comparing this to my anon days.
- "Comparing the two versions" is a bad plan becoz we will need 3-4 attentive editors constantly cross-checking with an outdated version which bore less info than this one. All we need to do here is to correct the effors in this present article and bring it in line with FA criteria, dat's all. "Pasting" select info into the older version is hardly a solution.
- The old article was well-written and seemingly comprehensive according to FA guidelines - that is prolly the reason it became an FA. It did not contain inline citations, and was not comprehensive - consider the huge amount of new data that was added. Its better to work with the present article.
- The Criticism of Gandhi and Gandhi's comments on various religions are cut/past jobs, that's all - it isn't exactly a great "fork" strategy. And user:Saiswa, as you point out in my case, should have raised the issue on the PR or talkpage first. The cut/paste job is a detriment to the main article. I feel that AFD is a proper solution, especially the person has not responded to my request to join the PR nor made any further edits yet to MG. I consider these so-called forks even worse than the Leadership fork.
If you want to start a FAReview, that's cool - I only knew of PR as a method to bring people together on a task. If you're concerned that the PR hasn't attracted a lot of comments, you should take into account the progress made since the start of this process: the problems were candidly identified, and user:Saravask gave a lot of good input. user:Taxman gave some great advice and asserted that the articles is making progress. This article is more comprehensive than ever and is increasingly coming in line with FA standards. We've (1) cut 8 kbs, (2) inline citations (more to come) (3) improved the lead, (4) rmvd POV (5) improved the prose (6) rmvd problematic images and data and (7) The "Leadership" article is no more.
If others aren't coming forward with comments, I don't care becoz we should focus on the work ahead. Everybody knows that the PR is open and everyone is welcome to participate. I feel that you should take the few hours to gather your technical points of criticism and recommendations on this article and put it up on PR. This will give a strong push forward to the process, and help us all in incorporating your input through the right channels.
Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow 21:33, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Hi - I strongly stand by all I've said and done, but you needn't fear any attitude/personal problems developing between us again. However, I think you should take the dialogue to the PR directly as I wrote above. I have not seen the kinda direct technical input from you which is necessary for me to understand your views. The only edits I plan on making till the end of next week is adding in-line citations and occasional vandal fighting. There is a need to discuss practical ways to prevent the deterioration of quality over long periods of time. Rama's Arrow 04:52, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you Gurubrahma, it will really help me out. --shyam 14:08, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Wow so you are online now! And, my thanks to you too as you have created so many nice pages. And, I am not correcting: was doing a bit of minor linking here and there. One thing more, let us identify some more users from this part of the world who may be nominated for adminship: perhaps we require more Indians or administrators familiar with topics relevant to India. In case, you want someone to nominate, I shall pleasantly be a co-nominator. --Bhadani 14:35, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- Permit me to interfere by saying that I consider user:Deeptrivia to be absolutely qualified and well-deserving for adminship. The man has impeccable standards regarding other users and his work. He is decent, often selfless and hardworking. He has done a fantastic job with Wikipedia:WikiProject History of India. I wanted to give him another barnstar, but didn't coz I've already given him two. Do consider him for a RFA. Rama's Arrow 16:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- Please see my response to above message on my talk page. Let us do something fast. --Bhadani 16:26, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- Permit me to interfere by saying that I consider user:Deeptrivia to be absolutely qualified and well-deserving for adminship. The man has impeccable standards regarding other users and his work. He is decent, often selfless and hardworking. He has done a fantastic job with Wikipedia:WikiProject History of India. I wanted to give him another barnstar, but didn't coz I've already given him two. Do consider him for a RFA. Rama's Arrow 16:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
I went through and added all the languages I could find here, to Wikicommons barnstar page and to each of the Awards Pages on the different languages. Are there other languages that are missing?
-- evrik 17:46, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- I left a note on the page you mentioned, but since you speak Hindi, I was going to see if there was an award page on the hindi version of wikipedia that could be linked to.evrik 18:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
It has increased in size. Could use more work... the COTW week is almost up.
- hydkat 18:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Just to inform you - in case you've missed - that Kargil War is a FA candidate at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Kargil War/archive1. Almost all the objections raised have been worked out so far. You comments and vote on this are solicited. Tx Idleguy 06:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi Gurubrahma - I've made some comments on your adminship page, but that is all I have to say about the matter. All this is best handled by Bhadaniji and yourself.
Regarding Mahatma Gandhi:
- I gave my reply on your idea of "reinventing the wheel" - I feel its okay to consult it, but you're attaching too much importance to a piece which is quite deficient, IMO: (a) Sardar Patel is referred to as "authoritarian," (b) complex political developments and events are left unexplained, so as to enable misconceptions, prejudices to arise. (c) links, references, citations are insufficient. Sections needed coverage are glaringly missing, and lead is poor - I would not have voted for its FAC.
- This version is too simplistic - Gandhi's life is well-documented and deals with complex issues with an easy-to-misunderstand philosophy. For example - you and I are "Gandhians" despite knowing of Gandhi's quotes on the holocaust, "kaffir" and role in Hindu-Muslim issues. Surely there is a reason for that - the quotes are in a complex context, easily provoking anti-Gandhi thinking.
- Britannica's bio of Gandhi is long, and even so glaringly deficient (no Champaran, Kheda details). We've got a reasonably important job to do.
What I intend to do next:
- In-line citations - coming up next week.
- Reduction of size: compress sections by cutting off long-winding sentences, unnecessary detail. I will make the changes slowly and one section at a time. No significant changes expected.
- user:Taxman and myself feel that the "Penn and Teller" criticism is unencyclopedic - their own intentions/purpose is not clear, and a television program is not credible enough IMO. Besides, the P/T thing just criticizes the "Kaffir" statement and Stanley Wolpert's work, which have been criticized and counter-criticized all-over. Right now, the thing seems problematic and insufficient, while adding more to it will jeopardize the focus of the article. At best, an external link should be tied in.
The most valuable input has come from user:Saravask and user:Taxman. Can you please make a similar list of what you intend to do/should be done to the article on the PR page? This will help me understand what you want better (so far we've discussed "ideas"), and I will help you carry the work out. Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow 06:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! Rama's Arrow 08:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Dear Guru, its so nice to receive your message -- thanx for being both supportive and understanding, and for the commendation on Nirav's talk-page -- I'm glad not everybody imputes low motives and bad faith to me. Anyway, time to move on. Yes, I'm writing some exams, and as a resolution, I refrained from all editing this past month, and for some time from even logging in, but just could not keep off WP otherwise!! Isn't it terrible? This addiction is downright alarming, but I will not edit (I think!) for another 10 days. Thanx again, and catch you later, ImpuMozhi 17:27, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for yr reply on query on admin. kindly enlighten as to whether an admin's views are authentic as wiki's official view. Appaiah 08:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi Gurubrahma,
Thank you very much for your support - it is always nice when other users appreciate your views on certain matters. I will try to make sure my edit summaries get up to 100% - I completely understand why this is desirable and will endeavour to achieve it ASAP!
Reinstated. However, IMHO 25 speechless days are more than enough to determine a proposal abandoned. Deryck C. 17:28, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thanx! But I did'nt do that much though. I hoped to have done more... but with my workload keeping me busy right now i need to compromise sleep time to do this. I'll keep working on the article.
- hydkat 18:16, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, yes i will do summaries in the future. Thanx. The Ash filmography came from imdb, Pa7 20:53, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. I am flattered by your comments in the talk pages :-) It is an honour to be thought of like that but I did some thinking after we discussed it a few months back and would like continue just as an editor due to a number of reasons.
First, I am more of an editor (not very good as a writer, but I like to think I am reasonably okay at digging up data, nitpicking facts etc) than admin material. I am not that good with words (as you or Sundar) and don't have the infinite patience of someone like Bhadani (whose WP:AGF for people who I would have dismissed as trolls is something that I admire). If I get comments like these in my talk page a couple of times, I probably would want to run away from Wikipedia rather than fight it out with such people.
Secondly, the two areas where I work - cricket and some sections of India - are great places for an editor as there is almost no friction with the fellow editors. I don't really want to get out of that comfort zone but being an admin will invariably bring new pressures and obligations and it wouldn't be right to avoid them. Both of these areas have a lot of good admins and an extra one is no real necessity. In AfDs too, there is very little backlog these days when compared to three months ago.
The only reason why I may want to apply for an RfA in the future is if I become active in articles related to Kerala and Malayalam because there are no admins who work in this area. But if one of Raghu, Jisha, Pournami or Kjrajesh becomes an admin by then even that won't be necessary. Tintin (talk) 03:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Gurubrahma,
The Bangalore peer review is in its final phase...a lot of work has been done to revamp the article and I like the way it stands as of now. I wanted to thank you for your continued support and contributions in improving the quality of the article. I am working on minor touch-ups, as necessary, and should be in a position to nominate it for FAC tomorrow (2/20). If you have a few minutes at your disposal, could you please give the article one last review before the FAC nomination? Thanks a bunch! AreJay 03:38, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the compliments. --Aravind Parvatikar 07:32, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Text has been directly copied and pasted in the articles Vikramaditya VI and Vijayanagara Empire
- Source of the article: OurKarnataka.com
- Author: Mr. Athreja (of Mangalore)
- Contributed by: Dineshkannambadi (talk · contribs)
Our Karnataka.Com no where specifies that the information on their site is free for reproduction. Is this a copy right violation? Please advise. I have referred this issue to you since you are a admin. Since Dineshkannambadi (talk · contribs) is a new member I haven't referred this issue to him Aravind Parvatikar 10:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you Aravind Parvatikar 14:00, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Gurubrahma, I changed Ash's pic to the old Devdas-pic by replacing the porn pic. Thanks again for the heads-up. Regards, --Plumcouch 15:53, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
How can one claim there was copyright violation in the material I put in regarding history of Vijayanagar Empire, when I have clearly quoted the reference source and the author. Can you please explain this to me. This also pertains to the content on page "Vikramaditya VI". A copyright violation happens when one takes material and calls it his/her own deduction, research etc when in reality the material was written by a someone alse.
Dinesh Kannmabdi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dineshkannambadi (talk • contribs)
Thanks for the tip, I'll do that now. Raven4x4x 08:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi GB - if/when you have time, can you please have a look at Lothal, which is terribly close to FAC? Also, Bangalore is FAC right now. Rama's Arrow 13:28, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- I know about the pic. That's ok. Rama's Arrow 17:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- What jumping the gun? I know both about your removing from MG, and placing on assasination. Its ok. Rama's Arrow 18:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
In response to post on my talkpage.
The Kingdom of England ceased to exist in 1707, and was replaced by the United Kingdom. Thus, there was no Queen/King of England after that date. 'United Kingdom' is correct.. Bastin8 18:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your information. I am trying to take care of this issue in some locations where I have cut and pasted interesting material. Good Job!!!
dinesh kannambadi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dineshkannambadi (talk • contribs)
Pardon Me Sir, or Madame. It won't happen again. HG —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.190.203.89 (talk • contribs)
Thank you for choosing Broadcasting in East Germany for DYK - and thank you again for all your hard work for the Wikipedia, which everyone benefits from but we're all too slow to say so! :o) ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 12:41, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I need your admin help with this. I suspect two usernames in sharing one person :) and common voting in favor of the RfA nominee. However, I'm not familiar with respective Wiki procedures. That's why I haven't left the formal sockpuppet template. Would you do those procedures and post your official conclusion there? Of course I'll remove my comment and apologize to both users if I'm wrong. Thanks, Ukrained 13:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Gurubrahma, to the request so strange, a simple fact chek could easily sort this out. I know you are busy with DYK and other things, so I am providing you these links so that you don't have to spend any time on this: , , . --Irpen 19:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Is this vandalism? I dont know what to say. Articles are getting screwed up. I got another one Rashtrakuta. This article starts with the reference from Mr. Arthikaje. Well I have spent more than 22 years in karnataka, have completed my primary education in Kannada but havent heard of Mr. Arthikaje. Is he an authority in kannada or kannada histroy? Please advise.
- Credits for contribution Dineshkannambadi (talk · contribs) --> Article
--IndianCow 13:41, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- By the way i got my username changed... Thanks for the guidance. --IndianCow 13:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- I told him about it but I seriously doubt his "good fatih". Dineshkannambadi-Previous avatar Dineshkannambadi (talk · contribs) --IndianCow 08:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Through history on my talk page
Hi. Could you take a look at Sri Ranganathaswamy Temple? There is a new user, who is very knowledgable about the subject, but who keeps deleting an introductory section. I have tried to engage him on the article talk page and on his user talk page, but so far, without success. If someone else could try, it might be helpful. --BostonMA 15:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. I spoke too soon. The new editor is now using the talk page. Thanks anyway. --BostonMA 15:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Hello.. Yes, I see moved the information we to the user section. Could you move it back, please? We were asked (by fellow colleagues) to create a page here in order to direct and help those inquiring about the artist. We are new to creating pages here... new to editing information. Our fan club president believes the ever-growing "gee phenomenom" could be better understood and better defined with an entry in the online encyclopedia. If there is a problem, we understand. We do not want to violate your rules or code. We can research and list elsewhere. Warmest Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geecobain (talk • contribs)
Hi Gurubrahma - Finally! I've finally gotten a barnstar from you! How far have we come! Hahahaha....Sometimes we are left lacking enough words or forced to repeat some to emphasize the depth of our genuine feelings. I am very grateful. Thank you. The joy I get from working on Wikipedia is in no small measure due to you - I've basically tried to follow the example you set.
Note: there apparently already was an article on "Pattabhi Sitarammaya." I had acted upon a request I saw on Portal:India, and discovered this problem when I went to set up redirects. I incorporated its material into the newly created article becoz its titled on his full name. Plus, I added some of my own. Thus I cannot claim much credit for this task.
I want to take this opportunity to clear up a venue of misunderstanding: I had acted upon the valid criticism of ImpuMozhi prior to your comments. I had also asked Sundar (see this comment) to lemme know if there were errors in the article on the lines of ImpuMozhi's "critique", in case I was blinded by aggravation. And I stake my final destination when I tell you that I never ignored or spoke insultingly to ImpuMozhi: I sent him this "note of thanks", thanked him repeatedly on the PR and devoted a subsection to answer his points. I also asserted immediately to ImpuMozhi this time that he should not construe my heat as any personal attack.
Once again, thanks! Rama's Arrow 16:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Help! - please check out Wikipedia:Defense of content. I've come up with some interesting proposals to fight vandalism. I request your involvement in the discussion. Rama's Arrow 16:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Though about that, and came up with this:
Hi, thank you very much for placing the article in the DYN section. HJKeats 18:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed your comment on Swedenman's talk page, and I just wanted you to know that he's a troll. Swedenman is identical with Användare:Filipman on Swedish Wikipedia. So far he has been blocked 8 times, see sv:Block log. Probert 04:49, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Kundan Amitabh appears to be a vanity page created by the anonymous IP for the user who created the page Angika. I would request for your comments, and if required we may recommend the page Kundan Amitabh for deletion. --Bhadani 14:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Firstly, it is techically impossible to restore images from deletion. However, please be aware that I have the full backing of the Arbitration Committee and Jimbo Wales to start deleting images of TIME Covers which are in violation of copyright. I'm going to keep doing this as we have a clear legal issue here. - Ta bu shi da yu 14:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- It was done via email. If you'd like, ask him yourself, either by his email or on his talk page. I'm sure he'd be happy to respond. - Ta bu shi da yu 14:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you Gurubrahma, I am fairly confident Bangalore would not have been such a high quality article without the active involvement of yourself and other the other Indian admins! AreJay 14:46, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- Oops! Sorry! ;-) AreJay 14:57, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I've changed it. The wording on the actual AfD should be the definitive decision, what's on the talk page is just based on that (and usually added by the closer as a convenience, but some don't do it). So in this case it was indeed supposed to be a keep. --W.marsh 14:52, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
I see you have been talking with the man who is deleting all the Time magazine covers. I don't see any discussion at the article on Time (magazine) or on Wikipedia:Images. The images can easily be switched to any of the other thumbnail licenses allowed in the US such as {{newspapercover}}. Can you join the discussion so we can get a consensus. He is undoing hundreds of hours of work and the damage is not reversible. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 16:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, I'm stopping a clear copyright violation issue. I'm going to start reviewing {{newspapercover}} and {{magazinecover}} next. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:19, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- No, I'm adding them to IFD when there is no fair use rationale but I can see that they might actually be needed to illustrate an article. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with you on almost all points. However, the TIME covers are a special case. Several people who are against Wikipedia have noticed them, and I suspect would use them to cause a great deal of trouble for us with TIME. One issue that I would like to respond to is your statement "However, it is entirely conceivable that after some time, due to many edits on the article, the issue itself is no longer present in the article, but the image is." - IMO if the article removes the description of the cover then the image should no longer be in the article. Images in articles, as Gmaxwell has stated, are not for eye-candy, they are there to illustrate a point or provide visual information a reader can't gain from text.
- However, there is one issue I must disagree on. What is fair use for one may not be fair use for another, true. However, I don't really care what one person believes is fair use and another doesn't: fair use is a legal doctrine. I only care what a court of law believes. It won't matter in the slightest that we tried to gather consensus for what is or isn't fair use to the court: they will just say that we were wrong and order damages. Consensus != legal opinion. I think we need to bare that in mind. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:14, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- No, I'm adding them to IFD when there is no fair use rationale but I can see that they might actually be needed to illustrate an article. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi again! User:Swedenman keeps removing comments from his talk page, see talk page history. Could you do anything about his incorrect conduct? Probert 19:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
...for the appreciation on Kargil War becoming FA. As for adminship, I'm not too keen right now, but I might change my mind in a couple of weeks. :-) Cheers. Idleguy 09:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
I am a history teacher trying to make the very valid point that Wikipedia is not a valid resource for formal historical research. My teenage students use Wikipedia which has led them to write glowing defenses of the KKK and the Armenia Massacre. Why am I not allowed, on an open source site, to add constructive comments? (and how do I get your reply?) BT —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobtine (talk • contribs)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
