User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 30

Archive 25

←

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Books & Bytes – Issue 55

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 55, January – February 2023

• New bundle partners:
  • Newspapers.com
  • Fold3
• 1Lib1Ref January report
• Spotlight: EDS SmartText Searching

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:46, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Mahatma Gandhi voice recording

Hello, I don’t see a reason to remove the voice recording of Gandhi from the info box. You mentioned something about phrasing in your edit summary, I think you were talking about other edits made by other editors, I only put the recording I didn’t changed any phrasing or anything else with the info box. I think the voice recording (which wasn’t in the article) is very interesting and should remain in the info box where it’s easily seen by readers. ✠ Robertus Pius ✠ (Talk • Contribs) 14:09, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi there Robertus, My eyes must me tired. I couldn't find your edit in the recent history (going back to October). Could you please give me the link? Apologies. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:03, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahatma_Gandhi&oldid=1146146103

There’s the link for ya. It’s a very good quality recording, it’s in English, and it’s a good message. I think it’s perfect for the infobox so that readers can his voice clearly and hear a powerful message from him. Lemme know what you think. ✠ Robertus Pius ✠ (Talk • Contribs) 22:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I listened to it. Gandhi is talking about his belief in God and in truth as a manifestation of the divine. He enunciates clearly, unlike 15 years later when he was slurring his words. So that is a plus. But the lead describes Gandhi to be primarily a political figure, not religious. So, that is a minus. But Gandhi's politics were an aspect of his religion, broadly interpreted. So, that is another plus. Two to one is a majority, and those are just my votes.

Presumably there is one vote from you as the nominator, making three to one in all, which is a thumping majority. Please reinstate that video in the Infobox. Best regards. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:50, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Awesome, will do. Thanks very much. ✠ Robertus Pius ✠ (Talk • Contribs) 19:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Generally speaking, though, audios in the infobox are not just about the voice, but also about the content of what the voice expresses; in other words, that content has to be representative. A consideration for rejecting one version could be that by preferring it over many others in a place of such prominence, we might be skewing or subtly emphasizing one narrative about the subject over some others. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:12, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Administrator

Have you ever considered becoming a WP:ADMIN? I have considered nominating you. Please @ me in your response.  – CityUrbanism 🗩 🖉 14:42, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't think I have the patience it takes to be a good admin, nor for that matter the time these days.My abilities can probably be better used in improving WP policy in topics such as due weight, WP:BALANCE, and WP:FALSEBALANCE, especially in history-related topics. The late user:SlimVirgin, who was herself a contributor to WP policy, had asked me once, but I didn't do anything then. I'll have to mull this over. It will require some reading on at least half a dozen topics in history, perhaps even a dozen, at the level of OUP's Very Short Introductions.

But something like that is needed to elevate WP, to push it beyond one step forward, one step back state it seems to find itself in these days. Thanks for bringing this up. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:31, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@CityUrbanism: pinging you. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Violence against women during Partition of India

Sorry to bother you Fowler&fowler but I have noticed a few edits on this topic area by user UnpetitproleX who seems to be insisting Rawalpindi massacre of 1947 was the first instance of violence against women during Partition. Which it clearly wasn't I have made the relevant changes on the article mentioning tbr 1946 events which were the first time women were attacked looking at their other edits on Amritsar train massacre it is clear they are trying to down play attacks on Muslims and over hype the violence against Sikhs and Hindus by mentioning in the lead previous attacks so I did the same. Its the usual toxic religous nationalism we see daily on Wikipedia along with in India these days. Could you kindly review my edit as I need someone who is neutral and not a mindless nationalist to ensure these sensitive topics are as neutral as possible. Appreciate your efforts and effort you have put in to try and stem this tide of nationalism which blights wikipedia. 2A02:C7C:6782:7A00:91A9:9E69:C348:B335 (talk) 13:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Auld Lang Syne

Hi. I can do some light cheerleading and stuff, but pleased be warned that I am a thin sliver of my former Gryphon self. The mere thought... and here I am not exaggerating... of the fetid slime I had to swim through in the past makes me feel as if earth's gravity had nearly doubled, and its skies are all grim and gray.Lingzhi.Renascence (talk) 23:14, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I understand. This is a busy week for me. Will respond Saturday. Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:48, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

If not Bengal famine of 1943, then maybe Jallianwala Bagh? § Lingzhi (talk) 02:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Harijan (magazine)

F&f, I created the above stub a few days back when I realized that mentions of the weekly were erroneously being wikilinked to Dalit#Harijan. It's just a start with lots that can be potentially added/clarified. For example, I wasn't able to nail down Harijan's exact period of hiatus, last date of publication, editors besides Shastri, and place of publication besides Poona (there are are indications in the sources I read that the publication moved elsewhere). And the Chakrabarty book already used as a reference is almost entirely devoted to using MKG's writing in Harijan to analyze his developing philosophy; so lots of potential material there too although I didn't want to add too much from it yet since that would imbalance the stub in its current state.

In any case, if this piques your (or any of your page-watcher's) interest, dive right in! Hope you are doing well and happy editing. Abecedare (talk) 15:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

See forex: Arhive.org § Lingzhi (talk) 15:25, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Just randomly browsing through the issues, I see that Pyarelal and Mahadev Desai served as editors too. And I see that there are issues published in the 1950s under the editorship of K. G. Mashruwala; wonder what explains the discrepancy between that and 1948 being generally cited as the end of publication. If any of you find related secondary sources please drop me a note or mention it at Talk:Harijan (magazine). Abecedare (talk) 15:45, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:59, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much Gerda! A pleasant surprise indeed. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:30, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Jammu and Kashmir

Hi Fowler&fowler, I saw that you've reverted my edits to Jammu and Kashmir (union territory) stating that it doesn't follow consensus. Will you please provide me the link to the discussion where the consensus was determined. Thanks! --Ratekreel (talk) 17:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

You'll have to look for it yourself. It is not my job to edify editors who appear on a page with a long history and a hard-won consensus that will have lasted four years in August 2023 and pretend that WP:BOLD, unvarnished, is their right, but nothing their responsibility. Note that Ladakh, Gilgit-Baltistan, Azad Kashmir, and Aksai Chin all follow the same format. It couldn't be an accident. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus

Wanted to let you know that there is an ongoing page move discussion at Talk:Chhatrapati_Shivaji_Terminus#Requested move 23 May 2023. I had to restore the stable version today, especially lead and infobox. Some POV pushers had changed it. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:06, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 56

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023

• New partner:
  • Perlego
• Library access tips and tricks
• Spotlight: EveryBookItsReader

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Varanasi

Have a look at this revert. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:53, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion

Hi Fowler, please consider reverting your last post to Talk:Delhi. It is getting a bit meta for a talkpage, and if you do wish to post along those lines, the point is clear without the first sentence. CMD (talk) 17:22, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

I've fixed it CMD, and apologized. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:21, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Request

I want you to checkTalk:Violence against Christians in India#manipur? Hu741f4 (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

OK, will do, but maybe not right away. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

varanasi

i have a point in Varanasi talk page. please join it. Themodifie7 (talk) 03:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Request

Hi, I noticed that you have an interest in Jawaharlal Nehru, and have a prior history of involvement on the talk page. I was wondering if you could please look into a recent editing dispute? Talk:Jawaharlal_Nehru. Exdg77 (talk) 02:14, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for looking over Jawaharlal Nehru. I will defer to your rationale for reverting the lead, and discuss introducing any possible changes in the venues you suggested in the future. Exdg77 (talk) 23:52, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome and thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:23, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Persistent addition of flags/emblems/icons to Kashmir-related infoboxes

Kautilya3 added India's flag and state emblems to the infobox of Leh, claiming it was justified because Does the "consensus" apply to any cities in Pakistani control? (???), and left accused me of violating WP:NPOV on my talk page.

Similarly, India's flag has been inserted in the infoboxes of Jammu and Poonch.

Did I miss the discussion where we decided to add flags to the infoboxes? Solblaze (talk) 10:22, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Kautilya3 does want the consistent format across the various article and at different scales. I have fixed the articles on the major sub-regions, and their capitals. At some point in the future I'll get around to the district capitals. Thank you for posting Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:26, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Archive spacing

I've often wondered about the manual list of archives at the top of your talkpage. The problem lies in the MiszaBot configuration. This line

|archive = User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive%(counter)d

should be

|archive = User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive %(counter)d

with a space between /Archive and %. Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:20, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

I didn't realize there was a problem. So thanks, Joshua.

But will the change above make the pictures disappear? I do want to keep the pics. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

I think they'll stay; there's no signature nor date. I'll find out. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:27, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes: User:MiszaBot/config One potential problem is that lowercase sigmabot III does not archive sections that have no signatures. See also the two unarchived noticeboard-notifications above. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:37, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

April 2019 WBG signaled a problem with your archives diff; you corrected the actual archivenumber diff,yet retained the incorrect archive-parameter perma-link (do NOT change or save that page; it's an old version of your talkpage!). Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:11, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

I've made the change. Thank you again, Joshua. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:20, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty to move archive 24, 25, and 26 to the correct syntax. They should appear soon in the archives-list. Additionally, I've moved "Archive23" to "Archive 23a" (there already was an "Archive 23" ...). Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 02:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, they appeared in the archive-box! 🥳 - except for User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 23a (dec. 2019 - sept 2020)... If you like, I can merge it with User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 23 (march 2020 - aug 2020), or renumber the two.

PS: tip, for the unarchived threads: User:Evad37/OneClickArchiver. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:20, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Pilaf article reverts

Hello, thank you for your attention. Since I am new to editing on wikipedia, can you explain what procedure you would like me to go through before I try again with my revisions to that specific section of the article? "Please take to the talk page and explain what you have done and the sources you have added." By this do you mean I should always explain what I have done on the talk page after doing so or do you want me to suggest it on the talk page first and then wait until some other editor interacts with this before performing the actual edits on the article? Zimistani (talk) 11:45, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

No you don't have to explain everything on the talk page first, but you do need to cite your added text to reliable sources (preferably scholarly sources) and explain what you have done in each edit briefly in an edit summary. If someone reverts you, then you should open a talk page thread per WP:BRD and ask them why. The WP:ONUS to show what you have added is reliable is yours. Please also read WP:SCHOLARSHIP for scholarly sources and WP:TERTIARY (especially the bit about textbooks and other encyclopedias) for due weight. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:17, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Economy of Mughal Empire.

If this is the case, we need to remove the entire section of mughal GDP to be 25% . As Maddison report is the only thing which says this .Qaayush529 (talk) 11:37, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

I'll have to mull this over. It will take me a week, as I'm flat out of time right now. Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:37, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Lede of Narendra Modi

Fowler&fowler, regarding this edit, removing minor details from lede sections is not "bowdlerizing"; see WP:LEDE. Your mileage may vary but I fail to see how much of the text you replaced benefits the reader seeking "a concise overview of the article's topic". Casual readers probably don't care about Modi's father's tea stall or the failure of his marriage, but they can find it in the article body if they read further. Compliance with LEDE is required for Good Articles. But I've finished my c/e and I'm done. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 20:44, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh I can reduce its length, but in the instance of controversial figures, generalizing language and jargon can sometimes distort the truth in a manner that benefits them. Saying as

WP does,

"His administration has been considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots, in which 1,044 people were killed—three-quarters of whom were Muslim— and has been criticised for its management of the crisis. A Special Investigation Team appointed by the Supreme Court of India found no evidence to initiate prosecution proceedings against him."

is quite a bit different in both emphasis and detail than what Britannica does:

"Modi’s political career thereafter remained a mixture of deep controversy and self-promoted achievements. His role as chief minister during communal riots that engulfed Gujarat in 2002 was particularly questioned. He was accused of condoning the violence or, at least, of doing little to stop the killing of more than 1,000 people, mostly Muslims, that ensued after dozens of Hindu passengers died when their train was set on fire in the city of Godhra. In 2005 the United States declined to issue him a diplomatic visa on the grounds that he was responsible for the 2002 riots, and the United Kingdom also criticized his role in 2002. Although in the succeeding years Modi himself escaped any indictment or censure—either by the judiciary or by investigative agencies—some of his close associates were found guilty of complicity in the 2002 events and received lengthy jail sentences. Modi’s administration was also accused of involvement in extrajudicial killings (variously termed “encounters” or “fake encounters”) by police or other authorities. ... Modi’s repeated political success in Gujarat, however, made him an indispensable leader within the BJP hierarchy and led to his reintegration into the political mainstream.

I see my intervention as supplying the details that need to be summarized in some fashion, which the previous version had not supplied. Thanks for your post. Best, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:05, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Readers might not care about the failure of a marriage, but they do care when a man deserts a wife and keeps it under wraps for 40 years. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:10, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply; you seem to feel these minor points are more important than I do. I've no further interest the article, though I feel I've done my best with the c/e, which was requested at the GOCE Requests page. Good luck with the article; have a lovely weekend. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 07:19, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Dominion of India

Hello @Fowler&fowler. I recently noticed that you removed the government parameter from the infobox of the Dominion of India article, stating that that it wasn't a constitutional monarchy. I do not intend to open a large rambling discussion in the talk page so I'm quickly, directly asking you in your talk page. The Union of India was a dominion in British Commonwealth of Nations between 1947 and 1950, simalar to Canada (then, Dominion of Canada), Commonwealth of Australia or the Union of South Africa. All these articles state "parliamentary constitutional monarchy" in their government form parameter in the infobox. All these countries (incl. India) were in personal union with United Kingdom and shared George VI as their monarch at that time, so that would mean the Dominion of India would also be a federal constitutional monarchy, wouldn't it? PadFoot2008 (talk) 07:40, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

From August 15, 1947 onward the Indian leaders kept the British monarch determinedly at bay. George VI never visited India because between 1936 and 1947 there was too much turmoil both in the world and in India, and between 1947 and his death in 1952, he was not welcome. Indian nationalists called their new political dispensation that lasted between 1947 and 1950, "Union of India," not Dominion of India. On Wikipedia it used to be called Union of India, but during once of my absences the monarchists had their way, and I've never bothered to set it right again. In other words, George VI might have been theoretically the monarch of a dominion that was acting like an independent country within the Commonwealth, but for all practical purposes he was not. Alternatively, he was the de jure monarch, but he wasn't the de facto monarch. All vestiges of Britain disappeared from India on 15 August 1947 except Mountbatten who went in late spring of 1948. Unlike Canada or Australia, there was no symbol of Britain in India's national flag, national emblem, national anthem, or national observances. The Canadians took many decades before they changed their flag to the maple leaf and God save the Queen to O Canada, and the former still remains the royal anthem. As for Australia, Advance Australia Fair became the national anthem (instead of GSQ) only in 1974, although it has been first composed in the late 19th century.

You may add a footnote it you'd like, which I'll look at later, but there is no chance historiographic terms that it will receive anything more. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

The reason why the page isn't called "Union of India" is because the present Republic too is called the Union of India or the Indian Union. If an article called Union of India would've existed it would need to cover the period entirely from 1947 to present. Even though in international events Republic of India is used, domestically and constitutionally the Indian Union and Union of India are used too. Indian school textbooks too I've noticed, use these terms in a present day sense. In regard to the monarchy, It doesn't matter is the monarch ever visited India or not, the Indian Government never said that it was a republic or its wasn't a monarchy ever. Only in 1949 Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru said that India would be getting rid of its monarchy and becoming a republic in 1950, but requested that it remain a part of the "British Commonwealth of Nations". If India didn't have a monarchy, why will Nehru say that he was going to abolish the monarchy? An excerpt from the dedicated article:

"The principal topic of the conference was the relationship of India, which was intending to become a republic, to the Commonwealth, which, hitherto, had been an association of Britain and British dominions united by sharing a constitutional link by sharing the British sovereign as their head of state, in particular whether a Commonwealth state could become a republic and remain in the Commonwealth, if so, whether it had the same status in the Commonwealth as the dominions who had the British sovereign as their head of state."

Why would India "intend" to become a republic if it was already not a monarchy in 1949? Constitutionally, George VI was the monarch of India from 1947 to 1950 with the acceptance of the Government of India. It was completely legal and de facto. It doesn't matter if he visited India or not, or if he had any powers aside from nominally appointing the Governor General. Are you trying to change historical facts, @Fowler&fowler? PadFoot2008 (talk) 02:17, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

I really don't have time for this sort of speculation. As I've said at the British Raj page, you are dabbling in fringe notions, and pursuing them on multiple platforms. I feel further engagement with you is not productive for me. I request that you not post on my talk page again if it is about British colonial India issues (or their immediate aftermath). @Abecedare and RegentsPark: Is it time for a topic ban for Padfoot2008 from British colonial India related pages broadly construed for at least a period of three months and perhaps more? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:41, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd got busy with other stuff and forgot about this. If you feel that engaging in this discussion with me is not productive for me, it's up to you, but it certainly is be productive for me and for the article where you mindlessly removed important information. I'd prefer not to comment on the part about topic banning me, except that in my opinion, I've done nothing to deserve it. PadFoot2008 (talk) 08:05, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Re: Kashmir RFC

Regarding your comment: note that the conclusion of this RFC may well be that, as North8000 suggested and you hinted, no updates are needed to the existing consensus! Getting the 2019 consensus re-affirmed (if that is what happens) will itself be of benefit IMO. Also, if your preferred option for the lede language is not among the ones listed in the RFC's currently (as I suspect), feel free to offer it as part of your comment. I haven't yet examined the listed options carefully enough and it would be good to have your preferred version listed before I get down to weighing in myself.

PS: I am commenting here in order to avoid have a threaded discussion in the "Survey section" of the RFC, because we both know how messy that gets! Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 00:45, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I added an "explanation" after that comment, mentioning your earlier argument, which I thought was beautifully precise, epitomizing what GH Hardy had said in A Mathematician's Apology about reductio ad absurdum, "A chess player offers the pawn sacrifice. A mathematician offers the game." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:12, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

2c

F&f, if an editor asks to be referred to as male, female, or of neither gender, it behooves us to do so as a matter of common courtesy. The "real gender" [sic] of the editor or the reason behind their on-wiki preference is frankly irrelevant because while we can and should "argue" over article content based on sources, wikipedia policies etc, when it comes to this issue there is, IMO, no external authority to refer to beyond the person(a) themselves.

Of course, it is not always easy to remember each editor's preference and inadvertent lapses are almost inevitable. As a personal practice, for the last few years I have started using neutral third-person pronouns in all communications (both on and off-wiki) where the gender of the referent is unknown or is irrelevant to the topic of the discussion. And I haven't received any push-back from people who identify as male or female so far. The singular "they/them" takes some getting used to but English after all is a living language.

Note that in the above, I have not referred to any wikipedia policy although I believe there are some that have been formulated recently (tps'er can perhaps link to them). For me, the crux is that, irrespective of whether such policies exist or are enforced, we should hold ourselves to high-enough standard not to stoop to questioning other peoples gender or gender identity. Hope you will give it some thought; feel free to respond here or through email, if you prefer (best though, not to make the discussion about any particular editor). Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 00:31, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

I belong to a peer group of men and women that didn't change their last names after marriage; some of us adopted hyphenated names for both, then argued in the best traditions of equality about order of hyphenated names for themselves and their children, ... Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir, were our idols or were Anna Freud and Dorothy Burlingham (whose WP article I had the pleasure of writing),

So, I do try and remember your dictum most of the time, but like you said, there are times when the generic male pronoun pops up unannounced. It does in the speech of women I know and they are not Phyllis Schlaflyites by a long shot.

Speaking of her, and I'm reminiscing now ... I went to the big ERA demonstration in Cincinnati in the spring of 1979, and then we crossed the mighty Ohio river to oppose the Right to Lifers in their own something or other in Lexington, KY, and that wasn't the first time. I've been around enough straight women, gay women, and gay men to know that the humane ones at least don't make a big deal of occasional slips of the tongue.

So, I'll try follow your advice more diligently, but I can't help feeling that in some of the The lady doth protest too much, methinks type objections I hear on WP, especially for some reason on India-related talk pages where they appears in an ambience of increasingly brazen hatred, I can't help feeling that I am being conned. I get irritated not so much because I am personally offended, but because I think such cavalier use of something that grew of our such serious things is an insult to Sarte, de Beauvoir, A. Freud, Burlingham, to Betty Friedan, Harvey Milk, and a long line of pioneers who fought for various forms of equal rights, going back to the nineteenth century, not just to Frederick Douglas and Lincoln and Harriet Beecher Stowe, but also to others not so well known such Herbert Musgrave Phipson (whose article on WP I wrote long ago) and his wife Edith Pechey, both of whom did their bit more modestly.

The cavalier use of usage, without irony or the kind of wisdom that usually accompanies heartfelt things, hurts for that reason. Maybe it is not cavalier, but the seeds of doubt remain Pinging @Johnuniq: by way of explanation, not defense. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:24, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

I have to tell you that the pendulum is swinging strongly and we all must adapt to the times. Whether or not someone is using the issue as a tactic is not relevant in any way. Contributors, particularly those working in contentious topics, are quite readily indefinitely blocked when difficult issues erupt on a noticeboard, and where it is clear that the standard advice offered by Abecedare above has not been followed. From now on, everyone is they (or, find a way of avoiding pronouns perhaps by repeating the user name). Johnuniq (talk) 06:15, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

The thing about pendulums is that they swing both to and fro. Please have a quick read of WP:THREATEN. Personally I find using a plural pronoun when a singular one is used to be offensive to the reader. It interrupts the flow and makes you go back to find out which person you've forgotten about. But then abiding by standards accepted by the majority is considered poor form by right-on woke campaigners. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 07:10, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Martin: I consider John to be a benign presence who had my best interest at heart just as I do you. I didn’t think they were threatening me, only telling me what the mood out there is and that their (Abecedare’s and John’s) hands would be tied in case someone dragged me to ANI. It’s what the rules are for better or for worse. The thing is that I do try to use they/theirs, might have even argued in favor at a MOS discussion.

Given that the nominator at the RfC is quoting rules repeatedly, they might be looking to drag me to the wood shed and caution is best overall but especially now. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 07:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

OK, fair enough, and it is your talk page. It just read as "You're old fashioned, do it my way or you'll be punished" which is why I reacted. Best, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 07:59, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I understand. I think both of you to be guardian angels and don't want to lose you. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 08:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

You have read the situation accurately. A complicating factor is that at a noticeboard like ANI, almost no one can follow the background of a complex dispute so arguments might be settled by what onlookers do understand, namely that person X said something that person Y found to be offensive. Doing that more than once is an own goal. Johnuniq (talk) 09:19, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that bit of insight into decision making at ANI-like noticeboards. This is very helpful. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:35, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Not being a soccer or hockey player, I had to look up "own goal" in the OED. At first, I thought it meant a personal goal (in life)  :)

1. Sport. A goal scored against the scorer's own team, usually unintentionally.

1922 Times 10 Apr. 6/5 Lennon (own goal), Smith, Pagnam 2.

1947 Sunday Pictorial 9 Feb. 15/1 An amazing ‘own goal’ by Wilf Mannion.

1976 Norwich Mercury 10 Dec. 8/6 With no one taking control J. Purling eventually left M. Warman stranded with a back header that lopped just under the crossbar for an own-goal.

1998 Miami Herald (Nexis) 16 Nov. 4 d His team's recent slump was highlighted by an own-goal off his stick against the Hurricanes on Saturday.

(Hide quotations)

2. figurative (originally and chiefly British). An act that unintentionally harms one's own interests.

1975 Economist (Nexis) 4 Oct. 27 The doyen of the Tribune group..scored an own goal on Wednesday night... His speech at a packed Tribune rally was a gross tactical miscalculation of [etc.].

1976 Guardian 11 Aug. 10/8 Two youngsters of Provisional IRA blown up by premature explosion of own bomb while crossing peace line..described as own goals by smiling Army press officers.

1989 Advertiser (Adelaide) (Nexis) 14 Dec. Senator Haines described Mr Downer's plan as an ‘own goal’ which would rebound against the Liberals.

2001 Farmers Guardian 17 Aug. 9/2 For a Government minister..and a key adviser..to state publicly their low estimation of farmers and farming is yet another spectacular own goal. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

WP:WHAAOE see own goal! Johnuniq (talk) 09:43, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

So, its more than just soccer or hockey. It means I have not really been watching my Green Bay Packers or Chicago Bulls with any diligence. Thanks! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:51, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

By the way, another cultural lesson is that asking "what gender are you?" is very creepy. I can't quite put my finger on why, but it is not appropriate at Wikipedia. We're not supposed to make any personal queries at all—it's none of my business where other editors live, or what they do in their personal lives. It might be ok to ask what pronouns are wanted but that's not scalable—we can't have each of a thousand editors asking each of the others what pronoun to use. Stick to singular they (it's not plural). Johnuniq (talk) 10:44, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

I won't ask anyone again, but I asked in part because I assumed they are confident in their gender identity and would thereby give me a better idea of Wikipedia's demographics, which I currently assume to be overwhelmingly male in IT-related professions or male students preparing for careers in IT-related fields (according to the NY Times). Indeed I've spent much time (months, maybe even years intermittently) at WT:FAC arguing that topics that are of interest to "quantitative" males of the Anglosphere are the ones that inundate FAC (and its overworked reviewers) and are usually promoted; there was some sympathy for my views there and some change effected.

But I generally agree with you and won't ask again. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

I also asked, to be honest, in part because I doubted their new found identity and wanted to test their answer against both very confident and very shy people I have known who have talked about identity issues. Both of the latter share a kind of underlying honesty that people who use it as a tactic are unable to muster. I agree that I should not have done that. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:14, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

They are unable to muster, in part, because they have simply not thought about it enough. No angst, let alone melancholia, has accompanied their introspection. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:20, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

The thing is that I'm not your typical his user by a long stretch, at best an occasionally forgetful one.

No typical user would be making a valiant stand to have :"wheechair bound" and "is confined to a wheelchair" depracated at MOS talk; none would have been asked by Ceoil to look look over: this tribute to SlimVirgin; and none would have had someone new to WP but dealing with issues of identity and disability make this post of thanks.

I'm not being defensive, only giving some idea of the finer nerved views I hold most of the time and the strangely opaque Wiklawyerish objections of my interlocutors. I don't mean you, John, obviously. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:57, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

So summing up, you are maybe saying that all the finer nerved stuff doesn't add up to a hill of beans if at ANI the only thing that the judges of the passing moment can understand is WP:ASPERSIONS. I don't want to be marching to the gallows on that account. I agree there and thank you for the explanations, John. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

This is what happens when you get strongly identified with your digital life on Wiki and start owning your community contributions. Ego is the path to the dark side. I think you should study this Sanskrit quote: “Seva Paramo Dharma”. Fayninja (talk) 16:48, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Service is merit, or Service is righteousness, apparently.

Kind of like Service is its own reward, or Virtue is its own reward. But then there is also (Mallory's) "Because it is there," or "Valor is its own reward." But then there is also: Discretion is the better part of valor.

Mottos are a dime a dozen. It takes more than one motto to carve out a philosophy. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:39, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes. It is translated as "service is the highest duty" or "selfless service is the ultimate virtue." The phrase encapsulates the idea that serving without any expectation of personal gain or reward is a noble and honourable way of life.

In many spiritual and philosophical traditions, seva (service) is considered a fundamental principle. It promotes compassion, empathy, and a sense of interconnectedness with others. By engaging in acts of selfless service, individuals can contribute to the well-being and upliftment of society as a whole.

Since you have contributed so much of your time to Wikipedia, I thought you were already walking the path but just needed a gentle reminder.

I apologize if any of my comments had hurt you. I tend to be spontaneous most of the time. Fayninja (talk) 15:40, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

True. In the heat of the moment, I do veer off WP's principles which I will follow with greater resolution after your reminder, especially in reference to using "they" as the universal personal pronoun, which this thread is about. Remember that WP's principles may not always conform to national perspectives. Kashmir might be one of those topic areas. Beyond saying this, I cannot offer much about the topic on this page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:52, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

'43 Famine

Hi F&F,

In the t/p archives of Bengal famine of 1943, you have frequently highlighted Hindu men's desertion of their families, as the famine gained pace. I am interested in a few sources on this narrow locus but for purposes which are not connected to Wikipedia. Will appreciate some aid. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello @TrangaBellam:

• The time honored is Paul Greenough's Prosperity and Misery in Modern Bengal: The Famine of 1943-1944, Oxford, 1982. Difficult to find. I have a hard copy but no pdf.
• Arjun Appadurai's How moral is South Asia's economy: A review article
• Among many rural folk in East Bengal, who were mostly Muslim and perhaps a few Hindus, a strange kind of passive acceptance was seen. They had gradually lost everything: their crops, their steady incomes, their livestock, their furniture (auctioned), even their thatched roofs (also auctioned or taken by the money lender). Eventually, they just sat in their homes and died by the tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, never asking for help. It is briefly discussed in one of the war volumes of Bayly and Harper. Hauntingly sad. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:51, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Kashmir is complicated

There seems to be no consensus in the academia about how to refer to the disputed regions. Even if we use the term Indian/Pakistani-invaded uniformly over all regions of Kashmir, we will still technically achieve neutrality because of the uniform application of the template. I have put in my last comment on the matter, now it's time for the bystanders to chime in and finish it. Good night. Fayninja (talk) 16:12, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Please prove that the Demchok sector is part of Aksai Chin. If you do not give direct evidence of that, then I feel morally obiliged to remove this map, for lack of evidence of claims made: Commons:File:Kashmir region. LOC 2003626427 - showing sub-regions administered by different countries.jpg @Fayninja:Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:07, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

I am not involved with the creation of this map. Fayninja (talk) 13:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Indian independence movement

Surprised to see that you don't seem to edited this article to any significant degree. It somehow wasn't on my watchlist till earlier today either. Haven't read the article yet but looking through the references etc, the citations seem pretty "random" with each work apparently selected to support a individual claims. Not clear which, if any, history texts were used to "structure" the contents.

Anyway, no particular ask at the moment but this may provide an interesting project if you are feeling particularly inspired or bored. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 17:17, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

I did write an early draft in 2007(?), now in User:Fowler&fowler/Short History Indian Independence Movement, but there was too much opposition. Eventually, large parts of it became the history section of the British Raj. I'm flat out of time now, so feel free to work on it if you'd like to. But yes, there are many that constitute "unfinished business" of the early efforts of many editors, including yours, RP's, Nichalp's, and others', and as old articles seem to have achieved some stability, they are worth finishing. Company rule in India (which might not get so much attention because its name doesn't have "East" in it, ( :) ) I do mean to finish. The absence of East serves me well, as people add Macaulay to the Raj. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:56, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Speaking of the Raj, I just remembered you had asked me a question on that talk page that I forgot to answer. Apologies. Let me mull that over. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Rajput

Dear Sir, I remember you had participated in the debate and discussion on this Rajput page in last November 2022. Please have a look at this page and just compare it with pages of other communities whose main body had been written by you. I remember how you had suggested to write caste article for communities in a nuanced manner. It is sad to see inter-community rivalry is going on this particular community pages. Your attention is definitely needed.Akalanka820 (talk) 07:18, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

AN/I notice

Hi Fowler&fowler, I wanted to let you know that an editor has started a discussion about you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, see this thread. Thank you. — AP 499D25 (talk) 05:47, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Archive, again

Hallo Fowler&fowler,

I've merged User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 23a into User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 23; moved User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 30 to User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 27 (27, 28, and 29 were missing...); and corrected the counter. Now everything should be fine. Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:50, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Nope... Still several archives with the wrong spacing... I'm going to correct that now. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:52, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, now it's all as it should be. See the Archives-box at top: all there, from #1 to #30. Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:07, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much Joshua! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

The relevant news, June 24, 2022

Executive Order No. 600: Protecting Access to Reproductive Health Care Services in the Commonwealth, DATE 06/24/2022, ISSUER: Charlie Baker, MASS REGISTER: No. 600 ... WHEREAS, the Constitution of the Commonwealth has long provided a guarantee of reproductive rights independent of and more expansive than any protection provided by the United States Constitution ... NOW, THEREFORE, I, Charles D. Baker, Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution, Part 2, c. 2, § 1, Art. 1, do hereby order as follows: ...Given at the Executive Chamber in Boston this 24th day of June in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-two and of the Independence of the United States of America two hundred forty-five.

Nomination for deletion of Template:Fowler image rotation

Template:Fowler image rotation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:49, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: I only just saw your notice. I don't remember this template; it was probably some fledgling effort of mine. So, no big deal. Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Request

Hello Fowler&Fowler! While patrolling new pages, I saw several pages that were formed by duplicating some existing articles, and I nominated some of them for AFD. I requested help on Wikipedia's Discord channels to check the reliability of these pages, and someone suggested I contact you. Could you please examine the sources of the Chalukiya and Chandela clan articles? These two articles appear to be clones of the Chalukya Dynasty and the Chandelas of Jejakabhukti, respectively. This same creator has created several more history-related articles that appear to be wholly fabricated and dubious. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 04:29, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

A little strapped for time now, but will take a look later. A cursory reading of the first few sentences suggests efforts at murky caste upliftment. Don't know why they feel the need. We all humans came out of Africa, only recently separated in geological time from our primate cousins, bearing as Darwin put it, "in our bodily frame the indelible stamp of our lowly origin." Periyar, the South Indian crusader against caste, had said somewhere that the north Indian lower-castes (by which he meant all but the top two) have not had the guts to reject caste; they only want to inch upward in it. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 57

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023

• Suggestion improvements
• Favorite collections tips
• Spotlight: Promoting Nigerian Books and Authors

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

A reminder in good faith

Ive been watching your comments and edits on Mahatma Gandhi. In quite a few of your comments and edit summaries, your "my way or the highway" behaviour is quite concerning. Also concerning is the fact that you consider (and loudly proclaim) your contributions to be far above those of others. I doubt that this is a good way of reaching a consensus. Have a good day, and I hope you keep this in mind and try to improve.
Cheers, Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 13:46, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

It might appear that way, but as WP:OWN states at the outset, "In many cases (but not all), single editors engaged in ownership conflicts are also primary contributors to the article, so keep in mind that such editors may be experts in their field or have a genuine interest in maintaining the quality of the article and preserving accuracy. An editor who appears to assume ownership of an article should be approached on the article's talk page with a descriptive header informing readers about the topic." Although I am not the primary contributor, I have spent time crafting different aspects of the article, and also of related articles, such as Assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, Herbert Reiner Jr, Dominion of India, British Raj. People are quick to assert rights (the right to be BOLD, the right to copy and paste, the right to edit war, the right to assert equality in every aspect of the WP endeavor) but not a peep is heard about responsibility (the responsibility of maintaining the article, of writing reasonably well-crafted summary-style precis, which takes years if not decades to hone.

Look at yourself @CapnJackSp:: you have no compunction leaving a superciliously preachy message on my talk page about my behavior, but—as you have been tinkering with the lead of Mahatma Gandhi, adding "Rashtra Pita," which I in the many years of my involvement in Indian history topics, have never seen mentioned in a scholarly history book—have you never thought about leaving a post here complementing me on my contributions to the Gandhi article? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:37, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

While your contributions are not worthless Regardless of your contributions to the article, keep in mind that those do not empower you to talk down to others on the basis of the belief that you must be right. You may certainly know a lot about the topics you edit around, but the assumption you know enough to disregard others is incompatible with how we handle disputes.
It is good that you acknowledge that you were not the primary contributor to the article - Accepting that is a positive step. You should also try to work collaboratively when challenged. That would be quite an improvement.
As for the edit you pulled up, my phase was quite accurate. "Rashtra Pita" is used commonly in India for Gandhi. Your version, where you inserted "but not officially" was quite out of place. It was an improvement over your version which moved the wording closer back to the one before your edit while accommodating your "official" concerns.
Anyway, I doubt that this message will push you to improve drastically, but incremental improvements in behaviour would also be fine. :)
Cheers, Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 17:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

F&F has been collaborating effectively, if not always in total harmony, with a large group of editors on Indian topics, for well over a decade. Can you say the same, or anything like it? Your condescending tone ("While your contributions are not worthless ..." and so on) is unearned and unhelpful. Johnbod (talk) 17:55, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

If not always in total harmony is the point I wanted to drive home. I have not opined that the issue is of disruptive editing, or lack of knowledge, or anything along those lines - I think F&F is usually constructive (if verbose) on talk pages and adds value to articles. The issue was that they take opposition to their views with quite hostility. If they were to edit in harmony with others, it would be a major improvement.
Regarding the tone, it wasnt intended as an insult, and I have changed it for something you might find more acceptable. As an aside, a condescending tone is never earned on a collaborative project among equals. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 22:31, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

If 'Rashtra Pita" is used commonly in India for Gandhi, it should appear somewhere in a scholarly history book in English, but it doesn't. It doesn't even appear in the trade books on Gandhi (see here) or the popular biographies written by Ramachandra Guha, Rajmohan Gandhi or Joseph Lelyveld (see here).

So, how did you divine the English-language reliable sources to consider this to be a commonly used expression?

How did you manage to sneak "Rashtra Pita" into the lead when there was no mention of it in the sub-section "Father of the Nation," that presumably the sentence in the lead was meant to summarize? (See the sub-section on "Father of the Nation" at the end of the awards section at the time of your edit).

India has 22 official languages. "Rashtra Pita", dear @CapnJackSp:, is an expression of Sanskritized Hindi. How did you manage to privilege Hindi and not Tamil or Urdu or Assamese for a so-called common expression? Hindi, to be sure, is the official language of the union, but "Father of the Nation" is not an official expression.

In other words, you have broken every rule in MOS:LEAD and then have had the gumption to lecture me on behavior. You should be reading WP:Lead fixation. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

It is indeed used commonly for Gandhi - See [1]
Quite a few books as well, havent bothered to sort through them yet.
And yet, this is one of the issues that I wanted to point out with your edits. You accuse me of "sneaking in" the phrase, when it had been there already prior to your removal of it. Indeed your change introduced "but not officially", which was in opposition to a prior consensus discussion amongst editors, as later pointed out by a different editor. Still, you could yet be right, and the phrasing might perhaps be better - But simply asserting it does not make it so.
If you had tried to raise these concerns, instead of reverting to your preferred version, it would have been more productive. That is my point here, that your interactions could be much better with other editors without much effort from your side.
Regardless of whether you chose to improve or not, I doubt my persistence here will change your mind. Good day to you. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 09:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

You have as evidence some links in the Devanagari script used in the Hindi language. Even if I were to allow that non-English language sources count on the English Wikipedia, how have you managed to privilege Hindi, my dear @CapnJackSp:, of the 22 major Indian languages? In Tamil he is very likely called something else as he is no doubt also in Urdu. You are unable to source at the minimal standards required for a high-level article such as Gandhi. I request that you not waste more of my time on my talk page. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@Fowler&fowler: Your comment above suggests that non-English reliable and verifiable sources are not permitted on Wikipedia. They are. Bazza (talk) 11:30, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Not at all, @Bazza 7:, but if Hindi-language sources are used in the lead of an article such as Gandhi's in the English-language Wikipedia, then the WP:ONUS of showing that they are just as reliable as the scholarly English language sources being currently used—is the adder's. What is the Hindi-language equivalent of a major scholarly publisher in English, such as: Cambridge University Press, or Oxford, Princeton, Chicago, Pennsylvania, ...? I'm unaware that there is any equivalent. The scholarship is simply not there.

There is also the question of adequate and reliable translation. Who will translate? I recall a nominator at FAC using Arabic sources for a series of articles on Islamic/Arabic kingdoms in the early medieval era. The nominator was using their own interpretation born of conflating early medieval Arabic and modern Arabic. I learned this from an Arabic-language expert whom I consulted about the texts. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:47, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

I recall a similar problem with a very earnest editor who had nominated a Gujarati language author or poet (i'm forgetting now) at FAC The author or poet had almost no English-language material. What there was in Gujarati was hagiographic and simplistic. It really should not have been brought to FAC. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:59, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

A masterclass in irritating someone on their own talk page followed by a masterclass in how to rain down a tonne of bricks on someone who does so in return. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:47, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

July 2023

Your recent editing history at Mahatma Gandhi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Capitals00 (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Please don't facilely template competent editors. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:23, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Fowler&fowler. Thank you. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 11:08, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Gandhi

Oh well, I tried! Johnbod (talk) 18:17, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

And I owe you big time. Big time. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:40, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

PS In case some revamped Hindu nationalist nosy parkers are looking in this exchange for gleanings of meatpuppetry, its conspiracy or promise, it is just another way of saying, "Thank you for the effort." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:48, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Wouldn't that be more like a Hindu nationalist nosy Prabhat? EEng 17:34, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

nosy Parrikar would be closer in rhyme, but that guy was actually a decent fellow, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:41, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Best I could do with my limited Greek. EEng 07:41, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

That's a good one.  :) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:10, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

You are very well aware that Wikipedia will soon fall to Hindutva. We have a strong tradition of equality of treatment; however, you may not want to get on our bad side with such accusations of "meat-puppetry'. You will most likely be banned and made to disappear from the chronicles of Wikipedia project. The hackers are always looking out for which accounts to compromise and many on the top are no longer the people that they were. Meowkiti (talk) 05:49, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, it seems @Meowkiti:, that it is you that have been banned (for sockpuppetry). The meatpuppetry aside above was in the nature of humor and not an accusation. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

With all the warmth and woofs...

DaxServer has given you a puppy!

Puppies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your puppy must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a puppy, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of puppies by adding {{subst:Puppy}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.

Hi Fowler&fowler! I can feel and understand the desolation in the process of thwarting off bias. It is a thankless job. You have contributed to countless topics with some of the most impeccable sources there ever might be. Thank you 🙏 I hope you continue to do so undeterred by all the hurdles you'd face. And I really hope you like puppies :) — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 19:12, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much @DaxServer: both for the thought and the puppy. Yes, we do like puppies, and kittens too. Ours have aged a bit. Our eldest kitten is 17 years old and has just returned from a visit to the vet, and the eldest puppy is 14. The youngest puppy is six and the youngest kitten is nine. During the last ten years, we have lost four kittens, the oldest living to 20.

From the time I was a toddler, there were puppies around. They used to be pure breeds reflecting my parents' choices. As a result, my fantasy of independent living, say of my mid- to late-20s, was two English setters, a rocking chair, and a fireplace. But then I ran into Charles Darwin, intellectually that is, and became partial to the strays, the landraces, and the feral, though there was nothing in Darwin that specifically promoted this form of attraction. From 2006, when I joined Wikipedia a total of 17 puppies and kittens have been taken into our household, thereafter spayed or neutered. They have watched our children leave home, and with us, grown older.

I thank you again for the nice thought, the gift, and the occasion that spurred my reflection. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

I wanted to piggy back a bit on this, having just seen the WP:ARE. What I'm seeing in the various comments is people being disappointed in some of your responses to people on this issue. You've previously been warned about civility issues on this. I'm not going to say the ice is thin, but your reactions are eventually going to undermine what you're trying to achieve if the incivility in sustained. It can be difficult to not react. Truly, I get it. But, when you react in uncivil ways, they win. You want to use reliable sources and remove bias. This is very laudable. But, it can't happen if they win. There are only so many editors willing to throw themselves into the fray with the good intentions you have. Don't let them win. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:59, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

@Hammersoft: Thanks very much for writing this with such sensitivity and wisdom. (I like your user name, btw.) I am going to make a big effort to be civil in my interactions and also to walk away from them if I find them heating up.

PS There are other pages—non-South-Asia-related pages such as Mandell Creighton and History of English grammars—that I had intended to go back to this summer, and still do. (I'm thinking aloud now.) Or shorter articles such as Dorothy Burlingham, The Mimic Men that I had intended to expand. They've never had these issues. One strategy could be to avoid working exclusively on South Asia's controversy-ridden pages—to always have havens such as the Creighton, Grammars, or Burlingham alongside—so that at least some of the time hours of rigorous work with impeccable sources are not undone by someone asserting the right to be WP:BOLD but nothing articulate that meets the critical minimum for rational discourse. I'm not good at responding to six-word sentences with two question marks. Thanks again for your beautifully written post. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:54, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, of my editing areas, the less-viewed pages for art history are normally quiet (a bit less so for Indian subjects) and garden history is very quiet and peaceful indeed. Johnbod (talk) 16:09, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

AE thread closed

Hi Fowler&fowler, I have closed the AE thread regarding you with no further action as you have accepted and taken on the advice provided by a range of editors in the thread. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:44, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much @Callanecc: I will do my very best to follow that advice from here on out. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Revert in Mahatma Gandhi

Re this: as per MOS:DOC, "Dr." should not be used unless it is a part of a "pseudonym or stage name" under which the subject is more widely known; this does not seem to be the case with Annie Besant, and so "Dr." should not be used. Unless you object, I will re-remove the "Dr." --Qwerty12302 (talk | contributions) 14:10, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I understand. I used the occasion (which perhaps I should not have) to have a discussion on her doctorate. See the Gandhi talk page. Best, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:15, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

ThecRfC

Hi, you seem to be doing at the RfC much the same as you were recently criticised for doing by people in the AE thread. I know you mean well & I know you are knowledgeable but in hammering home a point with multiple posts, each veering further and further away from the central discussion, you are muddying waters and potentially could upend the entire process. I won't be responding further regarding that issue because it is a byway.

Just to be clear, the arguments about the Constitution, illegality, endogamy etc are completely irrelevant and will be ignored by whoever closes the RfC. All that matters are arguments rooted in policy, accepted guidelines and utility. Whether the caste system is offensive etc makes no difference to the outcome, just as it would make no difference in a discussion at AfD. As far as utility and policy go, lists of Balochs etc are as problematic & time-consuming to maintain as lists of Rajputs, Kayasthas, Nairs etc but I'm content to let it go for now, in full knowledge it will happen in future. That is why I didn't respond to your initial post of early this morning (GMT). - Sitush (talk) 12:58, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

But the voters in the RfC have not understood this. Quite a few have cited continuing discrimination, racism, and so forth, as their reasons. As long as we stick to caste in Hindu India I have no problem. I won't be voting in RfCs on lists of Baloch or Macedonians or Navajo, because I don't have knowledge about them. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Inserting Mauryan empire map

hey @Fowler&fowler can you tell me what is a encyclopedic map and please explain the reason why my edit was reverted? Melechha (talk) 18:19, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Melechha: Please raise it in a new thread on Talk:Maurya Empire and seek to attain consensus for your edit. Consensus takes time, even when there is adequate support. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Wrong date?

So for Joppen map-India in 1751 published 1907 by Longmans.jpg, although both the title and the image says that it's of the year 1751, the description says it's of the year 1651. Is that intentional?

DestinyPegasus (talk) 22:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Whaat? It's 6pm right now not 22:24 DestinyPegasus (talk) 22:27, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Please ignore the previous comment DestinyPegasus (talk) 22:28, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

:) Good catch on the Joppen map. It must have been the result of uploading three maps at the same time. I will fix it next. Thanks also for the wonderful Barnstar! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:18, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

How do you change the font of your signature? It shows up yellow and the <<Talk>> thing is all fancy DestinyPegasus (talk) 22:01, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello: Here's one way to do it:

Go to WP:WPCOL, which is WikiProject Color. If you scroll down to "Color subcategories," you'll see different "Shades of ---" Let's say you like some shade of yellow and click on that Category, you'll then arrive at "Category:Shades of yellow". Let's say, next, you like "Sunglow," and click on it, you'll now arrive at Gold (color)#Sunglow. Copy the Hex triplet on the right, i.e. #FFCC33. Let's say, you want «Talk» to appear in some other shade, say "Sunset" (it doesn't have to be a shade of yellow, though); its Hex triplet is: #FAD6A5.

Now go to you Special:Preferences page and scroll down to Signature. In the box there, paste: [[User:DestinyPegasus|<span style="color:#FFCC33">DestinyPegasus</span>]][[User talk:DestinyPegasus|<span style="color:#FAD6A5">«Talk»</span>]] and save. When you sign with ~~~~, lo and behold, you'll see your swanking new signature. Pinging @Joshua Jonathan:, who is an expert on the technical stuff, for any errors in the above.

Btw, I had modeled my signature on user:Nichalp's, but with a change of color. He was the editor, now retired, who had begun the drive on Wikipedia for improving South Asia-related articles. He was a role-model of sorts for me and I'm sure an inspiring presence for many others such as @RegentsPark, Abecedare, Dwaipayanc, and Ragib: PS I've fixed the Mughal Empire map, btw. All the best, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

The preferences-page is the right place. I forgot the immediately after I changed my signature, but the process is quite easy. Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:43, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

thanks DestinyPegasus (talk) 22:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

What about the fonts? DestinyPegasus (talk) 22:50, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

hey do you know how to change the background of your name? like, highlighting and stuff? Z!t!@n«T@1k» 23:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks DestinyPegasus (talk) 22:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

ooh nice DestinyPegasus«Talk» 22:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

how do you change the font tho DestinyPegasus«Talk» 22:54, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

I want Trebuchet MS for my username pls im a bit rusty w/ html code DestinyPegasus«Talk» 22:59, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Please and thank you DestinyPegasus«Talk» 23:00, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

the only font I can find is Times new Roman ㅤ«ㅤ» 23:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

oh wow I can edit again Z!t!@n«T@1k» 23:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Glad to have you back. I'm afraid the fonts' issue is above my pay grade or below my depth. Perhaps @Joshua Jonathan: or @EEng: above who seem to have more technical knowhow or nonstandard signatures, or both, might have an answer. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:08, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

The thing to do is find someone else's sig that you admire (on a talk page or something), then open that page for editing and plagiarize the markup. EEng is was a poopy fart 19:23, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

lol Z!t!@n«T@1k» 22:14, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

how did you manage to have two colors? Z!t!@n«T@1k» 22:14, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

nvm I'll just steal it

wait, how do you

ohhh Z!t!@n«T@1k» 22:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

lol Z!t!@n«T@1k» 22:18, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I like your signature a lot Z!t!@n«T@1k» 22:19, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I wont revert it until you reply to prove you've seen it >:) Z!t!@n«T@1k» 22:19, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Seen it.  :) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:26, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

oh i was talking to EEng but sure :) Z!t!@n«T@1k» 22:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have scrolled up to see who you were replying to. No probs. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

oh wow you reply fast Z!t!@n«T@1k» 23:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

i linked some stuff lol

Im a haker now yay Z!t!@n«T@1k» 23:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, related to Varanasi infobox images

Hello, hope you are doing well.

Having lived in Varanasi for a few years what the city actually represents, what the city is known for are completely ignored in infobox images section.

Some poet or person's image, Some instrument are shown in the infobox of the City page!

City page should consist city related stuffs not some famous personality related even if the personality belong to the city.

Hence I have made few changes with proper format and also captions with hyperlinks. Feel free to suggest, please don't revert back to previous DaDeadzombie (talk) 18:38, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@DaDeadzombie: As the images that you had changed had remained in the article for quite some time and as I have reverted your choices, per WP:BRD and WP:ONUS, please discuss your proposed changes on Talk:Varanasi and attempt to garner a consensus. I should warn you, achieving a consensus takes time. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:36, 2 August 2023 (UTC) Updated Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:38, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm not going to push hard on this, as obviously there's a strong local contingent who want the standard postcard montage. Johnbod (talk) 16:11, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks much for what you’ve already done. Will post there shortly though I hate editing on a cell phone. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:59, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Replaceable non-free use File:Jashodaben Modi at fast for slum dwellers.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Jashodaben Modi at fast for slum dwellers.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:18, 17 August 2023 (UTC)