User talk:S3000/Archive 3

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Village of westward Ho!

Hi

I don't agree with the use of the word TOWN regarding Westward Ho! It has never had a Market therefore it can only be known as a Village.

Bramanfiles.

Douche?

Dear S3000, Be you a douchecock? I believe it doubly so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.252.211.130 (talk) 12:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Srinagar

i am editing srinagar as it is not mentioning the fact that the city lies within admiministered and disputed territory just like Mirpur please do not revert or vandalise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nangparbat (talk • contribs) 16:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

???

i have not removed the azad kashmir tag because srinagar now also contains it fight over bye bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nangparbat (talk • contribs) 17:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean?? Please be more specific.. I can't make head or tail of what you're trying to convey! S3000 ☎ 11:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nakhudas/Tadkeshwar

Hey, I am a Nakhuda living in England and recently read your Nakhuda article. I am eager to know about where you got your information from - are you from Tadkeshwar yourself? I started creating a website for Tadkeshwar and if you could tell me where your info. is from, that'd help me with that too. The articles were great, by the way.

KarateKid (talk) 17:54, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nangparbat

Hi, I got your message but apparantly when there is an "Obvious, disruptive sock puppet", using the checkuser is "unacceptable" and the solution they recommend is "Block, no checkuser needed". I'm not sure what to do... [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 17:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

on using trivia template

Hello! I have found you used trivia template in Get a Clue. And I feel there are 2 misusages of the template. So I write it here.

This template should be used not as {{subst trivia}} but as{{trivia}}.
Date parameter should be added to the template like {{trivia|date=August 2008}}

Thank you! Penpen (talk) 22:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genelia D'Souza

Hey, it was nice to see your intermittent reverts on Ms. D'Souza's article page. However, I saw your edit summary which spoke about her date of birth. Accordingly, you seem to be under the impression that IMDB is not regarded as a reliable source. Hence from the existing RS, no one really knows what her DOB is. I've been trying to track it down, but to no avail. Please bear this in mind while reverting DOB edits. For all reasons, the edits by some of these anons might be correct. Mspraveen (talk) 10:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair enough to me. Though IMDB is a non-reliable source, it is the closest we can get at the moment. Keep up the good work so far. Btw, nice to meet you. Mspraveen (talk) 16:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Substing

Hi, just a heads up that subst:'ing maintenance templates (such as {{:trivia}}) causes User:SmackBot so flag the pages as having invalid date parameters [1] so it is preferable not to subst maintenance templates. Thanks, ~ AmeIiorate _{U T C} @ 00:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. S3000 ☎ 09:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

bias

86.153.130.184 is a pro pakistani vandalizing articles. another user claimed he is a sock of a user called Nangparbat. please see [2] and [3]. help please. he is inserting pakistani argument everywhere n remove indian ones. he write administered near kashmir (india) n removes for pakistan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.111.31.145 (talk) 18:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nangparbat

Please go ahead and add any more active IPs to User:Hersfold/Vandal watch#Nangparbat, taking care to keep them in sorted order to make rangeblocks easier to determine and marking the new ones with (active). I'm going to go to ANI about this - I'm not certain about a rangeblock a second time around, as this is a very commonly used network in the UK, and he is bouncing around a bit as you can see. Hopefully we'll get an end to this soon, although any measure we do is likely to be temporary, as it was last time. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 13:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem here is that we're dealing with a huge network. Most of these IP addresses should be stable, but Nangparbat has apparently found out how to force his IP to change sooner than it should. As a result, any IP address we block is going to be someone else within a few minutes, and any range we block is going to be filled with innocent users within a day or two. I know last time it seemed to work well enough, but we probably blocked off hundreds of other people who didn't bother to protest the block.

What we can do is contact the ISP through an abuse report and make them aware of the situation. With any luck, they'll be able to do something on their end to stop this. Until then, we're more or less limited to blocking each IP for a short time as they come up. It's annoying and not as effective, I know, but we also have to consider what we're doing to other users looking to join. Sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's also a possibility. Again, semi-protection can't be permanent in this case, especially on talk pages, but it should help deter him if he gets particularly troublesome. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Report has been filed at Wikipedia:Abuse reports/81.15x.x.x and 86.1x.x.x ranges. Hopefully it will get dealt with soon, although it technically doesn't meet their criteria. I'm hoping whoever looks at this will understand that 92 IP addresses are a bit excessive for one person to be using. You may want to add in your two cents as well, since you're more directly involved than I am. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. - If you see any more, keep adding them to the vandal watch page for the benefit of the abuse investigators. If he seems to be sticking around on it, get someone to block him at WP:AIV, making sure to reference either my talk page or the vandal watch page. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep an eye on him for a while, I guess, and if he doesn't cause any more trouble I'll just delete the abuse report. We can always get it restored if it's needed again. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indian administered Kashmir

just like you said the real name for Indian administered kashmir is Jammu and kashmir the real name for Pakistan administered kashmir is Azad kashmir this is not mentioned in jammu and kashmir article the jammu and kashmir article states it as pakistan administered kashmir while when i put the same on northern areas you revert why do you have this constant undying bias ? 86.162.67.217 (talk) 17:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this is a small issue made big for no reason its just a couple sentences lol not whole essays and to keep in with neutrality this must be done 86.162.67.217 (talk) 18:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is a small issue made big. As I said before, I'm open to discussions. However we can only progress if you are willing to talk before making any future edits. If you wanna continue editing without discussing, I will not discuss further with you. Discussion excludes ranting, cursing, swearing and all your "anti-Pakistan", "Facist BJP Hindu" accusations. I WILL NOT entertain ANY messages with such remarks and will not engage in future discussions with you if you post any here. You can use my talk page to discuss this further if you're agreeable. Till then however, no related mainspace edits are to be made. Shall we continue? The ball is in your court.

Let me have the go. Reply only if you adhere to my invitation. Or else, all your postings here will be deleted point blank.

"just like you said the real name for Indian administered kashmir is Jammu and kashmir the real name for Pakistan administered kashmir is Azad kashmir this is not mentioned in jammu and kashmir article"

Have a look at my last revision. I believe that should be satisfactory. As such, I have reverted your edit(s) in the Northern Areas article.

As I said to keep this discussion alive, you should refrain from further controversial edits and no ranting, swearing and usage of vulgar language is permitted. Be nice and I'll be nice. Thanks. S3000 ☎ 18:43, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

if you look closely i only started swearing when one of your dear freinds called me a paki he apologised so i stopped swearing shovon is a nice guy

Youd shouldnt have reverted Northern Areas as it redirects to the Jammu page whats so wrong with that its not POV fork and also administered tag must be added as it is added beside pakistan in the Jammu and kashmir page.

Now about administered fuss im only putting on administered to articles equally i.e srinagar and jammu and kashmir because baltistan and azad kashmir contain this also do you understand im not putting this tag on baramulla or other parts of Jammu and kashmir 86.162.67.217 (talk) 18:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I jus explained about Srinagar thats the only part of jammu and kashmir tagged places like baltistan and azad kashmir are so its only fair if it added on srinagar how much more do i have to explain not exactly quantum mechanics is it 86.162.67.217 (talk) 18:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ill wait for a bit for your response 86.162.67.217 (talk) 18:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Didnt notice the jammu and kashmir page IM SO SORRY I REVERT AT ONCE CHEERS S300086.162.67.217 (talk) 18:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, please leave a space between new messages to form a new line. Secondly, please leave all messages under this topic. Do not open a new topic. Coming to the point, changes have been made to the Jammu and Kashmir article for on-par status with Northern Areas. I'm sorry, I read your second message (re: Srinagar) 3 times but couldn't understand what you mean. Please be more clear and try your best to use punctuations (fullstop, comma etc.). Anyway just forget about the swearing / cursing incidents. I'm not gonna call you a Paki or anything and I believe you won't do the same. Thanks for accepting my invitation for discussions. S3000 ☎ 19:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ya, and please try to limit to 1 post per reply and all you need is 1 signature for the whole post. Sorry for all these but I like my talk page to look neat. Seeking your co-operation. Thanks S3000 ☎ 19:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

dont worry you wont hear from me for a long time now the issue is sorted out sorry for creating a huge fuss the jammu and kashmir page is now neutral (in my veiw atleast) forget srinagar im saying this because you removed the administered tag for pakistan in the Jammu and Kashmir page so its only 2 articles on both sides of the party which are tagged thats all i was after for the past god knows how many years i only went berserk when articles only stated pakistan as administered and left india without the tag what really ticked me off was the POK page which even you would agree is POV based anyways as long as azad kashmir and northern areas stay stable i wont edit anymore and as for all that abuse i only responded to Paki slurs so i cant really apologize for my retialiation i look forward to your FINAL RESPONSE LOL cheers bye bye 86.162.67.217 (talk) 19:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, now that it's over lets put that behind us and move on. I never prevented you from editing anymore, you can, so long they are constructive. I hope you realise that talking is the best way to sort a problem out, and if you so return someday, please resort to this method. Thanks for engaging in this conversation and farewell to you friend. S3000 ☎ 19:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note on my talk page about this. I think he seems sincere enough and hopefully if there are any issues in the future we can all have a reasonable discussion about this :-) Regard Pahari Sahib 05:18, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks buddy for reverting vandalism and fixing my userpage. I wonder why would anyone do it to me when I'm rarely here! Anyway with this I reward you with this barnstar:

		The Special Barnstar
		Thanks for everything.. You truly deserve this.. From FleXiJane (T) 15:42, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take care. FleXiJane (T) 15:42, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thanks

Welcome. Just don't abuse it. See Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback if you want to play around with it some where you can't hurt anything. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:47, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the shiny!

Yeah, I really like reverting vandalism, so I do it quite a bit. Cheers! J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 22:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vandalism

Thanks for the message of support mate! Unfortunately I'm using IE7 which doesn't seem to support Twinkle (bloody rubbish microsoft, why can't they make a decent browser?), and I'm stuck in an office which means I have no say which browser I can use here. I've just started using Vandal Guard instead to flag up anything suspicious, then using rollback to revert any vandalism I find. So far, I've found it a hell of a lot quicker than repeatedly going through the recent changes page - only drawback is, as you've noticed, vandalism warnings have to be done manually. Ah well. Bettia (rawr CRUSH!) 08:24, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SAVE POK ARTICLE FROM DELETION

please save POK article from deletion Pakistan occupied Kashmir article has been posted for deletion..i have made the following appeal there:

do not delete : PLEASE allow editing to take place in this article so that it gets balanced; disabling editing and then crying unbalanced is hypocrisy!!!..As we all know we didn't delete european union article just because there was an "england" article or "france" article or "germany" article (which are part of EU nevertheless) ... Similarly we did not destroy soviet union article just because it is divided into 15 parts..Further it is very very clear that POK is not the same as "azad k ONLY" or "northern areas ONLY" as pok also includes trans karakoram tract, gilgit and baltistan (from 1947 till now)...pok term is used by most if not all non pakistan media.so ip and soman contention invalid.. i think it is not "fork" since contents are not identical, verifiable, has reliable sources and differs from the other articles like "trans-Karakoram tract" or "Northern Areas" (at the maximum, there is a passing reference in the summary(if this is considered fork) style with redirect links to sub regions).So, i am opposing this high handed move based on ignorance..rather i suggest that those who suggest it as non neutral contribute towards making this neutral, if it is not already neutral..pahari sahib's contention of inflammatory not substantiated both in talk page of pok or otherwise..so DO NOT DELETEKashmircloud (talk) 11:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

if you can improve this article or if you believe that the article can be improved by removing the edit ban(say, exampple: semiprotect) and if you also concur that pok not equal to ajk, please help in saving this article from deleters with nationalistic (pakistani)/ religious(islamist?) motives for POK article removal(example: User:paharisahib is pakistani)..please save the POKarticle...Kashmircloud (talk) 11:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

S300 think with a clear head about kashmir cloud he has lobbying for votes lol look at his edit history im sure you will make the right decision86.158.235.148 (talk) 13:01, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He also stated that pakistani editors are islamists 86.158.235.148 (talk) 13:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The both of you, please stop WP:Canvassing. It's not allowed. And Kashmircloud, this is a warning to you: no personal attacks will be tolerated. I don't care who started it. Even in retaliation is it wrong. Please refrain from commiting such acts in future. S3000 ☎ 18:05, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

kashmir cloud is the one canvassing not i 86.158.235.148 (talk) 21:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever it is.. S3000 ☎ 09:55, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

Investigating sockpuppetry at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistan occupied Kashmir, it became very clear that you were behind a good number of accounts. Given the large amount of abusive editing that plainly comes from you (but which I shall not list here out of respect for your privacy, given that it is logged-out editing), I have blocked you for two weeks.

Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 21:53, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have also removed your access to the rollback tool, as this indicates you cannot be trusted to act in accordance with policy. I'd further add that I am extremely disappointed to hear this. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:55, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it's because I'm related to Nangparbat, I QUIT! S3000 ☎ 07:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would, of course, have corresponded with you by email first. The fact that you did not have your email enabled is the sole reason I did not (posts by CheckUsers saying "Please email me" tend to get people very excited and it is not at all profitable). I have no reason to think you are related to Nangparbat, but I am very strongly of the opinion that you have used abusive sockpuppets. If you would like a second opinion, that can be arranged, though I suggest you consider whether you really do want that done. If you want any more information, I am very easily accessible -- smoddy@gmail.com. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 19:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well Sam, 3 emails have been sent to you requesting further details. You acknowledged receiving atleast one of them, but there has been no further reply. Although you claim I was using "abusive sock puppets", you haven't proved it to me. Isn't it my right to know exactly "why" I was blocked? If you are not prepared to furnish me with more information, you shouldn't have offered it in the first place. S3000 ☎ 07:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

? Have emailed you more details twice already. Will do so later today when back at my normal computer. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 12:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup templates

Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "{{Unreferenced}}", "{{Fact}}" and , "{{Trivia}}" etc., are best not "subst"ed . See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 02:53 16 September 2008 (GMT).

Noted. Thanks. S3000 ☎ 09:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]