User talk:Ajaypal2k

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Kukini's Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Ajaypal2k! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Finally, Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky or even vandalizing. Happy Editing! -- Kukini 05:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

[edit] Messages/ Discussions for AjayPal2k

[edit] User:HKelkar

[edit] No anecdotal statements

Please don;t put unsourced statements & anecdotal statements in the Indian Caste System article. To do so detracts from the theme of the article which is of a scholarly nature, not a political one.Hkelkar 17:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

My reply: User_talk:Hkelkar#No_thanks

[edit] User:Subhash bose

[edit] Hi

You seem like a nice enough fellow.There were several problems with your edits to the Indian Caste System. I did not delete them. I did, however, fix up the language and tone:

• Wikipedia is about NPOV. You were using ridiculous POV language in your edits. Always write in the third person, never in the first or second person.

• Please spell words correctly. It's spelled C-A-S-T-E, not C-A-S-T.

• Under all circumstances, never take a position in your edits. This is a blatant violation of WP:NPOV. A more malicious user would report you for vandalism. Since you are new here I'll be nice and not bite you like that.

You were loading your edits against the caste system. While I agree that casteism is a great social evil, we cannot suggest our opinion in the article.

• Some of your edits were completely inaccurate. Bant Singh was the victim of medical malpractice. The article clearly states that the amputation-as-a-retaliation is an ALLEGATION, not an ESTABLISHED FACT (though that's probably what happened).

Addendum:Sorry I made a mistake. The act of the amputation was carried out by assailants, not doctors. However, the assailants were not identified so this "caste" stuff is a mere allegation so far. Again, POV Shiva's Trident 18:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC) Shiva's Trident 18:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

My Reply: User_talk:Subhash_bose#New_Message

[edit] Your Message

In response to your message in my talk page: "we can't say that it is evil. to do so would be a violation of NPOV". We can only report facts, or the opinions of others as facts.Shiva's Trident 18:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gautier

Francois Gautier is a well-known and reliable columnist who has been cited with wualification numerous times on wikipedia. I'll look for some additional refs.Shiva's Trident 18:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I have found another article. Though it is written in the first person like Gautier. Two articles from two reputable news sources are enough to establish at least the validity of the allegations of a pattern. I put citations on the pageShiva's Trident 18:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BAd Faith Assumptions

Please assume good faith WP:AGF and observe WP:Civility. Edit summaries like "malicious content" are unhelpful. Hkelkar 17:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes it does, read TFA [1]:

According to the police, the gangrape was one of several incidents in Mumbai-bound trains by people mobilised by different Dalit political parties in the state.

Note the mention of "Dalit". Please read refs thoroughly, and see WP:POINT and WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for political correctedness. We are to report facts, all facts.Hkelkar 17:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. The incident is clearly caste related as it was not done by a mized gang group but by an organized group of Ambedkarite political activists belonging to the Dalit community. I have asserted in the section that there is no criminality in the Dalit movement to contextualize the section. However, the ugly truth is that certain radical elements among Dalits HAVE resorted to crimes with the view that their historical persecution somehow "entitles" them to do so. This cannot be whitewashed if we want to present a balanced outlook. The same things have happened with the Burakumin castes as well but you don't see those editors whitewashing it do you? Hkelkar 18:12, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

All right. Let me explain my point as clearly as I can. The section is supposed to represent a cross section of caste based incidents, so every incident involving caste need not be mentioned, just a representative. The fact remains that this incident IS caste related because of my comments above.Now, I have some other cases that I can add, like "Dalit Voice", a publication that has said that Hitler was a good man and made anti-semitic attacks on Jews and vicious statements against Hindus. I could add that even Muslims regards radical Dalits like Kancha Ilaiah as bigots. I could add articles that show alliances between radical Dalit Panthers and Islamic terrorist groups (there is an article on Huffington post about this btw). I did not want to do that because it would skew the article. My contention is that there have been violence committed against Dalits, OBC's etc, and there have been violence committed BY Dalits/OBC's etc. The former is more frequent than the latter. Thus, more detail has been added regarding the former cases and brief mentions regarding the latter. This makes the section adequately reflect the actual situation. If you removed that women raped part then it would skew the article AWAY from the norm. I know that this may be difficult (and distasteful) to accept. It is for me too. But we MUST be representative.

As far as the specific incident is concerned, let me point out that the same arguments can be made against the Bant Singh incident. I mean sure that the perpetrators were upper caste. But the articles cited do not show that it was SYSTEMIC to a caste conflict. By this I mean that the articles do not establish that had the perpetrators been the same caste as Singh then the incident would not have happened. Thus, it is a stretch to say that it is caste related. However, it is fair to put it in provided a balanced outlook is presented, and the women raped incient does exactly that.Hkelkar 18:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The article you cited is an op/ed by a criminal apologist. One cannot put too much stock in it as a neutral source. Of course, the basic idea of citing Phoolan Devi is sound and something that I could try to do.Hkelkar 19:12, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I removed it.Hkelkar 19:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)