Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhurabal

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Kimchi.sg 15:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bhurabal

I list this article here for reasons of process and don't vote myself. It was tagged with template:db-attack. On the talk page concerns regarding WP:NOR are given. --Pjacobi 09:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• The person tagging the attck is notorious for doing so.See Talk:Bhumihar and should not be used to nominate it for deletion.This will only encourage vandalism. Holywarrior 09:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

  Holywarrior's version is hopelessly biased. I have reverted it to Pataniyababu's attempted NPOV version. No vote. - Mike Rosoft 13:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

  Sorry it was not my opinion that you may call biased.Infact what you reverted was not in conformity with discussions on talk page.People not seeing talk page should not revert either.Holywarrior 15:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

  Plz follow the link to evaluate the deeds/misdeeds of editor,contents were intentionally mutilated to suit the delition criteria [1]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holywarrior (talk • contribs)

• Delete. Even if it were not attack-like, it is a neologism, mostly dictdef, and at most belongs instead in the Lalu Prasad Yadav article, about the person who coined and politically uses it. —Centrx→talk 21:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Page history indicates that the page was created purely to spew abuse on certain communities. In any case, the word is a neologism. ImpuMozhi 01:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to Lalu Prasad Yadav at the spot presently wiki-linked to this article. Fails WP:NEO to stand on its own, but it is pertinent to the creator of the neologism.GRBerry 02:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment First of all, I would like to remind everyone here that the Wikipedia serves a different purpose than you all think. It is not a dictionary where you can find hogwash neologism uttered by a corrupt, technically illiterate, low-profile and nonserious Indian politician. If any low-caste user likes this word then he may have it listed in the wiktionary. Remember, this is an encyclopaedia and has been created to share great knowledge. I do not see the reason why such things should occupy valuable space on the already overloaded Wikipedia server. Another point to note that even if the word exists (though I doubt it), it is an abbreviation and the 'article', if continues to exist (if some ignorant fools have their way), should not have anything more than who was the hick who coined the term and what is the expansion of this word. The vandal User:Holywarrior (who is also a Chandala / Chandal by the grace of God as he has confessed on Khatri talk page) is notorious for cleverly defacing the pages of almost all the upper castes. I find it inappropriate fo him to question the origin of certain castes when he has no sound basis for that. How can he add "historians are not certain of the origin of these people"? He can discuss such things at the repective talk pages of these castes and not on this boorbaal (or whatever it is) page. I would like to ask him: "Are historians sure of the origin of your caste (Chandala / Chandal)? If so, how? If yes, why do you not write about it on its page? It would be better to block him for good so that his dreams of becoming the first Shudra admin gets shattered. Friends, I don't blame him for all this. User:Holywarrior, being from an untouchable caste of India, must have faced discrimination and humiliation from these castes whom he collectively refers to as Bhurabal. Consequently, he has become mentally deranged. Man, get treated for Antisocial Personality Disorder or schizophrenia or whatever you have. I would be back with some proofs of his great deeds of vandalism. VandalPatrol 06:22, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Whenevewr You are back be sincere to admit You were user:VandalPatrol user:hardinge,59.94.. and related Ips and banned user:WiseAdmin too.Holywarrior 07:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC).Also see [2] Holywarrior 09:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • How about deleting Wikipedia/RC patroller-Everyone seems to be having dubious records there.How can one deny affiliation from this and Vnadal Control Units are the first target of Vandals/Scoundrels to get listed there so as to impersonate as respectable editors/admin and also acts as a link page for vandal interaction.I am not a bit amazed to see development on Bhurabal page and comments here.Perhaps this has become modus operandi of vandal groups in which admins too are participating.Sad but true.Holywarrior 07:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• I take this opportunity to thank user:VandalPatrol for igniting the fire within me.Not only this You have exihibited all the traits what belongs to you and people who would not have been able to know your community through edit wars and encyclopedia would soon come to know about it in better way.If projecting true image of your community was your mission and people backing you,you have succeeded,You have told all what you are and also exposed people behind you in a more categorical manner.Wikipedia is different from other encyclopedia.You exibit your traits here.And the comments in the Box--which actually are not yours,but wiki has given you privilege to express yourself--- All of you have been poorly exposed.People coming to these pages will know Bhumihar in much better way than what they can learn from article itself.Holywarrior 14:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

• If we can get back to this discussion, delete, fails WP:NEO. --Coredesat 21:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • If Bhurabal fails how come Java ScriptSurvive it.Holywarrior 08:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment ...because JavaScript is not a neologism coined by one person to describe people he doesn't like? --Coredesat 03:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete neologism. Check of "The Times of India" and "The Hindu" online websites turn up no instances of this word. Also apparent attack page. Tychocat 08:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Further Comment Mr "Holy" +"Warrior", what makes you assume that I am of the "community" you are referring to? And which community???????? I am here to make the Wikipedia better and I would use my knowledge and intelligence for the purpose. DELETE stupid unnecessary neologism. (NB: Neologism is also a serious symptom of schizophrenia (especially its paranoid form) and other related disorders.) Where is the question of admitting that I own these usernames????? Vandalpatrol 13:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • So you will never improve.Do you think everybody here is as stupid as you.Every sentence of yours bears the signature who you are....No secret for anyone who has interacted with you even when you remained anonymous.Have merry time and try to improve. Can you tell why you created this id when you were warned of having created similar one earlier....Traits speak !!!!!!!!!!Holywarrior 14:24, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I am not answerable to anyone including the Shudras. Bhurabal should be deleted as nobody is against its deletion and no point has been made to save it. PandalPetrol 04:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Please take a look at his deed in Khatri page. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khatri&diff=56981012&oldid=56977855

PandalPetrol 04:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• • Another helpful link where he slanders the Bhumihar caste cunningly. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dalit_%28outcaste%29&diff=58211485&oldid=57791312. Please ban this vandal. PandalPetrol 04:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Welcome user:VandalPatrol with your new id.Let me explain.Edit[3] was rv in which I had added citation from Manushmriti which was erased by an user.I never have indulged in Kshatriya/Shudra edit war.Holywarrior 09:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
    • [4] Yes I had added these links because they were relevant.Domkatar legacy rightfully belongs to Dalits.Dholbajja version too supported that it should be linked.Because Bhumihar was mentioned in these two links and Talk:Bhumihar had all these elements tell me why should a visitor of Dalit page not be interested in Bhumihar with these elements.I have not done anything cunningly.It is you who have many Ids and anonymous accounts.I always sign my comments and use only one Id.How can you say I am cunning.If you differed you should have gone to talk page.There is nothing wrong in directiong viewrs from Dalit page to Bhumihar page.
    • Now tell me under what authority you have posted {{Block} message on my page.Do you think you will always be able to create new account and abuse people as you like.Holywarrior 09:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment This AfD has gotten way off track with personal attacks, accusations, and so forth. I have tried to restore some sembalance of order. I have changed formatting and removed some sections. Please limit your conversation to the article in question, and do not make personal attacks. And on the article itself, no vote for now. Thanks. -- Irixman ^{(t) (m)} 15:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
• DELETE, I think Holy had created this article to divert Vandals (ref:Talk:Lalu Prasad Yadav ,it has served its purpose,Neology and attack nature not ruled out.Holy should not take offence.Regrets Wmnnzzr 11:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Some action on this fellow called Pandal/Vandal Petrol is desirable.Admins plz take note.Better expunge out his comments ,not tolerable by any civilised person.Wmnnzzr 11:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.