User talk:Bhimaji

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello, Bhimaji, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that will get you started:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using three (~~~) or four tildes (~~~~), which will leave a link to other users so they can reach you. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Thank you and we hope you stay!

This was sent by Deathgleaner(talk)

We sue you we sue Wikipedia we sue WizardofWar for LIES LIES. MDSI has now France lawsuits against Wizard, X, Bhimaji, Kirkpatrick and RONZ. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeanclauduc (talk • contribs)

Contents

[edit] Praise

I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for being reasonable. Its far too often the case with COI editors that they get unreasonable, uncivil and even a bit manic in their arguments and editing. You have done great in remaining civil and reasonable, made honest efforts to improve the MDSA article, avoid personal attacks and be completely honest about your affiliations. Even though I may not nessisarily agree with your assertation of notability, I do think you deserve praise for your attitude and efforts. Russeasby 03:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advice on improving my edits

"Blocking Jeanclauduc indef would not fix the problem as we have the COI stuff going on here w/ employees of a company are editing many related topics.-- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 12:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)"

I've been working on understanding Wikipedia policies and have been trying to ensure that any edits I do have been both fully COI-disclosed and properly NPOV. I've also talked to all the MDSA people that have been doing edits. I'm not the boss so I can't order them, but I thought that there was good improvement.

Obviously, from your comments, I see that you are still concerned about some of the edits by myself or my co-workers. Do you think you could make some suggestions or identify article edits you feel are inappropriate?

Thanks. Bhimaji 13:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Bhimaji. Your efforts are much appreciated. I have one major concern and it is related to WP:COI. If we read through the policy we'd find the following:

Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit," but if you have a conflict of interest avoid, or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors...

If you are involved in a court case, or close to one of the litigants, you would find it very hard to demonstrate that what you wrote about a party or a law firm associated with the case, or a related area of law, was entirely objective. Even a minor slip up in neutrality in a court-case article on Wikipedia for an active case-in-progress could potentially be noticed by the courts and/or their parties, and this could potentially cause real-world harm, not just harm to Wikipedia. Because of this, we strongly discourage editing when this type of conflict exists.

So that is my main concern and i am talking about all editors in direct relation w/ the subjects on hand. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 13:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent block of 76.109.17.236

Please look more carefully at the logs and edit history. The refactored comment was one that this person posted, but when connected to the wrong network. He changed the posting IP because he wanted to avoid confusion. If you look here: [1] you can see that he has signed his comments with his primary IP when he's been using his other IP address. I've suggested to him that he would be better off registering, but I can't force him to.

Given that the offense happened 11 days ago, I'm surprised that the block is happening now, and is for 73 hours, as opposed to the block of 31 hours for User_talk:83.206.63.250, who has written extremely distasteful and insulting material. Can you explain your reasoning? Bhimaji 20:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll be unblocking him even if it would not make any sense. He is obliged to get registered now as all pages are locked. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 22:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I appreciate your willingness to admit to mistakes. I must admit, however, that I am still confused about a 3 day block for an 11 day old transgression that was warned about and not repeated. Bhimaji 22:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Everything is well explained at the talk pages Bhimaji. There's a new situation now and also because of two reasons: Everybody has been informed by the situation at the ANI lately and the revert happened today and not 3 days ago. The problem itself was the fact of removing a request (there weren't warning) from his talk page w/o explaining to folks why he's changed IP numbers. Co-editors have the right to know but instead of knowing they have been reverted. So that is the main reason. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 22:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Note that this IP address has previously claimed to not be Jean Claude Ducasse: [2] but in this post he clearly says he is. I wonder if he'd be willing to PGP sign his posts :)
WP:SHUN. I believe the problem of IPs is sorted out now. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 16:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2nd XMonad AfD

Hi: you previously contributed to/edited the 1st AfD discussion about XMonad. XMonad has again been nominated for deletion; as you previously edited, I thought you would like to know. (I have also contacted all the other non-anon editors.) If you no longer care, please feel free to ignore this. Thanks. --Gwern (contribs) 02:02 24 December 2007 (GMT)

[edit] Moving

Not really, but I have added a comment there about this mistake. Remember that we are in an open encyclopedia and we must be bold when edit. Thank you!--OsamaK 10:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Great view, let's talk with Wikipedians in the village pump. Can you write about this thing? My English is worse than writing there :P--OsamaK 15:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the comments.

You might want to glance at my user page about my interests in New Thought. Low Sea (talk) 16:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RoHS and Swatch

Hello,

You recently undid my removal of the Swatch section in the RoHS article. Let me explain -- I did not remove it based on opinion, but rather fact. I obtained the EU paperwork officially filed by Swatch and the EU's consultant recommendation to deny Swatch's request for an exemption. So based on these documents and Dr. Fischer at DFR Solutions - I removed the section as being incorrect.

I am never eager to remove content, and I left an explanation with Aki, who originally added it. I have also sent an email to the UK Guardian which was cited as a reference, asking about their possible mistake.

Do you still think this content should remain? I'm willing to rewrite it and explain - perhaps that would be better than just deleting it, however if it's inaccurate or in dispute, it shouldn't be there in my opinion. Please see the RoHS discussion page for more detail. Prosecreator (talk) 20:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)