User talk:Mysorebhai

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

whatttttttttt

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Mysorebhai, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

[edit] Edits to Tipu Sultan

Do not remove my sourced edits. Doing so is vandalism. I have studies your references in the Talk:Tipu Sultan and some of them are good and others are from Fundamentalist Muslim sources so should not be stated without qualification as per the WP:Reliable Sources rule. Please see my response and act according to wikipedia guidelines in your subsequent edits.

Some of your suggestions are very good and I appreciate them. Please put them into the article without vandalizing other edits. That is not how wikipedia works.

Hkelkar 12:41, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attacks on Talk:Tipu Sultan

This is your only warning. You posted an npa tag there. Since I commented on content, not on contributor, your comments and warnings are bogus and constitute a personal attack.


Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you.


This is regarding these edits:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ATipu_Sultan&diff=77719483&oldid=77694207

Hkelkar 23:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Might want to look up meaning of NPOV and WP:NPA

None of what I said was not directed at any particular user,bbut to the content so it does not amount to a personal attack.If an editor chooses to personally identify with his content then it is his problem and he should see a psychiatrist as this is a mental disorder. Try and prove that any of my statements were an attack on a religion. The fact remains that every single thing that I said was correct and supportable by evidence. The CONTENT of the article is so hopelessly fundamentalist that it pretty much shoots the credibility of wikipedia straight to the ninth circle of purgatory (that's "Gehennem" in case you're wondering). All I want is for wikipedia articles to be SCHOLARLY ie report the facts and cite all perspectives on the subject as opinions. Calling Tipu Sultan a "patriot" (as opposed to saying that he is "widely regarded as a patriot") is laughable as he did not have anything to be a patriot of. The fact remains that, from the objective historian's point of view, he was a tin-pot monarch of an obscure province who tried to stand up to the British and lost, and there have been questions raised about his religious atrocities. If none of these controversies are mentioned then the article is one-sided. I will file an RfA on this article and get admins to drive out all this jingoist gobbledygook from the article.Hkelkar 01:37, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding allegations of personal attack on Tom harrison's page

Since my comments were on the content, not on the contributor, they do not satisfy WP:NPAs criteria for a personal attack. Read the policy before wasting admins time. Thanks and have a nice day.Hkelkar 01:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tipu Sultan

Hi - as I'm sure you're aware, there has been some edit warring going on at Tipu Sultan, which has, from what I've seen, lead to some nasty accusations and personal attacks. Of course, these are things that we don't want in Wikipedia - we're building an encylcopedia, not making an informal forum for arguement. I have been called upon to mediate for, and provide my opinion on the article in question by User:Hkelkar, and am sending this message to all those to whom I feel it pertains. What I am looking for are reasons for the reversion (or, as I could be seen by some, content blanking) of edits by Hkelkar, which were well sourced (WP:CITE) verifiable (WP:V) and presented in a neutral point of view (WP:NPOV), in the hope that with this reasoning, I can turn the article back into a peaceful editting area. As part of this request, I would like you to consider that Hkelkar's submissions were well sourced, and that if there is a counter arguement against them, then that should be included too - the whole contribution should never be deleted. Thanks for taking the time to read this, and please place your reply in a new section on my talk page. Thanks again, Martinp23 13:27, 8 October 2006 (UTC)