User talk:RegentsPark/Archive 39

Archive 35

←

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Siege of Sirhind

RegentsPark Can you please take a look at this page as there is a disagreement on where some of the information is best suited within the article? Kamhiri has been part of the contribution to this page and had no issue with it whatsoever but all of a sudden today, decides to place some of the information within the article from section "Aftermath" to section "Siege". Also the user is misbehaving by calling initial rv as disruptive even when explained the reason in description. And the user continued with such comments, the second time as well. I even tried to resolve the issue by moving some of the information from the section "siege" which best fits under "aftermath". This is why I think an admin should step in to resolve this issue as Kamhiri still disagrees and continues to revert. MehmoodS (talk) 00:18, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

just fyi - We both are discussing in article talk page. MehmoodS (talk) 00:26, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

User Kamhiri continued to revert even while discussion was on going on. MehmoodS (talk) 00:41, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

RegentsPark, I believe that this user is hounding me as per [1]. Here he is, following me on both discussions I posted on the TeaHouse unprovoked[2], [3]. Some other concerning things I noticed: [4], reverting a 1993 Cambridge University source while putting sources from Patwant Singh, who is not a historian (and he got confirmation of this on RSN) [5] and other highly concerning edits on Sikh Empire where he [6] removed content sourced from university scholars under a false and I would say maybe abusive edit summary and he did the same thing on Ranjit Singh's page the same day. He even cited a book published by Singh Bros as a Cambridge University book even though absolutely nothing in that book suggested it was. [7] Today I believe I justifably removed some content as the citation was a source from the Sikh Educational Trust for Sikh University Centre (clearly appears to be a COI). He reverted the edit and classified it as disruptive even though it was poorly sourced [8]. May I add that he immediately went to an admin instead of going on the talk page first- as per WP:BRD. We were told this on RSN that involving admins or third editors is the last thing to do, not the very first. Going back to the topic, it strongly appears to me that this user is following me around (even if he watchlisted these pages) it doesn't explain some other things I've seen. In either case, I will accept an outsider opinion in regards to Siege of Sirhind but I also want to inquire about possible interaction ban with this user. Would this particular situation suffice for that? Kamhiri (talk) 00:54, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

This is perfect example of personal attacks where now Mr. Kamhiri is coming up with baseless accusations to justify his actions. I have numerous pages from Maratha Empire, Mysore Empire, Sikh Empire, religions under my watch list to prevent from vandalism and disruptive editing. First of all, according to WP:RSN Patwant Singh's book is not reliable and the source was removed AFTER. So what is the point here? What does this even have to do with the current change? And what was so concerning about the edits on Sikh Empire when I clearly mentioned to get opinion on WP:RSN regarding the reliability of the source? This is absolutely baseless argument you are coming up with instead of focusing on the topic of discussion Siege of Sirhind. Also you cannot remove or alter changes because "you believe so". You have to get consensus or 3rd opinion or even WP:RSN. Removing citations with information it supports is disruptive. RegentsPark you can clearly look at the history of Siege of Sirhind and can see who made irrelevant accusations. Description will provide the information. And since there have been many disagreements with Kamhiri without any conclusion to getting a consensus, that is why I thought it better to get admin involved. Even the discussion on the talk page was started by Kamhiri after 3 edits, when he should have done it before making the first change. And even while the discussion is ongoing, Kamhiri reverted the changes with 4th edit. Finally after he sends you a message here, his last message is that he is ok to get 3rd opinion. And this is what I was here for in the first place, to get your involvement because this is where it was ultimately going to end. Kamhiri, please stick to topic of discussion. MehmoodS (talk) 01:56, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

This is the timeline of what happened on Siege of Sirhind today- I made a change, you reverted, I reverted, I start a discussion on the talk page, you revert, you post this message on RP's talk page, then you go on the talk page, then I revert (last revert perhaps an error in my judgement). But you going to get a third opinion defeats the purpose of going to the talk page because we're supposed to exhaust the discussion on the talk page first and then ask an outside opinion as per BRD. That's why I didn't bother going any further on the talk page because I knew it would be inevitably decided by a third editor shortly afterwards. "Also you cannot remove or alter changes because "you believe so". You have to get consensus or 3rd opinion or even WP:RSN. Removing citations with information it supports is disruptive.".....I certainly can remove info if the citation is contentious, of course if another editor disagrees with it, it would have to decided on the talk page whether that citation can be used or not. "And since there have been many disagreements with Kamhiri without any conclusion to getting a consensus, that is why I thought it better to get admin involved"....are you forgetting the 2 RSN posts? Also it doesn't matter, we as editors need to stick by BRD. Any editor is free to consult the history of Siege of Sirhind and come to their own conclusions, I dont mind. Also I would recommend taking this discussion to the talk page of the article- as we shouldn't clog up or unnecessarily send pings to RegentsPark talk page.Kamhiri (talk) 02:13, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Admins can view the timeline by going through the history. No need to give details. Admin can confirm it. Also removing citation and information because "you feel are contentious" isn't the right method. On to topic of Siege of Sirhind, after 3 edits, you started discussion and still continued to revert committing edit warring. That is why, you should have had the discussion in the first place. And I even tried to help by moving some of the aftermath information from "siege" section to "Aftermath". But you still ended up reverting. Sorry RegentPark for such lengthy discussion here. Kamhiri, if any further discussion,

we can use article talk page. MehmoodS (talk) 02:34, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

RegentsPark, the issue has been resolved on the talk page. However, could you provide feedback on a user asking an admin to "step in and resolve the issue" before even engaging in the discussion started on the talk page. To me this seems like an intimidatory or unfair way to get an upper hand in a content dispute and completely disregards the use of the talk page. Moreover, it's widely known that admins don't get involved in content disputes, unless it involves very overt vandalism. Kindly provide your feedback. Kamhiri (talk) 18:48, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Disregard of the talk page is when someone continues to revert the change even without reaching a consensus. There is nothing intimidatory or unfair here by asking an admin for advice. Where did you get that idea? Intention is to get advice on how to resolve issue or they can even help by assigning a 3rd editor to take a look at the dispute or even review the article. MehmoodS (talk) 19:27, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

• @MehmoodS and Kamhiri: Apologies, RL became suddenly busy. If the issue is resolved, best to WP:AGF and move on. Though, I do agree that it is better to (a) seek consensus on the talk page and (b) seek dispute resolution rather than attempting to get help from an admin when the primary issue is content related. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:16, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Audrey Truschke

Deserves a 30/500 protection under ARBIPA. Consult recent edits. TrangaBellam (talk) 14:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Done. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks; semi-protection is prob. warranted at Gyanvapi Mosque. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:26, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

EPC - indefinite, please. Semi isn't helping. TrangaBellam (talk) 07:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

I second that. Even EPC wouldn't guard against the editor that got 3RR warning this morning. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Looks like it will only partly help but done anyway (not sure why this mosque is topical?)--RegentsPark (comment) 20:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Hindutva wants it back. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

We need semi-protection of the t/p too. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:13, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Soomra dynasty need to be indefinitely semi-ed under ARBIPA — edit-warring to insert Rajput in lead (or delete Dani's comments) for the past one year. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:25, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

RegentsPark is not some kind of janitor at everyone's beck and call. As V. S. Naipaul said (before me), "Don't bring Regents Park every two-bit squabble to resolve. Bring only the big battles." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Forgot to say: both the late V. S. Naipaul and I are (talk page stalker)s Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:41, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

• Done. F&f, it is fine to bring these requests to my talk page. The main role of an admin is janitorial! --RegentsPark (comment) 15:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Unexplained addition or removal across multiple pages

Hi, some user @Smith Jats is editing multiple pages and adding/removing things without any explanation. All without any source. Please check the user contributions. Thank you. Krayon95 (talk) 02:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

You talk my page.Smith Jats (talk) 11:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Alha

Could you look at the content dispute? To me, neither preferred veersion is good. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra: That and Udal of Mahoba are a mess and I think we should just revert to some version before these two new editors arrived on the scene. Perhaps @Bonadea: has ideas? --RegentsPark (comment) 15:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I see you've reverted and fully protected, for the best. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I would happily see both TBANned at this point. My impression is caste warfare/glorification --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:37, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I dropped a CS CASTE notice on Iamritwikaryan's (littered with warnings) talk page. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:42, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Why do we even need a separate page on Udal of Mahoba? TrangaBellam (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Need your attention here

Dear Admin, I checked that you have blocked the user ( for 1 week ) who created this page [[9]], is such caste based Wiki project allowed? I have not seen any similar example till date. I think the above newly created page should be deleted. Akalanka820 (talk) 17:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Is this statement true?

"You are not allowed to use large quotations in "quote=" parameter. It should not exceed more than 25 words in general." RegentsPark Is this correct? MehmoodS (talk) 16:10, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

@MehmoodS: Not to my knowledge. Imo, quotes should be avoided (because they are lazy) but if there is a quote less than 25 words you probably don't even need the quote= parameter. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:33, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

RegentsPark Thanks. Just wanted to confirm as an editor used this excuse to revert my changes. [10] and here is my change that was reverted.[11]. Before my change, in the article, in infobox, result section, the quotes were incorrect or you can say mis-represented as those weren't the correct quotes about the conclusion of the war but rather about initial war. And when I corrected the quote as it seemed necessary due to many disruption on the page, two editors reverted the change without any discussion. Seems like they are pushing POV. Even they are using two unreliable sources by Y.G. Bhave and Barbara West where earlier is a scholar in humanist and the latter is anthropologist. Not historians. MehmoodS (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

@MehmoodS: The diff you've provided above has the edit summary "Copyvio and POV pushing", and there is a a talk page discussion on the result. The 25 word limit is, of course, not the case but Aman.kumar.goel seems to have moved on from that reasoning. The reliability of the sources is best evaluated at WP:RSN and you will need consensus on the result since you're changing it from the status quo. You could ask for more eyes on WT:IN. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:53, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete the article

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripura_People%27s_Front as it is not notable one. Wikifulness (talk) 12:23, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

I can't do that. You will need to try WP:PROD and, if that does not work, then try WP:AFD. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Page moving

The page titled Thori (tribe) has been recently moved to Kalash tribe without explanation. Including unexplained removal of content. Recent editors are @Virendra Raghuwanshi and @Smith Jats. Seems like it was done in imitation of Kalash people. Please check. Thank you. Krayon95 (talk) 15:00, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

I undid the move. If you could restore the last best version, I'll keep watch on it. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:59, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Nupur Sharma (politician)

Thank you for the protection. Can you please also take a look at the related event article 2022 BJP Muhammad remarks controversy. It is currently unprotected. Venkat TL (talk) 12:56, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

I semi-protected that one but will continue to watch it. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:01, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I almost got blocked for asking this Venkat TL (talk) 13:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Jeypore Estate

May I know why have you removed my edit? I am providing a legitimate source of Raphael Rousseleau. MasterClass8x (talk) 19:28, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

@MasterClass8x: I'll respond on the article talk page in a little while. Best to keep it there. --RegentsPark (comment) 19:39, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Deletion

Rashmi Samant has been created in contravention of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rashmi Samant racism row. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:44, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Alha

Hello sir why did you remove information from alha? while the source support that information. 2409:4053:C94:8FC1:0:0:88C9:A807 (talk) 03:27, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Could you please take that to the article talk page? --RegentsPark (comment) 13:10, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@RegentsPark ur admin what do you think was the thing I added wrong? What would be your opinion on the talk page? 2409:4053:E12:7A94:0:0:8149:EA0D (talk) 08:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

The Alha page sees a lot of sock activity so I routinely revert any significant change that has not shown to be a consensus change. I have no opinion on the content itself and suggest you post your suggested changes on the talk page and get consensus if you want them to be incorporated in the article. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:38, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Help!

It looks like we've run into a biased editor here. The term Kafir was used in that movie, but neither the term nor a link to it is being allowed.—2402:8100:281D:D59A:0:0:0:1 (talk) 15:10, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

That's a content issue that is best resolved through discussion on the article talk page. If you're unhappy with the exclusion of the word, you can always try dispute resolution or a WP:RFC. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:05, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

ANI

Good Evening. In your recent ANI close, you said that I show up at "every report that involves VenkatTL", but to be exact, there were multiple long ANI threads against Venkat TL where I didn't show up[12][13] and had no plans to show up here either until Hemantha dragged me into the controversy.[14] I hope you either modify the wording or remove it. Thanks.Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 17:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I'll take a look in a bit. Best wishes. --RegentsPark (comment) 19:25, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Modified. --RegentsPark (comment) 20:14, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HatsuneMilku (talk • contribs) 13:00, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

The thread is here. Primefac (talk) 13:10, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Hmm. Perhaps time to start selling admin NFTs. That way I can keep my addiction and make some money!--RegentsPark (comment) 13:40, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

1630

Hi RegentsPark

Why did you revert[15] my edit[16] to the article 1630 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)?

Per WP:REVEXP, a revert should be explained. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:31, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @BrownHairedGirl:. Apologies, I assumed that the edit was made by a bot. The link you added appears to point to a site that's not in English and appears to be an online casino site. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:21, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

I did not add a link. I simple extracted the original URL from the archived link, so that readers can check the original, which has now been usurped.

This is standard practice for archived links. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:26, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

I see. Feel free to re-revert. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:29, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

I have restored my edit[17], but with |url-status=usurped. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:30, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Apologies for the confusion. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:32, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Babur

Hi, RegentsPark. I noticed you have recently reverted my edit in the article on Babur. Sorry if I haven't indicated the reason for making that particular edit in my edit summary. The thing is, it was added to the Personal life section of the article and to the paragraph that described Babur's poetry and his lack of knowledge of Old Hindustani language, a dominant language in the region before the establishment of the Mughal rule. Classic Chagatai version of the poem was employed to show interested readers (especially to those who have a good grasp of that extinct language) that the above statement was true. Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 11:58, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Please use the article talk page to get consensus for this. Frankly, not many people will have a good grasp of that extinct language and I don't see much point in quoting random verses of your choosing in an article but feel free to seek consensus. --RegentsPark (comment) 12:28, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

I am amazed to learn that a well-cited per WP:RS, relevant information added to the right place in the article now needs consensus. Who started it and when? I thought I was contributing to Wikipedia by giving people the chance to see his usage of his native tongue. I have even employed Latin letters with a correct language tag for that verse to aid the reader, even though it's a common knowledge that he (Babur) used an Arabo-Persian script. There are numerous articles in English Wikipedia about non-British poets where pieces of their poetry are given in their native languages alongside English like Hafez, Rumi, and etc. Why not here? --Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 12:45, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Why this particular verse? Why not use a different verse? You need a reliable source that explains the significance of a particular verse and need a good reason to include the verse itself. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:35, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Done. Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 16:12, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Copyvio revdel

From 1 to 2. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:31, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

 Done--RegentsPark (comment) 19:39, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

New message from Admantine123

Hello, RegentsPark. You have new messages at Abecedare's talk page.
Message added 12:13, 13 July 2022 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hey RegentsPark, Long time to see you here. I just need a suggestion there. I have put my sources and want to create an article, but need little suggestion on title. Can you see there plz. Admantine123 (talk) 12:13, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

P-block

Shweta Chaturvedi000 from Sakaldwipiya: edits like this. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:42, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Or maybe, a NOTHERE block is more appropriate. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:44, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear RegentsPark/Archive 39,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 17:40, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Misuse of sources at Mahto

• Papiya Ghosh (2008). Civil disobdience movement in Bihar, 1930–1934. Manak. p. 94. ISBN 978-81-7827-000-5. ... the surname 'Mahto' was used by Dhanuks, Dusadhs, Goalas, Koeris, Sunris, Tharus, Dhobis, etc, and 'Raut' was used by Amats, Chamars, Dusadhs, Dhanuks, Goalas etc.

Someone used this source at Mahto. I can see they have used sources which don't say anything about the particular surname, yet it's there for long. I need just one help. Can you tell me, whether any of the source used there verifies that Mahto surname belongs to those castes listed there?. The cited source seems saying something else. Admantine123 (talk) 17:38, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

• I don't appear to have access to the content of this book. Sorry!--RegentsPark (comment) 20:31, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Page protection

Hi RP, can you renew the ECP for Nupur Sharma (politician)? Disruption started as soon as the previous protection expired. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:18, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: Doesn't look too bad at this point but will monitor the page. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:05, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: On second thoughts, extended for one year. --RegentsPark (comment) 20:56, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

P-block

BrownSugar57 from Makarand Paranjape. Resumed edit-warring after protection expired. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:14, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Blocked from editing that article.--RegentsPark (comment) 17:33, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

page protection

Edit war on Yaduvanshi dynasty page please sir protection it. 2409:4053:2C9D:73F6:0:0:81C9:7F05 (talk) 14:33, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Reducing protection on Karna

Hi, I was responding to an edit request, and noticed that Karna was extended protected for ~3.5 years. Do you think a reduction to normal protection is warranted? I've seen in the logs that sockpuppetry was a chronic issue on that page, but maybe enough time has elapsed that a reduction can be done. What do you think? SWinxy (talk) 03:36, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

@SWinxy: I think it best to keep it protected. There are an endless number of socks that battle over Karma and Arjuna and the edit history tells me that they are still around. But, let's give unprotecting a shot and see what happens! --RegentsPark (comment) 14:34, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

@RegentsPark:

Hi,

Sorry to butt in here, but few months back, we had a huge sock puppetry case regarding Karna for which a request had to be raised in Administrator's Notice Board. @DaxServer: had taken care of the situation. Wouldnt be surprised if more socks are lurking around. Perhaps, it is indeed best to keep the page protected protected. Request you to monitor it. - (Panchalidraupadi (talk) 15:24, 21 July 2022 (UTC))

Yeah. I doubt if this will work but let's see. Will monitor the page but feel free to drop a note on my talk page if you see something. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:48, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

@RegentsPark: Thanks! Panchalidraupadi (talk) 16:14, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Hmmmm. Maybe indef ECP is warranted, then, if there's such long-term, massive abuse going on (link to ANI thread). Does anyone have a TL;DR of what the motive is for these disruptions? I'll have the page on my watchlist, too. SWinxy (talk) 20:29, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Already up to two generally bad edits, and the same sock master targeting it twice. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:30, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

I guess that didn't work. Reinstated ECP.--RegentsPark (comment) 15:33, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Welp. That was fun. At least we tried. SWinxy (talk) 18:00, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Jimmy Hoffa

Thanks for that. I just excised it because the article would otherwise be eligible for the front page for selected anniversaries, rather than tag and wait if someone sources it or not (and not displaying it, if nobody was able/willing to source it). I wasn't expecting such a quick reaction, so a win-win for everyone/thing. Great! Thanks again Bumbubookworm (talk) 22:53, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

No worries. Sourcing is always good!--RegentsPark (comment) 22:55, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Just saying Hi

Hello! How are you? Dwaipayan (talk) 04:30, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Dwaipayanc:. I'm fine, hope you are well too! --RegentsPark (comment) 10:23, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, so far so good. Did not get Covid yet (at least, knowingly)!--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:39, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

A couple of times, luckily mild. Not sure about what long covid is going to do though. Congratulations on the upcoming Darjeeling TFA!--RegentsPark (comment) 19:34, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Need your help

Hi! I am not a experienced editor and haven't contributed much, and I don't know how to handle disputes related to interpretation problems when it comes to experienced editors like Chaipau. I had some discussions with him/her earlier and I found that sometimes he/she doesn't understand clearly but insists on the same argument such as claiming expansion time as arrival time. Now here Boro_people#Boro_identity_formation, He/She seems to misunderstand what the Author is saying.

Boro is an endonym but they were known as Kachari and Mech to Hindus, this fact has been reported since the time of Francis-Buchanan Hamilton and B.H. Hodgson. The Kachari and Mech names appear in Historical chronicles written by Hindus but not the Boro. Again Boro has been anglicized as Bodo and Bodo has been used as a self-designation and generic name for a larger group including Boro.

• Author discusses the Boro Brahma religion influenced by Brahma religion originated in Bengal. The author calls this Brahma identity a new Bodo identity. [Earlier Boros were listed as Kachari and Mech in the censuses. After the Linguistic Survey of India becomes influential, They were allowed to be listed as Boro.] By 1921, In the census, They abandoned Kachari and Mech names and returned Boro as the name of the community. And the Author discusses the aspirations of the community.
• Author doesn't say anything about the origin of the self-designation, Boro. In reality, Nobody knows when they started to call themselves Boro.

So, I believe the section name [[Boro_people#Boro_identity_formation]] is not right. Could you please give your opinion? I tried to give him/her ARBIPA alert but i couldn't as his talk page is protected against wide range of IP which affected my IP as i use mobile internet. Thank you. Northeast heritage (talk) 03:33, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Northeast heritage: I'm not sure I can be of help since I don't know much (if anything at all) about this area and I'm too busy in RL to dig into something totally new. You don't need to give Chaipau an ARBIPA alert since they already have one active (User_talk:Chaipau#ARBIPA_sanctions_reminder). My suggestion is that you clearly formulate the dispute with Chaipau and seek dispute resolution or try an RfC. But you will need to be very clear what the dispute is and make sure you bring good sources to back up your position. --RegentsPark (comment) 11:53, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate your suggestion. Thank you. Northeast heritage (talk) 14:01, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

56% Yamnaya face?

Must have been pretty insulting to get revdelled!  Tewdar  12:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Juvenile is a better descriptor :) --RegentsPark (comment) 15:33, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

RfC

Hi RegentsPark! It seems that you might be double voting in this Rfc: [18][19]. Shouldn't the two votes be coalesced into one? Best पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 18:04, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. Fixed, I hope! --RegentsPark (comment) 18:15, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Fair use file name

Hi RegentsPark! I messed-up the file name of a Fair Use file when uploading: File:Psamtik II colossal statue reconstruction in Heliopolis.jpg. The ruler should be "Psamtik I", hence the file name should be File:Psamtik I colossal statue reconstruction in Heliopolis.jpg
Is it something you can correct with your administrative tools? Thank you! पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 12:19, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done--RegentsPark (comment) 13:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much! पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 13:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Page move

Sakaldwipiya into Maga Brahmin per COMMONNAME. Thanks, TrangaBellam (talk) 11:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Moved. --RegentsPark (comment) 18:07, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Indefinite block ?

Hi RP; as you blocked this editor yesterday; diff for a racist slur of labelling me as Castiest Brahamin; diff. They as usual are still in no mood to mend their ways; actually they are proud of their disruptive past for getting banned from Delhi Riots page (still acusing reliable media outlet for alleged anti-hindu bias again in accordance with their habit of not attesting it with counter RS); diff.

• As usual they again restored to defaming of a reputed academic (Romila Thapar) by comparing them with him/her; diff literally saying that her scholarship is unworthy in comparison to me; (would have avoided it had it been only limited to me) but fearing possible repercussions, they slashed Thapar name from there; diff.

• While they are blocked for personal attacks; they again hurled abuse towards me; diff (no issue with shoe lace remark but saying that I ain't worthy of cleaning their toilet is definately a unacceptable abuse.

• If I got carried away; I appologize sincerely for that but this user who has been on razor edge for sometime (whenever they edit regularly); and even when they are blocked; they are still ranting and beliting a female academic (though remove it after fearing a long term block); and calling others to clean their toilet (don't even have adequates of communicating with a female) definately deserve much harsh reprimand then a 31 hour block; probably indefinate block ? or at least ban from Indian-related topics. I leave the rest to your wisdom and fine sense of judgement; Cheers. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 02:01, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Urgent attention needed

Dear Admin, the content of this article Varman Dynasty (Bengal) is exactly copy pasted from this website here : [[20]], Is it allowed on Wikipedia? I don't think so. There are more similar such articles ( recently created on Wikipedia) with all content from the same website. Akalanka820 (talk) 06:18, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Diannaa: could you take a look here? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:12, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

in the first case it seems the content has been copied from that website as the date suggests, but this article Murho Estate is firstly created on Wikipedia and later pasted on that website with same content here [[21]]. Is the website owner having some connection to the editors who created these article? I will leave this up to Admins and more experienced editors. I just think there is some WP:COI here. Akalanka820 (talk) 09:18, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

The article on the Varman Dynasty was published on October 19, 2021, and is a copy of the Wikipedia article as it appeared on that date. It's an unattributed copy, a wp:mirror. Likewise, their article on Murho Estate, published on September 19, 2021, is a copy of the Wikipedia article as it appeared on that date. Also a Wikipedia mirror. — Diannaa (talk) 14:01, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Diannaa: for explaining this out, and apologies for taking valuable time. It did created some confusion, because word to word it is same. Again, sorry for taking time. I would definitely reach out to you, if I find something odd. Akalanka820 (talk) 14:44, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Inconsistency among astrological signs and another article

You edited Template:Infobox zodiac to eliminate the varna parameter. But the parameter remains in the documentation for this template. Further, there was another article with a table giving varna attributes for zodiac signs, but I can no longer find it. I'm guessing that it may have been deleted in the recent flurry of edits. Jc3s5h (talk) 19:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up and it looks like it has been removed from the documentation. If you find it elsewhere, go ahead and remove it.--RegentsPark (comment) 19:44, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

OR

Can you take a look at Talk:Aisha? Newbie editors are disputing scholars like Kecia Ali, Khalid Yahya Blankinship and Denise Spellberg by using "Bing Translate" and tampering with sourced content. Doug, who keeps a tab on the page, is already involved. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

@TrangaBellam: I'm a bit busy in RL but did take a look. Perhaps just tell the editor to take their source to the reliable sources noticeboard?--RegentsPark (comment) 18:30, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Partially blocked IP

Thanks for your edit on my page, Reg. The IP is part of a great big range (a /30) that I partial-blocked from Talk:Ghirth a couple of weeks ago, strictly flying by the seat of my pants. I don't know if that's relevant to their LTAishness. Probably. Bishonen | tålk 19:53, 20 September 2022 (UTC).

I think so. This range has the habit of making non-comments on talk pages, of the sort they made on your tp. --RegentsPark (comment) 19:58, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Logged warning in order?

All of this material was inserted by a single editor. Not a newbie and hard to see how this is not blatant disruption. TrangaBellam (talk) 14:59, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

The more I look, the better is the case for a CIR block. Superstitions in Sikh societies, another of their creation and chock-a-block with synthesis. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting! I’ve dropped ds notice on their page but this needs a deeper look. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:54, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Will appreciate that. The rambling response hardly instills confidence. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:19, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• The AE report involving the said editor has been archived by bot while all the admins including you weighed in for some kind of action against the editor for his problematic editing. Would ask you to see to it. Thanks! USaamo ^(t@lk) 17:07, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

  @USaamo: I haven't looked at this in enough detail unfortunately. I suggest asking deepfriedokra.--RegentsPark (comment) 17:16, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Need an indef

Kalapaharindia - BLP vio, NOTHERE. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:09, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Information about edit difs I came across

I came across 2 edit difs likely to be BLP vios based on speculative news story. There after User seems to have gone through short duration block by @Bbb23 and under discussion by @EdJohnston. Probably above cited dif edits are gone unnoticed by other WP users.

Me being under Topic Ban from your side, I hope, you would allow me to report unattended problematic edit at your talk page for your information and suitable action if any.

I came across above cited edit difs after following a doubtful edit of a political page appeared on my watch list.

Bookku (talk) 08:52, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Bookku:. Unfortunately no. The way a topic ban works is that you can't comment on that topic anywhere. You may, of course, ask for clarifications here but you cannot revert or discuss even obviously problematic edits. Best to avoid the topic entirely and, assuming you have a good edit record in other areas, ask for it to be lifted sometime after six months. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:19, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Okay no issues. I removed dif links from above message and strike out rest of the post above. Thanks Bookku (talk) 16:53, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Bookku

Hello, RegentsPark,

This case has a note saying that it can't be moved to the ARE archives until 25 September 2032. Is there a reason to keep this one around on the main ARE page for another 10 years? I don't want to remove this note because I don't know what your intentions were when you set it up.

Thanks and I hope all is well with you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:42, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

@Liz:. I didn't set that. My guess is that whoever restored the case (it was archived briefly) did that inadvertently and you can go ahead and remove/archive the case. --RegentsPark (comment) 12:31, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

@Liz: it was done by User:TrangaBellam while unarchiving the case. There was a talkpage notice at AE in this regard as well. USaamo ^(t@lk) 20:53, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Mike Milken

Please take a look at the Mike Milken biography page and the removal of philanthropist from the lead graph. 24.24.138.20 (talk) 18:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. You should discuss this on the article talk page (where I see there is a discussion open). --RegentsPark (comment) 16:49, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

ARCA request

Hi RegentsPark, I've mentioned one of your entries at WP:AELOG/2022 at WP:ARCA#Clarification_request:_Appeal_restrictions_as_part_of_discretionary_sanctions; you may like to join the discussion. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:04, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: Thanks for bringing this up. My first reaction was that this was unnecessarily procedural but, when I read my t-ban summary on AE, realized that not only does it preclude the possibility of appeal it is also at odds with the templated notification I left on the talk page. "Poor messaging" would be a charitable summary. Good call on your part! --RegentsPark (comment) 16:53, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries from my side, thanks for the kind feedback and the statement at ARCA. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:55, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Clarification regarding a sanction you imposed

Following a clarification request regarding appeal restrictions as part of discretionary sanctions, I have amended a sanction you previously logged at WP:AELOG/2022. The archived request can be viewed here.
For the Arbitration Committee, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:52, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Requesting few inputs

To help process of my self evaluation and improvement I seek following inputs from you.

• a) When you refer to/ suggest incremental editing, you refer in particular to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Incrementalism or you refer just to ".. Articles can be improved in small steps, rather than being made perfect in one fell swoop. .." or something else?
• b) Any examples of your own incremental editing.
• c) Any examples of your own contributions in area of Women's rights.
• Bookku (talk) 09:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

• "".. Articles can be improved in small steps, rather than being made perfect in one fell swoop. ..". I don't believe I've ever contributed to women's rights. If you have many questions about editing effectively, you might want to seek a mentor. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:36, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Always precious

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. A jewel of Wikipedia they are. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:02, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Gerda Arendt and Fowler&fowler:!--RegentsPark (comment) 17:07, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Request for protecting the article on Debnath

Hello RegentsPark, I have been keeping an eye on the article on Debnath for years. You had protected the article for a year, which has expired and the socks are back! Please help. Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 18:10, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Protected. (Can someone explain why my section edit link overlaps with the archive link (Safari)? Very annoying!)--RegentsPark (comment) 18:22, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 07:38, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Save important newspapers' pages

I have seen deletion tags on some important newspapers' pages, like Ajkal Tripura, Manush Patrika etc. They criticize government's mistakes and serious issues. But now they're nominated for deletion. Please review and save them https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Tripura. Wikifulness (talk) 12:17, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

I took a look at the two and they don't appear to be made in bad faith. Best to comment in the discussion and see how it plays out. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:32, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

MBlaze Lightning (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

MBlaze Lightning (talk) 09:03, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Saka Sirhind

What's the case with this page? TrangaBellam (talk) 18:21, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps reduce it to a barebones version and merge with Guru Gobind Singh? Assuming he was a son, there must be some English language references.--RegentsPark (comment) 19:18, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Striking comments by Radio Sterling

I just wanted to check in about your strikes of Radio Sterling's comments, given their sock block. They have a few other comments on the 'crat chat talk page not yet struck, should they be? --Pinchme123 (talk) 02:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes. They are purely disruptive comments. Strike any that you see though it doesn't really matter given the way it will close!--RegentsPark (comment) 13:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Mughal-Maratha Wars result dispute resurfaces

Hi, I have a user Adhonorium edit warring to unilaterally change the result of the war in favour of the Mughals. I have addressed him on his talk page but the user refrains from engaging in a debate.

A snapshot of what I have spoken to him: "In light of your recent edit to the result of the Mughal-Maratha Wars, I have read your Cambridge (reliable publisher) reference and it does mention a Mughal pyrrhic victory, however, the author of the book is a sociologist and not a qualified historian. Therefore, a single source by a non-specialist does not carry sufficient weight to warrant a change against a view supported by reputable publications of several historians. Welcome to challenge this on the talk page. WP:RSUW, WP:ONUS".

Also, does his singular source garner enough weight to be included under the Maratha victory result? Many of his contributions on Wikipedia are persistently without citations and can be categorised as vandalism. Fayninja (talk) 12:34, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Blocked. --RegentsPark (comment) 00:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your time! Fayninja (talk) 13:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Contentious topics procedure now in effect

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's contentious topics procedure revision process.

In December, the Arbitration Committee adopted the contentious topics procedure, which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period.

• For a detailed summary of the changes from the discretionary sanctions system, see WP:DSVSCT.
• A brief guide for administrators may be found at Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Administrator instructions.
• Updated templates may be found at Template:Contentious topics.
• Suggestions and concerns may be directed to the arbitration clerk team at WT:AC/C.

The drafting arbitrators warmly thank all those who have worked to implement the new procedure during this implementation period and beyond. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Contentious topics procedure now in effect

This need to be added.

Atleast some mentioning should be made in the Narendra Modi article regarding the controversial documentary India: The Modi Question and Indian government later blocking this in the country under the cultural depiction section. 117.254.35.195 (talk) 12:35, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

You should post this at either WT:IN or at Talk:Narendra Modi. I see that there is a related discussion already at WT:IN so, perhaps, that would be the appropriate place. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Rajput Mali

Hello, RegentsPark,

I wish you had left a redirect when you did this article page move as it created a bunch of broken redirects that needed to be fixed. You might check "What links here" before you move a page and see if there are any redirects that need to be considered. If there are none, then there is no need for a redirect to be left over after a page move. But if there are some, then you either need to leave a redirect (so our bots can correct the double redirect) or you can go change the redirects manually after the page move. Thank you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Requesting clarification

Greetings @RegentsPark One of the user prematurely submitted a draft Draft:Aurat (word) previously created by me and I reverted that submission for being premature. Idk if such revert is allowed for me for the draft created by me.

As such I have avoided editing in draft namespace in ARE sanction area and drafts like Draft:Aroosa Alam have been deleted for not being edited in six months.

So please do guide if my revert of premature Draft submission is okay or I revert my reversion.

Thanks Bookku (talk) 05:36, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Imho, the edit does not disregard the spirit of the sanction. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree with TB. No worries Bookku. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Alan Mikhail

Need semi protect for a year. IPs removing scathing reviews of his latest work etc. Longterm phenomena. TrangaBellam (talk) 20:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I've added it to my watchlist since there isn't any recent activity. Do we really have a full professor at Yale plagiarizing Wikipedia or am I misunderstanding what the article says?--RegentsPark (comment) 20:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Mikhail wrote a trade book making bizarre ahistorical claims on almost every alternate page and citing a range of dubious sources including but not limited to Wikipedia articles. When the book came out, Finkel had commented (prob. in private) that even experienced editors of Wikipedia appear to use better sources than Mikhail, which says something! Anyway, not content with writing the book, Mikhail would publish equally, if not more, bizarre op-eds for a dozen dailies and made his publisher dispatch multiple copies of the book to departmental libraries in the USA. A couple of months later, he was taken to the cleaners by Sanjay Subrahmanyam, Cemal Kafadar, and Cornell Fleischer, leading to what became known among Historians of the Ottoman as Selimgate. Other scholars joined in and pointed out dozens of examples of misrepresenting sources, among methodological flaws.

Mikhail, who is tenured, saw little need to offer any rebuttal, but someone is very concerned about keeping the criticism off his wiki page. Tracing the IP addresses gives a fair idea about who this "someone" may be but Wikimedia ToC precludes such speculation. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for the roll-back on the article on Asma Shirazi — iFaqeer (talk to or email me) 07:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Mahathma gandhi criticism

Hey, I would like to know why you removed 2,154 bytes from the mahatma Gandhi page, if you think my criticism was wrong please share some tips and th reason you removed it Samuraiiscool (talk) 22:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Please see the article talk page where I've already left a note. --RegentsPark (comment) 22:06, 4 February 2023 (UTC)