Wikipedia

User:Street Scholar/archive

Street Scholar

edit

I'm making this page as I do not have one at the moment. ;-)

Vandalism to your userpage

edit

Hi Street Scholar! Indeed, the edit which 216.58.60.51 (talk · contribs) made to your userpage was bad faith and vandalism. I have now given him a warning not to do that again, and I hope that will stop him. WP:AIV is for cases of a repeat vandal who keeps on vandalizing and vandalizing, even after given multiple warnings (usually three or four). Yours, Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:59, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

OK Thanks. --Street Scholar 10:01, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

You can use the tags like {{test1}} {{test2}} {{test3}} {{test4}} too. --HappyCamper 16:11, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Baha'i

edit

Could you go sign my talk page for book keeping. Type in ~~~~ and it will automatically sign your name and time-stamp.

I agree that the Baha'i Faith is not a sect of Islam. But I think on the names of God page it's relevancy comes from the fact that Baha'is claim to have the 100th name of God, and the mention of the Faith is under the section of the 100th name. Though not a sect, it is as much connected to Islam as Christianity is to Judaism, so I don't think that erasing any mention of it would be wise. I'm not interested in arguing this. Edit away.

BTW, thanks for the fan comment. Cuñado   - Talk 16:34, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Evolution theory

edit

Did you mean to delete Evolution theory in Islam? I was looking at it, and you deleted all your contributions and made the page blank. Did you want help with something? Cuñado   - Talk 04:16, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Bin-Qasim

edit

There is no Bin-Qasim article! What the hell are you talking about it?! Never message me again! --Dangerous-Boy 06:00, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Image:Binqasim.jpg

edit

Your image is up for deletion since there is no copyright info. --Dangerous-Boy 06:06, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Bin Qasim

edit

First off, I made the comment that I was an atheist to avoid being labelled as religiously biased and I did not claim to have some sort of special knowledge as a result. Your misinterpretation. secondly, I did not say there was or was not a massacre by the Syrians, so again perhaps you would do better to address that comment to someone who made it. In addition, the Hindu ruling class and Buddhists were killed because Sind and southern Punjab were not conquered without some bloodshed. Lastly, you really need to calm down and I've read some of your sources, but the article doesn't entirely reflect an academic view. It is too subjective and you can't be taken seriously unless you make more of an attempt at neutrality. Take care who you call ignorant by the way. Tombseye 12:24, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Salam

edit

Hey . Wellcome to WP . I have added Category:Muslim Wikipedians , if that isnt a problem . Joining Muslim guild doesnt need much . You just add your name there , with a brief intro & interests on WP( if you want to ), and thats all , U R in . Also dont forget to add category of your country & your native language to your page . Makes easy for everybody to search . I dont have much time right now , but if you stick around , inshallah we'll have a lot of fun in the future . F.a.y.تبادله خيال /c 19:21, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

edit

Please stop removing content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Kefalonia 11:56, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. [1] --Kefalonia 12:09, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

None of that is vandalism, Kefalonia. Please stop abusing the vandalism warnings, read WP:Vandalism and assume good faith. Also he can't be blocked for this. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:25, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

You're wrong, blanking of entire sections is vandalism. He has done this repeatedely on the Islamic conquest of SA and also on the Iconoclasm article. Is it surprising that you're defending his pov-warring? Kefalonia 17:32, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I am not defending anything, but I am against the abuse of vandal warnings. Only use those against clear vandals and not wiki users whose pov you don't agree with. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:13, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

It seems that AE defend anything - including vandalism- that helps him to promote his personal PoVs. -- Karl Meier 08:50, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Very nice Karl. Please do not sneakily revert again. Notice how others are actually involved in discussion. Anyways this shouldn't be discussed on someone else's talk page. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 15:58, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Please stop inserting copyright violations, removing text from wikipedia and pov-warring.
 
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Kefalonia 12:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Your edits

edit

Someone (user:Karl Meier) has reverted your edits without explanation in the article Islamic conquest of South Asia. So you might want to check what was changed. Just thought I'd tell you since you had concerns about the article. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:20, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Help

edit

Please vote to merge and redirect Islamofascism to Neofascism and religion...

... which is where it belongs. Vote here: [2] BrandonYusufToropov 14:59, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Islamic conquest of South Asia

edit

Hi, Street Scholar; Unless I'm mistaken, you added some material from this page about Muhammad bin Qasim. The page says, "Copyright © 2000-2003 Jin Technologies. All Rights Reserved." Do we have, or can you get, permission to use this material? Tom Harrison (talk) 14:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

User:Kefalonia

edit
 

Regarding the page User:Kefalonia: This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Nlu (talk) 15:28, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Also, please stop your personal attacks on article talk pages. Please see WP:NPA. You seem to be able to make productive edits, and it would be great if you can continue to do so, but please keep yourself civil here, or I (or another administrator) may be forced to block you. --Nlu (talk) 15:30, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Salaam

edit

Please check out the debate at the bottom of the talk page for Islamofascism (term) -- my goal is to redirect this to Neofascism and religion, where it will benefit from the surrounding material. Eager to hear your thoughts. BYT 02:30, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

2006 bin Laden video

edit

I recently started 2006 bin Laden video. Please improve it in any way you see fit. Thanks. KI 23:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

edit

Thanks for uploading Image:Picture0104dy.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact Carnildo or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Thank you.

Re: Hi

edit

What do you think? :D Have I done anything that disqualify or qualify me for being a Muslim? Just curious. Thanks. --Aminz 00:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am a Shia Muslim. --Aminz 22:08, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Wikiethics

edit

Hi,

We started a proposal Wikipedia:Wikiethics to state the existing policies coherently and make suggestions on improving the editorial standards in Wiki. I thought you might be interested in contributing to that proposal.

Unfortunately, a pro-porn and pro-offense lobby is trying to make this proposal a failure. They unilaterally started an approval poll although almost no one including me believe that it is time for a vote, simply because the policy is not ready. It is not even written completely.

Editors who thinks that the policy needs to be improved rather than killed by an unfair poll at the beginning of the proposal, started another poll ('Do we really need a poll at this stage?') at the same time. The poll is vandalized for a while but it is stable now. A NO vote on this ('Do we really need a poll now?') poll will strengthen the position of the editors who are willing to improve the ethics policy further.

If you have concerns about the ethics and editorial standards in Wiki, please visit the page Wikipedia:Wikiethics with your suggestions on the policy. We have two subpages: Arguments and Sections. You might want to consider reviewing these pages as well...

Thanks in advance. Resid Gulerdem 22:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Page deletions

edit

Hello, I noticed that one of your pages was deleted and you were complaining about it. You need more than just a 1-liner to start a page. I suggest you use the "Show preview" button at the page to help you create a more substantial start before reposting. Cheers. Sasquatch t|c 23:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I know what you mean however, I know what I doing and you don't because I am me. I am not going to waste 20hrs of my life writing an article then submitting it and 10 minutes later seeing it all being edited. By someone who seems like a Mongoloid with a candle stick stuck in its ear helped him out or his mom taught him history. So I would rather write a few sentences leave the article for a little while let others expand on it then come back to it and sort it all out. --Street Scholar 13:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, if you don't want your article edited, then perhaps this isn't the place. But leaving pages as "This is a Pakistani tribe. Do not delete." will only get them deleted. Anyways, happy editing. Sasquatch t|c 15:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Consider this your first civility warning. Sasquatch t|c 16:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Errr, that's your second warning. If you don't want to get blocked, I suggest you just leave the conversation here. Telling people to shut up in any way or form will not get you any where. Have a good day. Sasquatch t|c 15:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh yes, I'm soo racist and you have soo much proof for that. If you would clear your mind for a second you'd probably see that I just don't respond well to being told to "stfu". You deserve a warning for telling me to shut up. Don't ever tell others to shut up in any way or form on Wikipedia. It's clearly not civil as is calling me incompetent or accusing me of being racist. You know what, here, I'll be reasonable. This is your second warning. I will leave you alone the second you stop responding in an uncivil manner. Next time, the phrase "Just leave me alone" would do. Have a good day. Sasquatch t|c 15:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Edits to Feminism

edit

Stop adding commentary and your personal analysis of an article into Wikipedia articles, as you did at Feminism. Doing so breaches Wikipedia's NPOV rules. Furthermore, reinserting the same commentary multiple times may cause you to violate the three-revert rule, which can lead to a block. Catamorphism 17:44, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Your VandalProof Application

edit

Dear Street Scholar,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact with the new 1.2 version release it has even more power. As such we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that for security reasons, VandalProof's creator requires it's users to have made 250 edits to articles, which you have not. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again in the not too distant future. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof.

Prodego talk 16:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Amir Abdur Rehman Cheema

edit

As far as I can see the prevalent form of the name of the person in question is Amir Cheema, rather than Amir Cheema Shaheed, so I've moved the main article back there. Hope this is OK. Pseudomonas 17:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply - but is it not POV to assert that he's a martyr? (BTW, feel free to continue the dicussion here, better all in one place) Pseudomonas 18:38, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't say about the POV it may well be, however the title will be used for him. Actually maybe we can do something like, add that he maybe also known as Amir Cheema Shaheed, by some Muslims. That is a fact and I don't think its a POV. What do you think? --Street Scholar 18:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd keep the article at the current place, with the 'shaheed' version redirected to it. If your prediction comes true and it turns out that many sources actually do call him that, then by all means add a sentence to present that fact. Until that point, I'd suggest leaving it out. Pseudomonas 18:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


Sorry I am not making a "prediction" here I am stating a fact, some will give him the title 'shaheed' this is a fact. Guru Nanak was just called "Guru Nanak" now he is called Guru Nanak Dev if you're going to be objectionable to this fact then I suggest you go and tell the Sikhs not to add "Dev" for the Sikh articles because "Dev" is not part of the name its a title. I really can't understand what problem you have with that and by the way I have read the POV article and this is not a POV so please can you change it to as it was? or add a reference to that? or I am going to tag the article as "disputed" --Street Scholar 09:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

You say some will give him the title - if they're not giving him the title at the moment then you're predicting what they will do. That was the point I was making. You're welcome to tag the article as disputed if you wish, obviously. Pseudomonas 17:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

OK maybe you have a point. However I don't see what is wrong with adding "may also be known as Amir Abdur Rehman Cheema shaheed"? I personally have seen this title attributed to him in the Urdu papers.

P.S, I don't know how to archive my discussions please if you know how to do this please could you archive them for me of point me to an article which shows how its done?--Street Scholar 11:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Cheema article

edit

Hi, thanks for your request. I will do my best over the next few days to help you write this article from the sources I have. In the meantime, I would request you do the same and put up what you have about this tribe, and references (i.e. books that you got the info rom) this is important because then your work will not be messed about with as it will be able to stand up to scrutiny. Think of it as 'evidence gathering'.--Raja 10:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Done some work on it, hope that helps so far bro.--Raja 11:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


Cheema Sahib

Please do not make deletions, and statements like, Cheema were never Hindus,There are no Hindu Cheemas. They were Buddhists.

If you wish to learn more about jats, then try and go to a history discussion forum, dedicated to Jat Hitsory, like

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/

FYI Shiv(a) worship was widely prevalent in Bactria. The 'Kushans' Emperor Kaniska's coins depict this quite clearly. The Kushans are Jats.

I am one the moderators there.

You are welcome to join, if you wish


Ravi Chaudhary 01:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Category marked for deletion

edit

You may be interested.

Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_16#Category:People_killed_by_or_on_behalf_of_Muhammad

BhaiSaab talk 00:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Guru Nanak Dev Ji Page

edit

While your attempts to fix and maintain many wikipedia pages is greatly appreciated, I feel it would be better if you left pages which you don't have knowledge on alone. Your lack of knowledge on the word "Dev" almost led you to delete it from the article, whereas nearly all literature on the first Guru use Dev, as it is correct. Your comment on the contradiction of two statements of Guru Nanak Ji's was pretty much unneccessary. And your belittling his achievements was insulting. I write this without hate and this is meant only constructively. Thank you,

Vir Singh


Firstly, I don't think you understand what you're talking about "Dev" could be implied to mean "god" which would totally contradict the teaching of Guru Nanak, hence why I cleaned the articles up. I first addressed a Sikh who had done work on the Sikh articles and asked him what he thought, and he said yes go ahead.

Also Even Adding "Ji" to an encyclopedia article is wrong, Mohamed isn't called Prophet Mohamed. I don't see what problem you have, and also you cannot tell me which article I can edit or I cant edit. Firstly if you look at my contribution on the Sikh articles they have been in good faith I have even created some articles which were missing. --Street Scholar 12:37, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Combat455.jpg

edit

Thanks for uploading Image:Combat455.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 13:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia 30 June

edit
 

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thank you.


 

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. – Ian Cairns 13:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

So-called vandalism

edit

You had recently warned me for this [3] and claimed it was vandalism. However, in fact, it was removal of a huge quote quite simply copy and pasted into the page. The quote was definitely not supposed to be in the article and has been removed many times. This is not something to discuss first because the original edit was vandalism in the first place, I was quite simply reverting. I was not testing, nor vandalising, but fixing a page. Get your act together and research it before jumping to conclusions. --TheEmulatorGuy 09:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Administrator

edit

{{Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Salman01}}

Old discussions

edit

Cheema Sahib

Please do not make deletions, and statements like, “Cheema were never Hindus,There are no Hindu Cheemas. They were Buddhists.”

By you making these half baked statements, you are creating an unnecessary problem.

The facts are the Jats( howsoever you spell the name) have been spread all over from India upto and including central Asia, at least.

Over the last few thousand years, the Jats have followed various beliefs- initially Vedic, then Buddhist, Hinduism, Jain, Sikh.

When Islam came about and entered the Indian subcontinent, some also converted to Islam.

In other words they followed a variety of beliefs.

On the relationship to Hindusim:

As one example: Shiv(a) worship was widely prevalent in Bactria. The 'Kushans' Emperor Kaniska's coins depict this quite clearly. The Kushans are Jats.

Shiv(a) is a Hindu deity.

The Kushan period is dated to circa 200 BCE on.

We find the Vedic influence, spread into and upto the Central Asia- Bactria, Oxus, valley, Iran, Iraq. The Vedic period is traced back to 2500 BCE.

There is plenty of more evidence

Unless the 'Cheema' clan came with the Muslim Arabs, they would have followed the religions that existed in the NW India. Islam does not enter NW India until the 10th century or so.

If you wish to learn more about Jats, then try and go to a history discussion forum, dedicated to Jat History, like

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/

I am one the moderators there.

You are welcome to join, if you wish

Also try and read what is on the discussion page of the Cheema article


Ravi Chaudhary 16:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Transferred from ravi Chaudhary page

OK do you know any Cheema Hindus? you're just trying to imply that the Cheema clan also followed Hinduism when this is far form the truth, infact they were opposed to Hindus. This is an encyclopedia its supposed to document historical facts. We know there are Cheema Sikhs, and Cheema Muslims. We haven't and don't know about any Cheema Hindus and its pretty obvious why. Until you can provide evidence of Cheema Hindus the article is staying as it is. The Cheemas before Islam followed Buddhism, and then some converted to Islam, when they helped Muhammad bin Qasim conquer Hindu strong holds, and the main reason was the Cheema were being oppressed by the Hindu's and always opposed them and when the Arabs came they had the perfect opportunity to make strong alliances with the Muslim Arabs. Infact Jatt (Buddhist) a physician treated the prophet Mohammed's wife Aisha when she was not well, its documented by early Arab chroniclers. So the Jatts knew about Islam way before c. 695, many even settled in Madina as that was the center of trade at the time. So the Jatts were familiar with Islam, Arabs and their great conquest they were impressed and and converted to Islam out of free will, because they loved the concept of Islamic Jihad and how Muslims beat army's 3 times (Battle of Badr) their size so much.

--Street Scholar 11:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Mr Cheema

Are you suggesting the Cheema clan came to India with the Arabs?

If they were Buddhists before, do you have any evidence for the same?

There are plenty of similarities between Buddhist concepts and Vedic/Hindu concepts. Along with Jainism, they have always existed side by side, and intertwined with each other.

Have you studied any aspects of Buddhism?


Does your clan have any follow any Buddhist norms today?

Sindh where the first Muslim Arab/Indan wars occured, was a mix of Jats and non jats. They all followed various beliefs- Buddhism, Vedic, Jain, Hindu.

If your clan joined Mir Qasim( of free will or not) to fight the Indians( circa 700 CE) they were fighting fellow Jats, - who were Buddhists too, destroying their universities, and vihars( monasteries)- Vallabhipur, and Taxila( Takshashila) being two good exampples.

Is your Islamic identity getting the better of you?

You do need to sort your concepts out.

Let us keep this discussion on your page, I have put your page on watch.

If you wish to go deeper, I suggest you discuss this on the Jathistory group. That is what that forum is for, for serious discussion of Jat history.


Regards

Ravi Chaudhary 14:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Request

edit

It was I who nominated the template Castes and Tribes of the Punjab. Some idiot has been fighting a revert war with me throughout the day today. The point on which his record is struck is that Abhira, Ahir, Gujjar, Gurjara, Kamboj, Kamboja, Khasa should come under the category of "Surviviung Kshatriya Tribes". My only objection is that if this happens then people belonging to other groups such as Khatris and Rajputs will also ask to be grouped under the Kshatriya category. This in turn could lead to a caste war, the type of which we saw on the Khatri and Rajput pages. Thus I am only proposing that "Surviving Ancient Kshatriya tribes" be changed to just "Ancient tribes". But the other person refuses to listen. He says that it should be written as he desires or the template should be deleted. I agreed to delete. That is why I nominated the article for deletion. I even wrote the reason at the bottom of that particular version:"Template is divisive and inflammatory."

Please tell me your view. Rajatjghai 17:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

edit
 

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to women, are considered vandalism as you have been warned about before. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks.

Islamic Barnstar Award

edit

Please offer your opinion, vote, or whatever about your choice for the image to be used with the Islamic Barnstar Award at the Barnstar proposals page. Although there is consensus for the concept of an Islamic Barnstar Award, some editors would like to change the image for the award. I was just thinking you should be aware of this discussion because you have contributed to Islamic-related articles, received the Islamic Barnstar Award, or have contributed to the Islam-related Wikiprojects, etc.--JuanMuslim 1m 03:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Info on Islamophobic group

edit

Hello,

What follows are the thoughts, expressed in their own words, and in the 'protest signs', of the obscure, very small, but very vocal 'activist group' known as "Protest Warrior".

"What's becoming clear is how the religion of Islam is addicted to war and mayhem. Not a radical minority, not a rogue sect, but its very essence is about submission and sacrifice and proving your worth by worshipping death in this life to gain a paradise of orgies and drunkenness. Their entire history is of warfare, and any accomplishments of their so-called Golden Age has been proven to be merely parasitic off the cultures they've conquered and reduced to dhimmi servitude. That every country under sharia is corrupt, belligerent, desolate and barbaric obviously gives them no pause, except to constantly drive them into further psychotic rage as they refuse to ever accept any responsibility for their conditions. They are akin to the powers in Orwell's 1984; there must always be an enemy. It's no surprise that women are treated like property in these countries as that's the only way Muslim men can feed their egos, to dominate others rather than ever actually produce something."

Kfir Alfia and Alan Lipton, founders of "Protest Warrior"

Their 'protest signs'...

Signs

I thought you might be interested in this group's sentiments. They are currently very actively editing their own article on Wiki and there is a lot of 'group think'. Perhaps you might want to become involved in the editing and discussion process on that page. If you do, please don't vandalize, and try to remain civil. Should you not want to involve youself, please forgive my intrusion.

Protest Warrior

Protest Warrior Discussion

NBGPWS 09:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Images

edit

When uploading images, please follow the rules written in big letters on the upload page. Copyrights are not a joke. Mukadderat 16:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I am talking about Image:Normaswordsi.jpg. Do you really want it deleted? If you made the photo yourself, please write so. Mukadderat 16:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

And also Image:Baktar Shikan ATGM.jpg It is copyrighted by PakistaniDefence.com . Are you PakistaniDefence? Mukadderat 16:39, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

If you think I am funny with you, please read wikipedia:Copyrights and wikipedia:Image copyright tags for more fun. Mukadderat 16:40, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

sword pics

edit

The pictures of the swords, are they from Topkapi museum? --Irishpunktom\talk 17:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Fake Sword

edit

Probably bought at a flea market now Muhammads own sword? I dont think so! Three people now asking you, so far NO answers! Where is the picture from and how are you knowing its Muhammads?Opiner 07:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Civility

edit

Accusing other users like Street Scholar is disrespectful and not civil. They can be considered a personal attack. Such accusations damage your own reputation and also create conflicts. I would request you to be more respectful concerning other users' edits that you find biased or in any other way unpleasant. Mar de Sin Talk to me! 19:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Oops sorry, wrong person! Mar de Sin Talk to me! 19:44, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Sexism

edit

A per this diff, please be aware that such comments have no place on wikipedia, being as they are derogatory and offensive.

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Crimsone 20:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

  • As per WP:ANI[4], has been resolved and can be considered closed. Assalaamu' Alaykum, --Crimsone

Disruption

edit

I had planned to suggest you (and everyone else) avoid commenting on other people as individuals, whether about their gender, ethnicity, or religion. I was going to say, "comment on content, not on other people." But I am afraid this [5] is over the top. Unless you are prepared to work on an equal footing with everyone who choses to edit here, then Wikipedia is not the place for you. Your remarks go beyond incivility into disruption, and if you continue to make them it may be necessary to suspend your editing privileges. Tom Harrison Talk 16:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Still a bit Dubious

edit
I will check the references. If I find that they don;t exist and/or they have been mis-cited then I will begin RfA process accordingly.Hkelkar 16:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the link. The Centre of "Islamic Studies" is obviously partisan and so not entirely reliable. If my University library attests to the existence and/or availability of the ref then good. Else, I wil get an affidavit from the chief librarian that the references cited are fake and submit it as evidence in the RfA.Hkelkar 16:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, not unlike the racist Muslim Caste system, eh? (Ashraf/Ajlaf, Sayyid, Mojahir,Quomiyat, Biradari etc.). I still intend to file an RfA on account of the fact that I don't trust the veracity of the "refs".Hkelkar 16:29, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
The "scholarly" nature remains to be established.Hkelkar 16:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the personal attack. Now I have all that I need.Hkelkar 16:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and yes, there is a caste system in Islam per the Fatwa-i-Jahandari http://www.anti-caste.org/muslim_question/caste/bhatty_article.html.Hkelkar 16:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
And you know where the personal attack happened. You have been warned by admins before (see sections above) and action will be taken in accordance to your past behaviour.16:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
here making threats.
here against another user.
here earlier also.Hkelkar 16:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
As for the Muslim Caste system, the Fatwa-i-Jahandari has nothing to do with Hinduism as it was written by an Islamic Cleric Ziauddin al-Barani in a Muslim dominated area (Lahore). Plus, the al-Akhdham in Yemen (the Yemenese untouchables) are in a Muslim country not connected to Hinduism at all. Same with the Janjaweed in Sudan and the Abyssinian white muslims against the Abyssinian black Muslims.
Your accusations against Street Scholar seem a bit exaggerated, from the diffs that i can see. What threat? Mar de Sin Talk to me! 18:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

http://www.yemenmirror.com/index.php?action=showDetails&id=136

http://www.yementimes.com/99/iss01/l&d.htm

Dirty little secret, eh? Hkelkar 16:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


This [6] is definitely a personal attack through an implied threat and a violation of many wikipedia policies such as WP:OWN and WP:NPA and a defensive response to a clear violation of WP:Reliable Sources, as I'm sure many admins will agree.Hkelkar 17:00, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Removing the tags that illustrate the partisanship and Dubious scholarly nature of a reference does not take away the facts. I have just emailed my university librarian who will attest that one of your two references do not exist, except in a yahoogroups webpage (hardly "Peer Reviewed"). As to the other ("A History of the Jats sorry, mistake I meant the UT Thakkur reference"). I see a copy in the library and I will read to verify if you are lying about the edits or not.Hkelkar 17:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

the disputed book on Talk:Cheema

edit

I'd like to know if there's another way of obtaining the book you linked at Yahoo! Groups other than through that group. Could you let me know? - Che Nuevara 05:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

The thing is, its not one file, the book is loads of sections in the files section on yahoo groups. They are translated works and are hard to find otherwise. Furthermore, some are in Hindi which you have to install fonts on your computer to read them. It would be best if you sign up or if you get get hold of the following books which are available more easily:
The point is that Yahoo! Groups is not a reliable outside publisher. The problem isn't the readability of the documents, it's the verifiability of them as authentic. See the problem? - Che Nuevara 15:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Discuss only content

edit

In disputes on Wikipedia, discuss only the content of the article and how to improve the article. Do not make accusations or derogatory comments about other editors. —Centrx→talk • 18:15, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:521121427 m.jpg listed for deletion

edit

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:521121427 m.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Pakistan Hackerz Club

edit

I deleted it because it had been tagged for speedy deletion as being a non-notable group. While I'm still not convinced of the group's notability, I have restored the article. -- Merope 17:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I think there is a clear distinction between a notable event and notable people. The hacking of the site was notable; the people doing it are not. There are multiple non-trivial articles about the hacking, but not about the group. I think that the July 7 London bombings were notable, but the people who carried them out weren't. But this is just my opinion. I'll restore the other article.
Please do not make personal attacks (and, yes, misogynist statements to a woman are personal attacks). The GForce Pakistan article has no assertion of notability--it just says they're a group of eight hackers. Websites are not typically considered a reliable source, and so the groups being mentioned on them is not relevant. There are lots of websites that mention gaming clans, fanfiction, and bloggers, but that doesn't automatically make those things notable. You should re-read WP:BIO for an explanation of the notability of people. I will not restore that one as it clearly falls into WP:CSD#A7; you can take it to deletion review if you disagree. -- Merope 18:36, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Saying that a woman is always responsible for perpetuating ignorance is misogynistic--it shows that you don't respect women as equals. Characterizing them as shallow and illogical further confirms my attribution. Saying that you think I'm spreading ignorance because I'm a woman is a personal attack. You've had previous warnings about not being respectful towards other editors; please review WP:NPA (particularly the part that says "racial, sexual, homophobic, ageist, religious or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor" constitute a personal attack) and desist making such attacks. Users who engage in such attacks can be blocked from editing. -- Merope 18:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I am not a woman, but I'm certain according to Wikipedia policy edits like these are personal attacks. Please do not make them on Wikipedia. Thank you. Firsfron of Ronchester 20:07, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Neither am I a woman, but you give a bad name to men. Your argument is essentially that the fault is not with a woman's logic or reasoning, but is due to her gender. That is the definition of both mysogyny and an ad hominem fallacy. "I find misogynists' lack of depth and insight mind-boggling," because there is far, far more in this world that is relevant to the intelligence and rationality of a person than what's in their pants. Thinking that everything boils down to gender is a very shallow and uninsightful way of looking at the world. — Saxifrage ✎ 20:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

My love life would make you blush, so don't assume I need to play a stupid part to "get laid". Since I won't be able to continue this without violating WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA in a highly amusing but terribly improper way, I will just shake my head to myself that such illogical and ego-soothing worldviews still exist. — Saxifrage ✎ 16:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for personal attacks

edit
 

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for disrupting Wikipedia by making personal attacks. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. -- Merope 17:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

You're such a wise woman --Street Scholar 21:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't let the feminazis grind you down

edit

I recognise satire when I see it - keep up the good work! Dave 23:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S. You are a satirist, right?


Thanks for the heads-up Dave I'm not a satirist, but sarcasm is a concept which goes above the heads of the females, if you get what I mean. --Street Scholar 14:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Dude, you've just earned yourself a longer block. If you don't stop insulting other editors, you could be facing an indefinite block. -- Merope 15:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


I think we should hold hands and sing: "kum by yaah" errm... yeah... "Kum by yaah my lord, kum by yah" happy now? --Street Scholar 18:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I will be happy when you stop disrupting Wikipedia and insulting other editors. -- Merope 18:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


You should try to respect other peoples religious and cultural beliefs. Not everyone shares the same ethics and morals as you. I find it insulting, when you can't tolerate my beliefs. --Street Scholar 18:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I have a deep respect for Islam, and I think that Muhammad was a pioneering feminist. I do, however, find it hard to respect your beliefs, since they cause you to spout so much vitriol towards me and other users. However, your beliefs do not give you the freedom to insult other users. By participating in Wikipedia, you agree to abide by its rules, and Wikipedia prohibits gender-based attacks. If you don't like it, you can choose to stop editing. -- Merope 18:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm talking about about my cultural beliefs in particular not my religious beliefs.

And I am very plainly telling you that it doesn't matter. You're breaking WP rules. End of story. -- Merope 19:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

So you're saying my cultural beliefs do not matter to you right? and therefore you don't respect them? is that right??? -- StreetScholar 19:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I do not respect your actions. Your beliefs are irrelevant. You have a week to think your actions over. To save myself from further stress, I will not be replying to you in further. Another administrator has offered to monitor the situation. -- Merope 19:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Put in another way, if wikipedia prohibits an action, regardless of personal beliefs it is prohibited and thus people don't do it. In yet another way still, personal beliefs are just that - personal. where they are likely to break rules or cause offence they should be kept to oneself. Where it is known that they DO break rules, and where those rules state that users are not to deliberately cause offence with insulting statements at all (let alone the specific statement of not doing on grounds of sex (or race, etc)), then those beliefs must be kept to oneself. If this is seen as unacceptable by somebody, then that person need not enter a community that has such fundamental rules in the first place --Crimsone 21:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


My actions are part of my belief so therefore you don't respect my beliefs. I don't believe that is very hard to comprehend. So when you don't respect my beliefs you break wiki policy.

"Wikipedia's contributors come from many different countries and cultures. We have different views, perspectives, and backgrounds, sometimes varying widely. Treating others with respect is key to collaborating effectively in building an (*) encyclopedia."

Wikipedia:Etiquette

(*) encyclopaedia. (I hate the other spelling someone should change it)

And am sure as hell I would be able to find more policies which you're violating. I find your comments insolent. And anyway I don't care if I get a permanent ban (also so don’t try to threaten me with a ban as that’s against another wiki policy), unlike you guys my life doesn't revolve around wiki. Wiki needs its contributors to work, not the other way around. I hope the "other" admin is not a female.


Crimsone, you make several good points conversely I consider you’re overlooking certain other points at the same time. Lets recapitulate; I was being chivalrous to Merope and asked her why she deleted some articles which I had started. And I later said something to the extent of: "it always has to be a female" how is that an insult? We (Jatts) frequently articulate things like this in Punjab and is not considered an insult it’s a structure of an expression furthermore it’s a factual statement I am making. As it was a female who deleted my pages without even notifying me. Now Merope is supposed to be an admin. I presume she went to the article saw it, didn't like it so she deleted it I'm sure as hell things don't work like that around here as if this was the case then there would be nothing on wiki. Now that I ask her some questions, she doesn't want to converse to me, she’s saving herself from “stress” what ever that means. It’s probably some secret words only women can deduce the true meaning of. So maybe you can enlighten me as to what she is really saying. --StreetScholar 13:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Street, I don't know how to put this any more bluntly- your repeated comments about female editors constitute personal attacks- if you have an issue about specific deletions then there are procedures to deal with those don't make comments about the editors race, religion, sexual orientation, height, weight, looks, ability to find a mate, etc. To use what might be a clear cut example, I could have a deepseated religious/cultural belief that anyone whose username started with the letter "A" must be a flightly idiot. I'm entitled to that opinion. I am not entitled to attack users on Wikipedia for their use of that letter as the first letter of their screename. As for the word stress, I suspect you know full well what the word means and used this simply as another opportunity to attack females, however, I will nevertheless attempt to define it in this context- Merope most likely means by "stress" the negative emotions associated with having to deal with you and your repeated comments about her and her gender. Now if I can make a recommendation: I suggest that from now on you use the "preview" button before saving your edits and if there is any comment in the edit about "females" or "women" as a general class consider whether that comment is constructive or at all helpful. JoshuaZ 18:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC) p.s. And no before you try to bring it up- I'm not female. JoshuaZ 18:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Street, I don't know how to put this any more bluntly- your repeated comments about female editors constitute personal attacks

According to Wiki I am. Not according to me or any other person who holds the same cultural beliefs as me. The issue is not that I don’t understand I am making personal attacks (according to wiki) it’s just that I don’t acknowledge them as personal attacks or attacks in general. Anyone can say anything is a personal attack. Wiki rules are pretty ambiguous how do you define what is a personal attack and what is not a personal attack?

if you have an issue about specific deletions then there are procedures to deal with those don't make comments about the editors race, religion, sexual orientation, height, weight, looks, ability to find a mate, etc.

OK what ever you say.

To use what might be a clear cut example, I could have a deepseated religious/cultural belief that anyone whose username started with the letter "A" must be a flightly idiot. I'm entitled to that opinion. I am not entitled to attack users on Wikipedia for their use of that letter as the first letter of their screename.

I presume you mean “flightily” right? And what if that person comes and deletes articles you had created without even giving you a reason isn’t that going to annoy you? I never meant to attack her (which is not an attack in my culture) she pushed me into it. I also actually have anger management problems, and I hadn’t taken my medication. So all I could see was red.

As for the word stress, I suspect you know full well what the word means and used this simply as another opportunity to attack females

Of course I do know what it means but speaking from experience some women talk in riddles sometimes.

however, I will nevertheless attempt to define it in this context- Merope most likely means by "stress" the negative emotions associated with having to deal with you and your repeated comments about her and her gender.

And how do you expect me to talk to her if she gets “stressed” easily and emotional? If she can’t take the stress then she should not be administrating wiki. I made the comments once and that was on her page, I asked her simple questions and she’s “stressed” how convenient and rude.

Now if I can make a recommendation: I suggest that from now on you use the "preview" button before saving your edits and if there is any comment in the edit about "females" or "women" as a general class consider whether that comment is constructive or at all helpful.

Being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue. In closing, we must work together to resolve our disputes without violence. --StreetScholar 20:02, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

All right. The reason this is causing me stress is not because I'm emotional. It is because I am tired of wasting my time explaining the rules to someone who is determined to break them. I cannot make this any simpler:

  1. At Wikipedia, editors are prevented from making sexist remarks.
  2. You have made sexist remarks.
  3. Ergo, you have been prevented from editing Wikipedia.

Your personal beliefs do not matter in this situation. As you will notice, I have treated you with respect despite the fact that I disagree with you. You, on the other hand, have insinuated (or flat-out said) that I am ignorant, flighty, shallow, irrational, and unworthy of my role as an administrator just because I am a woman. Even though it is difficult, I have managed to be respectful to you, in keeping with the policy. That is what the policy you quoted means. It does not mean that we just ignore anyone who insults other users. A person who hates Christians is entitled to his belief; it does not mean he has the right to treat Wikipedians who identify as Christian contemptuously. As long as a person chooses to edit here, they agree to abide by Wikipedia's rules.

Since you refuse to reign in your personal attacks after the intervention of several editors, I have no choice but to file a request for comment. -- Merope 21:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Why ?

edit

Why is it that you find it necessary to invoke your religious/cultural beliefs when showing bigotry ? You only succeed in making those Muslims who aren't bigots look bad. Jcam 04:09, 27 October 2006 (UTC) 

Everyone has different ethics and morals. For example where I come form in Punjab its uncommon for a female to wear a skirt she would be considered sexually promiscuous if she did. In the west this is not the case. Would it be right for me to call all those women who wear skirts in the west as sexually promiscuous? well to answer my own question no it wouldn't so who gives you the right to say I am showing "bigotry"? are you a racist? are you intolerant of others? if not, then don't use such terms. I can present to you another example, Hindu vegetarians believe those who eat meat are savage barbarians and have killed people on rumors of meat eating. Yet in the west this would be looked upon as absurd. Furthermore, I could quote many verses from different holy books such as the Bible, Qu'ran, Guru Granth Sahib, Torah, etc. Which hold the same beliefs as me, are you going to call these holy books "bigoted"? are you? --StreetScholar 11:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
My advice to you personally is this: With Wikipedia's GNU license, you implicitly have the Right to fork. You can take all 1,000,000 articles(except maybe for those articles you might find offensive-such as the ones which imply women have rights), find a server somewhere, and start your own encyclopedia with your own rules (ie. women can't be administrators- maybe even ban women from editing all together !!!). Until that time, if you edit on this encyclopedia, you must obey its rules and respect all of your co-editors (which unfortunately for you and your belief system includes those without a Y chromosome). As for me being a "racist", if thinking a culture which finds women subservient to men is backwards and inferior to one which thinks men and women are equal, then go ahead and call me one. Yes, I suppose you could quote many scriptures which, taken out of context, could be used to support your viewpoint. Knowing your background above, I'm surprised that you are this way. Every Sikh man I've ever known has always had great respect for women(since a Sikh woman can become a Granthi, Ragi, or one of the Panj Pyare). And the fact your mother is a Muslim that married a non-Muslim (which is against Orthodox Muslim beliefs since women can only marry a Muslim while men can marry any "person of the book" ) shows great courage and a strong will. I'm surprised you seem so narrow minded. Jcam 15:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't matter am going on a holiday. Am not going to be around for a while am going back to Lahore for a few months. Also regarding my mother and father. Its actually a pretty interesting situation, as originally my father was a Muslim, he fell in love with my mom and requested her to convert to Islam (she was a Sikh at the time) and she did 15 years later he (my father) converted to Sikhism and my mom remind a Muslim, and still is. I believe what I believe. Which I am not going to say as then I'll get accused of being a misogynistic. In my culture for a guy to say what I say is not considered insulting or misogynistic. Any man made equality is inferior to the rules of god. --StreetScholar 18:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Unblocking

edit

Given that you persisted in making personal attacks while you were blocked for that reason, I'm highly disinclined to unblock you. Feel free to file an WP:APB. -- Merope 13:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:1614927_gforce300.jpg

edit

Thanks for uploading Image:1614927_gforce300.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

edit

Pl do no attempt POV pushing and first read sources before editing. I have replied in the talk page, but you seem not to have read it. Idleguy 14:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Martial Race

edit

I have replied to you on Talk:Martial Race. Cheers. -- Merope 20:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

PS - I've also fixed your header so that new messages will go below it, not inside it. Please feel free to change that if this was not your intent. -- Merope 21:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks I was trying to figure out how to fix that. --StreetScholar 11:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


Frankly, I don't care what kind of dispute/argument you are having with Hkelkar or others, but edits like this amount to hate speech, and bad examples of derogatory racial comments. Please refrain from them. Thanks. --Ragib 22:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

You are stating your "opinions". There is no point in justifying your hate speech as linked above. Please refrain from making such hate speech and racist comments. Thank you. --Ragib 23:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Street Scholar

edit

Concerning this edit. Accusing your fellow editors of committing ethnic slurs, whilst basing this on their own ethinicity, is not acceptable. Please, do not make insinuations or personal attacks of this manner. Further incivility may lead to you receiving a block. Regards, Proto::type 15:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


am already blocked genius! --StreetScholar 15:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

--StreetScholar 12:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks

edit

I have blocked you for 2 weeks for making personal attacks [7]. You already know that personal attacks are against policy. Attack the argument, not the arguer. If you believe this to be unfair you may use the {{unblock|reason}} template to ask another admin to review this decision. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 20:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

This is extremely unfair and I do not agree with this block, I demand you unlock me. Or decrease the block, my comments doesn't even constitute to a personal attack. You're just taking the fucking piss dude. --StreetScholar 11:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
You are using this template in the wrong namespace. Use this template on your talk page instead.

He is a racist, I have the diff to prove it. What the hell do you want me to say? I'm going to say what is true, I have the proof. He has called me same things many times, I have the diffs to prove them. OK, lets see what you do right now. I will show you the diffs where he has called me many, many names. I want to see if you will actually give him a block. We will see how competent you're right now. You're an Indian helping an Indian out, Jesus, and I am supposed to believe your decision is un-biased? --StreetScholar 12:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

You can believe whatever you want to. If you continue making such personal attacks, your block will be extended and/or your talk page will be locked. - Aksi_great (talk) 14:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Since you have engaged in personal attacks again during your block, I am reseting the block to 2 full weeks. Continued breaches of civility will result in an increase in the block length, and locking of your talk page for the duration of the block. Please read and follow our Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar

edit

This case is now closed and the results have been posted above.

For the Arbitration committee, Cowman109Talk 06:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Request for balance on racism page

edit

Talk:Racism and Talk:Racism by country there is an editing pattern on these page preventing any plural discussion of Israel and racism, there are two criterion in place where poorly constructed arguments are allowed in, but detailed arguments for inclusion of Israel are vetoed for all kinds of reasons. I believe Wikipedia has a duty to prevent this kind of behavior which is not only undemocratic it is dangerous. See the chain of convo on the talk page to see the impossible retort to every voice which is about Israel and racism, at least 4-5 editors in this gang pushing the same POV--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 04:36, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:S78669.jpg

edit

Thanks for uploading Image:S78669.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ITAQALLAH 16:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

vandalism

edit

A user using the ip 71.234.9.178 has repeatedly vandalised your user and made personal attacks directed torwds you [8][9][10][11] [12] [13] [14] [15] wich mainly consist of accusations of sexism,misogyny,racism,fascism and pedophillia although you shouldent be making comments like these [16] this person shouldent be directing personal attacks towred you and defacing your user page--Crocadog 22:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

and this user also is a prolific cross wiki vandal,spammer and troll. And is a constant sockpuppeter [17][18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37]

vandalism

edit

A user using the ip 71.234.9.178 has repeatedly vandalised your user page and made personal attacks directed torwds you [38][39][40][41] [42] [43] [44] [45] wich mainly consist of accusations of sexism,misogyny,racism,fascism and pedophillia although you shouldent be making comments like these [46] this person shouldent be directing personal attacks towred you and defacing your user page--Crocadog 22:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

and this user also is a prolific cross wiki vandal,spammer and troll. And is a constant sockpuppeter [47][48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67]

vandalism

edit

A user using the ip 71.234.9.178 has repeatedly vandalised your user page and made personal attacks directed torwds you [68][69][70][71] [72] [73] [74] [75] wich mainly consist of accusations of sexism,misogyny,racism,fascism and pedophillia although you shouldent be making comments like these [76] this person shouldent be directing personal attacks towred you and defacing your user page--Crocadog 22:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

and this user also is a prolific cross wiki vandal,spammer and troll. And is a constant sockpuppeter [77][78] [79] [80] [81] [82] [83] [84] [85] [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] [96] [97]

vandalism

edit

A user using the ip 71.234.9.178 has repeatedly vandalised your user page and made personal attacks directed torwds you [98][99][100][101] [102] [103] [104] [105] wich mainly consist of accusations of sexism,misogyny,racism,fascism and pedophillia although you shouldent be making comments like these [106] this person shouldent be directing personal attacks towred you and defacing your user page--Crocadog 22:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

and this user also is a prolific cross wiki vandal,spammer and troll. And is a constant sockpuppeter [107][108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] [115] [116] [117] [118] [119] [120] [121] [122] [123] [124] [125] [126] [127]

regarding your comment on your user page

edit
 

Please do not make racist comments towards other users, as you did at User:Street Scholar. Wikipedia has a strict 'no personal attacks' policy. Users who continue to be racist towards other users will be blocked. --Fang 23 20:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Query

edit

Forgive me for seeming nosey, but, is this your account [128] at Evowiki? --Mr Fink 01:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Street_Scholar/archive&oldid=1142401373"