User talk:Prasi90/Archive2

So the {{vandal}} University of Idaho edit which I made was to MY userpage,and was also intended (clearly) as a joke.You blocked me for one week for the said edit.So,technicallt this edit of mine could be ignored and the one week block is void-this one week could (technically) be deductyed from the three weeks remaining on my current one month block?Please give any comments which you may have MONGO-on this {{vandal}}issue and also about my explanation of why I called Americans Neo-Nazis.Also in light of your "joke" I ask you once more (though fulling respecting your initial refusal) can a settlement be reached between us without taking this matter to RFAr and RFDA?

Please stop calling Anti-Americanism nonsense

this is just one simple website...what about those blogs you talked about, you know the ones you wanted ti fill up with all that anti-American nonsense...maybe you should concentrate on those for the time being. See you in a few weeks.--MONGO 11:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

In this edit on my IP user talk page,you seem to be implying that anti-Americanism in "nonsense".I request you to stop labelling other people's personal views as "nonsense".Many people around the world,including intellectuals and influential public figures identify themselves as being Anti-American.I ask that you develop a more tolerant attitude toward peoples' views.It appears here,MONGO that you are displeased at the idea that I am against the foriegn policies adopted,and tactics used,by your nation.User:Prasi90 10:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Part of the problem is that you have not been courteous yourself regarding this matter. You can be anti-American without calling us all Nazis. And we can be wrong without being Nazis. Fred Bauder 13:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

A question to Megaman Zero.

You should have been blocked for a lot longer than a month, my friend.--Jimbo Wales 17:13, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I found this on an old version of your Usertalk page,Zero [1].Please correct me if I am wrong,but it appears you were blocked for a month youself?I am not trying to insult you in any way I am just wondering if you yourself had (indeed) found yourself to be in the same situation that I am now.That would explain the interest you have shown in my case.User:Prasi90 05:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Jimbo didn't post that there...Zero moved it as a quote from another location because he liked the comment.--MONGO 05:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying,sorry for the misunderstanding MegamanZero.-—Preceding unsigned comment added by Prasi90 (talk • contribs)

No harm done. I transferred it there not becuase "I liked it", but rather because it endorses a key aspect of the wikipedian community that requires attention. And why should that be surprising..? Trolling has no place on wikipedia.

I then subsquently removed it becuase it looked somewhat provocative to an outside viewer on the subject, and it also looked messy when I formatted my navigation bar. -Zero^Talk 07:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

How about a conditional unblock?

I have a suggestion,to MONGO and other concerned Administrators-how about if they unblock me after laying down certain conditions viz.: 1)I refrain from editing Userpages,Usertalk pages (except my own-that too I will not add anything political or inflammatory) or Articletalk pages-where most of my disruptive edits have been made. 2)I refrain from voting at RfAs for the time being. 3)I refrain from editing disputed articles. 4)I stop sending e-mails to Administrators unless the matter is urgent.

I,myself guarantee that if I violate the conditions of such a conditional I will agree to the block being reinstated PROVIDED I am WARNED ONCE (before being re-blocked) if I violate the conditions.

This,to me,seems to be a constructive solution to the problem at hand.In this manner the dispute can be solved amicably and both parties involved can be satisfied-without the need for an RfAr or RFDA.Please consider this suggestion and reply at the earliest MONGO.User:Prasi90 11:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

As an outside admins who has been watching this situation, I say absolutely not. You are in no position to dictate terms and the block was completely justified. My two cents is not to unblock and allow Prasi to continue to use the site for research educton, but simply not for editing as he was been nothing but a bigoted troll.Gator (talk) 12:28, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

In light of the sampling of diffs I provided above I can see no reason that you shouldn't, at a minimum, remain blocked until the 30 block I imposed is fulfilled.--MONGO 13:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I had made a comment here which I later deleted since Gator's response appeared to be a sufficient answer.

You assume too much.Gator (talk) 14:42, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Gator,I was not "dictating" terms at all.I was only making a suggestion.In light of my repeated apologies to MONGO and my promise to change my ways (which I did-if you notice,my edit history after NSLE unblocked me-sometime in the 3rd week of March 2006 {from a block imposed by MONGO} my conduct has been good).I feel that I should be given a chance to turn over a new leaf instead of being blocked for edits made by me before the said unblock.In my opinion I have proposed a good suggestion which will bring an end to this time-consuming issue.I had also said I was willing for Hamstersandwich to return,but he has said he will be taking a hiatus for some time to come.I request MONGO and Gator to please not misconstrue my message as insolence.User:Prasi90 14:54, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Dictated or not, there should be no terms and the indefintite blocks should stand in my opinion. You were given multiple chances and you chose to continue with your bigotry and trolling. Good bye and good riddance.Gator (talk) 15:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Good riddance?Gator1 please be more civil.User:Prasi90 15:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah sure thing, pot. Love, kettle.Gator (talk) 15:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Mr.Gator forgive me for bringing up this issue again but I do ask that you speak to me in the same manner that I have spoken to you-in polite,lucid language.While I am on the topic,I must say that My two cents is not to unblock and allow Prasi to continue to use the site for research educton, but simply not for editing as he was been nothing but a bigoted troll.Gator (talk) 12:28, 5 April 2006 (UTC) this message confused me a bit.What is research eduction?And was there supposed to be emphasis on "simply".Kindly clarify this.Also,Gator,you (on your userpage)

claim to be a litigator of some sort.Taking this into account,I expect you to be especially formal and precise in your communications with me.Thank You.User:Prasi90 16:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Semi- Official Mentorship Offer from Hamster Sandwich

Prasi90, as an interested party here, I would make a suggestion that you ignore any and all users, editors or administrators who on the surface of things seem to be trying to goad you into further bad actions. The suggestions you have made for an unblock are entirely reasonable, as the issues they address seem to be at the crux of the dispute between yourself and several other users. Do not rise to the bait cast before you. In fact the terms you have suggested for your unblock are very much the ones I would have asked you to adopt in the case of any so called "mentor-ship" that I could provide to you. A few very good administrators have pointed out to me in the past that it is incumbent on us (meaning you!), the individual editor/contributor to take "The High Road". Of course what is the high road is subject to an individual reading of that term. To me, by implementing the terms you have suggested, by not sending, responding to or most importantly posting email messages extraeneous to Wikipedia spaces within Wikipedia, will carry you to a better and happier and more productive editing place than you have recently been. I am prepared to give you a clean slate to start again. Others do not seem to be as willing to do so, but the onus is now on them to change their opinion, based on your new and reformed ways. some points for your consideration...

1. Maintain WP:NPOV
2. Adopt WP:NPA
3. Embrace WP:AGF

Prasi90 if you agree to these terms, plus the suggestions you yourself have made above, there should be no problem in getting unblocked. However, I will ask the opinion of a few editors whose opinions I trust implicitly and who to my knowledge have not thus far been involved in the issues that we are faced with here at this time. They may choose to not involve themselves, but I am hoping for some direction and advice from them, nonetheless. I will direct them to this post, and so to encapsulate your suggestions for them here...

Prasi 90 will agree to:

1. Refrain from editing Userpages,Usertalk pages (except my own-that too I will not add anything political or inflammatory) or Articletalk pages-where most of my disruptive edits have been made.
2. Refrain from voting at RfAs for at least two weeks.
3. Refrain from editing disputed articles.
4. Stop sending e-mails to Administrators unless the matter is urgent.
5. Maintain WP:NPOV
6. Adopt WP:NPA
7. Embrace WP:AGF
8. That if I,for some urgent reason,need to e-mail an Administrator,I contact Hamstersandwich with the reason for sending such an e-mail so that he may decide whether or not the matter is sufficiently important to warrant the sending of an e-mail.
9. I be allowed to post messages to Hamstersandwich only regarding any doubts I might have about these conditions.These messages must be as far as possible be avoided.

One word of caution to you, if you do choose to accept these terms. I am an old and generally very grumpy person who does not suffer foolishness gladly or for very long. I take real pleasure from blocking vandalism and reverting the work of the perpetrators. If I ever think or am shown by others that you are engaging in egregious behaviour, I will not hesitate to end any arrangement that we have come to, and wash my hands of the situation entirely.

By accepting these terms, you be under a de-facto probationary period of no less than one month and perhaps as long as three. If I feel, that you have improved to the extent that you no longer need my advice on a regular basis, the period would end sooner, rather than later. Also, you would be aware that I have limited computer access so it might be two or three days over weekends that you may not get a response from me concerning any questions/situations you might run up against. In the interest of full disclosure,this is the first such mentorship arrangement that I have offered to any person, so I might be asking other editors whose opinions/actions I trust to advise me as we go along, and I would be likely to adopt any suggestions that they might make in the course of any arrangement we have between us. Also, the terms of this arrangement may be altered by me at any time as events transpire. Please read the through the pages that I have indicated by through the blue links in this posting. Take some time, read them thouroughly, and re-read them if you have done so in the past. There may be a quiz.... :-) OK?

If you agree, please state in clear terms below this post, and I will do what I can to get the block lifted. Hamster Sandwich 16:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree to the terms mentioned by you above.I will also like to add one more condition (to avoid any possible misunderstandings)-that my IP address also come under these terms and conditions.However I ask that if I ever (unintentionally) go against these conditions,I would like to be given ONE WARNING ONLY before the block is reinstated.I would also like to state here that in order to avoid being goaded into making any unreasonable edits I will (as far as possible)abstain from interacting with those Users,with whom,(in the past)I have had disputes.Once again I apologize to any Administrators I have inconvenienced by my behaviour (especially MONGO) and the Wikipedia community at large.I thank you,Hamstersandwich for your help in resolving this matter-you are a model Administrator.User:Prasi90 16:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree that a ONE WARNING ONLY policy be instituted, for the purpose of providing you with some instruction/suggestions in the case of a contentious edit that you may make. Of course any admin could block you without warning, but they themselves may be in error of Wikipedia:Blocking policy by doing so. Blatent vandalism, racist/bigotted comments and threats of a legal or personal nature are not tolerated and result in immediate blocking, without warning. Those are standards that apply to all editors. Prasi90, I am now going to endevor to get you unblocked, and have the Indefinate block template removed from your user pages. I will look for an appropriate template to indicate that you are engaged in a probationary mentorship, and that asks any interested editors/administrators to leave comments or postings directed to you on my page as well. I have created a new page: User:Prasi90/Probationary mentorship log, to copy related materials to, for continuity purposes. (The preceding sentence amended by to reflect the present position. -- RHaworth 18:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)) Thank you for your consideration that you have shown thus far. Remeber, the purpose of this excerise is to help you to learn how to conform to the community standards, even in the face of adversity. The goal is to help you to be a happy, helpful and concientious Wikipedian. No more, no less. Hamster Sandwich 17:30, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Prasi90, I have read the posts in the section directly below to your last comment dated "04:31, 6 April 2006". I also left a message here [2] asking for another administrator to remove your block, but so far there has been no response. I see you are going to take a break over the weekend to the 10th. so if the block has not been removed by then, I will do so myself. I think we should get started, and get you producing the good work that I know you are capable of. I am also considering asking for some neutral and impartial comments on the "One Warning" proposal that we have suggested. The editors/admins in the following section that have been most resistant to this idea are the one(s) who feel they have been most badly "burned" by your past actions, and they are strenuously opposed to this idea, perhaps rightly so. In the interst of providing you with an instrument to give you direction and instruction in proper "wiki-etiqutte" I feel it is a mechanism that would not be abused. I am however, not at all intractible on this point. More discussion/opinion is needed I feel, and I am going to ask for this at RfC, on this single point only:

"Prasi90 will be held to a "One Warning Only" for the duration of his mentorship/instructional period, no less than one month from the start date (likely April 10) and for no longer than three months. If after this period of time Prasi90 has acted in a way that he is considered a member in good standing of the Wikipedia editing community, this restriction will be lifted and Prasi90 will be afforded the same freedoms as any other editor in good standing"

Hopefully the RfC will give us a broader and more neutral base of opinion regarding this clause of our agreement. Have a good weekend, go out and get some fresh air and sunshine! Regards, Hamster Sandwich 17:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Comments of other interested parties below this line, please!

Other than the one warning condition this seems fair enough. You've had more than enough warnings, this would be your last chance.Gator (talk) 17:08, 5 April 2006 (UTC) I withdraw my support for this. After sleeping on it, I was swayed by how strong Hamster seems to want this to happen instead of remembering how little Prasi has and will offer this project. I don't think he should be unblocked at all. And this is coming from a neutral third party who, until recently, ahs had NO contact with him. Sorry. No hard feelings.Gator (talk) 18:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

A strange turn of events. If dear Prasi is truly willing to contribute in a productive manner, then I think Hamser's request is pretty good. I disagree on the one warning prereqisite though. The first slip up and its over. Full stop. -Zero^Talk 17:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I will, likely, not issue a final warning if I see a slip up.Gator (talk) 17:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I'd be ok with this, if Hammy (and/or another he slips the King's Shilling to) will be checking the contributions. --Alf ^melmac 17:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Prasi90 is not to have any warnings. If he resumes his previous behavior then an immediate block is mandatory. It should be noted that Fred Bauder (an arbitrator) was reluctant[3] to unblocking his IP...so it may be best to direct him here to this before Prasi90 is unblocked.--MONGO 02:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I have requested that if I obviously unintentionally violate the conditions layed out above due to a misunderstanding of the above terms I be goven one warning only before being reblocked.I also have two more conditions to add to the list 4)That if I,for some urgent reason,need to e-mail an Administrator,I contact Hamstersandwich with the reason for sending such an e-mail so that he may decide whether or not the matter is sufficiently important to warrant the sending of an e-mail. 5)I be allowed to post messages to Hamstersandwich only regarding any doubts I might have about these conditions.These messages must be as far as possible be avoided.User:Prasi90 03:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you quite understand the deal here. You just escaped the means of an indefinite block due to unaceptable behavior, and even if/when the block is nullified, you will be under close observation and probation. You've recieved plenty of chances, which you've rebutted and summited a false apology, only to return to your disruptive behavior. No more chances. Its pie-in-the-sky to think that. No way.-Zero^Talk 03:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Zero (and also Gator1),I request you to consider this condition I imposed on myself (as can been seen above):"I would also like to state here that in order to avoid being goaded into making any unreasonable edits I will (as far as possible)abstain from interacting with those Users,with whom,(in the past)I have had disputes".Zero,with all due respect,your messages to me appear a bit uncivil (according to me).Might I request you to please post any messages that you want to post on any other page like (ANI or RfC or the Userpages of involved Administrators) instead of on my Usertalk page?Thank You.User:Prasi90 03:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Megamanzero is correct. You have been given a lot more chances than most have after the kind of edits you have performed. You do not make up the rules or get to choose what the conditions of your unblock will be. Those conditions will be set for you. You will abide by those conditions as set forth by the respected contributors and administrators here or you will be blocked indefinitely.--MONGO 03:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you MONGO.All I did was to request that certain Administrators/Users post their comments about me elsewhere.User:Prasi90 04:24, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

You may wish to contact Fred again via email and get him to either agree or to not agree to your mentorship.--MONGO 04:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

As you may have noticed I have agreed to (for the time being) refrain from e-mailing users.In any case I will be on Wiki-break from today until the 10th of April 2006.By that time,if Fred has not viewed this discussion I will e-mail him.Also given the fact that most Users who have read the conditions of my unblocking agree to the same,might I know if Fred's approval is vital to my unblocking?User:Prasi90 04:31, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Can I just ask: For what purpose do you request an ublock? What articles do you have in mind to edit and in general terms what edits do you plan to make? --kingboyk 18:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

This is an expletory inquiry. I'm immensely curious to hear the reply to this as well. -Zero^Talk 18:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

ADVICE(Remember Prasi90: You are under no obligation to respond or corespond with any user, although it may be considered impolite to not do so. For the present time, I suggest you provide only a cursory answer. The only time I would suggest that you must respond to comments are when it is related to an Arbitration. Altough impolite, it is sometimes a nescessary evil to ignore comments. In this case you must weigh the benefit of providing an answer to kingboyk's question against not doing so. Also, I suggest that you do not respond to any further comments by MONGO and Gator1 until our "program" is completed. I may ask you to ignore the comments of other users as we progress. This is a way of putting some distance between your old self and your newly minted powers to do good. Remember, the purpose of this exercise is to improve your skills and establish your good standing as a Wikipedian of merit. Keep a cool head always, better to say nothing at all, than to give your detractors ammunition to fire at you. It is my hope that you are afforded a bit of room to improve, but you must be aware that your actions (and mine as well!) will be closely scrutinized. I'll be signing off till tomorrow, so keep it cool, simple and pleasant in your interactions here, ok? No need to debate anybody about anything! Peace!) Hamster Sandwich 18:45, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Well hold on for a minute! Review of this decision by admins was requested, and I'm here as an independent admin with a simple honest question. I don't appreciate being labelled a "detractor". I knew nothing about this user nor his history, and I just want to know why he does the request the priveledge of editing here? (And, as open and accomodating as we try to be, it is a priveledge not a right). What are his plans for contributing to the encyclopedia? However, I don't need an answer now, if this is the mentorship he'll be getting (being civil by ignoring a polite request from an admin?!) then I think it's best he stays blocked. --kingboyk 19:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Kingboyk,thank you for taking an interest in this matter.However,for the time being,I will take Hamstersandwich's advice regarding my replying to certain comments.Please do not take this personally.Also,you might get a satisfactory answer if you check my edit history if/when I am unblocked.Regards.User:Prasi90 03:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

PS-Sorry for the late reply.

Thank you for the reply. Good luck. --kingboyk 03:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

April 10. Memo to Prasi90

Hello Prasi90. To bring you up to speed on the high speed goings on here at Wikipedia, the most important online reference website, from what I can see, there has been very little discussion genterated on your un-blocking. I think that in the interest of candor, and as a way of embracing WP:AGF you could offer the community an cursory outline of the articles that you have an immediate interest in editing. I might suggest that you look at the list of articles here. Find a topic on one of the lists. Do some research, make a few notes (remember your citations!) and craft an article, post it to this page as an example of your work. Do it in standard article format with proper sections and show me what you can do. I'll come back here tomorrow, give you my critique or at least opinion of your effort. I think at this point you should welcome the input of any interested parties that are given in a spirit of Good Faith.

The community is thus far largely resistant to your unblocking. You must endevor to show them that you as an editor, as a human being of good moral character should be given a chance. With your continued promise that the community can hold you to the standards we have agreed on through your mentorship, and with a good example of what you can potentially contribute on view, we should be able to find an administrator to un-do your block. Till tomorrow, my best regards. Hamster Sandwich 16:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Sample article (2) Ganapatipule

Ganapatipule is a pilgrimage centre and tourist spot located in the Ratnagiri district of Maharashtra,India.Its picturesque beaches attract many tourists and and the 400 year old Ganapati temple is visited by a large number of pilgrims.

Location

Ganapatipule is located on the Konkan coast,approximately 375 Kms. south of Mumbai.The nearest aiport is Pune International airport,331 Kms away.Ratnagiri (50 Kms. away) is the nearest railhead.Ganapatipule can also be reached by road from Mumbai,via the Mumbai-Goa Highway (NH 17).

Climate

The climate is hot and humid and the average temperature is above 30 C.May is the hottest month with temperatures going upto 38-40 C.Heavy,regular rains are experienced between June and October.

Languages and Culture

The main language spoken in Ganapatipule is Marathi,however most natives are fluent in Konkani.Gauri Ganapathi is an important festival celebrated here,however other Indian festivals such as Diwali and Holi are also observed.The majority of the population follows Hinduism.Muslim communities are found in the area around Myria Bay on the outskirts of Ganapatipule.

Occupation

Fishing and agriculture are the main source of livelihood for the people of this area.Tourism is another important source of income.

Swayambhu Ganapati temple

The famous Ganapati temple attracts many pilgrims each year."Swayambhu" means "self-originated".The idol of Lord Ganesh located in the temple's sancton sanctorium is said to be self originated and not man-made.This is what makes the temple so unique.The temple itself is over 400 years old and is located at the foot of a hillock.Most pilgrims show obeisance by walking around this hillock.The Swayambhu Ganapati is also known as the Paschim Dwar Dewta (Western Sentinel God).

Sources/Links

Journeymart.com Map showing the location of Ganapatipule Mahrashtra Tourism Department Website-Also gives tourist details

Congratulations Prasi90! This is a well written, referenced and useful article! I could not be more pleased with your efforts! I only have a bit of time for wikipedia today, but I will make some further effort to have your block lifted. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I could lift the block, but I feel it would be better to convince a neutral party to do it. Your good effort speaks volumes toward this end. Feel free to continue as you have been doing, the more good you contribute to offset your previous questionable behaviour. I hope you appreciate the pleasure your effort here has afforded me! Keep up the good work! Hamster Sandwich 16:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Sample article (from requested page)-List of Chief Ministers of Indian States (as of 11th April 2006).

Current Chief Ministers

Andhra Pradesh

Chief Minister Dr.Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy

Arunachal Pradesh

Chief Minister Mr. Gegong Apang

Assam

Chief Minister Mr. Tarun Gogoi

Bihar

Chief Minister Mr. Nitish Kumar

Chhattisgarh

Chief Minister Dr. Raman Singh

Delhi

Chief Minister Smt. Sheila Dikshit

Goa

Chief Minister Shri Pratapsingh Raoji Rane

Gujarat

Chief Minister Mr Narendra Modi

Haryana

Chief Minister Shri Bhupinder Singh Hooda

Himachal Pradesh

Chief Minister Shri Virbhadra Singh

Jammu and Kashmir

Chief Minister Shri Ghulam Nabi Azad

Jharkhand

Chief Minister Shri Arjun Munda

Karnataka

Chief Minister Shri H. D. Kumaraswamy

Kerala

Chief Minister Shri Oommen Chandy

Madhya Pradesh

Chief Minister Shri Shivraj Singh Chouhan

Maharashtra

Chief Minister Shri Vilasrao Deshmukh

Manipur

Chief Minister Shri Okram Ibobi Singh

Meghalaya

Chief Minister Dr. Dethwelson Lapang

Mizoram

Chief Minister Shri Zoram-thanga

Nagaland

Chief Minister Shri. Neiphiu Rio

Orissa

Chief Minister Shri Naveen Patnaik

Pondicherry

Chief Minister Shri N. Rangasamy

Punjab

Chief Minister Captain Amarinder Singh

Rajasthan

Chief Minister Smt. Vasundhara Raje

Sikkim

Chief Minister Shri Pawan Chamling

Tamil Nadu

Chief Minister Selvi J. Jayalalithaa

Tripura

Chief Minister Shri Manik Sarkar

Uttar Pradesh

Chief Minister Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav

Uttaranchal

Chief Minister Shri Narain Datt Tiwari

West Bengal

Chief Minister Shri Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee

Link

Indian Government Website

A request to Hamster Sandwich.

Thank you for your appreciation of my sample article.It really means a lot to me.However,I fear we might have a problem-MONGO has stated that he no longer concurs to your offer of mentoring me.This came (possibly) in reaction to an edit I had made to the RFDA section of my userpage.I had written up this RFDA against MONGO incase an unfortunate situation arose wherein I would have to take up the issue with higher authorities.I added this evidence today lest I forget about it in future.However,at present,I have no intention of filing an RFDA,I am merely compling any diffs. made by MONGO which I think are unbecoming of an Administrator for convenience.Also,i have a lot of Wiki-time on my hands since being blocked and hence I can spend time in drafting an RFAD which will perhaps never be filed!I hope Hamster Sandwich,that you will continue to help me in my efforts to be a good Wikipedian despite MONGO's decision not to concur.Please tell me whether your offer of mentorship still stands.Thank you once again for all your help and support.User:Prasi90 15:59, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

PS-In the past,my actions might make it seem that I harbour feelings of ill-will toward all Americans.This is not true.I am only against some aspects of US foriegn policy(which many Americans are against too anyway).If you are an American Hamster Sandwich let me just say that (despite MONGO's comments about my "bias) I hold you in high regard as both a Wikipedian and a human being.

A question to MONGO.

I could not help noticing that until recently you had no objection to Hamster Sandwich's mentorship offer.However,after I added another edit made by you to the RFDA I had drafted,you accused me of trolling (even though I had infact edited my OWN talkpage) and decided that you did not,afterall,concur with Hamster Sandwich's offer.This sequence of events has caused me to wonder if the reason behind your unexpected change of heart is an apprehension that I might go ahead and file an RFDA.If this is the case,MONGO,worry not.I do not,at present,intend to file an RFDA against you.I am merely drafting a mock RFDA to pass my Wiki-time.Hence there is no need for you to become anxious about retaining your Administrator status.Reponde`z si`l vous pla^it.User:Prasi90 12:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I am not the least bit worried about you filing a Rfar...the reason I am opposing your unblocking is because you have shown little evidence that you intend to be constructive in your editing. I am also concerned that HampsterSanwiches good intentions here may be not enough as he hasn't been editing very much lately, so I am not sure he can keep track of you well.--MONGO 07:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for replying.I assure you that after I am unblocked I will become a constructive editor.By the way,have you considered unblocking me yourself,in light of my acceptance of the terms of the Probationary Mentorship Offer and the sample articles I have written here?If not,do consider.User:Prasi90 08:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Prasi, your block expires on 4/28/06. I have seen no evidence that anyone wishes to unblock you before that. You can consult with Hampster if he comes back...probably in a day or two as he may worship on Easter.--MONGO 08:53, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Hamster Sandwich has expressed a desire to unblock me/have me unblocked.Also in future while mention dates please use the Commonwealth Date/Month/Year format instead of the American Month/Date/Year format-alternatively you could write the full name of the month eg.April.The American system is confusing to Wikipedians from the Commonwealth.Do have some consideration.User:Prasi90 17:22, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll write it the way I want. I find your manner of writing it confusing. Hampster Sandwich is alone in his beliefs that you should be unblocked. Even he has stated that he will not tolerate much as far as your editing goes. Don't for a minute think that in light of your past edits, that there is some kind of red carpet awaiting you on your return.--MONGO 18:26, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I noticed MONGO that you have tracked my IP down and have posted your findings on various places on Wikipedia.I came across what happened to Gator1 on WP:AN.I light of this,I am sure you will agree that posting details of my location is a grave danger to my personal security.Whilst,on the topic MONGO,I do not recall your asking me for permission before tracking dwon my IP.With no offence to you,the fact that you are trying to find out my personal details worries me to no small extent.I request you MONGO to please delete the details of your findings (upon tracking down my IP) from Wikipedia,since there is now no more reason for keeping them visible to all.Might I remind you (with no intention of threatening legal action against you or anyone else) that while violating Wikipedia policy is not a legal offence,posting private details of a user (which may seriously endanger his personal security) is not taken very lightly by the authorities.I request you to please see to it that these details are removed.I also ask that you clarify why you had to track down my IP when I had already mentioned that I live in India.In light of what happened to Gaator1,I am sure you will understand why I am so concerned about this matter.Forgive me if the tone of this message makes it appear as though I am "dictating terms".User:Prasi90 04:24, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

The only thing your IP trace reveiled is that you edit from an ISP based in India. I have posted no private details of anything about you...what are you talking about? Your IP was easy to find as it was used to edit both this page and in the Rfc that was written up on you. There has been no more invasion of your privacy that there is on anyone here. I didn't need your "permission" to trace an IP...those things are routinely done here when someone goes around vandalizing articles like you did. I am about as interested in your true identity as I would be about knowing how to serve chilled monkey brains.--MONGO 04:33, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

When you contribute without logging in, your IP is automatically visible. There is no violation of personal info here. NSLE _{(T C)} at 04:28 UTC (2006-04-17)

Yes,NSLE I am aware of that.However MONGO has himself stated (on my RfC page) that he (quote) I checked Prasi90's IP address by an IP tracker and it clearly demonstrates that he is in India, not Idaho.The diff is [4].Now I don't know whether on Wikipedia one needs to ask for permission before tracking an IP address.MONGO has as (admitted by himself) tracked down the location of my IP,which is different from noting down my IP address.Now I do not in any way mean to imply any sort of legal action against anybody,however might I remind you that of a few Internet Regulations?According to the Indian Cyber Crime Code,tracing IPs without the permission of the concerned IP user (and posting details of that IP on the internet) is not legal-it is a criminal offence which can legally be reported to the Cyber Crimes Cell of the concerned police department.Therefore,I assumed that this practice is not allowed on Wikipedia either.Also I do believe there are International Internet treaties that both India and the United States of America are signatory to.Even under these laws it may be illegal to post details of an IP on the Internet.The main concern here,MONGO,is that you publicly displayed my personal information (which you procured by tracking my IP) without obtaining my prior consent.This,as I have explained is not legal under the laws of the country of which I am a citizen.Also,as far as I know,my activites (even if they are disruptive activities) on Wikipedia cannot be considered a legitimate reason for violating (at the very least) the Indian Penal Code.The point of this rather long and highly theoretical diatribe is to bring to your attention,MONGO that tracking my IP (for any reason) and posting information obtained in this manner (however inconsequent it may seem) requires you to obtain my consent.Oh,and might I add that since I'm only 17 years of age (still a juvenile) and you are above 18 years of age (an adult) you might have also violated certain Child Protection Laws?I hope that the issue has been clarified?I do not (I reiterate) threaten any sort of action against you.I am merely posting this information to explain my views on this matter.I also requset you,once again to remove from Wikipedia any details (however uminportant they may seem to you) which you have obtained by tracking my IP without my consent.I would appreciate any response/comment from your side. User:Prasi90 05:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

PS-I am about as interested in your true identity as I would be about knowing how to serve chilled monkey brains.Are you sure that this does not violate WP:CIVIL?Please recheck.

still a juvenile) and you are above 18 years of age (an adult) you might have also violated certain Child Protection Laws?

Talk page re-protected for legal threats. No admin should unblock this user. NSLE _{(T C)} at 06:11 UTC (2006-04-17)

I am blocking the IP indefinitely now. It's about time.--MONGO 08:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Unblock template.

I am adding this unblock template here primarily to attract the attention of Administrators who have been involved in the issue of my unblocking under the terms of the Probationary Mentorship.Administrators who are new to this issue,please go over the facts of my blocking and the terms of the Probationary Mentorship offer made to me by Hamster Sandwich before unblocking me (if you decide to do so).

Administrators who already know the facts of the case-As you know Hamster Sandwich and I have agreed on the terms of a Probationary Mentorship.However,we have agreed that it would be better if we could convince someone else to unblock me rather than Hamster Sandwich doing it himself.But,as can be seen,he has been unable to continue his efforts in this direction (due to his other engagements).I request one of you to please unblock me,so that I may commence contributing constructively.Also read the sample articles I have posted here to be sure of my capabilities to edit constructively.If you do not agree with my putting this template here,please delete it without protectin this user talk page.Thank You.

Page unprotection and status of user block

I am going to unprotect this talk page at the request of this user. I am, frankly, perplexed at the supposed 'legal threat' for which this user was blocked indefinitely. While I can't speak for the other accusations levelled against this user, I'd assume that saying 'I am not at all intending to make a threat here' in the message would in most cases discount it from being construed as a legal threat. As far as I can see, Prasi90 merely raised legitimate legal concerns about the use of anonymous IP addresses - concerns which have been raised before several times by many people who (as far as I know) have not been blocked for legal threats.

This tenuous basis for an indefinite block troubles me. The user has indicated that he/she would like to undergo some form of probation/intense supervision, and put the past behind him/her. Perhaps this indefinite block should be reconsidered? - Mark 12:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

This editor is nothing but a troll...you should ahve contacted the blocking admins before you did the unprotect of his userpage...look at the block log on this account and the associated IP...nothing here has been unilateral. Don't make everyone waste time on arbcom when the end result will be the same as now. Under no circumstances is this editor to be allowed to continue editing this forum.--MONGO 00:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Mark.Also for MONGO,NSLE or any other Administrator-please unblock me so that I may return to constructive editing.I have already agreed to a probationary mentorship.Incidentally (with regard to my "legal threat" block),this probation agreement requires that (in "borderline" cases) I be given ONE warning before being blocked.Even otherwise,as Mark said,my last message could not reasonably be considered a legal threat.Thus,the reason given for my blocking(violating the no-legal threats policy)may itself be questionable.My only wish is to put my past behaviour behind me,start off with a clean slate,and become a good editor.I request that MONGO(who has expressed a desire to wash his hands off this matter) and NSLE(an other blocking admin)kindly consider unblocking me so that I may edit constructively as opposed to wasting my time in repeatedly requesting unblocking).I also ask any other Administrator (including Mark) to consider giving me a chance to prove myself and put behind me and the Community my past unreasonable behaviour.User:Prasi90 12:31, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

PS-At the moment my Mentor(Hamster Sandwich)seems unavailable.in this light I formally agree/suggest that an other Administrator (if possible Mark)be appointed as my ad-hoc mentor.This way Administrators considering an unblock need mot worry about who is keeping an eye on me.Might I ask you,Mark to suggest a neutral Administrator who will take this post?It will likely be only for a few days since hamster Sandwich will probably be back soon.It must also be mentioned here that my repeated attempts to have my block revokes by the blocking Administrator(MONGO)have met with failure-therefore I request the intervention of other Administrators.MONGO has (via email)clarified that he is not opposed to my requesting any other Administrator to unblock me.

Discussion

If contacted by this editor for an unblock...please read at Administrators Noticeboard:Unblocking of Prasi90 and or contact me in regards to this. Thank you.--MONGO 04:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey hey, nonny nonny...

Prasi90, it seems to be exceedingly difficult getting somebody to lift this indefinate block. I have not given up hope, but perhaps a different approach is necessary. I merely haven't thought of where to go yet. I was greatly heartened by the two potential article additions you provided on this page, but those who have most consistantly expressed their views that you should not be allowed to edit have not been swayed. Considering that at least one of those editors has themselves undergone a period of mentorship, I find the situation a bit perplexing. I must say that I consider the imposition of a permanent block without the benifit of due process a bit galling. I am almost willing to take the formal step of requesting arbitration in your case. I expect that if this request proceeds to an actual arbitration, the terms set forward by the comittee will be as stringent as the ones we have previously agreed on, and perhaps even moreso. I have two exams in the next three days, next week I will be able to concentrate my efforts in this direction. I will look to see the reason why this page has been protected, and seek to unprotect it so that you can respond here. As I hold high expectations of your behaviour, so too I seek substantial reasoning from those editors who have taken the offense against the mentorship agreement we have come to. In my opinion, any evidence that has been offered against you that occured before our agreement is part of your past. We live now for the present and future good work that you might be able to contribute. Remember, keep a cool head, do not be reactionary in any of your comments. The high road is the only road you can travel. The view is always nicer there, anyways. Regards, Hamster Sandwich 16:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I have been talking with Prasi90, off-site. I do want to unprotect the page so he can discuss this with you, but will run it by Mongo. My position is that if he does well on another project he ought to be given another chance here. Fred Bauder 18:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. A few days ago I received email from the system telling me Prasi's IP had asked for a new password, and I received a mail from Prasi saying he was "sorry" and was just playing around trying to "get back at" me for protecting his page. I would be strongly against giving him a new chance. NSLE _{(T C)} at 06:06 UTC (2006-04-27)

As I clarified NSLE,I was just trying to play a minor prank on you in order to vent my "Wiki-frustration" at having my Usertalkpages protected by you AND being banned from IRC by you.This (in my opinion)was a rather unusual way of trying to (as it seemed to me)"shut me up".However soon after playing my (stupid,needless) little prank I e-mailed you to clarify that I had no intention of invading your privacy (I also admitted it was me who sent the mail) and that I was merely kidding around.User:Prasi90 06:15, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Unprotected

Once again, I have unprotected this talk page, based on a request to do so by Fred Bauder--MONGO 18:55, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm working on Wikinews temporarily-to show good intentions

Hi,Hamster.I have already asked someone to IRC to post a message on your talkpage to this effetct but I wanted to let you know personally nontheless.I'm editing Wikinews now-since the 20th of this month- under a different ID (PVJ59)so as to avoid any stigma.In the last 6-7 days I have made over 80 edits including 6 new articles-as of 06:04 UTC 27th April 2006.The link to my contributions page on that Wiki is [5].Nontheless I have a lot more work to do there to redeem myself here.I am hoping that by contributing constructively to Wikinews I can convince the Wikipedia Community that I do indeed want to put my past behind me.Even after/if I am unblocked here I do intend to continue contributing to Wikinews-i.e I am not editing the latter just to have myself unblocked here.I am also on good terms with the Wikinews community.No blocks,no trolling,no bad faith.Just wanted to let those who are helping me out know that their efforts are not going to go to waste.User:Prasi90 06:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I sense that things are moving in a more positive direction. I will ask you not to e-mail any administrator with any messages that may seem sarcastic or inflamitory in any way. In 10 months of editing, I have not had occaision to email any administrator for any reason. But, if you must, please be civil, courteous and concilliatory. I am very glad that you have found an outlet for your editing that pleases your sensibilities. I'll be able to devote a bit more time to our endevors next week. Prasi90, keep up the good work, but remember that that the critisism of your past actions by others is not empty, or meaningless. The greater part of those comments held some weight, so your future behaviour will have to be exempilary. No more sarcasm, unless it is towards a friend here, offered in friendly good humour.OK? Peace! Hamster Sandwich 16:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

O.K I will avoid emailing Administrators.Thanks for your advice-you are right-my behaviour needs to be perfect from now on in order to win back the faith of other editors.I will also follow the advice given by you earlier-avoid communicating with editors with whom I have had issues in the past so as to avoid any ill-will.And as for the NSLE email thing-let me explain:My usertalkpgaes were protected and I was banned from IRC so I was frustrated at not being able to communicate with anybody (especially you-who is helping me in my efforts to become a good Wikipedian) and I was informed that I had been blocked indefinitely so I just sort of lost my composure.No real harm was intended-I was just upset at being unable to communicate with anyone.It won't happen again-as you said I have to maintain my cool even if things don't seem to be going my way. User:Prasi90 17:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

To Fred Bauder

My mentor Hamster Sandwich has once again gone on Wikibreak since the 27th of April.My IP and my User ID have been blocked since the 28th of March.My IP block was to become void on the 28th of April,when it was changed by MONGO into an indefinite block.In the words of Hamster Sandwich,the imposition of such an indefinite block without the consultation of the Arbitration Committe is a galling.Especially as the reason for such a block ("legal overtones") has been questioned by another Administrator,Mark [6] Nontheless,I started editing Wikinews slmost 3 weeks ago on the 20th of April to show my good intentions.On Wikinews,I have thus far made 132 edits-[7] without running into any conflicts/blocks etc.You had offered to help me have this block reverted if I could stay out of trouble on Wikinews.In this regard I request you to kindly take some measures in this direction,especially since you are an Arbitrator and hence your word is likely to be taken seriously by the Community.Thus far,atleast 2 other Arbitrators including Tony Sidaway and Angela have supported my being put on probation.With each passing day,my block duration keeps increasing and my hopes of being allowed to contribute constructively to Wikipedia as I have done on Wikinews,continue to fade.Please do help me and advice me on any new course of action.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Prasi90 (talk • contribs)

You should be unblocked now.--MONGO 03:24, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks MONGO. Once again,sorry for any bad-faith editing, it won't happen again. And the same applies to the "legal-threat" issue-it was unnecesarry,and just an expression of Wiki-frustration. Thanks also to other editors who helped me.User:Prasi90 03:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I like what I'm seeing. A brief glance over your contributions depicts good edits and occasional vandalism reverts. I apologize for my earlier assumption of bad faith. Keep it up. -Zero^Talk 13:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.User:Prasi90 17:28, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

While I have a few minutes at a terminal I'd like to say that I'm glad cooler heads and a bit of good faith on the part of interested parties has yeilded a positive result. Keep up the good work, noble wikipedians! Hamster Sandwich 21:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)