User talk:Scheibenzahl/Archive 1

It may be helpful to know which image we're talking about. You might want to try calling the University's Help line at 773-834-HELP to get in contact with their Academic and Administrative Resources division - they might be able to help you out. Note: I am not from U of Chicago. However, you might want to ask some of these people who do or have attended. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 22:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey there, just wanted to let you know that images from Chandra are generally allowed on Wikipedia, despite what it says on the terms of use page on that site. They are public domain, and can therefore be used even for commercial purposes. The exception is images used on the site, alone or in compilation images, that are not owned by NASA. I assume you wanted to use an image of Chandrasekhar from that page, an image that I believe it says is owned by AIP, and so that image, I'm afraid, won't be public domain. You can always ask the woman who deal with permissions on that site, however, but I doubt AIP is going to allow it to be used commercially. Lexicon (talk) 23:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

The 32 refers to both the 15 DYK I have actually written and the 17 I nominated. The box only talks about the 15 I've written.Bakaman 01:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your complaint here: [1] I request two things:

1. You comment on
   Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#User:DBachmann
   regarding this matter
2. Configure your preferences with an email address and contact me by clicking here. I have information that will be of use to you.Thanks.Nagsheh 02:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

To give you some context, I have created the redirects as {{

Since you put the redirect up for deletion, the page was rewritten, and now placed for deletion here.Bakaman 23:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Since you commented on the afd, it has been re-Afd'd Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hindutva pseudoscience (2nd nomination).Bakaman 19:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

party-line ballot-stuffing on Wikipedia, nein danke.

dab (𒁳)

09:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Sprechen Sie Englisch? There is no ballot box stuffing, merely inviting those who voted to vote on the second AFD. Not all the people even voted the same way so "ballot-box stuffing" is hardly in order.Bakaman 17:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like to draw your attention that Dab is trying to use `Aryan race' term in his created `Indigenous Aryans' theory article. This way he seems to misguide that IA notion is relating with `Aryan race' of Hitler's understanding. I just read this `Aryan Race' words in your opposition of using Hindu pseudoscience. He is trying to misguide. He first associated `theory' term to Indig. Aryans and created this article to denigrate his opposers. WIN 09:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

The discussion is

I would recommend going to

Talk

20:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I am sorry I forgot to inform you about that request. Thanks for AGFing. Not many people do that these days. I am convinced now that you are not Hkelkar. Sorry if my accusation hurt you. With Kelkar coming up with so many sock accounts, I forgot to apologise to you. - Aksi_great (talk) 18:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I would also like to apologize for suspecting you of sockpuppetry. From your edits, it has become abundantly clear that you are an independent new editor, and as such you do of course deserve to be cut some slack until you find your way around on Wikipedia. I hope you understand that after two years of permanent attacks on the "Hindutva" topics by genuine socks, any new account that immediately joins the fray raises suspicions. I realize the topic is advertised on various mailing lists (hinducivilization) , which often gives us new editors with much zeal but little or no understanding of either the subject or the project policies. Your point of view is welcome, as long as you understand and adhere to the Wikipedia fundamentals (

It looks like you are correct. The tag was applied, but lost during the page moves. I apologize for missing that. I have removed my comment from the closing. It doesn't affect the closing itself as there was still a split opinion on deleting or keeping. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 18:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for not simply reverting it this time. It makes editing much more pleasant. The Behnam 09:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Is it necessary to add links to Hindu proselytizing works? Since you are adding two anyway, just remove the one from 'how i became a hindu' and we should be alright. Thanks. The Behnam 10:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh and I am referring to the 'bovine' references. The Behnam 10:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. The Behnam 10:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

If there are any topics you are interested in, if you can write a page in one-day (a well referenced non-stub article), you can get it on the main page. Its one of my pet projects, and most of the Hinduism editors have at least one under their belt. By the way, you may want to join

I haven't had any official contact with the U of Chicago in YEARS. You probably need someone who is going there now and knows which office to contact. Zora 05:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for showing interest in learning Kannada. I have forwarded your request to user:Sarvagnya. User:KNM is also a potential person to contact. These guys will help you find the right source material.thanks.Dineshkannambadi 19:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Scheibenzahl(whew!). I'm sorry I took a while to reply. I certainly can point you to some sources. But then, before I do that, I just was wondering if you know any Indian languages or better still, any south Indian languages. If you do(especially S Indian languages), it shouldnt be too difficult at all. Sarvagnya 10:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Good work. Funny thing is that I had contacted Mr. Garfias a long time back but he was busy at that time. Hence I remembered and tagged this image. Once again, good work. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, could you take a look at the other images used in the article? I don't think they are valid fair-use. And now that we have a free image, they are unnecessary. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the images in the articles are used as fair-use, but I don't think they are valid fair use. For example, the lead image (image in the infobox) is a cover of an album. These images should only be used to illustrate the album in question to claim valid fair-use. When we use the cover to illustrate Bismillah Khan, it becomes a violation of copyright. - Aksi_great (talk) 05:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Contact me within an hour. Special:Emailuser/John Reaves John Reaves (talk) 06:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Greetings, Scheibenzahl! Your request for an assessment of

If you want to contact me via e-mail, simply use the "E-mail this user" link in the toolbox at the left side of the page when on my user or talk page. Lexicon (talk) 14:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

hi there, what do you want help with? other than ofcourse learning kannada :) Sarvagnya 09:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, this message is for administrators who are allowed to edit the linked page :) Thanks for replying though :).--

Scheibenzahl

09:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

ohh... how i wanted to help  :(  :) never mind.. i'll help you with kannada. just gimme some time.. i have some links stashed away somewhere. see you soon. Sarvagnya 09:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I am waiting as always.--

Scheibenzahl

09:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

There is a message on

I added the

Template:Editprotected to the talk page; an administrator should be along to make the correction. ➪HiDrNick

! 11:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) You can attract the attention of an administrator to an edit that needs to be made to a protected page by placing {{

editprotected}} is more likely to find someone who can make the change. Hope that helps! --ais523 11:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC

)

Thanks!

Yeah, go right ahead and merge. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 20:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

• Makes to make "Jail" (which points to Prison) the main article, since the other uses of Jail are so minor (Monopoly? Chroot?) --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 20:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I stepped out; hm, where's the "Jail (American)" history now? Hm. Unfortunately, I don't know how to fix this problem. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 22:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure we were not better off with Jail (American) which has the history and talk ? NOw 'jail' has nothing. Maybe I'm missing something or you're not finished? Tvoz |talk 20:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

sorry for jumping the gun - I wouldn't know exactly how to do it either! Will look at it when the dust settles. And yeah, I know my talk page is long - will get to that sometime soon.Tvoz |talk 22:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

And I re-fixed the links that I had changed.Tvoz |talk 22:19, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Some administrator please delete

Done. Placed deletion tag on page.

Real96

22:15, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

{{unblock|I have been blocked for being meatpuppet or sockpuppet of [[User:Anupamsr]]. I never denied that I am not. I have not participated in any scheme. The decision was taken without my consent or knowledge. I would like plea. I do not have any idea as to how to do that, please be kind.--[[User:Scheibenzahl|Scheibenzahl]] 12:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC) Please have a look into contributions of account [[User:Anupamsr]]. I added a script to log me off, for wikibreak forcing. Unfortunately, I could not resist, plus I had to use popups, which needs account creation. Please look at contributions of [[User:Scheibenzahl]], the first one is adding popups. The report is here: [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Blocks_for_meatpuppetry_and_sockpuppetry]]. I don't know how to plea. Is it allowed to edit there? Which pages are allowed to edit while I am blocked?--[[User:Scheibenzahl|Scheibenzahl]] 12:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC) I had no knowledge as to how and why the decision was taken. I would like to plea. Please help. I need to discuss it with other editors in question, namely [[User:Rama%27s_Arrow]], [[User:Dbachmann]], and other administrators with whom I have talked to regarding this issue, like [[User:Aksi great]], [[User:Lexicon]] and [[User:John Reaves]], and ANI report. I will absolutely not edit any other page. I have no history personal attacks or violating any wikipedia rules. Please unblock, by request is being unheard. I need to make my point. }}

Hi!

I am Anupam Srivastava. I edit using account User:Scheibenzahl. I have been blocked for being a sockpuppet of User:Anupamsr. I have never denied it, and if you look at my contributions, I have posted my email address and names at many places. As User:Anupamsr I was never blocked, or accused of incivility, violating WP rules etc. Absolutely nothing.

I am being blocked for being a meatpuppet of banned user Hkelkar. I would like to plea. Here is my story:

1) I was Anupamsr. My wikipediholic score was neer 600 or something. So I decided to take a wikibreak. I was unable to, so I added a script which will automatically log me off, to force wikibreak. You can check my contributions at User:Anupamsr

2) I was still unable to resist, and my browsing was horrible because of too much reliance on popups.js script. I tried to add it into my IP address but I couldn't, so I created a new account:

3) As Anupamsr, I was a target of lot of bad faith due to my Indian connection, especially from, now banned, Unre4L, Nadirali etc. So I did not post much info on my user page. One can easily understand.

4) I once saw three articles: Hidutva pseudoscience, Hindutva propaganda, and one more. They were redirect pages. I nominated them for delete.

5) This caused User:Dbachmann to believe I am a sockpuppet of Hkelkar. This was not the case and was proved in a Checkuser. It was conducted without my knowledge. I was not even informed of the consequence. Dbachmann later apologised for not AGF.

6) The redirect was converted to article. I edited it, and had trouble of NPA and AGF from User:Rudrasharman. After which I was contacted User:AMbroodEY (not banned).

7) He told me that I should give Rudra a NPA warning, which I finally did not. After some talk with User:AMbroodEY, he sent me an invitation for a forum.

8) I joined the forum. The forum had a lot of regular postings from Hkelkar. I did not do anything.

9) I voted delete on the article. Finally article got deleted.

10) After that I had no connection with Dbachmann, or any content dispute with any user, except once with

I am prepared to reduce your block to a shorter period of time (you'll have to be blocked for a period, I'm sorry) but you must give an explicit commitment to uphold Wikipedia's policies and its mission. Also, which account do you want to use as your sole, permanent account? The other will be indef'd. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 14:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

You can merge or block User:Anupamsr. I use this account!--

Scheibenzahl

15:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

You can place a "sockpuppet" of Scheibenzahl at the top if User:Anupamsr. Please don't blank the page.--

Scheibenzahl

15:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Your block has been reset to 2 weeks - you cannot avoid (at least in my opinion) the penalty for not being forthcoming about your multiple accounts and for being involved in Hkelkar's email cabal. Please DO NOT repeat this behavior or involve yourself with banned users. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 15:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for you cooperation. I would like to actually know where did I do anything that was against wikipedia policies, something I regard so high.

There are two allegations against me: not being forthcoming about multiple accounts. I do not know of any such policy. My previous account

Scheibenzahl

15:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Anupam, the situation is complex - from the emails, I saw that (a) Scheibenzahl was your sock and (b) you were involved in the exchange of some damning e-mails. Apart from your own word, what is the evidence that there was no intention of deception and subversion? You were also editing the same range of articles and AfDs and linked with Baka and co.'s pattern of editing. How do you expect me to believe that your creation of Scheibenzahl was not for dishonest purposes? You did not declare to any admin or otherwise that you are were Anupamsr, despite being investigated for sockpuppetry - you were suspected of being Hkelkar, while all the time you were Anupamsr. You were involved in the email ring and editing along the same pattern. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 16:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Under the circumstances, I have

assumed good faith and commuted your block, but I am not in favor of unblocking you. I have respect for your intelligence and work on Wikipedia and I assure you that this is not personal. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy)

16:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for assuming good faith. But I want the block to be removed because I did NOT need to prove that I am Anupamsr! It just does not make any sense? Why would I associate myself with an account? Especially when it has my personal information posted? There is NO such policy advertised when you make an account! And since Anupamsr was NEVER blocked, and it is evident that this account was created because I was unable to login through previous account, it is definitely NOT a case of sock sockpuppetry. Please do not refer to Scheibenzahl as a sockpuppet. It is me! Anupam.--

Scheibenzahl

18:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I accept that I had indeed started a forum to discuss Wikipedia activities.

User:Nadirali and his cabal. This was supposed to be one of those hundreds of other secret single purpose mailing lists. User:Rama's Arrow has had the knowledge of existence of this forum since January 2007. Hkelkar joined the forum sometime in January. I emphasize that I have on many counts helped track and block Hkelkar's sock's on account of my intimate knowledge of his activities, User:Rama's Arrow and User:Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington

will vouch for me on this.

Lastly I'd say, I have never acted as a meatpuppet on behalf of anybody plus I have never ever acted like a belligerent POV-pushing troll. I'd ask anyone linking me to User:Hkelkar or User:Bakasuprman's disruptive activities to provide any evidence that shows me participating in their disruptive behaviour. On their failure to do so, i ask them to clear my name which they have so wantonly besmirched. Amey Aryan DaBrood^© 17:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I would like to ask the same. My editing pattern is not at all related to Baka, D-boy, or Hkelkar. Thus, how come I am blocked while you are not? How come you demanding me of proof to show you are related while I am being blocked without even being able to prove that I am not?--

Scheibenzahl

18:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I would like to know what postings/mails/edits were related to me being a part of forum that you started and Hkelkar joined? How am I supposed to know that such a forum has Hkelkar in it? And how am I supposed to back off from it when you are the administrator and has actively rejected my questions? It just does not make absolutely any sense for me to get blocked while you are the puppeteer of this whole show, you, are free and making comments as if a third party to whole issue.--

Scheibenzahl

18:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I frankly dont knwo why you were blovked, but you for one have misrepresented my role in the whole affair. Nirav has had knowledge about my association with such a forum for ages now. Amey Aryan DaBrood^© 18:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I just demand fair treatement! If Nirav has knowledge of your being involved in such forum, how come my involvement deserve a block? You are the administrator, you sent me the invitation, and now you are telling me that you have no knowledge why I am blocked? I want a fair statement as to why I am blocked. Sockpuppetery is not a violation, because it DID NOT HAPPEN! I never pretended I was NOT Anupamsr, I never edited by both accounts, simply because I couldn't. If due to technical grounds one is unable to login, and thus creates a new account, no reasonable administrator can come around and say - "you are a sockpuppet, and are banned indefinitely" and then reduce it to 2 weeks and act as if it is my fault! It is actively a mistake on

Scheibenzahl

18:17, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Dude cool down! I agree there has been a mistake. He probably suspected you of sockpuppeting. Its best if you would discuss this with Nirav. I think some people can provide explainations via email. The evidence i've seen will be too divisive and disruptive. Amey Aryan DaBrood^© 18:23, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Lastly i havent ever invited anyone besides the three users i mentioned. I appears that given the system, my email address was the address of the forum. Amey Aryan DaBrood^© 19:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

May be. All I knew was that mail came from your email address. I was never a participator to know who is the actual admin or not. I joined it because invitation came from you. I requested you the remove me. I was not removed, and thus it is not my fault at all.--

Scheibenzahl

19:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Scheibenzahl (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log

))

---

Request reason:

I want to contest this block! The decision is taken without my consent and is wrong! I am being mistakenly framed for something I did not do! I promise to not edit any article until the period of block is over --Scheibenzahl 15:56, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As you promised not to edit any article until the block is over, there's no reason to unblock you. — Yamla 18:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your request for unblocking makes no sense at all. A block is meant to prevent you from editing any pages on Wikipedia except for your own talk page. Why do you need to be unblocked if you promise not to edit any article during the next two weeks? --  Netsnipe  ►  17:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

By article I did not mean Talk page. The block has been granted without even telling me about my faults. I have been blocked because I have been grouped with banned users and POV pushers. It is incorrect because I have never indulged into any POV pushing. I know about the proofs the blocking administrator had, and I know that while blocking me he has jumped the gun. I would like to contest it on proper grounds. I have no history of incivility or anything, and I need to prove myself that I am not a disruptive editor and never have been. Any one can look into my contribution as

User:Scheibenzahl and User:Anupamsr

and come to the same conclusion. Thus I demand to be unblocked.

I am not convinving enough, please tell me. I have solid basis for my arguments.--

Scheibenzahl

17:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Unblock

Y

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): After a detailed look at your case, and the fact that a number of highly respectable editors and admins are vouching for you, I will unblock you. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 20:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC) Request handled by: Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 20:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Autoblock

Y	Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 129.69.36.89 lifted or expired. Request handled by: Kuru talk 23:14, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Should be good now - please confirm. Kuru ^talk 23:14, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Your mail

I have posted a message to RA regarding your mail, asking him to consider shortening your block. Since he has unblocked you now anyway, that's without consequence now. I do hope you take this seriously all the same: It would have been arguable enough to give you a temporary block of a week or so for disruptive behaviour: rudra has shown this edit as an example where you just mindlessly join a revert war of "your team", obviously without even looking into the matter. You must understand that you are responsible for your own edits, and that it is a bad idea to join a trolling campaign simply because it supports the gist of your opinions. If you use multiple accounts, make sure to state up front that you are the same user, and do not use them fraudulently. Otherwise, you risk that you'll be blocked again as an unmasked sockpuppeteer the next time we have to take measures against Hkelkar & cronies (I have no doubt they'll be back with a vengeance, they have made very clear that they do not know when to leave good enough alone). You are most welcome to continue editing honestly and within policy, and I am looking forward to collaborating with you in good faith.