User talk:Giani g

License tagging for Image:300px-Indo-GreekKingdomMap.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:300px-Indo-GreekKingdomMap.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands 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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

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. 12:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Indo-Greek map

Hi Giani g, There are very few maps of the Indo-Greeks around. A map showing the territories and expansion of the Indo-Greeks, and which is broadly consistent with the challenged map, seems to be available in the Westermanns "Atlas der Welt Geschichte" (referred to me by Sponsanius, who was talking about the 1955 edition). Otherwise, the current map is an illustration of all the referenced material in the article (about 20 works, ancient to modern, from Europe to Asia), whether we talk about Saurastra (Strabo), or the occupation of territory towards Pataliputra (Boppearachchi, Bussagli, etc...). Best regards. PHG 18:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Calm Down!

Hi Devan no need to get volatile on me and this isn't the first time:

(RV - Umm, not using opinion. Using "Age of the Nandas and Mauryas" by Nilakantha Shastri. Greek and Aramaic were not the predominant languages of the Northwest, let's not imply that they were.)

Perhaps if you were more diplomatic, more people may value your opinion. I hope you need not be so confrontational in future.

Regards (Giani g 16:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC))

Hello Giani G,

Umm, I don't know why you think there was anything confrontational or volatile about my post, but rest assured that it is not. It is unfortunate that you saw it in such terms. For future reference, it would be diplomatic to clarify a post first before attempting an escalation.

If you would like to be party to a constructive dialogue, I am more than happy to oblige; however, please avoid the usage of ad hominem attacks so that we avoid lowering the debate and focus on the issues. Have care.

Best Regards,

Devanampriya

Hi Devan,

I only said that as your tone seems provocative at times especially when you use phrases such as "ummm yeh" or just blatantly deride someone elses edit as convoluted or ridiculous. I hope you understand and help contribute to the articles here. Regards, (Giani g 13:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC))

Hello Giani G,

I am glad we understand each other now. I assure you, it is not my intention to sound like Lumberg from office space. The "umm" is on account of confusion with some of the curious charges that are often levelled by yourself or your counterpart. Regardless, I am confident that we can move forward productively to improve these articles. If you have any questions regarding the subject matter, feel free to bring them up on my discussion page.

Regards,

Devanampriya

Re: Jingoism

Hello Giani G,

Actually, I was looking over that section. I didn't contribute to the historical comparison segment, and it doesn't really matter to me whether it stays or goes. But I know that there were some other contributors who were pretty passionate about that section (see discussion page talk: response to Blnguyen). You might want to discuss this with them first to head off another edit war.

Regards,

Devanampriya

Indo-Greek map

Thank you for your support Giani! PHG 20:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Giani. Thank you for your message. I am waiting for a scan of the map by Sponsianus, so that I can incorporate the outline into a new, comprehensively referenced map. Regards. PHG 06:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Classical Removed from HM stylistic origins

Hi Giani

Here's an explanation about the removing of classical from the stylistic origins. The influences of classical are not denied at all. Only the descendance from classical is denied. Well just read what I've written in the talk page

Frédérick Duhautpas 10:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Yamuna

Yeah it does. Read the quote. "The Yamuna was known after the campaigns of Seleucus". That absolutely does give the impression that he did campaign that far. Moreover, that little tidbit is of no relevance to this article. It is out of place. Hence, it is fanwank.

Devanampriya 01:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

George Galloway

Hi Giani. I notice that you restored the word 'far' to the description of Galloway's political views. I would be interested to know your reasons for this, as in my opinion, there are a number of points in his politics which seperate him from, and place him markedly to the right of, many others (including members of Respect) who might more accurately be described as 'far-left'. I'm thinking, for instance, of his apparent opposition to abortion and his refusal to accept no more than the average worker's wage - to name but two. Guy Hatton 15:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Indo-Greek kingdom

For your information, the article on the Indo-Greek kingdom is under FA review following a request by User:Devanampriya to User:Blnguyen. You may leave comment at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Indo-Greek Kingdom. Best regards PHG 19:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

FARC coming soon. Regards. PHG 11:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

We are now in the voting phrase at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Indo-Greek Kingdom. Regards. PHG 12:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Italiotis

Kalispera. I saw that you have deleted the description basileus and reiinstated the title king. Please allow me to explain you the change. The title bore by the hellenistic rulers was never king as king derives from the german word koenig ( a derivative from the first name of Carolus Magnus). Basileus is the accurate title which was used by alexander and his diadochi. Such was the impact of basileus word in the hellenistic world that years later when Augustus initiated the imperial period of Rome he was know in the east as basileus from the first moment and not princeps as his title used to be. King is the contemporary litteral translation in english of the word basileus, but basileus was the particular title. If you disagree please use my discussion page to adress any of your concerns. Nonetheless I will include the word basileus and i will include the word king next to it in braquets as the modern common translation. Please find here a site containing a tetradrachm of Seleucus. The inscription on the second side read: Seleucus Basileos http://cgi.ebay.com/AAH-Seleucus-I-Nicator-312-281-BC-Silver-tetradrachm_W0QQitemZ140160603623QQihZ004QQcategoryZ4738QQcmdZViewItem

Thanks a lot Italiotis 21:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

IP Vandalism

I have put in requests for page protection on all the pages that our ip vandal targets. It appears the requests have been granted. I reccomend keeping an eye on them all and once the protection expires if the edits continue to request protection again at WP:RFPP. Knowledgeum (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!, that has certainly saved me some time, perhaps I'll be able to get some real edits in at some point. [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 13:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to decline your most recent batch at RFPP; I hope you understand that this tactic isn't working and we need to deal directly with the user. If you put together a good SSP report, we can probably get it CU'ed and get a rangeblock. Tan ǀ 39 18:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll drop you a message if I need some help. [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 16:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Biased edits

it seems pretty clear that you are biased i wall always remove the disambaguation on mirpur unless you add it to srinagar too good bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nangparbat (talk • contribs) 17:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Three revert rule

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on K2. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Dpmuk (talk) 17:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nangparbat

Hello Giani g, regarding your sockpuppet accusation over Nangparbat, I just wanted to remind you that if the accuser doesn't request CheckUser for ten days, the report will be closed by an administrator. I don't remember seeing your request in the mentioned page. Thanks and have a good day.  S3000  ☎ 08:40, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Then since all the evidence is presented lets just wait for some administrator to have his/her say and take the necessary action. I guess that's all we can do for now.  S3000  ☎ 17:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Anyway since you were recommended by Tanthalas39 to submit the report, why not seek his advice since he's an administrator.  S3000  ☎ 17:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

As per the resolution if you see Nangparbat or his ip's report the ip on this page User:Hersfold/Vandal watch under the correct section, keep the ip adresses in order and in the same group when you add a new one, and the ip will be blocked. Knowledgeum :  Talk  18:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Dont Ignore

Hi Giani g its your freind the dynamic ip how do you do anyways lets get it on First give me a reason for inserting disputed claims to pakistani mountains whats even the point of including it on several peaks you dont allow others to say the same about your indian mountains so please explain the logic if there is any of inserting these claims on the mountains why not do the same to indian mountians im sure you will answer me instead of ignoring me and having sissy fits and reporting me. P.S it doesnt make any sense why your adding this to the articles you added this claim to K2 but other editors deleted it why not re insert there??? are you afraid of other unbiased editors or are you just doing this to wind up me its pretty lame if you think about. 86.158.239.250 (talk) 13:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.239.250 (talk) 09:41, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I told you to sign in too, repost your message under nangparbat, then I'll discuss this matter. [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 13:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

lol this the best you could do ive prooven my point your not prepared to discuss keep your biased rants on mountain pages to yourself.(i forgot the password of that account i made it in a hurry)86.158.239.250 (talk) 13:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.239.250 (talk) 13:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

No, it's just I don't feel as though I have to do anything for you, if you can't stick to the rules like everyone else, why should you be treated like everyone else. In that case make another account before your ip gets blocked, shouldn't take too long. [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 13:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

as i have said before if i make a account you will swiftly and weasely report me as a sock puppet (EVEN AS I EXPLAINED I HAVE A DYNAMIC IP WHICH I CANNOT CONTROL A MILLION TIMES) if your not prepared to remove your biased edits on masherbrum and gasherbrum then indian mountains across the LOC in india shall be named disputed also your breaking the rules of neautrality so your rants of vandalism have no substance cheers freind :)86.158.239.250 (talk) 13:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.239.250 (talk) 13:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

No as long as you behave, and act with courtesy and consensus, you will not be reported by anyone, plus bans aren't indefinite, your last ban on Nangparbat was only 48 hours, so you haven't really anything to lose. [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 13:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Consensus how on earth can you talk about consensus when you troll around editing pages such as k2 which was reverted by less bias editors and then go around randomly editing pakistani mountains inserting disputed claims when you dont even consult others on it you have no RIGHT to talk of consensus if you keep on editing without sources and most of all without asking others on what they feel about your inherently biased edits than i have the right to edit indian mountains cheers brother :| 86.158.239.250 (talk) 13:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC) can you reply quickly i do have a life outside of wikipedia you know thanks freind :) 86.158.239.250 (talk) 13:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Well you didn't ask anyone before you went editing all those pages, I was never involved in those articles till I caught your ip vandalising some history articles so all I did was revert some anon's POV. The consensus was already there, I REVERTED articles to their former agreed state, you changed them without discussing. Seriously I am here to help you, and if you're going to write in that tone, no one is going to listen to you, plus if you really want to do something about this matter, I suggest you do make an account. Life outside wiki? I dunno, you are a really persistent vandal, unless you were multitasking I guess. [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 13:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Let me jog your memory first you edited k2 which was reverted then you targeted gasherbrumIV i simply reverted your source less claims which really made you angry at the end of the day unless these claims of disputed are put into indian mountains there will always be problems or choose NPOV remove these claims from pakistani mountains as i have said whenever i make account or when i restart my computer the IP changes which gives sly editors a chance to pounce unless you want to talk to the CEO of bt about on why this happens this case is closed remember neutrality is the key cheers Giani g :() 86.158.239.250 (talk) 13:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Nah you edited K2 first, here's the version after your first edit to it, I actually came across you when you edited Indus Valley Civilisation, as for source less claims, it was only a click away at the BBC website (which you also used) or Indian government website. In any case it doesn't matter if you have a dynamic IP, just get an account, 0therwise people who do have a bias will write you off as anon troll and neutral people won't care for what you say. [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 13:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

anyways Giani g im going to use this mountain template thing to level thie bias against pakistan which means indian mountains on indian loc side will also be called disputed cheers anyways freind ps please do not revert any indian mountain edits as i have discussed this and its seems to be fair bye bye now.86.158.239.250 (talk) 14:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Well you're going the wrong way about it, btw you are blacklisted, if you're caught it's instant block, so let me know if you're interested in dialogue [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 14:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

what are you talking about i just said im working on a template are you ignorant as well as blinde template on mountains ever heard of it???? and this was dialogue in case you didnt notice 86.158.239.250 (talk) 14:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

yeh sure i'm the blind guy, you didn't actually edit the template if you look, just the talk page. [[User:Giani g|Giani g]] (talk) 14:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

sock

86.153.130.184 is a pro pakistani vandalizing articles. another user claimed he is a sock of a user called Nangparbat. please see [1] and [2]. help please. he is inserting pakistani argument everywhere n remove indian ones. he write administered near kashmir (india) n removes for pakistan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.111.31.145 (talk) 18:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)