User talk:Hölderlin2019

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Hölderlin2019, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Nittawinoda (talk) 16:10, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Routledge a non-academic publisher?[edit]

About this edit: Are you sure that Routledge is a non-academic publisher?

I agree that the reference is not primarily concerned with the main topic of the article, so it is not an ideal tertiary source about the ongoing "debate", but Olson is an academic scholar who is far from propagating "fringe crankery". Please read the passage from the source [1]. Olson 1) starts with the mainstream view, then 2) describes the Indus-Valley-to-Vedic theory, and finally 3) describes a third position that suggest "mutual cultural influence". However, only the second part was quoted (more or less verbatim), which makes it appear as if Olson defends the Indigenous Aryans bunk. The only thing Olson can be blamed for is that he portrays the dispute between the scholarly mainstream view and the ideologically motivated Indigenous Aryans "theory" as if these positions were on equal footing. I'll reinsert the source at the end of the paragraph, but leave the quoted text out, which was redundant anyway. –Austronesier (talk) 15:53, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 17:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Salvator, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salvador (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:18, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you edited under another account?[edit]

If so, please identify those accounts. I find your editing patterns strange. You pop up on pages that you've never edited before only to revert me. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 15:50, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. To my knowledge, I’ve only reverted two of your edits, both of which consisted of undue lede additions. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 19:07, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain how you came to revert edits on those pages shortly after I did. Do you just happen to watchlist those two articles that you had never edited before? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 21:23, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I recently visited the Kushner article because I wanted to read it. I was struck by the inappropriateness of the lede — as were several other editors. Rereading the Kushner article, I became curious as to whether or not you were generally prone to inserting policy-violating ot otherwise undue material in leads generally. I’ll note that the reverts I made were backed by multiple others in both articles. You should take care to avoid infusing your POV so nakedly into your editing. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 21:39, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DS alert[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

You must completely refrain from doing WP:IDONTLIKEIT-based removals like here, here, here and elsewhere. Siddsg (talk) 05:44, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You must completely refrain from editing in topics you evidently know nothing about, particularly given your recent history of being admonished for edit warring on articles on which discretionary sanctions are in place. My removing the ‘quote’ from the articles on Hinduism and homosexuality has nothing to do with my personal preferences, and everything to do with the fact that the quote in question appears nowhere in the actual text of the Rigveda. You are welcome to demonstrate to me where I am in error by linking to the *actual* passage in the running text of the Rigveda which contains the quote I removed, *or* to a scholarly work by a Sanskritist documenting the passage with a translation (you should start with Jamison & Brereton). If you cannot (and you won't be able to - it's actually a quote from an entirely unrelated document), the quote will remain out of the articles. Frankly, even the form of the quote being cited - Vikruti Evam Prakriti establishes that the quoter is unfamiliar with Sanskrit, since the syllabic r̥ is transliterated in two different ways, which is not an error a Sanskritist would make. To say nothing of the translation itself, which is off.
The statement I removed from the article mleccha misrepresents the source, which does not make anachronistic claims about whether or not ancient cultic practies meet the standards of *modern* Hindu practice. I've revised it to reflect the source. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Stop icon

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

See WP:IDHT and WP:DE especially when you make erroneous claims[2][3] even when the added sources are supporting the text. [4][5] Your reverts came after getting reverted over the same problem earlier and you were notified on your talk page about it and even after one other editor reverted you. Though it seems that you haven't read WP:IDONTLIKEIT, I would recommend you to read WP:RGW as well. Siddsg (talk) 10:33, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you able to link to the actual verse in the text of the Rig Veda, or provide an academic source from a Sanskritist, establishing the presence of the quote in the Rig Veda? I’m not righting great wrongs; I’m simply pointing out that there is no support whatsoever for the existence of this phrase in the Rig Veda in the academic literature dealing with the Rig Veda itself. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 10:50, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One of the two sources is from Ashgate Publishing which is an academic book and journal publisher. No need to say more. Siddsg (talk) 10:57, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a source by a *Sanskritist*; that's a source on queer theory, etc., which does not make it a reliable source for claims about Sanskrit texts, especially since they themselves have not sourced the claim. Can you explain why this passage appears nowhere in the text of the Rigveda, and why it is not present in any of the academic sources on the Rig Veda, such as Witzel's, or Jamison & Brereton? Hölderlin2019 (talk) 11:00, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They have no expertise in LGBT history by a long shot that's why they don't bother. But nonetheless, a simple google search shows me gazillions of reliable sources supporting the information so all you can do now is that you can read WP:OR. Siddsg (talk) 11:06, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You are suggesting that LGBT scholars who cannot read Sanskrit, and who make a claim about the existence of a passage that is not supported by any of the actual scholars on Sanskrit, are more reliable on translations of Sanskrit than the actual Sanskrit scholars themselves? Also, I don't understand why you're unwilling to seach the database yourself and show me where the verse occurs. I provided you with a link; it'd shut me up *very* quickly if you could just link to the actual verse which contains the text in question. Monier-Williams categorically states that the words don't appear in the text Hölderlin2019 (talk) 11:08, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Unwilling" because of WP:OR. If your position holds any merit then it should be easy for you to cite an "academic" source supporting it, just like you have been already told on the article's talk page. Siddsg (talk) 11:17, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've just cited Monier-Williams, and Jamison and Brereton, which you claim aren't authoritative on Sanskrit or the Rig Veda because they have no expertise in LGBT history (!) - Bloomfield & Sastri also supports my position. I've mentioned all of these on the article's talk page. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 11:21, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see this is a purely WP:CIR issue then given you still don't understand the very basics. Noting that you are already engaging in blatant WP:CANVASSING[6][7][8] I am giving you a final warning now that if you engaged in further disruption then you will be reported accordingly. Siddsg (talk) 12:06, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it’s a CIR issue, but not in the way you might suspect. I’ve pinged a number of editors who specialize in India and Sanskrit-related articles; I have no idea what sort of stance they’ll take. I merely want their thoughts. Incidentally, I attach no importance whatsoever to your “warnings”. Do go ahead and “report” me, and keep in mind WP:Boomerang. I trust you’re enjoying the academic sourcing I’ve provided.
Now forgive me while I laugh my ass off at the levels of Dunning-Kruger irony present in you citing WP:CIR. Do refamiliarize yourself with this part: “ the ability to read sources and assess their reliability. Editors should familiarize themselves with Wikipedia's guidance on identifying reliable sources and be able to decide when sources are, and are not, suitable for citing in articles“ — competence certainly is required, and, in this context, you unequivocally lack it. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 12:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement[edit]

There is a report I have filed against you per above discussion. Siddsg (talk) 13:27, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm MRRaja001. I noticed that you recently removed content from Narayana without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. MRRaja001 (talk) 09:15, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia[edit]

Smile emoji Hi Hölderlin2019! Thank you for your edits to Amrita. It looks like you've copied or moved text from Ambrosia into that page, and while you are welcome to re-use the content, Wikipedia's licensing requires that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. If you've copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 14:48, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Koothali Nair moved to draftspace[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Koothali Nair. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources and it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:20, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Komath moved to draftspace[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Komath. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:22, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kalliat moved to draftspace[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Kalliat. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:22, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

C.V. Ranganathan moved to draftspace[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to C.V. Ranganathan. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:23, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 19[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kadathanadu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malabar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023[edit]

Information icon Hello, Hölderlin2019. I noticed that your recent edit to C. P. Ramaswami Iyer added a link to an image on an external website or on your computer, or to a file name that does not exist on Wikipedia's server. For technical and policy reasons it is not possible to use images from external sources on Wikipedia. Most images you find on the internet are copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia, or their use is subject to certain restrictions. If the image meets Wikipedia's image use policy, consider uploading it to Wikipedia yourself or request that someone else upload it. See the image tutorial to learn about wiki syntax used for images. Thank you. - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 09:43, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Nambudiri, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 20:04, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warning icon Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Nambudiri, you may be blocked from editing. - Arjayay (talk) 20:17, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Half the sources are already in the article; it's abundantly clear that you have no domain expertise whatsoever. Now, you could have asked, in the event I was somehow capable of typing hypertechnical descriptions in keeping with the literature, but you instead decided to wipe out my transposition of a summary from the K school of math. The obvious inference is that WP:COMPETENCEISREQUIRED.

Once I have the balance of the prose correct, I will re-add in the sources that already exist in the page. In the interim, find a workgroup competent on any of the germane matters and defer to them, since you clearly lack the competence to even understand what the article was initially saying. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 20:22, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So let's stop by one of the India or Caste or Sanskrit workprojects and see what their take on you ignoring sources already in the article are in order to prevent a more comprehensive improvement of it are. Shall we? Can I expect an apology and complete rollback when you're done demonstrating that you can't even trace the initial claims to already linked sources? Why are you so demonstrably editing outside of your depth? Hölderlin2019 (talk) 20:28, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Hölderlin2019! Your additions to V. K. Krishna Menon have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:09, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you able to actually identify these alleged instances of copying from the article you cite? Hölderlin2019 (talk) 16:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The matching content was found in this article. Here is a link to the CopyPatrol report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what was found by the detection service. The remainder I found manually. For example I remove the wording "acolyte, close colleague and occasional foil" — Diannaa (talk) 20:57, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page C. V. Viswanatha Sastri, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:59, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 22[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited V. K. Krishna Menon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Casey.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Komath[edit]

Information icon Hello, Hölderlin2019. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Komath, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:05, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Kalliat[edit]

Information icon Hello, Hölderlin2019. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kalliat, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Koothali Nair[edit]

Hello, Hölderlin2019. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Koothali Nair".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. plicit 00:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

V. N. Srinivasa Rao moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, V. N. Srinivasa Rao, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Maliner (talk) 01:36, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree wholeheartedly. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 03:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not repeatedly create the same page[edit]

You already recreated it twice (once, twice) after it got draftified. Please do not repeatedly create the same page under variants of a title. Work on your draft, submit it to AfC, and then create redirects to it once it's in mainspace. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 02:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not create drafts under draftspace, and did not do so there. Do not move my pages. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 03:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, V. n. Srinivasa Rao[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, V. n. Srinivasa Rao. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – V. N. Srinivasa Rao. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at V. N. Srinivasa Rao. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. AusLondonder (talk) 03:06, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The entire piece has been my work throughout: I simply do no accomodate domain-inexpert patrollers who mark perfectly substantial drafts as needing to me moved to draftspace. Direct your criticisms there. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 03:40, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 20[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited C. Sivaramamurti, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FRAS.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to T. Rangachari, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 23:31, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please take care to distinguish substantive edits from "test edits", so that I don't need to roll back your thoroughly inexplicable reversions. Thanks. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 23:40, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at C. V. Runganada Sastri, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 04:56, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to condescend, please don't fail to miserably by demonstrating a total unfamiliarity with the actual sources in question. Rolled back. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 05:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you familiar with Wikipedia:Inline citation and WP:V? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:03, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warning icon Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at C. V. Runganada Sastri, you may be blocked from editing. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop; if you continue to exhibit an extreme lack of WP:COMPETENCE, you *will* be blocked from editing. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 05:03, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let's start here. His father, Anantharama, was reputed to be one of the greatest Sanskrit scholars of the day, in the manner of his grandfather and great-grandfather, but initially could not afford to have him educated. Do you have a source for this? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:06, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Take your pick; it's a very well-documented story in the relevant literature.
Calamur Viravalli Runganatha Sastri was born on February 15, 1820, at Calamur Village in  North Arcot District. With his thorough grounding in Vedic lore from his father Anantharama Sastri, he became an erudite Sanskrit scholar. Financial distress drove the family to Chittoor, the district headquarters. The father took an Ijara (contract as per Islamic finance) under the government. Unable to pay the lease amount, he landed in civil jail. Runganatha’s grandfather’s annual ceremony was nearing.  Seeing his mother wailing, the 16-year-old-boy made an epoch-making decision that changed the course of his future. He went to the collector’s office, requested the release of his father for a day, offering to take his place in jail. Stunned, the collector let off both the father and son on the condition that they return after the ceremony. The pithrus, (spirits of departed ancestors according to Hindu philosophy) pleased, must have blessed young Runganatha. The rest of his story is history.
Hölderlin2019 (talk) 05:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you planning to cite them in the article for other editors to verify or are you just going to keep adding content without citing sources? Btw, you need to cite the book with the relevant page number. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:28, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Virtually all the context I include is cited; I'm working concurrently on multiple related articles. What is helpful if for someone to chase up citations if they feel each line needs to be autistically individuated. What is unhelpful? When you make risibly false claims of OR and blank large sections of text not because you actually can sustain an authentic belief of rampaging OR, but because your particular peeve-meter overflows.
The latter tendency is destructive to Wikipedia. Both the sources I cite above I've already cited, by the way; they're not suddenly pulled out of nowhere defensively.
I strongly suggest you go find a more productive use of your time, or at least a weaker target. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 05:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any content that will be challenged will need inline citations, per WP:V. WP:BURDEN: the burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Don't worry, as any unsourced content will be removed unless you provide a citation. You seem to be using a lot of sources from the WP:RAJ era, which are not accepted in Wikipedia. You working on creating multiple poorly sourced articles in a hurry is not Wikipedia's problem, as no one has a deadline here.
And according to your user page, if you are C. V. Karthikeyan, you have a conflict of interest in editing/creating these articles. I will be raising this issue with WP:COIN unless you disclose your conflict of interest and follow what's on WP:COI. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:53, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
> Any content that will be challenged will need inline citations, per WP:V. WP:BURDEN: the burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Don't worry, as any unsourced content will be removed unless you provide a citation.
No, that has never been Wikipedia practice, and occurs almost exclusively where a strong suspicion exists that a user is wantonly introducing specious material. Given that that is demonstrably not the case here, any further talk from you about "will be removed" will find you directed to any of a number of admins I can think of who can and will reorient your priorities. Your instincts have already misfired really, really badly - you thought perfectly widely accepted information was not only unsupported OR, but PROMO to boot. Your prejudices are your own; if you attempt to inflict them on me... don't worry.
> You seem to be using a lot of sources from the WP:RAJ era, which are not accepted in Wikipedia
Well, if that *were* true, it'd still be nonsense, since an essay tucked away in Sitush's userpage is not authoritative. That said, I do look forward to your explanation of how, say:
Jagadeesan, P. (1990). Marriage and Social Legislations in Tamil Nadu. Elatchiappen Publications.
Oddie, Geoffrey A. (1979). Social Protest in India: British Protestant Missionaries and Social Reforms, 1850-1900. Manohar. ISBN 978-0-8364-0195-0
History of Christianity in India: pt. 2. Tamilnadu in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Church History Association of India. 1990.
The 'most enlightened Indian' and a polymath unrivalled - Press Institute". pressinstitute.in. 24 June 2023. Retrieved 21 March 2024
These seem like quintessentially Raj sources?
How about these?
> You working on creating multiple poorly sourced articles in a hurry is not Wikipedia's problem,
as no one has a deadline here
.
There you go again; none of my multiple articles is poorly sourced. The only problem here is
you
, as I can continue to exhaustively demonstrate.
> And according to your user page, if you are C. V. Karthikeyan, you have a conflict of interest in editing/creating these articles. I will be raising this issue with
WP:COIN
unless you disclose your conflict of interest and follow what's on
WP:COI
.
Jeraxmoira🐉
(
talk
) 05:53, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
What's this? Lost on one front so trying to attack on another: I'm not CV Karthikeyan, and while your willingness to take a supreme court justice to task over nonexistent policy violations will remain an enduring moment of amusement for me, I've a better idea. You simply leave me alone, the way I leave you alone. If you think something *egregious* is taking place, ping someone like Joshua Jonathan to investigate. Give an orphan a cupcake when you show yourself erring, to yourself, again.
If you would prefer to harass me with
this weak of a hand
, well, have at it. I'll enjoy it, but consider what is in the interests of
Wikipedia
.
Hölderlin2019 (talk) 06:14, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Aryama Sundaram, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it.

The Show preview button is right next to the Publish changes button and below the edit summary field.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Isaidnoway (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warning icon Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Chinny Krishna, you may be blocked from editing. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:24, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at L. A. Govindaraghava Aiyar. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:26, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Hölderlin2019 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:25, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion[edit]

This page should not be speedily deleted because (your reason here) --Hölderlin2019 (talk) 06:40, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My usage of my userpage to mock up a future article I may wish to create or enrich is perfectly legitimate, and appears to be the latest toothless episode in the nominator's extraordinary vendetta against me. ````

Contested deletion[edit]

This page should not be speedily deleted because (your reason here) --Hölderlin2019 (talk) 06:42, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further to my initial contestation, the idea that I use Wikipedia as a private webhost and am inactivity in actual mainspace is demonstrably bonkers. Is there a mechanism by which the designator can be sanctioned for malicious tagging? Hölderlin2019 (talk) 06:42, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aryama Sundaram[edit]

Per your request, evidence of your poorly formatted citation, as seen here. Do you see the mistakes you made?

If you are unsure on how to properly format citations, please see - Help:Referencing for beginners with citation templates. You really shouldn't create citation errors, and then expect others to fix your mistakes, clean up after yourself. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 15:33, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are unduly traumatized by the airo/citer misfiring, a far more productive contribution to WP would be yes, for you to fix them yourself, if they offend you so. Certainly removing cited content that nobody contests the legitimacy of is the worst of all options. You REALLY shouldn’t do that.

By the way, I asked for a policy. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 15:42, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, clean up after yourself, don't expect others to clean up after you.

So no policy?

And it is considered disruptive behavior to deliberately introduce citation errors back into the article after you were notified of your mistakes. Please also read WP:BATTLEGROUND and competence is required. Isaidnoway (talk) 16:03, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s certainly considered disruptive editing to blank sections of legitimate text that WP relies on because you are dissatisfied with a bot’s clerical filings. I don’t need to read BATTLEGROUND or COMPETENCE; after all, I’m generally minding my own business and competently constructing enriching prose, while you think it apposite to remove text wholesale because the bot has cited the text in a manner repugnant to your frankly irrelevant sensibilities. I suggest you cease trying and failing to condescend, and leave me in peace unless you detect something actually problematic, as opposed to this present outbreak of Bureaucrat Syndrome, which will not be indulged. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 16:22, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NAM[edit]

Don't edit war.

I have addressed your concern with this edit. Menon coined a similar term but he was not the founder of the NAM. Capitals00 (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only sense in which he wasn't the founder is in deference to his boss, Nehru. No account of the genesis of the NAM has Menon as anything other than the instigator, as was commonly the case for Indian foreign relations matters while Nehru was PM. How familiar are you with the secondary literature? Hölderlin2019 (talk) 19:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 27[edit]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Mylapore clique
added links pointing to CIE, CSI, KCSI and KCIE
C. P. Ramaswami Iyer
added a link pointing to Delegate
Calamur
added a link pointing to Institution of Engineers
Calamur Mahadevan
added a link pointing to Narayana Rao

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mocharla Ramachandra Rao[edit]

Hello Hölderlin2019,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Mocharla Ramachandra Rao for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Wikisteveb4 (talk) 14:06, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 3[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited C. V. Kumaraswami Sastri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Presidency College.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Advocata per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Advocata. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
bradv 01:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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).

Hölderlin2019 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Could the ‘abusive’ use of the accounts be clarified? Advocata is not a sock of mine, being my wife’s account, , but I have occasionally inadvertently edited under it and vice versa since one doesn’t always check who is logged in. I have never denied this. I can’t recall ever using her account to create an “illusion of support”. For what? Hölderlin2019 (talk) 02:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per below and lack of response to same in over a week. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


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.

(Non-administrator comment) Note to reviewing admin: The 'abusive' use was reported here - Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1151#Reporting User:Hölderlin2019 for the repeated violation of WP:BLP and WP:V as well as engaging in Meatpuppetry with User:Advocata. Hölderlin2019 is a long term user(11 years?) and is very much familiar with the multiple accounts policy.
Hölderlin2019, while you didn't deny it, you also didn't accept or disclose it either during or before the ANI report. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 10[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Satyendra Prasanna Sinha, 1st Baron Sinha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Walker.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:C.V. Ranganathan[edit]

Information icon Hello, Hölderlin2019. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:C.V. Ranganathan, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:06, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]