Български | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Lietuvių | 한국어 | Magyar | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Suomi | Svenska | Türkçe | 简体中文 | The main embassy page
|
||
ukexpat ( talk) 14:58, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Please could you discuss any proposed changes to Autobiography of a Yogi on the talk page for that article and attempt to obtain consensus for them. Thanks. - Sitush ( talk) 13:53, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Autobiography of a Yogi. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
OK, you've had enough explanations and guidance. There are at least three other contributors involved and they are all discussing etc. If you revert again without obtaining consensus then I will seek to have you blocked from editing for a period in order to minimise disruption. Sitush ( talk) 06:41, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
I have said that I will be away over this weekend. I cannot tell you to do anything or to desist from doing anything, but I would advise you that letting things calm down for a few days and collecting your thoughts etc might be A Good Thing. As far as I am aware, there are no plans to terminate Wikipedia any time soon and the article is not a biography of a living person, so there really isn't any need to rush around. - Sitush ( talk) 13:53, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the content and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you.
You have just attacked me and others again in your message above. My tolerance of your behaviour is wearing very thin now. Sitush ( talk) 14:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:What appears at Google search when you look for "Autobiography of a Yogi".jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Google search image of Autobiography of a Yogi.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Google Search Autobiography of a Yogi.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I received an e-mail about this issue and answered it. Anyway, I am not using this media. Thank you. Tat Sat ( talk) 15:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
You have been warned previously about both forum shopping and attacking other editors, yet you continue to do so with edits such as this. If I find that you do this on one more occasion, I'll seek administrator intervention. It is a particularly bizarre situation given that it was you who initiated a discussion at WP:DRN. - Sitush ( talk) 04:16, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Sitush, I started a discussion at WP-DRN only because I was not familiar with Wikipedia. Now I know better. I should have gone straight to another instance, but I am happy with the help that's been provided. As you can see the article of Autobiography of a Yogi has wrong informations, I am not talking about subjective matters. For instance, among other problems, the name of the Publisher of the first edition is wrong, the book cover that illustrates the article is copyrighted by SFR, the ISBN belongs to a recent SFR's edition, the first edition of the book did not have ISBN, etc. I understand you are not happy since you were involved with the editing of the page. As for Magog the Ogre, on July 4th -- before all this dispute started -- I received an e-mail from MediaWikiMail about a public domain file which I uploaded -- that was wrongly marked for deletion because someone denounced that "perhaps" it was copyrighted in India. It was sent from Magog the Ogre and I was answering back to him, further clarifying this imbroglio about Autobiography of a Yogi images. I do not believe this can be considered "forum shopping". As you can see in the media copyright question page, the book to which the file belongs was not copyrighted by anyone from Yogananda's family, the only possibility (in India). Please verify if you can correctly accuse me of forum shopping before threatening to look for administrator intervention. Thank you. Tat Sat ( talk) 12:16, 18 July 2012 (UTC) PS Just to prove what I am saying:
"Dear Tat Sat, The Wikimedia Commons page User talk:Tat Sat has been changed on 4 July 2012 by Magog the Ogre, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tat_Sat for the current revision."
Honestly, a part of the problem is that you are flying around at breakneck speed without seemingly spending any time reading up about how we operate. Lord knows, you have been given enough links to policy etc in the last few days: are you actually reading any of them? And did you bear in mind my earlier comment that this really is a fairly non-urgent issue - if it takes a few days or even weeks to sort out, Wikipedia will still be around. - Sitush ( talk) 12:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
— Mr. Stradivarius on tour ( have a chat) 07:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Autobiography of a Yogi". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 4 August 2012.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by
MediationBot (
talk) on
behalf of the Mediation Committee.
16:38, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
The request for formal mediation of the dispute concerning Autobiography of a Yogi, in which you were listed as a party, has been accepted by the Mediation Committee. The case will be assigned to an active mediator within two weeks, and mediation proceedings should begin shortly thereafter. Proceedings will begin at the case information page, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Autobiography of a Yogi, so please add this to your watchlist. Formal mediation is governed by the Mediation Committee and its Policy. The Policy, and especially the first two sections of the "Mediation" section, should be read if you have never participated in formal mediation. For a short guide to accepted cases, see the "Accepted requests" section of the Guide to formal mediation. You may also want to familiarise yourself with the internal Procedures of the Committee.
As mediation proceedings begin, be aware that formal mediation can only be successful if every participant approaches discussion in a professional and civil way, and is completely prepared to compromise. Please contact the Committee if anything is unclear.
For the Mediation Committee,
AGK
[•]
12:43, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
(Delivered by
MediationBot,
on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
Hi Tat Sat. Sorry for the very long delay in resolving the dispute over at Autobiography of a Yogi. I have just received word from the Mediation Committee that ItsZippy has agreed to mediate the dispute. However, ItsZippy isn't a full member of the Mediation Committee yet, so we need all the editors involved to indicate that they are willing to have him as a mediator. Would you be ok with ItsZippy mediating the dispute? Please leave your answer over at the mediation page, and let me know if you have any questions about the mediation process. Thanks — Mr. Stradivarius ( have a chat) 15:27, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Tat Sat. I've invited members of WikiProject Books to look in at Autobiography of a Yogi. You are of course completely correct, WP Books sets the standards for what should be described and depicted in the infobox of an article about a book, and that should be exclusively the first edition of the book. I've corrected the infobox to conform with WP Books standards, and cited the publisher of the first edition to the US Library of Congress. Hopefully you will have less trouble keeping it that way with WP Books overlooking the situation. Yworo ( talk) 00:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I propose that we start a new version of the Autobiography of a Yogi page based on the template at WikiProject Books. We could place it in a subpage of the current article, or in your sandbox or in mine. If in either of the latter, only those invited to edit it would be able to participate. If in a subpage of the current article, everyone involved would be able to edit it, which might not be what we desire. We could integrate all the content which was removed from the current article and start adding the necessary citations to support the full text, though better organized according to the template, possibly reducing the total amount of coverage of the contents of the book itself. Once we finish it, we could have an admin "merge" it into the edit history. Let me know what you think of this proposal. Yworo ( talk) 16:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Is there any chance that you could reformat your proposed lead section etc at the Autiobgraphy talk page? It might be a bit tricky but it would be more clear if it was incorporated into the "Lead section" section. - Sitush ( talk) 21:45, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm hoping that the pair of you can come to some sort of agreement regarding the lead: you have both made constructive suggestions, which is a good start - I appreciate it. - Sitush ( talk) 22:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Please could you take a look at User_talk:Red_Rose_13#Talk_page_reformat. I am hoping that this meets with your approval but, as I say there, revert me if it does not. - Sitush ( talk) 03:06, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Noblesse Oblige (book), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Collection ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Dorothy Gilman.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 13:51, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi Tat Sat! I don't do adoption, as it makes it sound like we're not peers. Which we are. What I am happy to do though is offer any help I can. Is there anything in particular I can assist with? :) - Bilby ( talk) 15:55, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Noblesse Oblige (book), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Fleming ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:57, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
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)
14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Tat Sat
I see the cover now shown on the article says it's the 1946
original, and its blue color seems to verify that. Can you tell me if it is and why it seems to take Acts of Congress to accomplish something so basic in Wikipedia? This sort of thimg goes on in many Wikipedia articles, I'm sure you know. Example: On Roswell Incident article: First the US military told the press it was a "flying disc" in their possession. Right away they corrected that to weather balloon (second explanation). In 1994 they put out a report saying it was most likely a specialized balloon for a Project Mogul (third explanation). About 1997 they added a fourth possibility, that crash dummies used in testing could have been what was seen (inconveniently the crash dummy testing didn't start in New Mexico until 5 years after the 1947 crash). Yet one editor refuses to permit the wording "Project Mogul was the government's third explanation for the incident." Thanks Moabalan ( talk) 11:54, 24 February 2018 (UTC)