Pl. be careful about exercising editor's administrator's rights. I am reverting vandals. Followers of Pandurang Shashtri want to kill old deciples and yet glorify Pandurang Shashtri & Swadhyay Parivar. I think, you are from Ahmedabad and should know this.

swadhyayee 17:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Wikipedia policy can be interpreted anyway. When Hemendra and others remove contents, you don't find it content dispute and have no objection. Check what is the contribution of Hemendra as an editor? Has been here only to remove facts about Swadhyay Parivar. Be fair and honest Aksi, pl. don't be carried away in haste. swadhyayee 01:58, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

અક્કીભાઈ અમે મહેનત કરીને કામ કરી રહ્યા છીએ ત્યારે આપ શ્રી કેમ દેશ્ગુજરાતની લીંક કાઢી નાંખી રહ્યા છો ?

અમારું કન્ટેન્ટ ઓરીજીનલ છે

કંટેંટ સાઈટ પર અવાઈલેબલ છે

કોઈનું નુકસાન કરતા નથી

કશું કમાતા નથી

ઉલટાનો પોતાનો ટાઈમ આપીએ છીએ ગુજરાતની નેટ પર પ્રેઝન્સ માટે

આવામાં વિકિપેડીયા પર આપ ગુજરાતી થઈને અમને મદદ કરો એવી આશા તો રાખીએ જ છીયે પણ ભઈ અમારી ઢગલાબંધ લીંકો રીમૂવ કરીને અમારી મહેનત પર શૂં કરવા પાણી ફેરવો છો? અમારો કેટલો ટાઈમ જાય છે લીંક રીસ્ટોર કરતા ?કમસેકમ આ તો બંધ કરો ?

અમે દોડાદોડ કરીને જે કંન્ટેન્ટ ભેગુ કરીએ છીએ એની પાછળની મહેનત વિશે જરા વિચારી જુઓ. અને એમાં તમને કશું ખોટું લાગતું હોય તો કહો, અમે તો હંમેશ એ સાંભળવા માટે આતુર હોઈએ છીએ.

તમને ખબર છે વીકીપીડીયાની દેશગુજરાતની લીંક દ્વારા ગુજરાતનો વિકાસ જોઈને ગુજરાતમાં કેટલું બધું નવું કામ કરવાની લોકોને પ્રેરણા મળી છે ?

ક્રુપયા હવે લીંક ડીલીટ કરવામાં નહીં પરંતુ આપની વગ અને આવડત દ્વારા ગુજરાતના હિતના આ કામમાં મદદ કરવાની રાખો ભાઈ એવી વિનંતી.

જય ગુજરાત જપન પાઠક

japanpathak@yahoo.com japanpathak@gmail.com—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.96.144.149 (talk • contribs).

(Translating the message for others to read. It is in Gujarati - Aksi_great (talk) 13:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)) - Brother Aksi, we are working hard, why are you removing links to deshgujarat.com? Our content is original, our content is available on the site, we aren't harming anyone and are not earning anything from it. We are spending our own time to increase the presence of Gujarat on the net. You are a Gujarati on wikipedia and we expected some help from you. But why did you remove numerous links and destroy our hard work? A large amount of time goes in restoring the links. At least stop removing them. We work hard to gather content. At least appreciate the hard work that goes behind it. If you have felt wronged, then please tell us. We are always eager to help. Do you know that by seeing the deshgujarat links on wikipedia, people will appreciate the growth of Gujarat and be inspired to do new work? We request you to stop deleting the links and help us in this work using your knowledge and experience. Victory to Gujarat. Japan Pathak. [reply]

Akasi, I think you are un-reasonable. Who removed the contents and links from Swadhyay Parivar? What's wrong in my writing on your talk page about vandal in response to your notice? Does Hemedra get merit for not approaching you on your talk page? What's your answer to Hemendra's contribution except removal of weblinks from Swadhyay Parivar? Do you call it regular editing and edit-war?

swadhyayee 14:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not seeing sense when you can't make out difference. swadhyayee 14:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it applicable to me only? Have you noticed, Hemendra removed web-links? I think you have some problem with some people and you would abuse your admin powers and influence. swadhyayee 14:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you notice since when these web-links existed on article page? Check, they are not incorporated by me. Hope you will be fair. swadhyayee 14:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have been asked to revert some things that have been deleted from the article by a user. I went to his page and you have discussed with him the the 3 revert rule. I understand. But looking at what the latest editor did to the article he has in his 'cleanup' delted fact tags and not cited. Deleted entire sections especially any contorversy. Links there where there. A very POV oriented edit. I really don't want to get involved to the point of reading up on the subject to truly know whats 'real' and whats not. It seems blatant, but just enough not to be to not want to jump in. What do you think? Should it be revert back to pre major edit status and talk page only concensus major edits? I await your reply. Thanks. --Xiahou 22:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Aksi great,

I'm really sorry to bother you with that again, but it seems very likely that user Dutybirds is a sockpuppet of Hkelkar (see recent history of India-Israel relations). Yes, again. I think it will never end. But at least when he sprouts here and there it is worth mentionning... Bye. TwoHorned 15:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was clear consensus to delete. Do you suggest I re-AFD it, or are you going to delete it because it gets 0 google hits. Its complete dabcruft. Btw, take a page out of dab's book and block 64.111.114.14 (talk · contribs), Rantacker (talk · contribs), Lingamswamy (talk · contribs). Since he can get away with blocking any Hindu SPA account he sees, you might as well block these SPA Islamofascist trolls as well.Bakaman 14:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the prompt action. It seems you are impartial on the matter, and I respect that. While assuming goof faith with all new accounts, I have practically given up on another prolific Hinduism contributor since Nobleeagle left, and Hkelkar's bakwaas. Dabcruft is a phenomena that I was witnessed for a while, characterized by Assumptions of bad faith, unilateral blocks and deletions against consensus, useless redirect creation, and namecalling. According to him I am a chatterbot from BJP headquarters or an angry ABCD (ABCD being American Born Confussed Desi).Bakaman 15:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I too would like to re-propose it for deletion. It should be obvious from my comments that I am not a sock of anybody, & have no particular relationship with those disputing over this and similar articles or with the ed. who gave the previous posting.--just a WP interested in NPOV.What are your suggestions for the most appropriate way to do it? I know I could ask for deletion review, but I think we might do better having a new discussion from the start. I am relying on your obvious impartiality. I do not think you closed in error, because it was indeed an illegitimate nomination.DGG 18:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aksi, that comment was directed at me, and I believe he has a more jaundiced view of me than any user except those trolls that explicitly voted to get me banned. Whatever the Rajput scandal was (I was not an editor then), I am not a Rajput (nor involved in tat fiasco), neither is any other user that Dab is currently in conflict with or was with when he accused me of being a BJP mindslave. His inability to keep cool, abuse of admin powers (has used rollback multiple times in content disputes and blocked Sbhushan (talk · contribs)), and patronization of trolls (Bhaisaab, TerryJHo, Ikonoblast/Holywarrior, Hornplease, Timothy Usher) make all such "excuses" null and void.Bakaman 19:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I re-Afd'd Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hindutva pseudoscience (2nd nomination).Bakaman 19:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you may want to speedy-close that one as obvious bad faith, and maybe warn Bakaman that he is close to blockable disruption these days. thanks, dab (𒁳) 09:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Actually I had just sent a message to Planemad before your response. Hopefully he has time. I have left a message for Mlpkr too. If I dont get a response, I will contact Nichalp.Dineshkannambadi 15:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is B.S. Just because these accounst may be from the same campus does not mean that they are from me. I have not violated the sock. Wiki Raja 15:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]