Totaltully

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:47, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Please quote a verifiable source that Neil o Brien was the first to start a quiz in India.

The sources are already in the article. I'm not reposting them here. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Please refer to this better researched article - http://himalmag.com/Trivial-pursuit_nw4739.html

That source does not meet WP:Reliable sources guidelines, as it's an opinion piece written by a volunteer for a quiz club. I don't see how you can say it is well-researched, as the author doesn't cite any of his sources. It's pretty clear you've come here with an unyielding agenda, so the article will be protected for awhile. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:03, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Note: You can still make suggestions at the Quizzing talk page, but you can't just replace information with several good sources because you like one source better than the others. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:16, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:08, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Do not post on my talk page again regarding Quizzing in India. The discussion belongs on that article's talk page. If you'd like to suggest a major change, outline your reasons and present your sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:07, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Please refer to info on quizzes organized by the Min of I&B - http://books.google.com/books?id=cT5uAAAAMAAJ&q=quiz+india&dq=quiz+india&hl=en&ei=VUmrTLikO4i-sAPdn4m2Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDAQ6AEwATgK. Neil o Brien couldn't have fathered what was already a nascent trend in place in many locations.

Final warning

If you attempt to infer my personal identity again, you will be blocked indefinitely per WP:OUTING. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

What should the Quizzing on India stud talk about?s

I have absolutely no conflict of interest regarding O'Brien or any other content in that article; please refrain from making unfounded accusations in the future. If you look at the article's history, the bit about O'Brien was in there long before I ever edited it; I believe this diff shows the first introduction of it, though O'Brien had been mentioned in much earlier diffs. I didn't touch that article until years after that; I believe I stumbled across it when I was tracking spam links. The article had degraded into a long list of links for small quiz clubs and other promotional content. I removed all of that and preserved material that was verifiable through reliable sources. I've already given you the links for our WP:Verifiability and WP:Reliable sources policies. If you want to dispute any of the material on the page, post your suggestions on the article's talk page. If you can come up with reliable sources disputing O'Brien being the founder quiz. The Google books one is a start, though the snippet that displays doesn't give many details about it. If you can find several sources as described, I would not object to amending the material to read something along the lines of "though Neil O'Brien is commonly referred to as the father of quizzing in India, other sources suggest that local quiz clubs had been organized as early as <date>" That said, I think the main points about O'Brien and Basu is not that they invented quizzing, but that they were both instrumental in popularizing quizzing. As far as my "whims," my only agenda is to keep the page in line with our verifiability and reliable source guidelines, as well as to keep it free from spam and advertisements. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:07, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The article needlessly praises Neil O' Brien. Since you zealously guard the content and wont let anyone edit anything, please justify everything that is on the article. Where in any link does it say what Neil O Brien did to be regarded as the father of quizzing. How are you going to verify that. Mere platitudes are what you find on all those links, but there is no evidence of anything he did to justify that distinction. This very much gives the impression to anyone that reads the article, that this is some form of self promotion. Why should any one be bothered about What O Brien did in the UK or what he did later. He is known for being the first QM for the North Star quiz and that is it. Just because there is some trash on the article from an old edit, it doesn't have to stay there for ever. Please use the standards you are touting to judge the content that is actually there. Let me repeat once again, one of your links is by Derek, the son of Neil. Please explain how that can be taken as an objective source. That link mentions 3-4 QMs from Kolkatta as great QMs, but takes no effort to acknowledge other QMs in other cities. Hardly an objective article.

Further, the Bournvita Show started live, went on to Radio and then to TV. Here is the link that talks about this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bournvita_Quiz_Contest. And the 'grandfather of quizzing' is a bad joke by Marsden - not that i can expect you to suss that.

Please explain of what use is this article given the topic. The content is more relevant to a 'Origins of Quizzing'. How is the content relevant to Quizzing in India. Dont you think the article should talk about the popularity, differences from other forms of quizzing, formats, where a newbie find quizzing announcements. Chopping an article down to something irrelevant doesn;t count as good editorship, or does it?

On another note, please hand the editorship over to someone in Project India. This is better handled by someone who understands the context and has actually experienced some of this. Or you can actually answer my questions with something other than pointing me to the links on the article or elsewhere on wikipedia.

1. The article has two sentences about O'Brien. Not sure how that qualifies as "needless praise."
2. Sources that mention N O'Brien as the "father" of quizzing or something similar:
   1. Times of India says Neil Aloysius O'Brien, alias the Father of Quizzing himself.
   2. National Gems Higher Secondary School Not an ideal source, though it does say The 9th of December, 2009, saw the commencement of a novel quiz programme in honour of the father of quizzing in India, Mr. Neil O'Brien.
   3. Indian Express not sure how notable this source is, but it says Father Neil O’Brien was the doyen of quizzing in Kolkata
   4. The Hindu Quizzing in India started way back in 1967 when Neil O'Brien, regarded as the "Father of Indian quizzing"
3. You ask, Dont you think the article should talk about the popularity, differences from other forms of quizzing, formats, where a newbie find quizzing announcements. Chopping an article down to something irrelevant doesn;t count as good editorship, or does it? Popularity, differences, formats; sure, why not, as long as the information is properly sourced, neutral, etc. Announcements? No. Wikipedia is not a bulletin board. There are numerous other venues for that sort of thing.
4. I'm not "handing over" anything. I don't own the article; I just temporarily protected it since you came in with a clear agenda and refused to stop removing sourced material without discussing it first. One does not need to be an expert or insider in a topic to edit it. I've attempted to improve the article using high-quality sources as references. Alternatively, I could've blocked you for disruptive editing. I'll be happy to unprotect the article if you demonstrate on the article's talk page that you are willing to work with me and other editors to improve the article without bulldozering over sourced material. Your time would be better served if you started making specific suggestions on the article's talk page rather than making veiled attacks and accusations against me and my supposed motives. If you look at my edit history, you'll see I edit a wide range of topics. I don't have any conflicts of interest here. I'm just here to keep out spam, improve articles based on reliable sources, and remove and prevent vandalism. That's it. I'm going to copy this to the article's talk page, since this discussion really belongs there in the first place. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for taking a more tactful tone with me on your recent remarks on the quizzing article. I think we got off to a bad start because you made some erroneous assumptions about my intentions, and I was too quick to lock the article because I assumed you weren't willing to work with me constructively on it. I'm unlocking it now. Let's make it a better article without resorting to hostilities. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:35, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Toshi rainaa

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.

A tag has been placed on Toshi rainaa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Yally (talk) 08:06, 7 January 2011 (UTC)