text:
NCRA

NCRA is an initialism which may stand for:

 * National Centre for Radio Astrophysics, a premier Radio Astronomy research institute in Pune, India
 * National Campus and Community Radio Association, a non-profit association of campus radio and community radio stations in Canada
 * National Coalition for Reform and Advancement, a political coalition in the Solomon Islands
 * National Cooperative Refinery Association, an energy cooperative in Kansas, US
 * National Court Reporters Association, a US organization committed to advancing the profession of court reporting
 * North Coast Railroad Authority, a US organization to restore and preserve rail service along the Northwestern Pacific rail line.
 * Northern California Recycling Association, an environmental organization in California, US
 * Nottinghamshire County Rowing Association, an elite rowing organization from Nottingham, England (1981-2006)

title: NCRA


text: User talk:69.208.194.94

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:69.208.194.94


text:
User talk:Newpoete

As for the ad hominem attacks, what would you call this?
 * a new poete said...
 * Hey, this jackass just deleted us from the Wikipedia. If we remain deleted, this jackass wins.

And of course the word "jackass" linked to my user page. That was really uncalled for. Wikipedia is about sharing notable information and coming together, not name calling. EdwinHJ | Talk 01:15, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that would be an unequivocal and obvious example of an ad hominem attack. But one independent of a fair and reasonable discussion of the epistemological merits of the topic in question and outside the context of the Wikipedia altogether (for the most part). It was also posted in response to an unprovoked and largely gratuitous attack against the Totally Obvious namespace -- one that was finally justifed on a naked appeal to status and not the notability or want of notability of the issue at hand. If that's not contrary to the spirit of the Wikipedia, well then we should all just go back to the library and crack open an Encyclopedia Britannica.
 * Newpoete 06:15, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Newpoete


text:
Talk:Farid F. Abraham

Vote for Deletion
This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 01:15, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Farid F. Abraham


text: User talk:69.208.185.77

title: User talk:69.208.185.77


text:
Amazulu (band)

Amazulu were a British reggae/ska/pop band from the 1980s comprising five women and one man. They achieved success in the UK charts with four top-20 hits, the biggest being "Too Good to Be Forgotten" in 1986.

Early days and success
The name Amazulu is taken from the Zulu language word for the Zulu people. They originally wanted to be named Amazon but an American rock band already had the name. The name Amazulu came about when Sharon Bailey and Lesley Beach went to see a South African play by the same name and met the playwright, who gave his permission to use the name.

The band was started by Bailey, the band's original manager and Lesley, the saxophone player, together with Rose Miner, the original lead singer. With Debbie Dread joining on drums, initially all the members were female. Miner was later replaced by Anne-Marie Ruddock, and Dread was replaced by John "Nardo" Bailey, whom they called their token male. Miner went on to become a dancer, dance teacher and percussionist, performing with Quilombo do Samba in the UK and Brazil. Falcon Stuart, the former manager of X-Ray Spex and Adam and the Ants, was one of their early managers and helped promote their first single, "Cairo", to modest success in the UK, which included airplay from BBC Radio 1's John Peel.

The band started gaining appearances on television, including on The Young Ones (1984) and Top of the Pops several times, which helped to widen their fame. They achieved hits that included "Excitable" and "Too Good to Be Forgotten", the latter of which was originally recorded by The Chi-Lites. The band achieved a minor success in the United States with "Montego Bay" (a cover of the 1970 song by Bobby Bloom) in 1986; early the next year, it became a surprise hit in Canada, climbing to No. 6 on their singles chart. That year their eponymous full-length album was released on Island Records, although it failed to chart highly.

Line-up changes and break-up
The group trimmed down to a trio of Anne-Marie Ruddock, Sharon Bailey and Lesley Beach during 1986 as they were enjoying their greatest success. In 1987, Beach left the band and Ruddock and Bailey continued as a duo for another year, scoring the minor hit "Mony Mony". Afterwards, Amazulu recorded their second album, Spellbound, which was released in designated Asian countries including Hong Kong in audio cassette format under EMI Records. The album contained the singles "Mony Mony", "Wonderful World, Beautiful People" and "My Heart Belongs to You" (which was released under Ruddock's name only in 1988). In early 1988 they split.

Bailey, Ruddock and Beach appeared in the 1987 Alex Cox film Straight to Hell. After travelling the world and living in Brazil and Rome, Bailey lived in Buckinghamshire. She drums from time to time and is still involved in the music industry. Beach moved to Tucson, Arizona, after taking a break in the hills of Ibiza with DJ José Padilla. She went on to achieve a Bachelor of Arts degree from Prescott College for the Liberal Arts, the Environment and Social Justice and worked as a social worker in Tucson. She and Rose Miner reunited and played drums and percussion in the Samba band Quilombo do Samba, who won the Best Band in the 2002 Notting Hill Carnival. The band member who achieved the greatest commercial success in music was Clare Kenny, who joined Coming Up Roses and became a session player with Sinéad O'Connor, the Indigo Girls, Shakespears Sister and Damien Dempsey. Margo Sagov went on to graduate as an architect, played guitar with several bands and played with Rock Candy.

The band are mentioned in the song "Asbestos" by Suede, on their album Head Music.

title: Amazulu (band)


text: User talk:69.209.7.191

title: User talk:69.209.7.191


text:
Talk:Babur

Names of his books
The Babur is also know as the author of three famous books. Can anyone mention the names of these three book. His autobiography is mentioned in the article but with no name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.48.157.168 (talk) 12:24, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Ancestry
I observe that the account of Babur's ancestry is not consistent with the image shown alongside it. Maproom (talk) 11:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC) According to the book Genghis Khan And The Making Of The Modern World by John Weatherford, Babur was the descendant of Genghis Khan rather than Timur Lane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avinder bindra (talk • contribs) 11:10, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

 * He was a matrilineal descendent through his mother who was a daughter of the Chagatai Khan Yunus. But patrilineally he was a Timurid, his father was the son of Abu Said Mirza who ruled reunified some of Timur (Tamurlane)'s old empire before being killed in battle. Babur in his Baburnama lists both relationships, and Mirza Muhammad Haydar Dughlat corroborates it in his Tarikh-i Rashidi. 103.100.225.170 (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Uzbek sources

 * Please can we have translated quotes from all of the Uzbek sources. I've got grave doubts about this article and about raising it to GA status - there is a reason why it has been around for so long and had so many problems. I am particularly concerned given that the nominator has made so few contributions to the thing themselves. - Sitush (talk) 19:09, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * And can or  please translate After the battle Babur occupied Delhi and Agra, seated himself on the throne of Lodi and laid the foundation of the Mughal Rule in India, but it was yet to be established and Babur was yet to become the ruler of India, as new contenders for the throne like, Rana Sanga, who rose to challenge his rule. into English. It might as well be Uzbek for all the sense it makes. This GAN seems to have been rushed and I'm not happy. - Sitush (talk) 19:37, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * How about: After the battle, Babur occupied Delhi and Agra, took the throne of Lodi, and laid the foundation for the eventual rise of Mughal Rule in India; however, before he became India's ruler, he had to fend off challengers, such as Rana Sanga.? Aristophanes 68   (talk)  21:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * As for In 1495, at twelve years old, Babur became the ruler of Farghana, present-day Uzbekistan, after Umar Sheikh Mirza died "while tending pigeons in an ill-constructed dovecote that toppled into the ravine below the palace"., well, we seem to be quoting without in-text attribution, perhaps because the cited source appears to be itself unattributed. Worse, the source says Babur was 11, not 12. - Sitush (talk) 19:50, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * ... and the Eraly source that we cite immediately after the above says that he was 15 in 1496! Not that Eraly is a great source anyway - the good ones were not even cited and I've had to move them into the Further Reading section due to the potential confusion of labelling the things as sources when they are not. - Sitush (talk) 20:01, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Babur's relations with the Safavids began when Ali Mirza Safavi ventured to meet Babur at Samarqand in order to maintain good relations that would last even after the Ottoman's reached out to Babur. is near gibberish. Calvin999, if you are going to take part in the GA Cup then I'm probably have to keep an eye on it myself. - Sitush (talk) 20:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Babur began relations with the Safavids when he met Ali Mirza Safavi at Samarqand; their good relations lasted even after Babur was approached by the Ottomans.? Aristophanes 68   (talk)  20:59, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * In 1505, because of the low revenue his new mountain kingdom generated, Babur undertook his first expedition to India and had written before in his memoirs, "My desire for Hindustan had been constant. It was in the month of Shaban, the Sun being in Aquarius, that we rode out of Kabul for Hindustan" makes no sense. I can't see the relevant pages of Eraly but what we are saying is that he previously wrote his desire had been constant, which in the context of the entire sentence appears to be the incorrect tense. - Sitush (talk) 20:25, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Not sure what you mean by translating them into English when they are in English above? And I don't believe I rushed the GAN, thank you. I am satisfied that it reads well. — Calvin999  20:34, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Well, your standards are pretty low or perhaps English is not your first language. - Sitush (talk) 20:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey, quit the personal attacks.  — Calvin999  09:42, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * When is the truth or a query an attack? - Sitush (talk) 09:51, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * When there is no truth in it. You don't know me or what I do on here, so it's WP:BADFAITH of you to assume that I have "low standards" (not that I should have to tell you, but the three GANs I reviewed after Babur, I failed for not being good enough), and English is my native language.That's why it's a personal attack and uncivil. — Calvin999  09:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

 * How about: In 1505, because of the low revenue generated by his new mountain kingdom, Babur began his first expedition to India; in his memoirs, he wrote, "My desire for Hindustan had been constant. It was in the month of Shaban, the Sun being in Aquarius, that we rode out of Kabul for Hindustan"? Aristophanes 68   (talk)  20:59, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Babur started for Lahore, Punjab, in 1524 but found that Daulat Khan Lodi had been driven out by forces sent by Ibrahim Lodi.[40] When Babur arrived at Lahore, the Lodi army marched out and was his army was routed. doesn't read well. When did he find out? Presumably after he got there, so when did he get there (as opposed to setting off for the place). For example, we could say something like: "Babur arrived at Lahore in 1524. He found that Daulat Khan Lodi had been driven from the city by the forces of Ibrahim Lodi, which then routed those of Babur." - Sitush (talk) 20:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Or, When Babur arrived at Lahore in [1524?], he learned that....? Aristophanes 68   (talk)  21:08, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

thanks for the various suggestions above. I think I am going to clock-off shortly but they look good based on my quick skim through them. - Sitush (talk) 21:52, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Yay, thanks! It's not that much different from trying to decipher my students' rough drafts (and sometimes final drafts). Aristophanes 68   (talk)  01:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:GAR
Two paragraphs in I'm already convinced that it should be delisted. I'm sorry, but there are so many problems in the lede, which is after all the first thing the reader sees, that this can't stand. And apparently there are other problems (signaled in the two sections above)... Now, I'm interested in a proposed plan of action, or I will delist it myself. Mind you, pointed the article out to me, but he did so because I claim, rightly or wrongly, a certain expertise in English; I do not know who wrote, nominated, or passed this article and it's not an issue for me. Let's see if we can keep this at GA, which is the point of GAR. Copyedits first. Drmies (talk) 21:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * I've just conflicted with you, adding the GAR tag at the top of this page. Should I remove that to cancel the extremes of the process? - Sitush (talk) 21:49, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know, --I say go for the individual reassessment, since you know this stuff better than me (I just do sentences and the occasional word). If you wanna yank the GA star, you have my blessing. Drmies (talk) 21:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I can't even work out what to do with all the individual/community options + I'm not sure that the GA "star" can just be removed. Pinging, who may know the system and may also not be about to go to bed, as I am. Sorting the article out is going to take rather more effort than I can manage alone: the genuinely academic sources need to be mined and the Eraly source (and probably some others) really needs to be replaced by them as much as possible. I'm going to remove the GAR tag pending a clearer head. - Sitush (talk) 22:06, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think you can just unilaterally remove a GA rating; you can ask for a reassessment. Or can you simply reassess it yourself? And if so, does it need a formal review process rather than what amounts to a quickfail? Sorry, I'm guessing here; I'm no expert on GA. I'll ping, who is. Ritchie, here's the problem: This article was recently promoted to GA via what looked like a quick-and-sloppy review, and several people including Drmies and Sitush don't think it should be at GA. What are their options? --MelanieN (talk) 23:56, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes you can: it's the essence of "Individual reassessment". You have to allow some opportunity for response (there are no specific times set), but yeah, you can do it by yourself. Drmies (talk) 02:42, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I looked at the opening paragraph and that "series of setbacks" leapt out me - what's that doing in a GA's lead? I'll tell you what I understand procedure to be. The GA reviewer,, doesn't seem to be a bad sort and the review might be over-brief, but it's not an obvious drive-by that can warrant a quick undo and reset. If Calvin is okay with undoing the GA review and putting it back on the queue, then our problem is resolved. Otherwise somebody needs to fix the article ASAP or it needs a reassessment. I don't really have enough subject knowledge to be able to do it myself (if you don't know the subject, how do you know if a GA candidate is "broad in coverage" or "focused"?) so I'd support a reassessment. Sitush seems like an ideal candidate to kick it off. You want an individual reassessment, a community reassessment is only really done if delisting is likely to be controversial (eg: Nick Griffin to pick a random example) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:38, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, but I am obviously not in favour of "undoing a review" (which can't be done, anyway, as it's already been completed). I reviewed the article, I highlighted the issues which stood out to me and thought needed addressing, and they were carried out by the nominator. I stand by my review. I've reviewed about a dozen short of 200 GANs whilst being an editor on Wikipedia, and I think it's very WP:BADFAITH to be wanting to have this article nominated for reassessment the day after it passes. What has been identified as "problems" above, I happen to not agree are problems. If you really feel that strongly, you'll have to nominate it for GAR and open a reassessment, and then an outcome will be decided as to whether or not to delist it, at which point it can then potentially be re-nominated again. Failing that, why don't any you be WP:BOLD and carry out minor fixes yourself instead of shouting about it and making a lot of noise! — Calvin999  09:52, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Have you seen how many errors have been fixed already? Eg: that Fergana is modern-day Uzbekistan? However, not all of them can be resolved quickly, an example of which would appear to be the guy's age given that we have sources saying he was 11, 12 and 14 in the same year. This isn't a bad faith thing, it's a dodgy review thing. It doesn't mean every review you have ever done is similar. - Sitush (talk) 10:10, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have fixed some errors that you have introduced since I passed the article, such as the tags. — Calvin999  10:14, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * No need to be snippy - the fixes are a work in progress. You are aware, I hope, that there are other people who are unhappy with this review, not just those who have said so on this page? If you are going to oppose a reassessment then it is likely to reflect poorly on you and will certainly prolong the affair. - Sitush (talk) 10:25, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not being "snippy", and I said if you want to nominate for GAR, then go ahead. But you can't undo a GAN review when it's been passed, as another editor said above. If you feel that strongly, you'll have to open a re-assessment discussion and consensus will have to be reached amongst anyone to participates as to whether or not it is delisted. If it is delisted, then whoever works on it will have to nominate it for GAN again. I deemed the article to be of good quality, so I will not partake in any discussion you hold. My stance on it is already obvious by my action of passing it in the first place. — Calvin999  16:23, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, if you still cannot recognise the problems here then I think perhaps you should stop reviewing GANs. They're blatantly obvious issues and given your attitude it is beginning to look like I or someone else should run an eye over a few other reviews. Sometimes things are subjective, sure, but the issues here do not generally fall into that category. - Sitush (talk) 16:50, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to keep coming here going back and forth with messages. Nobody has presented me with any problems. I deemed it to be passable. If you don't agree, take it to GAR. That's what it is there for. I've reviewed nearly 190 GANs, and as I told you earlier, the three GANs I reviewed after Babur, I failed because they were too problematic. So please keep personal remarks to yourself. I have nothing else to say here, and I don't wish to have any more involvement with this. Instead of kicking up a fuss, feel free to make any improvements you feel necessary to the article, as no article is perfect. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  16:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Problems are listed all over this page and the GAR has begun! - Sitush (talk) 17:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Babur's sexual proclivity and disruptive edits by User:Sitush
i am very disappointed by the repeated disruptive edits by User:Sitush. The dispute here is about using Babur's autobiography as the primary reference for his sexual proclivities. Sitush instead prefers to use Abraham Eraly (who is depending in turn on Babur's autobiography) as the primary and only reference on this issue. What Sitush is suggesting is against all cannons of historical scholarship. Wherever a primary historical source like Babur's autobiography is available on a particular historical issue it should be used (particularly about something like his sexual proclivity)--this is what every student of history is taught. (Of course the primary source can be supplemented by secondary sources.) Sitush's insinuation that Babur's autobiography may have become "corrupted" is not supported by any mainstream historian.Soham321 (talk) 22:01, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You're painting with a very broad brush here: you're talking about one single edit out of many (at least in the recent history), and you in turn reverted Sitush. Plus, I don't know what school you went to, but I was taught that we should use a five century old autobiography with some care. I don't have much of an opinion on this specific dispute, but there's not a lot of disruption that I see. But that can be discussed here--preferably without too many quick accusations. Drmies (talk) 22:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Johnbod (talk) 22:31, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Soham321, a secondary source is preferable in this case. Citing the memoir directly is not a good idea because we're working with translations and the authenticity of the translations is best supported by a secondary source. Regardless of whether the text has or has not been corrupted over time. The correct way to deal with the memoir, if you want to highlight it, is to say something like "in his memoir Baburnama, ..." --regentspark (comment) 22:26, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The secondary source itself is using the primary source (Babur's autobiography) as its reference. Given this fact, what is the objection to using both the secondary and primary sources for this piece of information? You are also assuming that Eraly has read Babur's autobiography in the original. You would be mistaken in this assumption. I have personally met Eraly in Chennai; he has no knowledge of Chagatai ( a dialect of Turki) which is the language Babur used in writing his autobiography. In fact very few scholars in the world today are able to read Babur's autobiography in the original. See here: Chagatai language.Soham321 (talk) 22:43, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not assuming anything. An assertion from a reliable secondary source is acceptable however they may have arrived at that assertion. The original is unreliable because quotations can be taken out of context and, particularly when translation from an archaic language is also an issue, because the words may need to be interpreted. If we have a reliable secondary source then there is no reason to use the primary source as a citation (but you can use it as an inline link as I show above). --regentspark (comment) 23:07, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Had, since he died recently. Johnbod (talk) 22:45, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

My revert
I've just reverted a bunch of edits made over the last few hours. Some of them were indubitable copyright violations, some were taking us off at great tangents from the main thrust of this article, some were awkward phrasing, and old sources such as Stanley Lane-Poole were being introduced when we have a host of top-notch sources that are still not cited. Basically, we were going backwards, further away from GA standard rather than closer to it. Sorry. - Sitush (talk) 05:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright violations
I notice that two sections created by me, 'Goodwill towards Hindus' and 'Clash with Mewat', have been deleted by User:Sitush. The reason Sitush gives is 'copyright violation'. However, i have been careful to always summarize or paraphrase the material from the reference i have given and i have fully sourced the edits i made to the given reference. In my talk page, where Sitush has seen it fit to give me a warning, i have told him that i am challenging him to give a single edit of mine where i am giving material from the reference verbatim. Given this, i am a little surprised why the entire material should be deleted instead of Sitush spending some time making necessary modifications (perhaps further paraphrasing or summarizing). Soham321 (talk) 05:49, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Well, for example, the content removed here was lifted in large part from Satish Chandra's book, eg: around pages 44-45. Yes, I could spend time paraphrasing it all but I've already explained some other issues in the section above ... and I am wary of Chandra, who tends to have something of an obsession with everything being related to religious differences. - Sitush (talk) 05:58, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello, wikipedia is not a place for original research. Even you are lifting content from one source or another in your edits. I am challenging you to give any edit of mine where i have quoted from the source verbatim (without putting the material in quotation marks). Go ahead, since you are accusing me of copyright violation, you may as well show this to me. Paraphrasing and summarizing is what i have been doing, and this is what you also do in your edits. And about the source? Isn't this the same person whose books on medieval history are standard text books in Indian university courses? Soham321 (talk) 06:05, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You are copying entire phrases and then changing the occasional word, which amounts to close paraphrasing. For example, you said Thus, when Rani Padmavati, the widow of Rana Sanga, sought Babur's support for her son Vikramjit, who was in conflict with his brother, Babur received her envoy with honor. (using the wrong spelling of "honor", by the way); Chandra says "Thus, Rani Padmavati, the widow of Rana Sanga, sought Babur's support for her son Vikramjit, who was being harassed by his brother. ...  Babur received the Rani's envoy with honour." - Sitush (talk) 06:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This is the diff for the entire section: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Babur&diff=666853470&oldid=666850830 Even for close paraphrasing you would have to show that the pattern is being consistently maintained throughout the section. While paraphrasing it is inevitable that i would occasionally not do a good job on the first attempt. Also, i was using the american spelling of honor. Soham321 (talk) 06:21, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm am not arguing with you, Soham, re: the violations. You are invariably wrong and I simply do not have the patience at the moment: I'm likely to say something that we will both regret. I'll let someone else explain. Indian articles tend to follow British English spellings, if only because India's English derives from the colonial period. This article is a mess of inconsistencies and I have been trying to fix those: it is a slow job and it is not helped if people introduce new examples as fast as I clean up the old ones. - Sitush (talk) 06:26, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Let me refresh your memory about the fact that a senior editor recently wrote in an edit summary that your attempts to make this article better are resulting in the article becoming worse. Your point about the usage of british english spelling is a gray area because americans have also written on Indian history, politics, art, etc.. As such, both 'honor' and 'honour' should be deemed acceptable spellings of the word. It is true that educated Indians tend to use British spellings, however they are well aware of the alternative American spelling of the word as well. (For instance, honor vs honour, color vs colour, and so on). Bottomline is that you are not prepared to collaborate, and are attempting to assume ownership of the article for reasons best known to you. You and I both know that at least some of the sections you have deleted (like the Battle of Chanderi) are going to be a part of the main article in future. Soham321 (talk) 06:36, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, ffs. That editor (Calvin999) is a primary cause of the situation we find ourselves in. And go read MOS:TIES. You want to accuse me of ownership then take it to WP:ANI. - Sitush (talk) 06:39, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, but Babur did not have ties to any english speaking nation. As such it should be acceptable to use either honor or honour. Regarding WP:ANI, i wish to see what some of the other editors of this article think of your recent antics.Soham321 (talk) 06:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Stop adding to your increasing amount of personal attacks on me. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  11:51, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Ownership of the article
And now i notice Sitush has deleted all my edits. The Battle of Chanderi, for instance is a part of Babur's life. He took part in this battle. Sitush has seen it fit to delete this entire section, along with several other sections. May i respectfully suggest that what Sitush is trying to do is this: WP:Ownership_of_articles Soham321 (talk) 05:55, 14 June 2015 (UTC) Whether it is appropriate to allow someone who has an obviously poor opinion about Indians--with views that smack of racism-- to have the final word on Babur (or indeed on any India related article) is something to be pondered upon: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=666714511 Soham321 (talk) 07:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Like I said, take it to WP:ANI. Why you think accusations of ownership are relevant here is beyond me. FWIW, I have not edited Battle of Chanderi. - Sitush (talk) 07:39, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This section is relevant for the benefit of future editors of this article. I have no desire for ownership, but others must know what is going on here.Soham321 (talk) 08:17, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It is completely inappropriate here and some might consider it to be a personal attack, although I've had many worse. Either put your money where your mouth is or shut up. - Sitush (talk) 08:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I disagree. It is completely appropriate. You are assuming ownership, and at least some of your edits are resulting in the article becoming worse. This is also what a senior editor opined in one of the edit summaries in the main article. I can take you to ANI, or i can leave a note here for future editors informing them of what is going on. I prefer the latter alternative. This also shows that i have no desire to assume ownership of this article. Soham321 (talk) 08:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

The article's history is not on your side with regard to this accusations, Sitush. It doesn't look good. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b> 11:29, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Sour grapes or what? The issue is at ANI now anyway, as you well know. - Sitush (talk) 11:46, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Another comment which isn't civil. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  11:52, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If you want to see an uncivil comment from me regarding you then just ask. I've got loads of them in my head that I have refrained from using thus far. Mostly involving words beginning with "f" etc, the less rude ones including words beginning "i" and links to things like WP:CIR. Now can you please deal with this at ANI: the issue has moved from this talk page. - Sitush (talk) 11:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Babur hatred towards India
Babur considers Central Asia his homeland and had shown that he hates india.

"Hindustan is a country of few charms. There are no good-looking people, there is no social intercourse, no receiving or paying of visits, no genius or manners. In its handicrafts there is no form or symmetry, method or quality. There are no good horses, no good dogs, no grapes, musk-melons or first-rate fruits, no ice or cold water, no good bread or food cooked in the bazaars, no hot baths, no colleges, no candles, torches or candlesticks."

This is not to cause some Indians anger Alexis Ivanov (talk) 00:20, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it hate, more of a disdain. 72.53.146.173 (talk) 22:33, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Babur. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.the-week.com/23sep07/events1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II <sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 06:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Babur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150614180708/https://old.ut.uz/eng/kaleidoscope/the_countrys_history_on_postage_miniatures.mgr to http://old.ut.uz/eng/kaleidoscope/the_countrys_history_on_postage_miniatures.mgr

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:53, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Babur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130916175254/http://bse-soviet-encyclopedia.info/%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%88%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%8D%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F/54583/%D0%91%D0%B0%D0%B1%D1%83%D1%80 to http://bse-soviet-encyclopedia.info/%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%88%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%8D%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F/54583/%D0%91%D0%B0%D0%B1%D1%83%D1%80

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:47, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Islam in South Asia
I like to add this template to this page but not sure what the problem is. This page is part of a series on Islam in South Asia. Please help! Why it is not useful? 65.95.136.96 (talk) 14:53, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Replied on the template's talk page.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 10:17, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Adding individual reigns to infobox
I'm addding the individual reigns for each of Babur's realms to the infobox. My idea was that it made it a bit easier to understand in comparison to what we had previously. But considering the sheer number of times that Babur gained and lost a kingdom... I guess what I added could look a bit excessive. Any thoughts anyone? Alivardi (talk) 14:24, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's too long, and these "king of..." titles are OR & made up. The infobox now covers 2 screens. Thanks for asking anyway. Johnbod (talk) 14:53, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem and thanks for replying. I guess I didn't really think about the titles themselves. Maybe I'll change them to "Ruler of...". Shows that they are de facto positions as opposed to formal titles. In regards to the length, I'm still thinking this sort of format is better than what we had previously. Maybe it might be better to get rid of the predecessor/successor stuff but keep the rest? Alivardi (talk) 19:29, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Ruler of Kabul
The infobox states that Babur was the ruler of Kabul between 1504-1526. Does this mean that he lost Kabul in 1526? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:15, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * No (he was buried there) - changed. See the section above re issues with this box. Johnbod (talk) 17:47, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I was trying to convey that Kabul was absorbed into the Mughal Empire in 1526. Guess that wasn't made clear enough. My bad. Alivardi (talk) 12:22, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Perhaps this can be added but with the successor named as Himself as Padishah of Mughal Empire? >>> Extorc . talk  06:16, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Inclusion in LGBT category
Just wanted to get some thoughts on whether Babur's inclusion in the category is appropriate. I'm wondering if it gives undue weight to his sexuality, since the only basis is a single mention in his autobiography. Alivardi (talk) 19:30, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd take it out, but there may be a battle! Johnbod (talk) 22:36, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I think I'll take my chances. Thanks bud. Alivardi (talk) 10:26, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * We don't apply modern categories to historical personages. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:45, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Babur - An Islamic Invader
Babur was an Islamic invader and there are huge evidences to prove this fact. Anyone who wish to challenge this theory can discuss the matter here. ArifSingh99999 (talk) 14:17, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * See WP:NOR. Materialscientist (talk) 14:18, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

"Babr" PIE
Isn't this a fringe theory? Let's consider it's true, how did Babur's parent knew PIE words? Beshogur (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Chagatai Turkic
It appears that Chagatai Turkic was largely a literary language, rather than a spoken language. See and Language Policy in the Soviet Union pages 143-144. Additionally, it is listed as the written register of Uzbek and Uyghur on Wikipedia's Literary language page. This explains why Babur could understand and use the language, but probably means he didn't speak it. However, I realise that many sources say he did speak the language, which seems to be a miscategorisation of Turkic languages in general, exacerbated by the mutual intelligibility of many languages in the Turkic family. So I think this detail should be omitted from the Babur's wikipedia page until solid resources can paint a better picture. Gowhk8 (talk) 10:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Taimur and Changez Khan
Genuinely what's this? Why do we even use these spellings? Beshogur (talk) 08:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2021
Please add 3rd wife of Babur as "Maham Begum" : Reference: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humayun" Wikicontributer255 (talk) 16:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. See WP:CITEWIKI - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 16:42, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

RE: missing citation for Guru Nanak commenting on Babur in four hymns, under "Religious Policy" section
Under heading "religious policy", (after 54th citation)

"The violence of Babur in the 1520s was witnessed by Guru Nanak, who commented upon it in four hymns.[citation needed]"

we can find citation here: https://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Babar_Vani which states these hymns can be found in following pages (of the standard recension) of Guru Granth Sahib 360 417-418 722-723 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.83.64 (talk) 16:06, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2022
Category:Founding_monarchs Monkeyboi111 (talk) 06:26, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * , please explain why I should add this category and reopen the edit request by changing answered=yes to answered=no. Thank you! -Ferien (talk) 13:16, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * - reping as my last ping did not work --Ferien (talk) 17:59, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Ferein, Babur is considered to be the founding father of one of India's most important historical empires. The Founding monarchs category was missing several key personalities from India. I thought Babur and Chandragupta Maurya would make the cut. Monkeyboi111 (talk) 09:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Thanks. >>> Extorc . talk ; 13:27, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Is the portrait really Baburs?
What is the source of the Portrait of Babur in the infobox? It appears it might not be the right persons image. Sultans of the South: Arts of India's Deccan Courts, 1323–1687 pg 24. It states that this portrait is of Mirza Muhammad Hakim. If this is true then this image can be used as the next portrait. >>> Extorc . talk  15:36, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, and the image is far inferior. I've reverted this undiscussed change. Johnbod (talk) 04:50, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Just a "Yes" wont suffice, kindly provided sources. >>> Extorc . talk  05:19, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The British Museum, which has the actual painting in its collection, says it's of Babur. Abecedare (talk) 05:24, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Failed verification
The article says Meanwhile, a rebellion back home, approximately 350 kilometres (220 mi) away, amongst nobles who favoured his brother, robbed him of Fergana. The cited source is this and these pages dont talk about Babur. It appears it talks about Ahmad Shah Abdali. In fact it doesn't appear this book talks about Babur at all.

Kindly look into this. >>> Extorc . talk  09:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2022
Typographic error, Babur married Aisha in 1499, not 1599. Bitter Almonds (talk) 19:39, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ RudolfRed (talk) 20:03, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Verse from Babur's poetry
Dear. You've reverted my removal of a verse added by with the helpful edit summary "part of his poetry". Assuming that Babur wrote a lot of poetry, and that each verse of all the poetry he wrote is a "part of his poetry", does it follow that we include the entire collected works of Babur in this article? Or is there something special about the verse that Visioncurve has included? Please note that the "something special" should be sourced to reliable sources and not based on what you or Visioncurve consider special. I await a reasonable explanation from the two of you. --RegentsPark (comment) 12:35, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

 * There is nothing special in that verse. What do you mean with "something special"? Is something supposed to be special to include anything on wiki? It's sourced, and it's part of his poetry, so it can be included. I think you should say why you removed it? That's not a reason to remvoe. Beshogur (talk) 13:11, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You are mistaken. You need to explain why the verse should be included (see WP:V). I've already explained that random verses of your choice need not be included unless there is a reliable source that indicates its significance. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

I have reverted the addition of the verse, because (a) it is WP:UNDUE,, and, more importantly, (b) it is provided with insufficient context. If you check the source, Balabanlilar discusses the verse in the context of Babur's possibly insincere, but definitely politically beneficial, adoption of religious piety. In particular, she prefaces the quote with "the verse has been described as ‘more like a ritualistic observance or an ex post facto religious legitimation than a cry of religious triumph.'" and notes that this garb of defender-of-faith is a small part of the collection that, having served its purpose, is soon dropped as Babur "again turned his thoughts to the conquest of territory, rather than the destruction of infidels and Hindus". Excluding this context and presenting the verse as if the language it was composed in, is the relevant issue is IMO (possibly, unintentionally) misleading and misrepresent the cited source. Abecedare (talk) 15:09, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Re-added Babur's verse with sufficient context in line with WP:DUE, WP:RS, WP:MOS.  Visioncurve  Timendi causa est nescire  16:10, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I am disappointed that an experienced editor such as yourself is edit-warring in article-space instead of discussing the issue here to arrive at a consensus. And your new addition of the verse prefaced by "A special importance given to Islam by Babur" misrepresent both the context provided by the earlier source you cited (as I explained above) and the new one you are citing now; please read the section on "Culture and communities in South Asia" (pages 37-42) along with the pages you cited 47-48, where the point being made is Baburs's time-varying and instrumental use of religion. Abecedare (talk) 16:27, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * If Babur wrote so much poetry, is there a way to make it into an article? --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Visioncurve placed that to "Personal life and relationships" section. So I think it's pretty much relevant to show his view on religion and ghaza. Beshogur (talk) 17:10, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The verse and adoption of 'ghazi' title is misplaced in the Personal life and relationships section since neither of the cited sources discuss them in context of his personal religious belief. Both talk about Babur's religion as a political tool and the sources and their points could be usefully added to the Religious policy section. I'll give Visioncurve some time to respond to the above concerns about WP:UNDUE and source misrepresentation, before making any edits though.
 * I believe the verses are from Baburnama, which already has a wikipedia article. There are several sources on the subject (eg, ), which can be used to further develop that article (the two sources beinng discussed here are not about Babur's poetry per se). Abecedare (talk) 17:42, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

 * The verse in question was initially added as an example of Babur's poetry, to illustrate the use of his native Chagatai language in the paragraph where his poetry and knowledge of languages were discussed. I was reverted and asked why specifically that verse had been chosen. I had a counter question at the time - what verse should I have chosen? Why not this verse?

 * Later, there was a second question regarding my edit which undermined publishing the verse in the original language alongside its English translation. I wanted to demonstrate eloquent rhyming present in the original language, and absent in English translation of the verse. In addition, there are a number of splendid articles in English Wikipedia where verses also appear in their original languages and scripts as well (I mentioned those pages earlier). However, I was told that few people would be interested in reading Babur's verse in Old Turkic. My logical response to that is - How do you know that? I did not publish it in Simple English Wikipedia. Moreover, what those "few, uninterested people" are doing in the page on Babur at all? I personally know several aspiring historians who regularly check in with Wikipedia, learning new things here.

 * And finally, you, Abecedare, expressed your view that the verse had been provided with insufficient context. I agreed with you 51 percent and to this end, I published it after a sentence in the same section of the article where his adherence to Islam (and refusal to follow the Mongol torah) was stated. Remember, the verse was about Babur's celebration of his victory over infidels and calling himself a "ghazi". My sole purpose initially was to provide an example of his poetic skills so that those interested readers (Turcologists, linguists and etc) had an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the Old Turkic language deftly employed by Babur. Visioncurve  Timendi causa est nescire  11:21, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for joining the talkpage discussion. A couple of notes and few questions:
 * If you wanted to write about Babur's poetry find a reference that focuses on that topic (such as ]) and summarize it accurately in the relevant article/section, keeping in mind due weight. Don't pick up random sources that cite a verse in another context and use it "to demonstrate eloquent rhyming present in the original language" just because you believe that is what is worth including and is what the verse supposedly demonstrates.
 * If instead you want to write about Babur's religious policy, the sources you cited are okay for that topic (although more specialized sources are certainly available), but you need to summarize what they actually say. After reading those sources, including the quotes I provided above, why did/do you think that
 * A special importance given to Islam by Babur is an accurate summary of what Balabanlilar and Michael Fisher say? It's definitely not.
 * The verse (esp. the Chagatai version) is needed to illustrate the point?
 * It belongs in the Personal life and relationships section?
 * You needed to edit-war over the issue instead of participating in the already opened discussion on the talkpage?
 * Your approach of adding random bits that catch your eye to wikipedia article, and then edit warring and coming up with post hoc rationalizations to retain them, is not a good one. Abecedare (talk) 16:08, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Abecedare, I believe I have already more or less answered the questions you posted above. In addition, I didn't edit war at all or even had an intention to do so, please refer to the history of the page. Also, I don't see the end for this endless discussion nor do I see any light at the end of a tunnel in reaching consensus with you. No one seems to be interested in this subject, barring us, anymore; so the result will keep being the same like that of a math equation. Visioncurve  Timendi causa est nescire  07:36, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

 * You haven't really answered Abecedare's questions and some of your answers are definitely WP:OR. For example, (I'm numbering the points you need to address to make this easier for you) you say "I wanted to demonstrate eloquent rhyming present in the original language, and absent in English translation of the verse" and "My sole purpose initially was to provide an example of his poetic skills so that those interested readers (Turcologists, linguists and etc) had an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the Old Turkic language deftly employed by Babur" instead you (1) should seek reliable sources that talk about how Babur's poetry demonstrates the "eloquent rhyming" present in the original language and also (2) that these verses are illustrative of the deft use of the old Turkic language by Babur (Fisher merely says "he composed the verses") and (3) that this "deft use" is an important characteristic of Babur, important enough to include here rather than in some other article. You also need to (4) explain why all this is necessary here rather than in an article about poetry in the Chagatai language. Expressions like "I want" and "My sole purpose" are usually a strong indicator of original research and I'm removing your additions for the time being and suggest you wait for clear consensus here before re-adding it. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:44, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't believe you have even addressed how what you added reflects what the cited sources say but instead on repeating my or RegentsPark's questions, I'll leave it to you to propose any future additions about Babur's poetry (or, religious policy) and explain how they are compatible with the sources and wikipedia guidelines. Abecedare (talk) 17:14, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * ,, both of you forget one little detail that my addition was properly cited according to WP:RS, and placed in the section (after sentence) that discussed his poetry as per WP:MOS. No Wikipedia guideline states that we should provide a summary of the verses we add to Wikipedia or that there should be a sufficient context. Verse is a verse, it's not a statement, somebody's opinion or a minority view and etc. I wonder, why won't you two argue about removing the above-mentioned sentence, which is about lack of Babur's knowledge of Old Hindustani language. What is that sentence doing in the section about Babur's personal life and relationships in the first place? It it because it was added by someone else? I suspect you two do not adhere to Wikipedia principles of WP:OTHERUSERS, WP:NDR, and WP:WAWH. Nonetheless, I am working on the expanding the page by adding a whole new section on Babur's poetry, and will then watch over your next steps closely. -- Visioncurve  Timendi causa est nescire  05:54, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

tribe
The source published by Infobase publishing is not reliable. I found this RSN discussion Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_87. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 10:35, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@User:Aman.kumar.goel Anyways, replaced the reference. Have you got any question on it too? Sutyarashi (talk) 10:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think Abraham Eraly is expert on this. You will need multiple academic sources since its a disputed information like another editor said. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 10:51, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It seems like you don't have enough information on the topic. To start with, just read the articles on Mughal empire, Barlas and Timur.Sutyarashi (talk) 11:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:ONUS is on you here to prove credibility of your information. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 11:40, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

 * Well done. Beshogur (talk) 13:15, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Encyclopedia Britannica also points to his Barlas Mongol origin, which makes it credible enough for inclusion. Sutyarashi (talk)

@User:Beshogur explain your stand on how Encyclopedia Britannica isn't reliable source. Make reference to any past RFC on this. Otherwise your edit will be considered a breach of WP:3RR and treated as such. Sutyarashi (talk) 02:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Britannica is not WP:RS, at the very best being a very low tier source (one of the countless times this has been adressed ). Beshogur hasn't violated WP:3RR. You are removing a source published by the Cambridge University Press, replacing it with horrible sources like A Brief History of Pakistan by a journalist or Britannica . You have also recently made other unconstructive edits in regards to the ethnicities of other figures, where I had to step in   . This is concerning. --HistoryofIran (talk) 03:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh God, there is one week betweeb my 4th edit. And meantime, you got reveerted by another user as well. Beshogur (talk) 05:37, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

I removed it. Also we need am alternative for Britannica in this case, it's used below again. Beshogur (talk) 05:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

@User:HistoryofIran and User:Beshogur ok, come on, i maybe quite bad at citing but isn't this an established fact that Babur was fron Barlas tribe and it was one of the Mongol tribes which migrated to central Asia? He was also a descendant of Timur, a Turko-Mongol conqueror? Sutyarashi (talk)

@HistoryofIran please refer where i removed any already existing reference? Talking about my past edits, it was explicitly mentioned afterwards that they had Arab ancestry, and there was not really any reference about their being Persian. Sutyarashi (talk) 07:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

 * Well Babur's father might be Moghul from Moghulistan, however he himself wad Turkic speaking and he despised Moghuls as we can see from his writing. So it isn't logic to say "he was Mongol, definitely not Turkic!!" Beshogur (talk) 09:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

To be precise, he was neither a Turk nor a Mongol, but a Turko Mongol. Sutyarashi (talk) 10:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * please refer where i removed any already existing reference?

 * I did. Well, okay, you didn't actually remove the source this time, but you still removed the information it cited.

 * Talking about my past edits, it was explicitly mentioned afterwards that they had Arab ancestry, and there was not really any reference about their being Persian.
 * These "past" edits were only af few days ago and similiar to the ones here. Yes, having Arab ancestry from hundreds of years ago (no one is pure, including us), and yes, there was actually very clear references per the diffs. I don't want to make this topic about something else, but you're trying to justify those non-constructive edits of yours.
 * ok, come on, i maybe quite bad at citing but isn't this an established fact that Babur was fron Barlas tribe and it was one of the Mongol tribes which migrated to central Asia?
 * My main gripe is here that you are adding horrible sources whilst disregarding another good one. If that good source is WP:UNDUE then that's another story, but that doesn't seem to be the case. If this is such an established fact, then surely there are good sources about it? --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:14, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

I would like to add something about ancestors
timur also claimed to be the descendant of Genghis Khan. I think, this should be added. XK2aXsmasherX (talk) 17:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

NPOV Issues
The paragraph about the Babri Masjid in the Death and Legacy section is mostly full of Hindu nationalist sources and talking points. It's a contentious issue right now, but setting aside the biased narrative, it's mostly irrelevant to Babur's construction (especially the part about how the Supreme Court ruled it was okay to build the temple) and only shows the one POV. Yeep yorp (talk) 16:47, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Babur


text:
Jackie Lou Blanco

Jacqueline Lourdes Corrales Blanco-Davao (born February 11, 1964) is a Filipino actress and aerobic instructor. During the 1980s and the 1990s, she appeared in different film genres including Hihintayin Kita sa Langit, (1991), Si Aida, Si Lorna, o Si Fe, (1989) Misis Mo, Misis Ko, (1988) and Palabra de Honor (1983).

Career
Blanco co-hosted the noontime show Student Canteen on GMA Network from 1982 until the show's cancellation in 1986. She was also a regular fixture on the Sunday musical extravaganza GMA Supershow on the same network. In 1999, she became a household name when she played the main antagonist in the ABS-CBN primetime drama series Saan Ka Man Naroroon. Her television appearances include a regular co-hosting stint in Walang Tulugan from 2008 to 2016, and the sitcom Vampire ang Daddy Ko, where she and her mother Pilita Corrales alternated for the role of Sonya Ventura as the older/younger versions.

In June 2007, she enrolled in the Associate of Arts program of the University of the Philippines, Open University. Blanco wrote a column in The Philippine Star newspaper.

Since the 2000s, she has remained frequent with GMA-7 in afternoon and primetime dramas.

Personal life
Blanco is the daughter of singer and actress Pilita Corrales. She has a half-brother named Ramon Christopher Gutierrez.

She married Philippine actor Ricky Davao in 1989; however, in 2023, she confirmed that they had already separated. They have three children.

title: Jackie Lou Blanco


text:
Talk:Centerfold

CFO (disambiguation)
"CFO (disambiguation)" is a disambiguation page that has as one of its links Center Fold Out. Is "CFO" a term that is actually used, maybe in the publication trade, or is this likely a personal addition by a user which does not reflect common usage? Thanks for the input. Ceyockey 01:19, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Image
Is the picture of Monroe REALLY needed to explain what a centerfold is? As I mentioned on the photo's talk page itself, I believe the photo to be pornographic. I work hard to keep smut away from my kids, and then, when I delete the photo from the article, it gets put back with no explanation as to why it was put back up. Minizilla (talk) 01:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment, but please accept the fact that highly personal motives cannot serve as a sufficient reason for removing content or images from an encyclopedic article. The photo doesn't meet the criteria of pornography at all. --Catgut (talk) 12:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

--->How so? Is this a diagram of a woman's breast? Does it also link to the wiki article breast? No, it most certainly is and does not. It is a centerfold from a pornographic magazine, Playboy. Granted, it is not a HARDCORE pornographic magazine, but it is porn nonetheless. As I said on the photo's talk page, perhaps and edited version, with a black bar covering Ms. Monroe's exposed breasts? I can do that easily enough, or someone else. Either way, I stand by my contention that this photo is wrong. Minizilla (talk) 14:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The image seems appropriate to the article, and bearing in mind Wikipedia is not censored, the image should remain. Peptastic (talk) 06:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

 * OK, so Wikipedia isn't censored. That having been said, what if I uploaded a photo of, for example, a woman being raped (found easily on the internet, as sad as that is), and linked it to the article on rape, it would be A-OK?  Somehow, I feel that it would be taken down and my account banned or something.  Despite the fact that the photo would indeed correspond to the article, as the naked photo of Marilyn Monroe seems to do for Centerfold.  Don't get me wrong.  I love wikipedia.  I use it daily.  It is a great source of free information.  But there ought to be some kind of limits of some kind, in my mind.  Again, it is only my opinion and contention, but I will not be moved from them.  Minizilla (talk) 00:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The picture is unnecessary to explain what a Centerfold is. A nude picture is not necessary. You don't see any nude pictures in the article on Pornography because it is unnecessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.216.45.89 (talk) 04:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

 * The picture is highly relevant and necessary to increase the readers' understanding of the topic, by presenting a quintessential visual example; its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Wikipedia is not censored, and this image is no worse than the picture of Michelangelo's David, nor the photos in our articles on penis, breast, and vagina. DHowell (talk) 04:45, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

suicide
The image is inappropriate in that Marilyn Monroe suicided. If you place that information beside the picture it might give some people pause... "maybe the life of a sex object isn't that satisfying?!" Common myth suggests that "she had it all" - obviously not.Goddessreturns (talk) 01:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Marilyn Monroe's life and death are not relevant to the article on centerfolds; her centerfold is a well-known example of the object described by this entry. --Greymav (talk) 15:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Attribution to Hefner
Is there any source other than the CNN profile which qualifies Henfer coining the term centerfold? I've dug around, but I can't find anything else to substantiate the assertion.

10:56, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Centerfold


text:
Talk:Ruth Parasol

Vote for Deletion
This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 01:19, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Blackjack Fairness issue
An anonymous user has repeatedly added claims that PartyGaming blackjack software is not fair: she i.e. fair. look here http://www.undertherock.com/profile/1179649 ''iGlobalmedia, the gambling company founded by Ruth Parasol that now oversees Partypoker.com, was originally declared to have blackjack and roulette software that was not fair. "My results clearly showed they weren't fair," says famous Las Vegas actuary and casino consultant Michael Shackleford[also known as the 'Wizard of Odds']. An official from iGlobalmedia then acknowledged Shackleford's allegations as true, but dismissed it as a software mistake and not intentional. Regarding the legitimacy of Partypoker operations considering iGlobalmedia's blackjack and roulette operations, Schwartz of the Center for Gaming Research said a history of disputes should give players pause.''

This is not the proper article for such issues. Something like this belongs in the PartyGaming article, and it MUST include properly cited sources, not just a bunch of name-dropping. SmartGuy 13:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

An anonymous user has repeatedly added claims that PartyGaming blackjack software is not fair -False, I said specifically iGlobalmedia 'originally' offered unfair blackjack. You change my word from 'iGlobalmedia' to 'Party Gaming', which robs the reader of the understanding of time frame. Anyway, "They" did 'originally' offer "unfair" blackjack software, as per respected actuary Shackleford. [In fact, you forgot to mention I said they also offered unfair roulette...which undisputedly they did] These FACTS were not disputed with iGlobalmedia, and I added iGlobalmedia's response at the time...which was included in the linked reference I provided.

I don't know what relevance Ruth Parasol has to the World, and Wikipedia, if not within the context of the company that made her famous - the company that makes Ruth Parasol have an impact on most of those researching her...iGlobalmedia[now renamed Party Gaming]. Your suggestion to offer my information in the PartyGaming article is of course proper but entirely irrelevant as to whether it should be used in relation to Ruth Parasol. To essentially eliminate such essential contextual relevant material, as you have, from Ruth Parasol, equates to manipulation of the truth.

'sources'

Maybe you could bother to check the information for yourself, instead of eliminating it. My 'sources' are open and generally accepted knowledge. My 'sources' include an undisputed LA Times investigation on the subject. EVERYTHING I put down was in the Newsmax article I referenced. A very simple Google search will discover ALL of this. You can contact Mr. Shackleford for yourself if you take exception, no? Shackleford was referenced in the Newsmax article you (oh so kindly) allowed me to keep in the links area(after you first chose to wipe it out),...sooooo where do you want that reference put besides the links area?...or maybe you just eliminated the information with no regard to 'sources' because eliminating the information suits you. If there was a symantic problem with the presention of the link, why not correct it instead of eliminating it? Something's fishy here Smartguy. Looking at your volumous edits, you obviously have extensive contact in the poker world, and curiously you seem to almost exclusively exist to edit poker information here on Wikipedia. You curiously have not answered my question, "Do you have any affiliation with Party Gaming?" -user Bill0756 Aug 8 2006

 * Relax. I'm not trying to start an edit war here, and I think that you are confusing me with another user.  I have made exactly 1 edit to things that you added to this article.  This is the first time that you have ever addressed me.  I noticed that someone did ask another editor "Do you have any affiliation with Party Gaming?" but I believe that the question was directed an editor that goes by the name 2005, not at me.  At any rate, no I am not affiliated with PartyGaming other than the fact that I play there.

 * Re: the blackjack issue - my comments above meant that the issue should probably be presented in the PartyGaming article, not here.   I just think that the matter belongs in the other article, not this one, since it encompasses more than just Ruth Parasol.

 * 1 more thing - to sign your name at the end of a comment, use 4 tildes "~" - That adds your Wiki name and a link to your Talk page. Anyone who wants to direct comments specifically to you can do it there, rather than on the article's Talk page. SmartGuy 15:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

 * This article is about Parasol, and is not a place for you to make bad faith comments or add information not appropriate to the article. Why are you trying to add this information here instead of the Party Gaming article?  What is your motivation? (Rhetorical question since I don't care.)  Please add content to the articles that is directly relevant to the topic of the article and add content to linked articles that is relevant to the linked articles. The iGlobal/Wizard stuff is relevant to the Party Gaming article and can be put there with the proper cite.  That isn't the issue.  The issue here is you putting material in the wrong place, and then your bad faith response to its removal.  Just do things properly and you won't have any problems. 2005 19:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

She is a good person — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.160.176.66 (talk) 11:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ruth Parasol


text:
Clock (American band)

Clock is a rock band featuring Def Leppard guitarist Vivian Campbell and former No Sweat member P.J. Smith, who sang backing vocals on Def Leppard's cover of the Sweet song "Action" on Def Leppard's Retro Active (1993) album.

Clock's album Through Time (1998) features the original version of "To Be Alive", which is featured on Def Leppard's Euphoria (1999) album.

Other members have included Mark Schulman, Mark Browne, and Manny Alvarez.

title: Clock (American band)


text:
Luminophore

In chemistry, a luminophore (sometimes shortened to lumophore) is an atom or functional group in a chemical compound that is responsible for its luminescent properties. Luminophores can be either organic or inorganic.

Luminophores can be further classified as fluorophores or phosphors, depending on the nature of the excited state responsible for the emission of photons. However, some luminophores cannot be classified as being exclusively fluorophores or phosphors. Examples include transition-metal complexes such as tris(bipyridine)ruthenium(II) chloride, whose luminescence comes from an excited (nominally triplet) metal-to-ligand charge-transfer (MLCT) state, which is not a true triplet state in the strict sense of the definition; and colloidal quantum dots, whose emissive state does not have either a purely singlet or triplet spin.

Most luminophores consist of conjugated π systems or transition-metal complexes. There are also purely inorganic luminophores, such as zinc sulfide doped with rare-earth metal ions, rare-earth metal oxysulfides doped with other rare-earth metal ions, yttrium oxide doped with rare-earth metal ions, zinc orthosilicate doped with manganese ions, etc. Luminophores can be observed in action in fluorescent lights, television screens, computer monitor screens, organic light-emitting diodes and bioluminescence.

The correct, textbook terminology is luminophore, not lumophore, although the latter term has been frequently used in the chemical literature.

title: Luminophore


text: User talk:83.233.232.63

title: User talk:83.233.232.63


text:
Talk:Luminophore

== Article title == This article was originally under the term lumophore which is an admittedly often use incorrect version of the term luminophore. I left the original article there (modified of course to point out the erronious terminology) because it IS often used, and started this new stub with a lot of the original text, though some new text as well. -C.

title: Talk:Luminophore


text:
Sadaf

Sadaf is a name. Notable people with the name include:

Given name

 * Sadaf Foroughi (born 1976), Iranian filmmaker, video artist and film editor
 * Sadaf Hussain, Pakistani cricketer
 * Sadaf Malaterre, Pakistani fashion designer
 * Sadaf Rahimi, Afghani female boxer
 * Sadaf Siddiqui (born 1985), Pakistani track and field sprint athlete
 * Sadaf Taherian (born 1988), Iranian actress and model

Surname

 * Gulraiz Sadaf (born 1989), Pakistani cricketer
 * Sidra Sadaf, Pakistani female cyclist

title: Sadaf


text:
Talk:Karl Rove/Archive 2

Plame Affair As Separate Article
Although it is generlly well written, I don't think this detail belongs here. In fact, if you go to the Valerie Plame page there is another discussion very similar to this one. And on the Robert Novak page there is yet another discussion. I would recommend taking the long section out of this article and creating a separate independent article (unless there already is one I have not seen, in which case it should be linked). In this Rove article there should only be a paragraph or so as to how it directly affects or os affected by Karl Rove. --Gangster Octopus 16:22, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with Gangster Octopus - the story will continue to grow until it has certainly outgrown all three of those pages. -- BD2412 talk 16:33, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree as well. --Badlydrawnjeff 16:38, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * yes, there ought to be an article titled something like 'valerie plame affair'. then all 3 articles can point to it for a unified discussion of the events.  of course, plame issues directly involving rove should be discussed here (such as his pending frogmarch). Derex 05:00, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * As I proposed there, we should just use the Valerie Plame article. She is notable only because of this incident (for a precedent, see Monica Lewinsky). Indeed we should probably split off the timeline as a separate article, since the main article is already 48K. --agr 09:54, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I think that this developing story deserves its own article. Just because the Valerie Plame article is filled with stuff that belongs in a seperate article doesn't mean that that article should be the proper place for information regarding the criminal investigation into who leaked her name to the press. Same for this article, as well. So much *doesn't* belong in either of these articles, such as the jailing of reporters, the impact on the Presidency, Supreme Court decisions, congressional inquiries, impact on the Press, etc. If the Valiere Plane article should be redacted to only list her as "Was a CIA covert agent in charge of investigating Weapons of Mass Destriction proliferation in the 3rd world, until her cover was blown in an article by Robert Novak (see 2005 Covert CIA Agent Leak Scandal)" or some such similar text, then that's all that should be there. Just my 2 cents. --NightMonkey 10:03, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

 * Create split article on Plame Affair. Obviously Rove is a central figure in the Plame Affair and so some mention and background on it is necessary in this article about him, however, articles on Wilson, Plame, Novack, Judith Miller, Cooper, all touch on the Plame Affair, as do Yellowcake forgery and Downing Street memo. Calicocat 16:38, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Created Plame affair and included all "Plame affair" material from this article there as starting place. Calicocat 22:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

How the heck did the contents of this talk page get dupe-edited?
Pretty serious copy-repaste dupe going on. Everything between and  seems to have been duped. Was this intentional, or silly page-lengthening vandalism?
 * Or accidental? (Forgot to consider that. Also forgot to sign it.) -- Gnoitall 19:58, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, no comment. I'm gonna consider it page-doubling and just clean it up. -- Gnoitall 20:58, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * AAAAAARGH! I can't hold the whole article in my head and do the necessary diffs between duped sections which have been edited by others after the dupe. I guess it'll have to stay screwed up. -- Gnoitall 21:33, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think it was intentional - User:Badlydrawnjeff duped the article's contents, but I'm sure it was an honest mistake. -- RyanFreisling @ 23:23, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not even sure there was any mistake involved; there's a bug in MediaWiki somewhere which will sometimes cause a complete copy of the page being edited to be inserted at some place in the page being edited. So far as I know, the cause isn't known yet, but there's no indications that I know of that these users are making any "mistake" in particular which they should have known would cause the doubling-bug to happen. -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:29, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

 * It's now fixed. - dcljr (talk) 05:23, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Fixed
Okay, I've fixed this Talk page by removing the duplicated content. The way I did this was to start with the last "clean" version before the edit that caused the duplication (thanks, Ryan, for finding that) and step through every diff thereafter, inserting the new content in the appropriate places. Other than that, the only things I've changed are: In addition, because of the cut-and-paste method I employed the number of newlines and spaces will differ in certain places, but none of these changes should affect the appearance of the discussion in any significant way. Finally, note that this page is still too long (96K) and needs to be archived. I might do this soon. - dcljr (talk) 05:20, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) restored an original post (in the section NPOV) that had been split up and responded to in a weird way;
 * 2) altered the flow of a quote-response (to the aforementioned post) in a way that's easier to follow;
 * 3) removed a comment about "deleting the original posting" made by anonymous user whose post (see #1) is now preserved intact;
 * 4) removed my own notices about fixing the page and, of course, added this section.
 * Sigh. That's much better. Good work. -- Gnoitall 18:20, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Article development, todo list
I've taken the liberty of adding a todo list to this article. My hope is that the article's editors might make use of it as a focus point for helping to improve this article. Calicocat 07:44, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Liberal lies.
...west of Wichita. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * care to enlighten us as to what specifically is untrue? --kizzle 17:48, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

 * That's all there was, just a section heading that said "Liberal lies" with no text underneath (thanx to 129.61.46.16). I thought I'd finish it with something less inflammatory. (Read the whole thing together.) -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 18:00, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Talk archiving
Sorry, Calicocat, but that's not the best way to archive a talk page. You shouldn't effectively "blank out" the entire page. Disucssions that are ongoing should be left in place, with perhaps only the early stages archived to a separate page. Only discsussions that are not apparently ongoing should be moved. This is my opinion, but I think I could find justification for these ideas in policy or semi-policy elsewhere. In any case, I'm going to try to archive this in the way I'm talking about. Please Stand By... - dcljr (talk) 21:02, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * As it says in the archive, any on going discussion can be simply copied back to the main talk page. In the archive I created, I noted, per guidelines, "This archive page covers approximately the dates between start of article and July 19, 2005. Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See How to archive a talk page.)Calicocat 21:06, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, but that page says, "It is therefore customary on Wikipedia to periodically archive older discussions on pages that have become large", and "When archiving old discussions, it is customary to leave current, ongoing discussions on the existing Talk page" (emphasis added in both cases). It's kind of rude to remove an ongoing discussion from the talk page and ask people to go cut and paste if they want to reply to something... - dcljr (talk) 21:27, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've finished my version of the archiving process. Turns out, it's actually the same as your (Calicocat's) original version of 13:44, 19 July 2005, although I've used the simpler name Talk:Karl Rove/Archive1. I think we should keep things like this until discussion dies down on the earlier sections... - dcljr (talk) 21:49, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks good and sorry if I sounded a bit short. Did you put the other archive up for speedy delete? I usually like archive files (pages) that have to/from dates, but however it works is fine. There are many active threads which is why I used the "buzz cut" method, but if you think this is better I have no objections. And now, back to our regularly schedule program, already in progress... My best, Calicocat 22:04, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I put the other archive up for speedy deletion. Calicocat 22:20, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

From "Think Progress" (Claims Vs. Fact)

 * Used with permission, see license at bottom

CLAIM: White House Can’t Comment While Investigation Is Ongoing McClellan - “While that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it.”

FACT: White House Has Repeatedly Commented During the Ongoing Investigation McClellan had previously cited that same investigation and then gone on to answer the questions as they pertained to Rove. For example, on October 1, 2003, he said, “There’s an investigation going on … you brought up Karl’s name. Let’s be very clear. I thought — I said it was a ridiculous suggestion, I said it’s simply not true that he was involved in leaking classified information, and — nor, did he condone that kind of activity.” Similarly, on October 10, 2003, McClellan said, “I think it’s important to keep in mind that this is an ongoing investigation.” But he then added with regard to a question about Rove’s involvement, “I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this.”

CLAIM: Rove Didn’t Leak The Name So He’s Not Guilty Rove: “I didn’t know her name and didn’t leak her name.” Rove attorney Robert Luskin said “he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.”

FACT: National Security Law Says Identifying Covert Agent Is Illegal at the very least identified Plame as “Wilson’s wife.” Under section 421 of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, the disclosure of “any information identifying [a] covert agent” is illegal.

CLAIM: White House Didn’t Push The Story Rove’s lawyer Robert Luskin claims Cooper manipulated what Rove said to him “in a pretty ugly fashion to make it seem like people in the White House were affirmatively reaching out to reporters to try to get them to report negative information about Plame.”

FACT: There Was An Organized Campaign To Push Leak Info. First, Robert Novak admitted -- “I didn’t dig it out [Plame’s identity], it was given to me…. They (the White House) thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it.” Second, Rove told Chris Matthews that Plame’s identity was “fair game.” Third, Time magazine reported the orchestrated campaign against Wilson in October 2003: “In the days after Wilson’s essay appeared, government officials began to steer reporters away from Wilson’s conclusions.”

CLAIM: Conversation Was About Welfare Reform, So Rove Didn’t Do Anything Wrong National Review’s Byron York -- “According to Luskin, the fact that Rove did not call Cooper; that the original purpose of the call, as Cooper told Rove, was welfare reform.”

FACT: What They Spoke About Was Irrelevant The original purpose of the conversation between Rove and Cooper is irrelevant. It has no bearing on the fact that Rove did identify a covert agent during that conversation.

CLAIM: Plame Wasn’t An Undercover Agent Ed Rogers, former official under Reagan/Bush: “I think it is now a matter of established fact that Mrs. Plame was not a protected covert agent, and I don’t think there’s any meaningful investigation about that.”

FACT: Former CIA Officer Who Worked With Plame Verified She Was Undercover Larry Johnson, former CIA officer: “Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover–in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover.”

CLAIM: Rove Was Trying To Correct A False Story Rove attorney Luskin added, “What Karl was trying to do … was to warn Time away from publishing things that were going to be established as false.”

FACT: Wilson Was Right, Bush Was Wrong Bloomberg recently reported, “Two-year old assertions by former ambassador Joseph Wilson regarding Iraq and uranium, which lie at the heart of the controversy over who at the White House identified a covert U.S. operative, have held up in the face of attacks by supporters of presidential adviser Karl Rove.”

CLAIM: Wilson Lied About His Trip To Niger Former Rove deputy Ken Mehlman: “What Joe Wilson alleged was that the vice president, then he said the CIA director sent him to Niger.” [CNN, 7/12/05]

FACT: Wilson Never Said Cheney Personally Sent Him To Niger Bloomberg reported, “Wilson never said that Cheney sent him, only that the vice president’s office had questions about an intelligence report that referred to the sale of uranium yellowcake to Iraq from Niger. Wilson, in his New York Times article, said CIA officials were informed of Cheney’s questions. ‘The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president’s office,’ Wilson wrote.”

 * Source -- thinkprogress.org Think Progress is a project of the American Progress Action Fund.

A. License You may copy, reprint, publish, reproduce, or otherwise display materials (excluding AP photos and cartoons) from the American Progress Action Fund on the condition that you attribute those materials to the American Progress Action Fund and provide a link to the website of the American Progress Action Fund. Specifically, any article or materials that you reprint or otherwise reproduce must be displayed with its by-line, if applicable, under one of the following headings:

"This material ["How To Talk To A Conservative About Karl Rove (If You Must)" was created by the American Progress Action Fund" (online)

rove blames it on reporters
heard on Air America this morning that AP is reporting an anonymous legal source says that Rove learned Valerie Plame's name from a reporter. Yeah fuckin right. --kizzle 14:53, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * It was from a grand jury testimony leak. Might be worth noting in the article, even if you don't believe it. --Badlydrawnjeff 14:55, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * as long as its noted that Rove's lawyer already admitted he told Cooper. --kizzle 15:08, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Karl Rove/Archive 2