Aman.kumar.goel (talk | contribs) Warning: Disruptive editing. Tag: Twinkle |
Aman.kumar.goel (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
* If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents|Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]]. |
* If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents|Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]]. |
||
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]. ''You are fully aware of what you are doing. Refrain from disruption.''<!-- Template:uw-disruptive3 --> '''[[User:Aman.kumar.goel|Aman Kumar Goel]]''' <sup>(''[[User talk:Aman.kumar.goel|Talk]]'')</sup> 02:42, 15 December 2021 (UTC) |
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]. ''You are fully aware of what you are doing. Refrain from disruption.''<!-- Template:uw-disruptive3 --> '''[[User:Aman.kumar.goel|Aman Kumar Goel]]''' <sup>(''[[User talk:Aman.kumar.goel|Talk]]'')</sup> 02:42, 15 December 2021 (UTC) |
||
==AE== |
|||
I have filed a report against you at [[WP:ARE]] where you can comment. '''[[User:Aman.kumar.goel|Aman Kumar Goel]]''' <sup>(''[[User talk:Aman.kumar.goel|Talk]]'')</sup> 03:20, 15 December 2021 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:20, 15 December 2021
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
Archiving
Would you like me to set up archiving on your talk page? I can set it up so that it happens automatically when sections are a week old. Some of the messages you have received are important, and it would be best to keep them in an archive.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
- Toddy1, yes that will be very helpful if you can please do. Thanks in advance. --Bringtar (talk) 15:15, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
- I have set up archiving to automatically archive topics that are 7 days old, but to leave one topic left.
Full protection
Fully protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Georgethedragonslayer, Bringtar, as my protection summary notes, it's clear that ONUS rests on the side of exclusion, but report any BLP vios to WP:BLPN as those take priority. Thanks! El_C 16:35, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- @El C: Per my discussion just above, I think it will benefit the website if this user is topic banned at least from any edits related to religion in the context of India-Pakistan. They were already alerted of ARBIPA, then went through an ANI report as well. Even after months of editing they want to apply WP:BLPCAT on a person (Haridasa Thakur) who died 500 years ago, then reject the evident edit summary by telling "it removed due to failed verification and not because of BLPCAT" despite the attached sources support the information,[1][2] and also accuse me of "vandalise" and "lie" in violation of WP:NPA. Together with the disruption on List of converts to Islam from Hinduism which is protected for the 2nd time because of this user, I only see clear chances of more time being wasted. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 17:39, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- Very funny! @El C: said "it's clear that ONUS rests on the side of exclusion" so you should not remove well-referenced bulk content from the article and the article has been protected to avoid edit war as you have been making disrupting editing. Anyway, from the last ANI report it is clear that last time my edits were correct and well sourced so you should stop removing sourced information and engage with discussion if you think my edit was problematic. Can we do this please otherwise I have to see the dispute resolution process. Thanks. --Bringtar (talk) 17:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- Bringtar, do you not understand that ONUS dis-favours you in this dispute? El_C 17:49, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- @El C: I believe it does to both of us because when I removed unverified contents from the other article, it was reinstaed without any valid explanation. Maybe you can explain if I get you wrong. I also opened[3] this to discuss the dispute. --Bringtar (talk) 17:53, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- I can't follow any of those details, I'm just saying that, by it's nature, you're dis-favoured by ONUS. Because, if you hold an WP:RFC on the contested content, you'd need at least a WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS for inclusion. Exclusion, however, gets defaulted to in the event of a WP:NOCONSENSUS outcome. El_C 18:09, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- @El C:, sorry, my bad. I thought you read the other admin's comment here about BLPvios by the editor who had removed the exact same sourced material added by me. I couldn't add then because you fully protected the article. I should have pursued the incident at that time otherwise this new mess could have been avoided. --Bringtar (talk) 18:14, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- I can't follow any of those details, I'm just saying that, by it's nature, you're dis-favoured by ONUS. Because, if you hold an WP:RFC on the contested content, you'd need at least a WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS for inclusion. Exclusion, however, gets defaulted to in the event of a WP:NOCONSENSUS outcome. El_C 18:09, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- @El C: I believe it does to both of us because when I removed unverified contents from the other article, it was reinstaed without any valid explanation. Maybe you can explain if I get you wrong. I also opened[3] this to discuss the dispute. --Bringtar (talk) 17:53, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- Bringtar, do you not understand that ONUS dis-favours you in this dispute? El_C 17:49, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- Very funny! @El C: said "it's clear that ONUS rests on the side of exclusion" so you should not remove well-referenced bulk content from the article and the article has been protected to avoid edit war as you have been making disrupting editing. Anyway, from the last ANI report it is clear that last time my edits were correct and well sourced so you should stop removing sourced information and engage with discussion if you think my edit was problematic. Can we do this please otherwise I have to see the dispute resolution process. Thanks. --Bringtar (talk) 17:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- Bringtar, El_C is correct about ONUS. Please take it to the article talk page (as you have) and lets figure this out.VR talk 18:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
December 2021
Please stop your disruptive editing.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. You are fully aware of what you are doing. Refrain from disruption. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 02:42, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
AE
I have filed a report against you at WP:ARE where you can comment. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 03:20, 15 December 2021 (UTC)