December 2018
Hello, I'm Arjayay. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Balochistan, Pakistan, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Arjayay. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Human rights violations in Balochistan seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I'm INeedSupport. An edit that you recently made to 2017–18 North Korea crisis seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! INeedSupport(Care free to give me support?) 21:38, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Wikiemirati. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Wikiemirati (talk) 23:59, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Mountain157, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 01:12, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, I noticed that you are having some issues with signing your messages and comments I just wanted to let you know that you can sign your comments or your messages by typing four tildes (~~~~) as mentioned in this welcome message. SharabSalam (talk) 22:53, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
What Harrassment is not
Hello Mountin157, please do not accuse other users of harassment based on merely editing of the same page by another user. It must be emphasized that one editor warning another for disruption or incivility is not harassment if the claims are presented civilly, made in good faith, and in an attempt to resolve a dispute instead of escalating one.
Neither is tracking a user's contributions for policy violations; the contribution logs exist for editorial and behavioral oversight. Editors do not own their edits, or any other article content, and any other editor has a right to track their editing patterns, and, if necessary, to revert their edits. Unwarranted resistance to such efforts may be a sign of ownership behavior and lead to sanctions.
Unfounded accusations of harassment may be considered a serious personal attack and dealt with accordingly. Please read WP:HA#NOT and familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policy of harrassment before accusations of harassment.
Moreover, there is a difference between a user's page and a user's talkpage, read WP:USERSUBPAGE to get more familiar with it. Your user page has a name like this: User:Example. Editing a user's page without permission is vandalism. If you would like to send a message please send it through the user's talkpage. Your user talk page (sometimes abbreviated to "your talk page" or "your user talk") has a name like this: User talk:Example.
Please do not assume ownership of articles. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Your edits have been removed by multiple users due to violations of Wikipedia policies. Familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policy before you make controversial edits, and definitely before you accuse other users of violating them. For how to write citations, see citing sources. Wikipedia:Verifiability, no original research and neutral point of view are Wikipedia's core content policies. They work together to determine content, so editors should understand the key points of all three. Articles must also comply with the copyright policy.
You are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not reverting back to your edits, edit-warring, or making personal attacks. See BRD for how this is done. Wikiemirati (talk) 15:42, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
- You say that I am making unfounded accusations but you are the one making unfounded accusations of "ownership behavior" which could also be considered a personal attack. When did I ever say that I "assumed ownership of articles". What you were doing was not editing or redistributing but simply you were deleting my information repeatedly, which can be considered WP:Vandalism. In fact for that matter you were not doing any of the things that you claim should be done. For one of the articles in fact you were reversing my edits repeatedly which is Edit-Warring, especially since it was at least 3 times. Only for non-cited evidence should you have discuss not for properly cited evidence just because you think that it is "WP:No Original Research". It sounds like intimidation to me to be aggressive then accuse the other person of breaking Wikipedia policies. For other articles, the editors would remove or add a few more words, but they would not delete the entire thing. You use of the term "multiple users" was exaggerated". It was actually just 2 more users and that too in their edits they did not remove all of what I had put. I never made any personal attacks on you and was simply raising questions and/or concerns.-Mountain157(talk) 11:08 24 December 2018
- Thank you for your response. I apologize if I sounded intimidating or aggressive, I did not mean to make you feel that way. As for your ownership of articles, once your edits have been reverted and you disagree, the proper method is to discuss it in the talk page. You however, simply reverted back. I have linked BRD above which means: You did an edit, it has been reverted, you must discuss it. You however simply reverted it back and you're accusing me of violating the 3 revert rule. In the talk page here Talk:Haqqani network, when I asked you to clarify, you accused me of giving "preferable treatment" to certain content and "sponsored by Pakistan government". Do not make those accusations again. You seem to dismiss the WP:NPOV entirely, and accuse me of being non-neutral when I have no even added any content in the first place. You can always ask for a third opinion as well. You have read an article about general trade ties between two countries and decided to add them as allies to a certain conflict. This is original research. You have read an article about Al Qaeda supporting two countries and decided to add those two countries as supporting ISIS. This is original research. I have asked you to reword your statements, to add proper citation template and re-add the content. I am under no obligation to reword your paragraphs of violations to make sure it adheres to Wikipedia policy. You added it, you must make sure it conforms to Wikipedia's policy or risk it being removed or changed. If it is removed do not rebel and revert it without discussing it, that shows ownership of content. If you revert without discussing then you will get reverted back and asked to discuss your edit. Wikiemirati (talk) 16:34, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
- You say that I am making unfounded accusations but you are the one making unfounded accusations of "ownership behavior" which could also be considered a personal attack. When did I ever say that I "assumed ownership of articles". What you were doing was not editing or redistributing but simply you were deleting my information repeatedly, which can be considered WP:Vandalism. In fact for that matter you were not doing any of the things that you claim should be done. For one of the articles in fact you were reversing my edits repeatedly which is Edit-Warring, especially since it was at least 3 times. Only for non-cited evidence should you have discuss not for properly cited evidence just because you think that it is "WP:No Original Research". It sounds like intimidation to me to be aggressive then accuse the other person of breaking Wikipedia policies. For other articles, the editors would remove or add a few more words, but they would not delete the entire thing. You use of the term "multiple users" was exaggerated". It was actually just 2 more users and that too in their edits they did not remove all of what I had put. I never made any personal attacks on you and was simply raising questions and/or concerns.-Mountain157(talk) 11:08 24 December 2018
- I already apologized for the edits that I made previously about the North Korea crisis and with support for ISIS. Keep in mind that Vigilantism and Anarchy where one person decides "I am right" or "Your content violates policy" based on one's opinions is not acceptable. Also you bring up the rules but you should read WP:BUREAU. It in fact states not to "follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policies without consideration for their principles".-Mountain157(talk) 12:05 24 December 2018
- Which brings me back to what I have proposed: discussion. As per WP:BUREAU disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion. I did not follow an opinion based or an overly strict sense of policy. You have made controversial edits, and they have been removed. You wondered why and called me biased at first, and I have explained them, by using the policy. This is not my "opinion" or a "strict policy", this is the proper encyclopedia building process. I suggested you amend your edits, but you simply reverted them. Your controversial edits have also been removed by others too, which establishes that consensus is against you. I hope this makes sense. Have a good day. Wikiemirati (talk) 17:41, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
- I already apologized for the edits that I made previously about the North Korea crisis and with support for ISIS. Keep in mind that Vigilantism and Anarchy where one person decides "I am right" or "Your content violates policy" based on one's opinions is not acceptable. Also you bring up the rules but you should read WP:BUREAU. It in fact states not to "follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policies without consideration for their principles".-Mountain157(talk) 12:05 24 December 2018
Discussion at WP:ANI
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Nthep (talk) 18:00, 24 December 2018 (UTC)