User talk:A ssaiteja

April 2020

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Ghar Wapsi, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:01, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stop being biased

As you know Wikipedia is a unbiased platform so don't post your bias views on it make your website if you're so keen to whitewash their deed I understand your love for terrorism & and inhuman activities done by right-wingers in India make your own website & keep this Wiki as neutral as it is MilkyMike9788 (talk) 13:56, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

see do you have any proofs that treating it as a terrorism.... and ghar wapsi is a bulk process with a single video you cannot make it as forceful conversion..... and one more keep your missionary biasing with you wiki don't allow it A ssaiteja (talk) 16:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

it's you who is treating it as a terrorism... with no valid proofs.... wiki is not the platform for your allegations..... and one more thing don't judge a book by it's cover..... it's you who treating it as a terrorism which you don't like

I am not saying that they are not terrorists or doing forceful conversions you cannot decide it with one video which has no valid proofs as it is very bulk process A ssaiteja (talk) 16:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Ram Janmabhoomi, you may be blocked from editing. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:20, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

you first tell me on what basis you are saying it as hypothesized.... come up with proofs... A ssaiteja (talk) 04:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not allowing personal analysis.. then why allowing writing of views of a section of people... come with proof... did they really told to you or any news?? first come up with proofs rather writing few sentences with out proofs A ssaiteja (talk) 04:15, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the policies I have linked. Our content needs to be based on what reliable sources say, not on what evidence you personally find acceptable. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:32, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

yes they should be based on reliable sources....I am asking what are those sources??without mentioning the sources you added those sentences... first add links or any other things... A ssaiteja (talk) 05:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:LEAD. Sources are cited in the body of the article; they don't have to be in the lead, which is a summary of the rest of the article. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:30, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Vanamonde (Talk) 03:21, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]