User talk:Bimodamarjati
If you think that info is required, please explain why on the article's talk page. Until then, you have two editors who disagree with you. Please do not add the content again until you have at least attempted to discuss this on the article talk page. Remember, Wikipedia is a collaborative project. – PeeJay 16:58, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- maybe because you are not trying to hear my opinion and start to revert all things that i made. I have explained all the reason when I undo what u deleted.
- Just because you have explained yourself doesn't mean I have to agree. Please explain yourself on the article talk page so that others may express their opinions and we can come to a collaborative decision about whether or not the information is required. Until then, the article should remain as it is. – PeeJay 17:02, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- then who the fuck are you to make the decision ? you could do whatever you want and now I should waiting for everybody approval ?
- Yes, that's exactly how it is. But it's not just me who said you shouldn't add that content, as User:Mn1548 and User:2A02:C7D:DC41:7000:9158:CA39:DC68:35E1 also reverted your changes. Furthermore, please try to keep calm and not insult other editors. Swearing at other people is unlikely to win you many allies here. – PeeJay 17:06, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- And maybe start to respect each other and asking politely without making any changes like you the one who own the page will help you in the future. Because you and two other people don't like the changes do not mean the pages can't change. Because neither of you own the page.
- See, you keep saying we don't own the page and then you act like you own the page by disregarding Wikipedia policy and insisting that we accept your changes, despite the fact that two experienced editors disagree with you. You're right, pages can change, but if people think your change doesn't help the article, it's unlikely to stay. By the way, you have broken WP:3RR, so I recommend that you undo your last edit and restore the article to the way it was. Immediately. – PeeJay 17:13, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- Calling random people an experience editors. Nice to hear that.
- Why haven't you restored the article yet? Considering your flagrant disregard for the rules here, I am very tempted to report you at WP:AIV. – PeeJay 17:44, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- I guess you didn't have all day after all, baby ;) – PeeJay 18:22, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- Why haven't you restored the article yet? Considering your flagrant disregard for the rules here, I am very tempted to report you at WP:AIV. – PeeJay 17:44, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- Calling random people an experience editors. Nice to hear that.
- See, you keep saying we don't own the page and then you act like you own the page by disregarding Wikipedia policy and insisting that we accept your changes, despite the fact that two experienced editors disagree with you. You're right, pages can change, but if people think your change doesn't help the article, it's unlikely to stay. By the way, you have broken WP:3RR, so I recommend that you undo your last edit and restore the article to the way it was. Immediately. – PeeJay 17:13, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- And maybe start to respect each other and asking politely without making any changes like you the one who own the page will help you in the future. Because you and two other people don't like the changes do not mean the pages can't change. Because neither of you own the page.
- Yes, that's exactly how it is. But it's not just me who said you shouldn't add that content, as User:Mn1548 and User:2A02:C7D:DC41:7000:9158:CA39:DC68:35E1 also reverted your changes. Furthermore, please try to keep calm and not insult other editors. Swearing at other people is unlikely to win you many allies here. – PeeJay 17:06, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- then who the fuck are you to make the decision ? you could do whatever you want and now I should waiting for everybody approval ?
- Just because you have explained yourself doesn't mean I have to agree. Please explain yourself on the article talk page so that others may express their opinions and we can come to a collaborative decision about whether or not the information is required. Until then, the article should remain as it is. – PeeJay 17:02, 22 July 2019 (UTC)