User talk:JAIBHIM5

Do not place the picture again

Please refer to Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. I have told you repeatedly not to place the picture and if you think you have a legit reason then use the discussion section and do not revert my edits. The picture does not validate its cultural significance to the city and does not have any impact on the city of Aurangabad. Please use the picture in this article Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University. Also stop using unnecessary warning templates and read Wikipedia guidelines carefully. Do you know the The three-revert rule ? I guess not that is why you are reverting my edits. The sources themselves do not valiadate the use of picture in this article. Imagine having Namvistar ceremony picture on a Taj Mahal article. Please use a source that specifically says that this name change ceremony is an integral part of Aurangabad culture ? Do not confuse yourself. Nickelroy (talk) 04:48, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

== JAIBHIM5, you are invited to the Teahouse ==

Hi JAIBHIM5! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 23:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have already replied on the talk page so do not talk about this topic again with me. The picture is not going to be a part of Aurangabad culture. Your picture does not qualify Wikipedia:Relevance of content, Wikipedia:Images, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Do not allege or accuse me of any wrongdoing and stop Wikipedia:Wikilawyering. If the image does not qualify, then it does not. I noticed all your edits and it was clear that you were trying to promote a community celebration which you are attached to. Moreover, the image has no significance to the topic. You should also look at Wikipedia:Tendentious editing Nickelroy (talk) 03:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Community Affiliation

It is quite obvious that you are promoting a community which you are affiliated with, through wikipedia, so please take time and read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. I have pointed the same issue on the talk page of Aurangabad, Maharashtra. Nickelroy (talk) 03:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You should have a look at WP:HA and WP:BRD for your recent image removal in various articles. Answer separately on each talk page of article if you find an irrelevant image. Waiting to get answers on Aurangabad page and all pages.JAIBHIM5 (talk) 21:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

JAIBHIM5 and Nickleroy edit reversions

JAIBHIM5 (talk · contribs) and Nickelroy (talk · contribs): The constant reverting of each others' work is borderline disruptive. Regardless of which of you is "right" regarding a given edit and regardless of whether or note either or both of you have violated Wikipedia's 3 revert rule, you both need to find a better way to collaborate. Assuming both of you are relatively new to Wikipedia and have not edited before under other accounts, it's doubtful you both have a complete understanding of Wikipedia guidelines and policies.

I recommend that you both come to some kind of agreement like "before either of us inserts a picture on a topic we care about or reverts each other's edit, we will put a note on the article's talk page and notify the other editor, then wait 24 hours after any discussion dies down before making the edit." The agreement doesn't have to be what I just said - just make some kind of agreement with each other so the rest of us don't see rapid-fire back-and-forth edits.

If you cannot agree with each other about how to collaborate effectively, you both might consider utilizing one of Wikipedia's established dispute resolution procedures.

I am posting this message to both of your talk pages. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:45, 19 April 2014 (UTC) Diffs: [1] and [2]. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of Dalit Buddhist movement related images to several unrelated articles

First of all I have to tell you that I feel sympathy and respect for the Dalit Buddhist movement! However, this is an encyclopedia and your addition of Dalit Buddhist movement related images to articles like Torch, Decoration, Gesture, Seat and several others might be interpreted as a violation of WP:NPOV, WP:NOTADVERTISING, WP:UNDUE. The images that you have inserted several times, give no added value to these articles (most of these have already sufficient and NPOV-conform illustrations) . It appears to give WIKIPEDIA: Undue Weight to B. R. Ambedkar, Dr. Babasaheb Marathwada University, and Namvistar Din to add these pictures in the context of these articles. I am sorry, but I had to remove these pictures because WIKIPEDIA follows a neutral point of view policy and does not allow promotion. Please read WP:NOTADVERTISING, WP:UNDUE, WP:NPOV and please do not reinsert these images without WP:Consensus. If you really believe that these images are not promotion and should be added to these articles, you might consider utilizing one of Wikipedia's established dispute resolution procedures. Please note that slow edit warring and violaton of core policies may result in the restrictions of editing rights. If you need help, see [[3]]. Best regards JimRenge (talk) 19:36, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@JimRenge: See the new message to JAIBHIM5 a section or two down below, #Files you have uploaded, for related information. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 05:09, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Info

I noticed that you are editing pages related to India, therefore I wanted to alert you to the discretionary sanctions authorized for pages related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Best regards JimRenge (talk) 11:34, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

JimRenge (talk) 11:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Files you have uploaded

I didn't realize it until recently, but your uploads to the Wikimedia Commons since last fall and their use in the English Wikipedia seem to be made at least in part to promote the subject matter of the images. This is especially noticeable when they are used as mere examples in an article about an otherwise-unrelated topic. Typically these topics are things like gate for which there are a huge number of possible examples and there is nothing special about the image you added to the page that would warrant keeping that as an example. In many cases, the term is so common that having an example in the article may not even be helpful.

I've gone through all of your uploads on the Commons and checked the English Wikipedia for articles that use these images. Where there was an obvious situation where the image was not helpful, I removed it. I left the less-obvious cases - mostly those about India-related topics - alone.

Please do not use Wikipedia to promote the subjects you care about, even indirectly. Taken as a whole, your edits are similar to those described in Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-05-07/News and notes#Pirelli and in the "In brief" section of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-05-14/News and notes.

I also did some minor cleanup of categories and the like to some of these images.

Just so you know I'm not "picking on you," I also removed similarly-promotional images from some of the articles that I edited while reviewing the images you uploaded. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 05:06, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was too tired to list these the other day, but for your benefit, I'm listing the affected pages. They are: Homage (arts), Gate, Performance, Music of Asia, Seating assignment, Camera operator, Bronze sculpture, Pillars of Ashoka, Slogan, Exhibition, Statue, Buddhist calendar, Volunteering, Printed T-shirt. Note: In some of these pages, you or other editors have restored the images since the time that I edited them out. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:15, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. JimRenge (talk) 07:42, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Failure to understand WP:Undue weight

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges.

Your inability to understand the concept of Wikipedia:Undue weight and your persistent insistence on putting images related to Namvistar Din, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, and related topics in articles that are only marginally related to them is past the point of disruption. Multiple editors have discussed this with you over the past few weeks or months. Not only that, but your persistence has actually been counter-productive: Early on, I was somewhat sympathetic to your claims. The more I look at your overall editing behavior, the more I see that you are either simply unable to understand Wikipedia's editing policies and guidelines, or you understand them all too well and are deliberately ignoring them. I'm going to be charitable and assume it's the first case. In either case, please stop. The next time you add such an image to an article that is not closely related to the primary purpose of the image, you may find myself or another editor asking for an administrator to intervene.

I will hold out hope for you as an editor: If you are willing to "stand down" and stop inserting images until your understanding of Wikipedia editing standards is the same as the broader community's understanding, AND you agree to edit in accordance with the broader community's understanding of Wikipedia's editing standards, you will be able to edit Wikipedia without other editors routinely undoing your edits or otherwise complaining about them.

To any talk page stalkers who may be reading this: Two very recent examples of the kind of behavior I am talking about can be found by looking at the edit histories and talk pages of Broadcast journalism ~~and Aurangabad, Maharashtra~~. Additional examples can be found by looking at the images JAIBHIM5 has uploaded to the English Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Commons and seeing what pages link to them. For better results, look at his "upload log" - it will show the names of images which have since been deleted. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:50, 2 June 2014 (UTC) Struck second example - this one needs a WP:Third opinion and is not a clear-cut case of disruptive editing. The rest of my comments stand as does the "level 2" warning level. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed an image you added to Name

I have undone your edit from April in the article Name. Other editor(s) are correct: The image which I removed does not belong here. Not only does this image give undue weight to a different concept, it is a picture about a specific movement, Namantar Andolan (English: Name Change Movement), not the general concept covered by the article Name. Having that image makes about as much sense as using the image File:Sea of Japan naming dispute.png, which highly relevant to the article Sea of Japan naming dispute but, like the image that I just removed, totally irrelevant to Name. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:33, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring on Aurangabad

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.

Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. JimRenge (talk) 17:59, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JAIBHIM5. I have removed the contentious image from Aurangabad, Maharashtra, and i would urge you not to put it back; i believe if you do you will be edit warring, as described above. Instead, if you still desire to see it, i strongly suggest you formulate an argument different from those you have already put forward, and bring it to the talk page of the article. Several people now have told you that what you have said previously is not sufficient; take that as experience and move forwards. Cheers, Lindsay^Hello 08:23, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]