User talk:Jackgoswami

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello, Jackgoswami, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take 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 ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Pavanai45 (talk) 03:00, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Hindu mythology, did not appear constructive and have been undone. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New incarnation

@Bbb23, Doug Weller, Bishonen, and Kautilya3: sorry, I've an awfully bad memory, but this editor reminds me strongly of the one who removed all mentions of "mythology" from India-related articles. Does anyone of you remember who that was? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:43, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonathan, I am not removing references to mythology. Simply helping Wikipedia become a non-biased platform which does not favour the Abrahamic religions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackgoswami (talk • contribs)

@Joshua Jonathan: you mean @abdulgoswami? See 1 and 2. Probably worth an SPI, may be a WP:DUCK, given the names. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:25, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ms Sarah Welch.

Confirmed, blocked, and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:43, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you not realise the inconsistencies in Wikipedia's platform? Instead of rectifying the biases you are happy to leave them?

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Hindu mythology, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:16, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oshwah, I did give a valid reason. The change was made to ensure consistency between that page and the page on Islamic mythology which specifically states the page is based on a mythological perspective.

Hindu mythology

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. JimRenge (talk) 00:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]