User talk:JazzyBsolarjatt

Welcome!

Hi JazzyBsolarjatt! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 15:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Prohibitions in Sikhism. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
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. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. POV removal of sourced information

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Nihang into Sikhism. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 23:32, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Hello, I'm Toddy1. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Muslims‎, 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. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Toddy1. I did not feel that providing a source was absolutely necessary since the statistics are listed on the right side of the respective page, showing countries with the population numbers (sources included). I had originally thought this was superfluous and unnecessary. Upon your suggestion, I will add the citations and re-add my original edit. Thank you for posting your comment and clarifying your revert. I appreciate your kindness. JazzyBsolarjatt (talk) 16:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When a sentence has a citation after it, the citation is meant to support the statement in the sentence. If you want to add another statement, please do not nest it between the existing statement and the existing citation.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have again added information to the article on Muslims‎ that is not supported by the sources you cited for it. If you have a citation to a newspaper article that says that 250 million Muslims live in India, you can use that to support a statement that 250 million Muslims live in India. But you cannot use it to support a claim not made in the article. All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not clearly stated by the sources themselves. Your inference from the claim that 250 million Muslims live in India was that India has the largest amount of Muslims worldwide. But the source does not say that. It is a conclusion you drew from the information. See Wikipedia:No original research.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Religious clothing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ornament. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda Nunes

Hi Jazz Bsolarjatt, Pls note that our edits on the above page have been reverted. The MMA infobox info is as per Sherdog.com as per Wikipedia mma guidelines and not tapology and UFC is the primary source which means it is not independent. Sherdog is independent and reliable source. You can check all the mma fighter page especially those are currently fighting the info is derived from Sherdog. Sherdog ref can be found at the bottom of the page infobox or you can see here. Pls do not change the info. Cassiopeia talk 23:39, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Cassiopeia. I understand Sherdog may be an "independent" , "reliable", and primary source for the information IN THE SECTION of the infobox LABELLED "Mixed martial arts record" (on the above discussed page). This is further emphasized by the line at the bottom of the infobox, which says "Mixed martial arts record from Sherdog". However, the infobox contains other information, not under the labelled "Mixed martial arts record". For many of these pieces of information (in the infobox, on the same page), the source listed is UFC, tapology, ESPN, Globo, sportskeeda, xxx. This is the case for information corresponding to "Reach", "Fighting out of", "Team", and "Rank". There are many UFC links sourced for the information in this infobox, which do not source Sherdog.

1. If Sherdog is the primary source superseding all other sources, this needs to be made clear (maybe via a note at the bottom of the infobox, along with an explanation of logic. Withholding this information is a disservice to global users and readers, as it provides incomplete and misguiding information. This is especially true when different sources provide different information for name, reach, team etc.). This action would provide clear communication and transparency.

2. If Sherdog is the only source to be used, then all other links/sources for ALL of the information for "Reach", "Fighting out of", "Team", and "Rank" IN THE INFOBOX need to be deleted and need to only show information from the Sherdog page. This would be due to the fact that the sources for the info here are not as "independent and reliable" like Sherdog (as you stated in your post). This action would maintain consistency.

3. You feel that the official UFC website is not a credible source but Sherdog is? Can you please explain this logic to me. What makes Sherdog more credible as a source than the official UFC website? UFC is the biggest MMA promotion in the world. Accusing the UFC of having "non-reliable" information, as compared to "sherdog.com", is like saying the official NFL website or official NBA website does not have accurate information (compared to a third-party website). Sherdog is a website devoted to MMA that has many forums and discussion pages on the many topics of MMA like records, promotions, etc. It was created by a photographer. With how much confidence can you say that this 3rd-party website has more accurate/consistent information than an official sports website? Do you feel that Sherdog has less bias than an official sports league website? Please explain why.

4. Wikipedia MMA Guidelines clearly state that the official UFC website can be used as a source for information. It also mentions Sherdog, however it makes no mention on the hierarchy/ranking of the sources. Please see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mixed_martial_arts#Infobox_martial_artist

5. If UFC is not credible enough, is ESPN credible enough? If not, please remove all ESPN links from this infobox. Please see the respective ESPN page for this fighter, which lists the same info as the UFC official website: https://www.espn.com/mma/fighter/_/id/2516131/amanda-nunes

Please note: NOT clarifying this information and NOT making these edits holds your claim inconsistent. You cannot choose to uphold info coming from Sherdog as the only applicable info in some places, and then not hold it as the primary, sole source of info in other places, especially in the same infobox, which does not even specify that ALL info in the WHOLE infobox should come from only Sherdog (page only specifies specific section). Please go ahead and remove all non-Sherdog info from the textbox and change the statement at the bottom of the infobox with a statement explaining that ALL info in the infobox should only come from Sherdog. JazzyBsolarjatt (talk) 13:59, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JazzyBsolarjatt, All information can be derivate from Sherdog will be the info in the MMA infobox. Any other info is not from the Sherdog fighter pages, can be cited by independent, reliable source. UFC and ESPN is not independent source for UFC fighters is afflicted with the UFC Fighters and ESPN has business contract (7 years) with UFC.23:29, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

When you revert compromise edits that reflect sources, you risk being accused of being disruptive.NEDOCHAN (talk) 11:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ranjit Singh

Hello!

Regarding Special:Diff/1133694928, I don't understand your reasoning for making the text bold, and per the other listed titles, "The" probably shouldn't be included. You also added a stay '''Bold text''', so please look out for that in the future. Thanks! ~ Eejit43 (talk) 19:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh Riders of America moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Sikh Riders of America. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 02:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sikh Riders of America (March 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by HitroMilanese was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Does not appear to meet WP:NORG or WP:GNG.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Sikh Riders of America and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hitro talk 07:49, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JazzyBsolarjatt! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Hitro talk 07:49, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Sikh Riders of America

Hello, JazzyBsolarjatt. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sikh Riders of America, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:02, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Sikh Riders of America

Hello, JazzyBsolarjatt. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Sikh Riders of America".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:48, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]