User talk:My Lord/Archives 3

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kaylee Bryant (April 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were: 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kaylee Bryant and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Kaylee Bryant, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:42, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, My Lord! Having an article 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 03:42, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Ochannel ‎

User talk:Ochannel ‎ dan O Channel 6 Tahun Mulai 2016-2019 Television di TV Media, SCTV, Indosiar ok --AunkBInnnnn (talk) 15:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Terrorist

Re. your edit, please read WP:TERRORIST. Also, HuM is not based in Pakistan. — kashmīrī ^TALK 18:33, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

I have posted in Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Cow_vigilante_violence_in_India. Please have a look. Soarwakes (talk) 04:23, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Changes in Comparison_of_research_networking_tools_and_research_profiling_systems

Hi, considering your revert of the changes I've recently done to Comparison_of_research_networking_tools_and_research_profiling_systems, I believe the data I'm adding corrects and completes the information regarding Converis. Why do you allege these are not relevant? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.31.5.10 (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

IP disruption

My Lord, this Indian IP range here is causing havoc on Indian related topics. Constant WP:OR and additions that are just word salad. Any idea how to deal with this? (Highpeaks35 (talk) 04:28, 5 May 2019 (UTC))

Shashank5988, I am bringing you in as well. It seems like User:Eli Katzmann is the same as this IP. Just socking. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 04:52, 5 May 2019 (UTC))

Doug Weller, I see you also reversed this user and their multiple IP here. It seems like this user is just a possible vandalism IP/User ID. Can you please advise what can be done? My Lord, Shashank5988 and I reserved many of their edits, but the IP/user comes back from that location. Please advise/help. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 05:02, 5 May 2019 (UTC))

IP has been blocked now. ML ^talk 18:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019

Samf4u Please review your edit on Rare earths trade dispute. It looks like you reverted me by mistake.ML ⁹¹¹ 10:36, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi ML, Your right, all fixed sorry about that! - Samf4u (talk) 10:38, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! ML ⁹¹¹ 10:41, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Mughals in AK

Re this: the addition wasn't unsourced (though I really don't know how reliable the source is). – Uanfala (talk) 18:47, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

I have self reverted, however I have not included the Turkish claim. ML ⁹¹¹ 18:57, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

July 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jaggi Vasudev; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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 and 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. DBigXrayᗙ 07:58, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

DS 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 living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.

A procedural reminder post 12 months--DBigXrayᗙ 08:01, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

COI with Jaggi Vasudev and Isha Yoga Foundation

You have to disclose your relationship if any with Jaggi Vasudev and Isha Yoga Foundation. As per WP:COI--DBigXrayᗙ 08:37, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

See WP:ASPERSION. ML ⁹¹¹ 10:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Do not skirt the question. Your userpage does not say anything about Jaggi Vasudev and Isha Yoga Foundation. But your contribution history does say alot. Being your well wisher I am giving you this chance by asking this straight question. Skirting it is not going to help you. --DBigXrayᗙ 11:02, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:My_Lord reported by User:DBigXray (Result: ). Thank you. DBigXrayᗙ 11:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Jaggi Vasudev. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 17:27, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

My Lord (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

My reverts complied with WP:BLP since the content that was frequently being added by an account (reactivated after 4 years with only 69 edits) were violating WP:BLP by adding poorly worded WP:OR and disparaging the subject. This page has a long term history of disruption by such SPAs and disruptive accounts[1][2] that edit this page mainly for disparaging this subject. If unblocked then I would instead consider using WP:BLPN once the edit war gets out of hand. ML ⁹¹¹ 18:53, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline. Block has expired. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:44, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Hi, Bbb23, My Lord came in #wikipedia-en-unblock ^connect. While I normally don't expedite reviews based on that, he has said that he'd agree to 0RR on the article for the next 72 hours. If he indicates that here, would you be fine with my unblocking. I explained to him that I agreed with your judgement that the BLP exception didn't apply and that the talk page was better, and he seemed to understand it. Thanks. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:30, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: First, I prefer that My Lord say whatever he wants here, not off-wiki. Second, agreeing to 0RR seems like a nothing. ML shouldn't be editing the article after the block expires. He can use the article Talk page or BLPN if the Talk page proves inadequate.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Agreed on both points. The block has expired now, so it’s a moot question. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:43, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: I had to visit someone in real life. Since the unblock condition was accepted I think you should still modify in the block log that the unblock request was accepted because I am going to abide by the condition. Thanks. ML ⁹¹¹ 18:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry for not getting back to you sooner. I typically don’t do “block for a second to note something in the log” blocks. Your block is over now. If this comes up in the future, you can permalink to this discussion if you want to provide context for the block. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:40, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as you did at Jaggi Vasudev. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

• You were warned about this before during your last block. The fact that I blocked the other user for edit-warring did not entitle you to revert. Your judgment in this matter continues to be very poor.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:12, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bbb23: You are right. It was a bad judgement on my part. I would still like to get unblocked and I am fine with accepting 0RR for Jaggi Vasudev article for next 6 months. ML ⁹¹¹ 17:32, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm having trouble with this because your last block expired only a few days ago. Do you have so little control over your own actions? In any event, your condition is unacceptable. However, if you agree not to edit Jaggi Vasudev at all for three months, including removing what you believe is vandalism, I will unblock you. You can use the article Talk page if you wish, but if I were you, I'd take the article off my watchlist and forget about it completely. There are lots of other articles out there. If you agree to this condition and you violate it, you will be reblocked, but for longer than one week. Your decision?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

You are right once again. I accept this proposal. ML ⁹¹¹ 18:01, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Good. I've unblocked you. Take care.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:28, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Cave paintings in India

Hi, can you please comment on this revert, where you removed an addition of a source that you called unreliable? The same user is now adding material back again with the same source, here, and I'm not sure how to evaluate this source for reliability, and could use your thoughts. Ping, please. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 21:19, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

You have

been reverted at Rajiv Dixit and are asked to refrain from using misleading edit-sums.∯WBG^converse 10:48, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Kaylee Bryant

Hello, My Lord. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Kaylee Bryant".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (📧) 08:52, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Welcome back, ML! Kautilya3 (talk) 17:55, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ML ⁹¹¹ 18:16, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:BRD

Per this edit: I think you misunderstand WP:BRD. You boldly removed content; that was reverted; next you should have discussed - not started edit warrning. Dorsetonian (talk) 14:50, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

@Dorsetonian: I think you misunderstood WP:BRD, because I only reverted the half-sourced and half-OR done on 4 February[3] which is still very recent.  Though your edit summary claiming this faulty content as 'sourced and valid' is misleading. ML ⁹¹¹ 15:30, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

February 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jai Shri Ram; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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 and 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.

Template to take a diff. DBigXrayᗙ 10:16, 11 February 2020 (UTC)