User talk:Neysara

February 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Gangubai Kathiawadi, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. 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 your 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.
Please do not add trailer commentary as the film's reception. In addition, self published websites like transgenderindia.com may not meet the standard of reliable sources. Thanks -- Ab207 (talk) 11:12, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Gangubai Kathiawadi. 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. Please seek consensus at the talk page instead of re-instating your edits. Ab207 (talk) 13:47, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not silence LGBTQIA voices. Gangubai Kathiawadi is a movie involves trans peoples representaion in India. Trans exclusion is not constructive, but sadly this movie chooses to do that. I as a trans person believe that I am contributing constructively by voicing out trans people voices. So why is Ab207 silencing us ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neysara (talk • contribs) 14:30, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Neysara. Please note that content which is not upto the standards is routinely removed from Wikipedia. The motivation here is not to silence anyone but to maintain the quality of encyclopedia. Once the film is released, if any reviewer writing for any mainstream website or newspaper gives a perspective from the transgender community, that can be highlighted. However, adding so much content from a single source just on the basis of trailer can be undue.

In addition, since the credentials and editorial oversight of transgenderindia.com website is not known, it may fall under what Wikipedia calls self-published source and is generally avoided while adding content. Regards

Courtesy ping to other editors who have removed/reverted Neysara's content, so that discussion remains at one place: @Sush150, Bovineboy2008, and Kpddg: -- Ab207 (talk) 14:52, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. First of all, I reviewed the contributions, but am not finding the exact article I reverted. However, regarding the more important content dispute: we do not want to silence anyone. Its just that edits need to be backed by independent and reliable sources. What Ab207 said is exactly why the content was reverted. Kpddg ^(talk ^• ^contribs) 15:29, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kpddg. My ping was in reference to this edit. Although, I could have been more clearer as its an indirect removal. Thank you for your comments nonetheless. -- Ab207 (talk) 15:43, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ab207, Thank you for your message, I have made some changes to my edits. Now I write my edit under "Criticism from transgender community in India" . Here it is not written as a review but the voices transgender community in India has raised against the casting of a cis actor in the movie. I hope it works good for the policy now.

Hello Kpddg I wonder how you confer reliability for transgender content from a Cis gender sources. Most Cis gender people in India have not even met a single transgender person in their life, how do you expect such people to write trans perspectives for issues that are trans related. Transgender India is one of the most credible and reliable sources for trans issues in India. I feel a cis bias here. #nothingAboutUsWithoutUs Neysara (talk) 15:40, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hello Kpddg, I have made some changes to this edit. I now write under "Controversy" tab, I hope this works better for the policy.Neysara (talk) 15:49, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay,thanks. your intentions are fine and do go ahead. But I would suggest to first raise this issue on the article talk page. The movie has just been released, so perhaps more sources will point out this problem. And the content could be made more better as per the guidelines. Like: bullet points need not be added, the website cannot be linked as an external link, and perhaps some words can be replaced with more encyclopedic/neutral ones( like 'apathy', 'rosy', etc.). Thank you. Kpddg ^(talk ^• ^contribs) 16:09, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sush150 , Stop silencing transgender voices. You are repeatedly deleting our edits stating "This is not the right place for your(transgender peoples) voices". Please tell us why is this not the right place for transgender peoples voices ? and where do you think transgender peoples voices belong ? [User:Neysara|Neysara]] (talk) 17:04, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello Neysara, First of all the sources you added in article it's not appropriate and you only copy paste the contain from various websites. Also u attach YouTube link it also not proper. That why your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Sush150 (talk) 17:26, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring warning

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. El_C 17:35, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]