User talk:Nonameonlyusername

Welcome!

Hi Nonameonlyusername! 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! — Newslinger talk 11:39, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial topic area alerts

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 India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. 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. — Newslinger talk 11:39, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 articles about 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. — Newslinger talk 11:39, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rama, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages New York and Cannada. 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) 06:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Hinduism. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Rama in Sikhism

Hello, Nonameonlyusername,

Thank you for creating Rama in Sikhism.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Infobox has a disgraceful image of Rama, and says, in conflict with Chaubis Avatar and Dasam Granth that Rama is the 7th avatar of Vishnu. One source says 9th, another says 20th, and the infobox claims 7th. Sort this out.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru (talk) 04:30, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.Nonameonlyusername (talk) 12:42, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hinduism in India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jammu and Kashmir.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia

When you copy text within Wikipedia, you are expected to attribute it in the edit-summry: "copied from Article-name. You're now copying text I wrote - and editing it in a sometimes poor way. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rise and re-establishment of Hindu identity?

What exactly do you mean by this phrase? [1] Where does the source say anything like this? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And which source says that the Constitution of India bans cow-slaughter? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:33, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pls see the book reference. Nonameonlyusername (talk) 11:35, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Hello, I'm Yamla. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, List of national animals, 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 the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Yamla (talk) 11:53, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla Thanks for imformation, I am adding it as soon as possible. Nonameonlyusername (talk) 11:55, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Hinduism in India. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Hinduism in India 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. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:35, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya3 All edits are right and explained with references. Nonameonlyusername (talk) 12:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an acceptable response. When an edit is contested, you need to stop and discuss it and wait for CONSENSUS. You have doubled or triped the size of the Hinduism in India article over the last couple of days. A lot of your content is naive, poorly phrased, poorly sourced and ridiculously opinionated. You need to stop now, and answer the questions that have been posed. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya3 Ok, now I won't edit this page, but yes I have added all information right. Nonameonlyusername (talk) 12:53, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Now, please go back to the previous section above and answer my question. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya3 I wasn't aware of any such laws. Nonameonlyusername (talk) 13:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now you are aware. You are responsible for all the content that you contribute and ensure that it satisfies WP:Verifiability and WP:NPOV. If any questions are raised, you need to answer them. You cannot treat Wikipedia as your private property. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya3 I know but don't whitewash a topic or article totally such like that, I have done a lot of hard work in this article. Nonameonlyusername (talk) 13:31, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted your re-addition of the content, which is becoming disruptive. At this point the material that you are adding has been challenged by multiple editors. You need to achieve consensus at the article talk page before adding any of it back, otherwise you are likely to be blocked for edit-warring. See here for guidance on how this process works. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 15:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wham2001 only very few parts is challenged and why to remove whole part of nearly 68,000 bytes. I have collected it by a lot of hard work. And most of the editors are in conversiopn in the talk page. Nonameonlyusername (talk) 15:50, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how I read Kautilya3's comments on Talk:Hinduism in India, Nonameonlyusername; I think that they were objecting to the edit as a whole, as well as to the specific issues that it raised. My impression, upon a light read, was that the whole edit seemed to be written from a particular point of view, and that the text would benefit from re-working before being added to the article.

I realize that it's frustrating to have changes that you've worked hard on reverted – it's happened to me too – but it's the risk one runs when making big, bold changes to sensitive articles like this one. My advice to you is to take the least controversial small segment of the content that you want to add – say a paragraph or two – and propose it separately on the talk page. If it's neutral and well-sourced then its addition will sail through. Then repeat until we get to the parts that are more controversial and need detailed discussion. It will be a little slower that way, but we will all work together to make the article better. I am not a subject expert – far from it – but if you go down that route I promise to read your proposed additions carefuly and give them a fair hearing. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 17:56, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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:Nonameonlyusername reported by User:Kautilya3 (Result: ). Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 15:59, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya3 I know some edits may be useless but a lot of parts is informative and useful, along with well-cited sources. Well, rest is your wish. Nonameonlyusername (talk) 16:08, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that you have put in a lot of work and I don't want to be discouraging. I am happy to withdraw the AN3 report provided you promise not to edit-war and discuss the issues on the talk pages in good faith.

I would also advise you to make small changes, one section at a time, and see if there are any objections before proceeding. Editing controversial topics has a learning curve. You cannot do it at high speed. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:19, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Hinduism in India

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. 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 ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. EdJohnston (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Descendants of Ikshvaku has been nominated for merging

Category:Descendants of Ikshvaku has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:05, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]