User talk:Prabathsemail

August 2015

Hello, I'm PrinceSulaiman. I wanted to let you know that some of your recent contributions to Ranil Wickremesinghe have been reverted or removed because they could be seen to be defamatory or libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Prince Sulaiman ^{Talk to me} 14:11, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you re-added the removed controversial content from Ranil Wickremesinghe right after posting a list of sources on talk page. Do not hastily make changes to articles right after a discussion was created by yourself. Instead wait for other editors to reply. To arrive at consensus you have to request comments from other editors. You might also want to read WP:UNDUE and WP:CRYSTAL -- Chamith (talk) 11:27, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did at Ranil Wickremesinghe, you may be blocked from editing. You have used these reference as an interview (without evidence) from common foe to Ranil Wickremesinghe. I would suggest you to direct drop me a message on my talk page in regards to this section which can be solved through different reliable sources that certain actual evidence from the Government. As well the governments from Sri Lanka and India had denied that RAW was involved during elections. Therefore, Its actually nugatory content that were added by you.

If you continue to revert the controversial section from Ranil Wickremesinghe, You'll be blocked from editing the articles as result of violating the WP:NPOV. Prince Sulaiman ^{Talk to me} 16:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@PrinceSulaiman: Instead of repeatedly threatening this editor, why don't you explain on the talk page what's so wrong about the content? To me it's no worse than this. Wikipedia shouldn't be used in one instance throw mud at people you don't like but in another instance suppress embarrassing information about people you support.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 10:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Obi2canibe: I didn't use mudslinging at Mahinda Rajapaksa, which you pointed out here, There are official announcements made by government ministers, foreign diplomats that pledging to help the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe to find the funds that were slashed by Rajapaksa regime which he was widely accused of misusing state resource for his election campaigns and his personal gains. If you question me on why did I add the mud sling contents at Mahinda Rajapaksa, Then you should ask the Government why are they mudslinging at the Pro-Rajapaksa factor that created mess in the state affairs. My responsibility in Wikipedia is to keep the contents and affairs of government & people updated and I do not support the support the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe Government if it comes to Wikipedia, But i would dare to write whatever the reliable cites about government and opposition parties comes up in news (not individual interviews examples done by Prabathsemail) and author books. --Prince Sulaiman ^{Talk to me} 11:08, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please check Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for more information This article is one sided because it talks only about the plus side of Runil. Please don’t mislead readers. – Prabathsemail

Do you even know what is WP:NPOV? The WP:NPOV clearly states that the contents should be balanced view instead of “one-sided” Therefore, It not worth of adding both contents on Ranil Wickremesinghe's Wiki since the governments from both countries as diplomatic had declined the claims pertaining to the interview given by Gotabaya Rajapaksa and the factors from UPFA that supporting Rajapaksa camp. That means the fact is NOT valid anymore which doesn't belong here, You can publish it on your own blogs but not here. If you're new here take a look at Wikipedia:Welcome and learn the five pillars of guidelines. You can also check out the guidelines and policies of Wikipedia they're an important part of the editor as rules. Once you have studied these rules you will know how the contribution works here. You also should make sure that there are no editing wars between you and another editor or user, If you get involved you may get your account suspended as result of that. --Prince Sulaiman ^{Talk to me} 18:38, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friend, please don’t misunderstand me. I am NOT a supporter of Mahinda.

My only concern is that there are several important points about Ranil that need to be included in this article. These points are both “positive” and “negative” sides of Ranil that you forget to mention.

For example, the positive sides are 19th, 13th, and land distribution in North and East. Negative sides are the 110 vote no confidence motion in parliament, RAW involvement, and COPE report Mahendran’s Bond scandal.

I would be happy to include these in this article.

It is said that “truth and nothing but the whole truth shall set us free.”

I agree, But regards to the COPE and no confidence motion, The Parliament was dissolved at the time before presence of COPE and the confidence motion, therefore there will be controversy among of editors here in Wikipedia which will create negative editing wars since there is no truth of COPE report and the no-confidence motion that was brought up in Parliament, The President has very clearly stated that these two negative drafts was brought up to topple the government which he already said during last month after handing over the nominations to election commissioner's department. In my view that Mahendan's bond scandal is not easy to fault at Ranil Wickremesinghe (There are ongoing investigations) because he had no direct contact with these kinds of dealings but to defend these actions caused by Mahendan. If you desire to attach the scandal you should add it on Arjuna Mahendran's wiki, The controversy is already there on his page.

In my opinion these criticism cannot be faulted at President and Prime Minister since Arjuna Mahendran doesn't have direct relation with President or the Prime Minister, Therefore, the criticism would be considered as insignificant source here, For example regarding the misuse of State Assets caused by then Economy Minister Basil Rajapaksa which he was accused of misusing Housing funds for election campaign, This cannot be taken as blame for Mahinda Rajapaksa since he doesn't have involvement in this case which was bought up by JVP. So this is the same case as Arjuna Mahendran in a natural investigation, We cannot blame Mahinda for Basil's misdeeds. You're welcome to add any DIRECT criticisms against the Prime Minister without involving others (i.e Bond Scandal). Did you read the five pillars? If not please do, Its important to for you to know the rules of Wikipedia! --Prince Sulaiman ^{Talk to me} 12:11, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]