User talk:Summerkillsme

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Editing tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 12:37, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Hello, I'm Kautilya3. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Umayyad campaigns in India, 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. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:38, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Pala Empire

Hello.. please note that you must not edit while you are signed out, as you have apparently done in the article on Pala Empire! I assume this is your first mistake, and will not escalate the same! Be cautious in future please! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 12:27, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Never add non Wp:Neutral and unsourced claims of Maratha victory as you did in Maratha–Mysore Wars, no reliable sources claims Marathas won, Wikipedia isn't a place for glorifying your side based on personal views, we adher to neutral policy, Mysore won the final battle and Marathas got back some of their territories in exchange for accepting Tipu's authority as Nabob Tipu Sultan, Fateh Ali Khan until they switched sides and begged the help of the British. Either ways we support authenticity and reliable sources, you received past warning, this is your second warn on this matter, after third warning you may be reported and blocked from Wikipedia. Always be neutral, use "reliable sources" and seek proper consensus before making such changes in future. Best wishes. Dilbaggg (talk) 16:34, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you could read I did told the reason in my edit summary It was already written Maratha victory before the user 'Invincibleafidiciono' changed it without giving any reason for it . why don't you refer to that edit.

'won the final battle and Switched side and begged for help' lmao obviously I could very well see how neutral you are .

Hopefully you mind your language next time , don't try to act as some sort of dictator or owner of the site.

The so called first warning , I discussed that edit with fowlerxfowler and that guy as well on talk , there was no point keeping it on my talk page.

Second one is not even a warning of some edit , that user is simply telling me to make sure to always log in while making edit. Summerkillsme (talk) 17:43, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary is not sufficient, you need talk page discussion and consensus from other editors, anyone can add unreliable info on edit summary. Do not go adding personal views. Talk page you can see the tab right to the article tab on the top of the page. Dilbaggg (talk) 14:32, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally I retrieved an additional warning [1] erasing warns don't make them go away and are recorded on your talk page history, so my warn is actually your third, next time will be a report, best wishes. Dilbaggg (talk) 16:49, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dont try to scare me dude 'Muh I will ban you blah blah'

About The so called first warning , I discussed that edit on summary and subsequently discussed it with fowlerxfowler and that guy as well on talk , there was no point keeping it on my talk page when it has been discussed.

Second one is not even a warning of some edit , that user is simply telling me to make sure to always log in while making edit.

Summerkillsme (talk) 17:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not get offended by the warn, we just want editors to comply with Wikipedia policies and be neutral and not favor sides in such articles. Dilbaggg (talk) 17:11, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a message, its up to you to take it seriously or not, but if you keep violating Wikipedia policies you will be reported which may result you in block. We just appreciate constructive edits and hope you have a wonderful time on Wikipedia but please do not push your personal views and be WP:Neutral. Dilbaggg (talk) 17:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Imperial ^[AFCND] 18:13, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Summerkillsme! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Battle of Kasahrada (1197) several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Battle of Kasahrada (1197), please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 00:16, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please follow the Wikipedia protocols, multiple editors warned you regarding this matter. Dilbaggg (talk) 16:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Kautilya3 (talk) 06:06, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

3RR at Lalitaditya Muktapida

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; read about 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. Banks Irk (talk) 17:24, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

3RR at Kalachuri dynasty

Your recent editing history at Kalachuri dynasty 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; read about 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. Imperial ^[AFCND] 04:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]