Content deleted Content added
→Jainism page edit warring - Oct 25: new section |
→Warning for 3 RR: Reply |
||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 73:
Hi ParvatPrakash, I have been asking you continuously for discussion on talk page regarding your recent edits in History section of your [[Jainism]] page and engaging in edit war.
1. Your content is not in tune with the section of the page. The section simply mentions Jain poet [[Shrimad Rajchandra]]'s contribution in colonial era.
2. There is no mention of Shrimad Rajchandra as a monk which you are stating. So there is no context in your lines.
3. In one of the comments, you mention that "largest sect" doesn't recognise "Shrimad Rajchandra sect". There is no mention of Shrimad Rajchandra sect so this again is out of context. Secondly, numerical strength of sects don't get them any authoritative power to recognise or reject others.
4. The sources you provided from Shrimad Rajchandra website have no mention about other sects. Mr. Yugbhushan's personal views are not Wikipedia's voice to be accepted in Jainism's history section. Please provide sources from academic scholarship.
5. Please refrain from deleting random lines. [[User:Livingstonshr|Livingstonshr]] ([[User talk:Livingstonshr|talk]]) 15:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
:I have already rephrased my content. With all due respect, if you found anything controversial with my content, you should've ideally initiated the discussion on the talk page. Shrimad Rajchandra and his sect are related. If you mention one, you simply also refer to the other. His practices aren't accepted by other sects, and if you didn't know that, I can cite numerous sources from religious texts of all the historically recognized sects. Numerical strength is acceptable or not is not the point of discussion. Svetambara and Digambara are the only two historical sects. The rest are sects started later by laypersons. I did not delete random lines. One can simply not mention that Shrimad Rajchandra is revered without reliable sources. My point still stands. [[User:ParvatPrakash|ParvatPrakash]] ([[User talk:ParvatPrakash#top|talk]]) 15:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
::Your actions are clearly agenda driven, biased and sectarian in nature. You omitted a content which was present on the page since more than a decade, without any interest in gaining consensus. Shrimad Rajchandra and sect formed by his followers after him are not related. None of us are here to decide which sects are correct and which ones are not. The history section simply states his works and contributions. All notable saints have critics from other sects, Mr. Yugbhushan, whose personal opinion you cited is himself infamous for proclaiming himself "spiritual monarch" of Jainism. The purpose of Jainism page is only to give introductory information on notable people and places related to it and not to show one sect superior to another,or anyone's personal opinions. Kindly refrain from making any changes further. Thank You. [[User:Livingstonshr|Livingstonshr]] ([[User talk:Livingstonshr|talk]]) 16:42, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
== Warning for 3 RR ==
[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg|50px|left|alt=Stop icon]] Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|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 [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]] to work toward making a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about [[WP:EPTALK|how this is done]]. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]].
'''Being involved in an edit war can result in you being [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]'''—especially if you violate the [[Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule|three-revert rule]], which states that an editor must not perform more than three [[Help:Reverting|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.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> [[User:Livingstonshr|Livingstonshr]] [[User:Livingstonshr|Livingstonshr]] ([[User talk:Livingstonshr|talk]]) 18:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
:I've only reverted thrice. I did not go over the limit of 3 reverts. [[User:ParvatPrakash|ParvatPrakash]] ([[User talk:ParvatPrakash#top|talk]]) 19:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
::Hello {{u|ParvatPrakash}}, you have [[WP:EW|edit warred]] about [[Jainism]] independently of the three-revert rule. You had been blocked for edit warring before and it led to page protection today. If it continues on other pages, a block without automatic expiry date may follow. [[User:ToBeFree|~ ToBeFree]] ([[User talk:ToBeFree|talk]]) 00:38, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
:::I apologize for edit warring if I've violated policies. Usually, I do take care that it doesn't violate the 3RR and try to explain the reason for the revert in the edit summary itself. I understand the reason for this warning and I assure you that this won't repeat. I had taken 3RR as a litmus test. I'll take care to not edit war even without applying this rule. I wholeheartedly welcome your decision to protect the page because it's already a GA and it's fair that editors only with good experience of editing pages on Wikipedia are given the permission to edit this page. Earlier, it was already protected up to autoconfirmed access. I think it's a good move to take it up to extended confirmed viewing the recent vandalising edits and edits with original research. Thank you and sorry again for my careless behaviour. [[User:ParvatPrakash|ParvatPrakash]] ([[User talk:ParvatPrakash#top|talk]]) 10:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
::::All good. Thank you for your understanding and no worries. 🙂 [[User:ToBeFree|~ ToBeFree]] ([[User talk:ToBeFree|talk]]) 11:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
== Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion ==
[[File:Information icon4.svg|link=|35px|alt=Information icon]]
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 [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit warring]]. <!--Template:An3-notice--> Thanks. [[User:Livingstonshr|Livingstonshr]] ([[User talk:Livingstonshr|talk]]) 19:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
== Introduction to contentious topics ==
{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to '''[[India]], [[Pakistan]], and [[Afghanistan]]''', a topic designated as '''''[[WP:AC/CT|contentious]]'''''. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>.
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 [[WP:ARB|Arbitration Committee]]. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia [[WP:ADMIN|administrators]] have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit <strong>carefully and constructively</strong>, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
*adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Purpose|purposes of Wikipedia]];
*comply with all applicable [[WP:PG|policies and guidelines]];
*follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
*comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
*refrain from [[WP:GAMING|gaming the system]].
<p>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 [[WT:AC/C|arbitration clerks' noticeboard]] or you may learn more about this contentious topic [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan|here]]. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template. </p>}}<!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert/first --> [[User:ToBeFree|~ ToBeFree]] ([[User talk:ToBeFree|talk]]) 00:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
| |||