Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
84.21.145.26 (
talk)
13:36, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Edward Zigma, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Wikipedia:Current events noticeboard. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 16:32, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. — Paleo Neonate – 09:54, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia's reliable sources noticeboard archives seem to confirm that opindia is not a reliable source ( 1, 2). — Paleo Neonate – 11:05, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thanks for your help with the temple attack article yesterday! Most editing experiences aren't so contentious. Happy editing! Schazjmd (talk) 21:36, 3 July 2019 (UTC) |
Thank you very much @ Schazjmd:
@ Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#This_user_has_again_started_harassing_me. DBig Xrayᗙ 12:48, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
I never stalked that person. I cross paths with him only coz he edit articles which are liberal voices of India amd defame them. I never defamed opIndia or Swarajya article. If something fits then only I will edit them. Then why this person is hand picking and silently editing articles. Edward Zigma ( talk) 13:02, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
But no. I dont even watch his contribution but has to visit his page since he is involved in groupism.Can you please rephrase this line, at WP:AN thread, more clearly, possibly in separate sentences, since it is not clear to me. -- DBig Xrayᗙ 15:12, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
I accept that due to no expireance my tone may got out of the league amd I am sorry for that." on WP:AN, here are my thoughts that may help you. Please read WP:CIVIL once again. Editors on wiki are of different age groups. You should assume that everyone here is more than 20 years older than you are. Naturally they should get your respect. This thumbrule may help you to improve your tone in future. If you get agitated due to something, you should not comment in a state of agitation. Take a break from Wiki, spend time elsewhere, think about how you would like to proceed and then once you have made up your mind, only then comment. Remember there is no deadline on wikipedia, but you can be blocked for WP:NPA if you loose your temper.-- DBig Xrayᗙ 16:00, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Then let me tell you first he put the link of his own linking himself to the outside and after that I said the same which was used by him to try to open report against me." Please share diffs if possible. Secondly, if you claim Harshil is lying or overexaggerating to frame you, why dont you bring in the WP:DIFFs of what exactly you said vs what harshil is claiming. that will help your case a lot. -- DBig Xrayᗙ 17:59, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
WP:DYK. It's not an easy process, but it's pretty fun seeing your own article on the Main page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 14:29, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
How to join it? Edward Zigma ( talk) 14:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Edward Zigma (would you mind if I simply call you Edward, by the way?), some of the text you've added to articles is problematic because you've taken parts of the text in those references and put it right into the article.
A couple examples of what I mean are this edit on The Quint (that text comes straight from here) and this one on Tabrez Ansari lynching, which takes parts from here, but I suspect the same has happened in some of your other edits.
Just taking their words and slapping them in an article is a copyright violation and could get you, or wikipedia, into real trouble. Instead, you should take the meaning of what your sources say and put it in your own words (and then, of course, add the source(s) you've used as reference) Please read this supplement to the copyright violation page as well, as it does a pretty good job at explaining things: Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources. AddWitty NameHere 01:43, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Does someone claiming something automatically make it true? Well, obviously, no. I can say the moon is made of cheese, but just because I say so does not make it so. At the same time, just because something isn't true doesn't mean it was never said.
Obviously, "someone said so" would be a very bad source for saying in Wikipedia's voice that something happened--but that is not what my edit did. My edit stated in Wikipedia's voice that VHP has claimed that temples were destroyed, in other words, an attributed claim without Wikipedia stating that claim to be true or false.
And yes, it is a sensitive subject. You know so, I know so, VHP knows so. But that is part of what makes the claim relevant and noteworthy enough to be included in the article. AddWitty NameHere 04:45, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
That was just a false, politically motivated claim made to divert the issue. There was nothing like any temple demolition anywhere. This was used so that issue gets diverted. Coz there were really huge protests on this incident. I believe keeping his comment to minimal and language edit would be best if you wanted it to be in the article. But an edit on the language is must instead of keeping it as a whole. Thanks Edward Zigma ( talk) 04:56, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Vishwa Hindu Parishad called the lynching "a conspiracy of secularists"[1]. VHP Joint General Secretary Surendra Jain blamed it on "the Khan Market Mafia, which has repeatedly been maligning Hindu society, India and humanity.
Thank you very much for your great effort on the article. Edward Zigma ( talk) 07:05, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
References
They are pretty harmless, but my advice is to just follow WP:TPO: "The basic rule—with exceptions outlined below—is to not edit or delete others' posts without their permission." Doing so can annoy other people with very little gain. If that talkpage grows a lot, someone will probably add "automatic archive" at some point, so having "solved issues" on it is not a problem. Your own talkpage is of course a different matter, but there are "rules" there too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 11:04, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Oh no. No problem. I was just cleaning it. I didn't know that. Edward Zigma ( talk) 11:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
DBig Xrayᗙ 17:58, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Jai Shri Ram 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.— Harshil want to talk? 08:06, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Edward, thanks for pinging me. Since you have been here long enough, can I press you to learn how to indent posts correctly, unlike here. Before you save, please press the Preview button, and make sure that all your paragraphs line up. When it is broken up like this, it is hard to tell who is saying what.
You can indent any paragraph by putting enough ":" symbols at the front. Please see HELP:TALK -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 09:13, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Please edit it properly I will try to keep in mind next time. Thanks. Edward Zigma ( talk) 09:14, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
It's not great to see you and Harshil are at it again. This is especially concerning since this was your first edit since December. Could you maybe try editing something less controversial like making articles on Indian mosques? Alternatively, maybe don't edit war as much? It takes two to tango. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 16:38, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Takbir source given, please see. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 ( talk) 14:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
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.
Note that North East Delhi riots is one of the many articles covered by these sanctions. Doug Weller talk 11:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your edits on North East Delhi riots. However please refer to WP:REFBEGIN and WP:CITE to gain a better understanding on how to properly cite references. Thanks. SerTanmay ( talk) 20:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Yeah no problem. Please do thr changes. Edward Zigma ( talk) 03:46, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Regarding your AE report, the "Sanction or remedy to be enforced" is Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Standard discretionary sanctions. I've made a request in the correct formatting below for you:
Extended content
|
---|
==Dev0745== <small>''This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. <br />Requests may not exceed 500 [[Word count#Software|words]] and 20 diffs (not counting required information), except by permission of a reviewing administrator.''</small> ===Request concerning Dev0745=== ; User who is submitting this request for enforcement : {{userlinks|Edward Zigma}} 12:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC) ; User against whom enforcement is requested : {{userlinks|Dev0745}}<p>{{ds/log|Dev0745}}</p> ;Sanction or remedy to be enforced: [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Standard discretionary sanctions]] ; [[WP:DIFF|Diffs]] of edits that violate this sanction or remedy, and an explanation ''how'' these edits violate it : #[/info/en/?search=Special:Diff/944207085?diffmode=source 6 March 2020] the discussion is already [[Special:Permalink/944235685#Slow_spaced_disruptive_editing_on_page_by_some_user.|discussed in the talk page]] but still pushing it after many warning. #[/info/en/?search=Special:Diff/944195560?diffmode=source 6 March 2020] Slow spaced disruptive editing trying to change the context of page. ; Diffs of previous relevant sanctions, if any : #[https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_enforcement_log/2020&diff=944224920&oldid=944101641 6 March 2020] Dev0745 topic banned from [[Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019]] and closely related protests ;If [[Wikipedia:AC/DS|discretionary sanctions]] are requested, supply evidence that the user is aware of them (see [[WP:AC/DS#Awareness and alerts]]): *Alerted about discretionary sanctions in the area of conflict in the last twelve months, see the system log linked to above. ; Additional comments by editor filing complaint : <!-- Add any further comment here --> ; Notification of the user against whom enforcement is requested : <!-- Please notify the user against whom you request enforcement of the request, and then replace this comment with a diff of the notification. The request will normally not be processed otherwise. --> <!--- In the line below, replace Dev0745 with the username of the editor against whom you request enforcement. ---> ===Discussion concerning Dev0745=== <small>''Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 [[Word count#Software|words]] and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. <br />Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.''</small> ====Statement by Dev0745==== ====Statement by (username)==== <!-- Copy and paste this empty section below the most recent statement and replace "(username)" with your username. --> ===Result concerning Dev0745=== :''This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.'' <!-- When closing this request use {{hat|Result}} / {{hab}}, inform the user on their talk page if they are being sanctioned (eg with {{AE sanction}} or {{uw-aeblock}} and note it in the discretionary sanctions log. --> * |
I hope you find the above helpful. Please consider replacing your current filing with it. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 15:55, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
... I have included all deaths, just split into two sentences: the majority first, the minority second. Best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:19, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
But we are mentioning deaths in a lost, then how could it leave them. It was giving a biased view that's what I think. Edward Zigma ( talk) 04:21, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
84.21.145.26 (
talk)
13:36, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Edward Zigma, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Wikipedia:Current events noticeboard. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 16:32, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. — Paleo Neonate – 09:54, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia's reliable sources noticeboard archives seem to confirm that opindia is not a reliable source ( 1, 2). — Paleo Neonate – 11:05, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thanks for your help with the temple attack article yesterday! Most editing experiences aren't so contentious. Happy editing! Schazjmd (talk) 21:36, 3 July 2019 (UTC) |
Thank you very much @ Schazjmd:
@ Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#This_user_has_again_started_harassing_me. DBig Xrayᗙ 12:48, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
I never stalked that person. I cross paths with him only coz he edit articles which are liberal voices of India amd defame them. I never defamed opIndia or Swarajya article. If something fits then only I will edit them. Then why this person is hand picking and silently editing articles. Edward Zigma ( talk) 13:02, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
But no. I dont even watch his contribution but has to visit his page since he is involved in groupism.Can you please rephrase this line, at WP:AN thread, more clearly, possibly in separate sentences, since it is not clear to me. -- DBig Xrayᗙ 15:12, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
I accept that due to no expireance my tone may got out of the league amd I am sorry for that." on WP:AN, here are my thoughts that may help you. Please read WP:CIVIL once again. Editors on wiki are of different age groups. You should assume that everyone here is more than 20 years older than you are. Naturally they should get your respect. This thumbrule may help you to improve your tone in future. If you get agitated due to something, you should not comment in a state of agitation. Take a break from Wiki, spend time elsewhere, think about how you would like to proceed and then once you have made up your mind, only then comment. Remember there is no deadline on wikipedia, but you can be blocked for WP:NPA if you loose your temper.-- DBig Xrayᗙ 16:00, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Then let me tell you first he put the link of his own linking himself to the outside and after that I said the same which was used by him to try to open report against me." Please share diffs if possible. Secondly, if you claim Harshil is lying or overexaggerating to frame you, why dont you bring in the WP:DIFFs of what exactly you said vs what harshil is claiming. that will help your case a lot. -- DBig Xrayᗙ 17:59, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
WP:DYK. It's not an easy process, but it's pretty fun seeing your own article on the Main page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 14:29, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
How to join it? Edward Zigma ( talk) 14:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Edward Zigma (would you mind if I simply call you Edward, by the way?), some of the text you've added to articles is problematic because you've taken parts of the text in those references and put it right into the article.
A couple examples of what I mean are this edit on The Quint (that text comes straight from here) and this one on Tabrez Ansari lynching, which takes parts from here, but I suspect the same has happened in some of your other edits.
Just taking their words and slapping them in an article is a copyright violation and could get you, or wikipedia, into real trouble. Instead, you should take the meaning of what your sources say and put it in your own words (and then, of course, add the source(s) you've used as reference) Please read this supplement to the copyright violation page as well, as it does a pretty good job at explaining things: Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources. AddWitty NameHere 01:43, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Does someone claiming something automatically make it true? Well, obviously, no. I can say the moon is made of cheese, but just because I say so does not make it so. At the same time, just because something isn't true doesn't mean it was never said.
Obviously, "someone said so" would be a very bad source for saying in Wikipedia's voice that something happened--but that is not what my edit did. My edit stated in Wikipedia's voice that VHP has claimed that temples were destroyed, in other words, an attributed claim without Wikipedia stating that claim to be true or false.
And yes, it is a sensitive subject. You know so, I know so, VHP knows so. But that is part of what makes the claim relevant and noteworthy enough to be included in the article. AddWitty NameHere 04:45, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
That was just a false, politically motivated claim made to divert the issue. There was nothing like any temple demolition anywhere. This was used so that issue gets diverted. Coz there were really huge protests on this incident. I believe keeping his comment to minimal and language edit would be best if you wanted it to be in the article. But an edit on the language is must instead of keeping it as a whole. Thanks Edward Zigma ( talk) 04:56, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Vishwa Hindu Parishad called the lynching "a conspiracy of secularists"[1]. VHP Joint General Secretary Surendra Jain blamed it on "the Khan Market Mafia, which has repeatedly been maligning Hindu society, India and humanity.
Thank you very much for your great effort on the article. Edward Zigma ( talk) 07:05, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
References
They are pretty harmless, but my advice is to just follow WP:TPO: "The basic rule—with exceptions outlined below—is to not edit or delete others' posts without their permission." Doing so can annoy other people with very little gain. If that talkpage grows a lot, someone will probably add "automatic archive" at some point, so having "solved issues" on it is not a problem. Your own talkpage is of course a different matter, but there are "rules" there too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 11:04, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Oh no. No problem. I was just cleaning it. I didn't know that. Edward Zigma ( talk) 11:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
DBig Xrayᗙ 17:58, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Jai Shri Ram 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.— Harshil want to talk? 08:06, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Edward, thanks for pinging me. Since you have been here long enough, can I press you to learn how to indent posts correctly, unlike here. Before you save, please press the Preview button, and make sure that all your paragraphs line up. When it is broken up like this, it is hard to tell who is saying what.
You can indent any paragraph by putting enough ":" symbols at the front. Please see HELP:TALK -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 09:13, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Please edit it properly I will try to keep in mind next time. Thanks. Edward Zigma ( talk) 09:14, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
It's not great to see you and Harshil are at it again. This is especially concerning since this was your first edit since December. Could you maybe try editing something less controversial like making articles on Indian mosques? Alternatively, maybe don't edit war as much? It takes two to tango. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 16:38, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Takbir source given, please see. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 ( talk) 14:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
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.
Note that North East Delhi riots is one of the many articles covered by these sanctions. Doug Weller talk 11:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your edits on North East Delhi riots. However please refer to WP:REFBEGIN and WP:CITE to gain a better understanding on how to properly cite references. Thanks. SerTanmay ( talk) 20:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Yeah no problem. Please do thr changes. Edward Zigma ( talk) 03:46, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Regarding your AE report, the "Sanction or remedy to be enforced" is Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Standard discretionary sanctions. I've made a request in the correct formatting below for you:
Extended content
|
---|
==Dev0745== <small>''This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. <br />Requests may not exceed 500 [[Word count#Software|words]] and 20 diffs (not counting required information), except by permission of a reviewing administrator.''</small> ===Request concerning Dev0745=== ; User who is submitting this request for enforcement : {{userlinks|Edward Zigma}} 12:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC) ; User against whom enforcement is requested : {{userlinks|Dev0745}}<p>{{ds/log|Dev0745}}</p> ;Sanction or remedy to be enforced: [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Standard discretionary sanctions]] ; [[WP:DIFF|Diffs]] of edits that violate this sanction or remedy, and an explanation ''how'' these edits violate it : #[/info/en/?search=Special:Diff/944207085?diffmode=source 6 March 2020] the discussion is already [[Special:Permalink/944235685#Slow_spaced_disruptive_editing_on_page_by_some_user.|discussed in the talk page]] but still pushing it after many warning. #[/info/en/?search=Special:Diff/944195560?diffmode=source 6 March 2020] Slow spaced disruptive editing trying to change the context of page. ; Diffs of previous relevant sanctions, if any : #[https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_enforcement_log/2020&diff=944224920&oldid=944101641 6 March 2020] Dev0745 topic banned from [[Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019]] and closely related protests ;If [[Wikipedia:AC/DS|discretionary sanctions]] are requested, supply evidence that the user is aware of them (see [[WP:AC/DS#Awareness and alerts]]): *Alerted about discretionary sanctions in the area of conflict in the last twelve months, see the system log linked to above. ; Additional comments by editor filing complaint : <!-- Add any further comment here --> ; Notification of the user against whom enforcement is requested : <!-- Please notify the user against whom you request enforcement of the request, and then replace this comment with a diff of the notification. The request will normally not be processed otherwise. --> <!--- In the line below, replace Dev0745 with the username of the editor against whom you request enforcement. ---> ===Discussion concerning Dev0745=== <small>''Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 [[Word count#Software|words]] and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. <br />Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.''</small> ====Statement by Dev0745==== ====Statement by (username)==== <!-- Copy and paste this empty section below the most recent statement and replace "(username)" with your username. --> ===Result concerning Dev0745=== :''This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.'' <!-- When closing this request use {{hat|Result}} / {{hab}}, inform the user on their talk page if they are being sanctioned (eg with {{AE sanction}} or {{uw-aeblock}} and note it in the discretionary sanctions log. --> * |
I hope you find the above helpful. Please consider replacing your current filing with it. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 15:55, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
... I have included all deaths, just split into two sentences: the majority first, the minority second. Best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:19, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
But we are mentioning deaths in a lost, then how could it leave them. It was giving a biased view that's what I think. Edward Zigma ( talk) 04:21, 7 March 2020 (UTC)