I'm Rasnaboy, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some
common sense Dos and Don'ts:
|
If you need further help, you can: | or you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at
my talk page or type {{helpme}}
here on your talk page and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can
contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
To get some practice editing you can
use a sandbox. You can
create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}}
on
your userpage.
Please remember to:
~~~~
at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your
signature, a link to your talk page, and a
timestamp.Sincerely,
Rasnaboy (
talk)
10:27, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
(Leave me a message)
Hijabophobia is related to Islamophobia because hijab is black in color and it is wear by muslim women. Hijabophobia show that how muslim women are oppressed by islam Jku456 ( talk) 14:53, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
I don't think you understand what "see also" sections are for - they are not for collecting every tenuous link you think might relate to something - read WP:SEEALSO and stop shoehorning inappropriate links into articles. There'll be a review of the many "see alsos" you've been adding and I imagine a lot of them will be removed. -- Begoon 20:53, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Please stop adding tenuous, barely related "See also" entries to articles. Read and understand
WP:SEEALSO, which says "The links in the "See also" section should be relevant, should reflect the links that would be present in a comprehensive article on the topic, and should be limited to a reasonable number."
Many of the links you are adding do not meet this requirement, and your additions are becoming
disruptive. Thank you. --
Begoon
11:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Lingam is part of Hinduism culture, even I also follow Hinduism Jku456 ( talk) 11:49, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Religion in pre-Islamic Arabia 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. Doug Weller talk 15:02, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Seriously. If you can't actually communicate you should not be editing, communication between editors is vital. I won't block you myself but I will report you to WP:ANI. Doug Weller talk 15:07, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at
Criticism of Islam.
Please stop adding unreferenced or
poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at
P.N. Oak. Content of this nature could be regarded as
defamatory and is in violation of
Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Harshil
want to talk?
06:54, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Look, I'm getting really tired of telling you this - but you obviously don't understand what see alsos are for, despite all the links and explanations you've been given by experienced editors. Here, to Anti-Russian sentiment you add, and you must be kidding, surely(?) - a mode of a video game... Along with your latest swathe of tenuous, irrelevant additions to Criticism of Islam, again (after everything you've been told)..., my patience is now at an end.
Let me make myself perfectly clear - if I see just one more tenuous or irrelevant see also addition from you then I will ask for you to be blocked, to protect the encyclopedia from what I can only describe as your complete incompetence in this area. Please try to find something else to do, which you actually understand, and stop making a mess for other people to clean up. -- Begoon 18:11, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at
Vietnam War.
You appear to be repeatedly
reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at
Hinduism. 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. 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.
Don't post on my talk page every time an edit of yours is reverted asking why. The reasons are given in the edit summary or in the many conversations we have had about your complete inability to judge what is a good "see also". Just stop adding them, you clearly do not have the required judgement to do it sensibly, and you are very close to me asking for you to be blocked as a net negative who provides far less value than the time taken to clean up the messes you make. -- Begoon 20:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Private military company; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Begoon 19:12, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Don't post on my talk page again, ever, for any reason - it takes me some small part of a second to revert and I have better things to do with my time than to waste even that tiny amount of it removing the drivel of pathetic, clueless socks. You are very unwelcome there. kthxbai. -- Begoon 13:10, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
i am inoccent please remove block I did not done any collateral damage I just upload the photo of weapon and i do not how to register the author of the photo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jku456 ( talk • contribs) 10:37, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
And another thing, I do not Nittin Das and I am from assam rifle regiment . I just started my wikipedia career to upload photo of weapon on wikipedia and also to write military or paramilitary related in information and also to write information related to India.For example:List of paramilitary organizations,hinduism etc
Sorry my english is not so good but I wanted some discussion with some one who can guide me.
You see my amount https://m.facebook.com/alapan.mukherjee.39?tsid=0.14470429440442656&source=result — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jku456 ( talk • contribs) 15:10, 16 December 2019 (UTC) Please explain to Dreamy Jazz.I am not Nitin das
I am neither Nittin dad nor I am sockpuppet of nittin das Jku456 ( talk) 13:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm Rasnaboy, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some
common sense Dos and Don'ts:
|
If you need further help, you can: | or you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at
my talk page or type {{helpme}}
here on your talk page and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can
contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
To get some practice editing you can
use a sandbox. You can
create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}}
on
your userpage.
Please remember to:
~~~~
at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your
signature, a link to your talk page, and a
timestamp.Sincerely,
Rasnaboy (
talk)
10:27, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
(Leave me a message)
Hijabophobia is related to Islamophobia because hijab is black in color and it is wear by muslim women. Hijabophobia show that how muslim women are oppressed by islam Jku456 ( talk) 14:53, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
I don't think you understand what "see also" sections are for - they are not for collecting every tenuous link you think might relate to something - read WP:SEEALSO and stop shoehorning inappropriate links into articles. There'll be a review of the many "see alsos" you've been adding and I imagine a lot of them will be removed. -- Begoon 20:53, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Please stop adding tenuous, barely related "See also" entries to articles. Read and understand
WP:SEEALSO, which says "The links in the "See also" section should be relevant, should reflect the links that would be present in a comprehensive article on the topic, and should be limited to a reasonable number."
Many of the links you are adding do not meet this requirement, and your additions are becoming
disruptive. Thank you. --
Begoon
11:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Lingam is part of Hinduism culture, even I also follow Hinduism Jku456 ( talk) 11:49, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Religion in pre-Islamic Arabia 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. Doug Weller talk 15:02, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Seriously. If you can't actually communicate you should not be editing, communication between editors is vital. I won't block you myself but I will report you to WP:ANI. Doug Weller talk 15:07, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at
Criticism of Islam.
Please stop adding unreferenced or
poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at
P.N. Oak. Content of this nature could be regarded as
defamatory and is in violation of
Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Harshil
want to talk?
06:54, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Look, I'm getting really tired of telling you this - but you obviously don't understand what see alsos are for, despite all the links and explanations you've been given by experienced editors. Here, to Anti-Russian sentiment you add, and you must be kidding, surely(?) - a mode of a video game... Along with your latest swathe of tenuous, irrelevant additions to Criticism of Islam, again (after everything you've been told)..., my patience is now at an end.
Let me make myself perfectly clear - if I see just one more tenuous or irrelevant see also addition from you then I will ask for you to be blocked, to protect the encyclopedia from what I can only describe as your complete incompetence in this area. Please try to find something else to do, which you actually understand, and stop making a mess for other people to clean up. -- Begoon 18:11, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at
Vietnam War.
You appear to be repeatedly
reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at
Hinduism. 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. 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.
Don't post on my talk page every time an edit of yours is reverted asking why. The reasons are given in the edit summary or in the many conversations we have had about your complete inability to judge what is a good "see also". Just stop adding them, you clearly do not have the required judgement to do it sensibly, and you are very close to me asking for you to be blocked as a net negative who provides far less value than the time taken to clean up the messes you make. -- Begoon 20:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Private military company; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Begoon 19:12, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Don't post on my talk page again, ever, for any reason - it takes me some small part of a second to revert and I have better things to do with my time than to waste even that tiny amount of it removing the drivel of pathetic, clueless socks. You are very unwelcome there. kthxbai. -- Begoon 13:10, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
i am inoccent please remove block I did not done any collateral damage I just upload the photo of weapon and i do not how to register the author of the photo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jku456 ( talk • contribs) 10:37, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
And another thing, I do not Nittin Das and I am from assam rifle regiment . I just started my wikipedia career to upload photo of weapon on wikipedia and also to write military or paramilitary related in information and also to write information related to India.For example:List of paramilitary organizations,hinduism etc
Sorry my english is not so good but I wanted some discussion with some one who can guide me.
You see my amount https://m.facebook.com/alapan.mukherjee.39?tsid=0.14470429440442656&source=result — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jku456 ( talk • contribs) 15:10, 16 December 2019 (UTC) Please explain to Dreamy Jazz.I am not Nitin das
I am neither Nittin dad nor I am sockpuppet of nittin das Jku456 ( talk) 13:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)