Hello, Mkv22, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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 take 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! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:13, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I have reverted you again because there have been many discussions about genetics in caste articles and the consensus has always been that they should be avoided. I'll try to find you a link or two within the next 24 hours. - Sitush ( talk) 19:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
A recent example is at Talk:Ezhava#Genetic_studies. - Sitush ( talk) 19:58, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello, and
welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly
reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at
Caste system in India. 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 be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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 lead to a block. Thank you. Kautilya3 ( talk) 23:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Kautilya3 ( talk) 23:29, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Published genetics data on castes cannot be ignored
Some editors here who appear to be of not of the scientific background are reverting edits that cite published scientific research in highly reputed journals, such as the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA.
Who gives them the authority to judge on the scientific merit of published and accepted science research?
In all scientific journals a letter is a shorter research article (Nature, for example) and / or reanalysis of published data in the same journal (PNAS, for example). It is not an "opinion" and unqualified editors should refrain from making such defamatory statements here.
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, you may be
blocked from editing. Thank you.
OhNoitsJamie
Talk
19:14, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
I was about to post on ANI, but as User:Swarm has closed that thread, I'll post here instead.
That apart this is a fact: It is the exact symbolism the evangelical and proselytising campaign called "India for christ" uses.
Please tell me, when that is a fact, and when an avowedly christian "catholic" admin / user reverts the removal of the image without leaving any comment/feedback, what should one reasonably assume? Many thanks!
Mkv, the image has an obvious meaning: cross symbolising Christianity and the India map meaning India. It is quite an apt pictorial representation of "Christianity in India". I don't see why there should be any controversy about it. I think you are going OTT. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 00:20, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Mkv22 ( talk) 17:55, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Grantha script. 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.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. — LeoFrank Talk 12:42, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to insert fringe or undue weight content into articles, you may be
blocked from editing. Articles on Wikipedia do not give
fringe material equal weight to majority viewpoints; content in articles are given representation
in proportion to their prominence. – Please stop using fabricated documents or post 19th-century artificial "fancy" knock-offs as examples. Please do not revert edits based on this basic criteria. Please stop reverting to fabricated documents.
Mkv22 (
talk)
13:29, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Section title is self explanatory. Zchrykng ( talk) 13:50, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Swarm
♠
19:07, 30 April 2018 (UTC)Mkv22 ( talk) 17:33, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Mkv22 ( talk) 19:05, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Hello, Mkv22, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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 take 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! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:13, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I have reverted you again because there have been many discussions about genetics in caste articles and the consensus has always been that they should be avoided. I'll try to find you a link or two within the next 24 hours. - Sitush ( talk) 19:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
A recent example is at Talk:Ezhava#Genetic_studies. - Sitush ( talk) 19:58, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello, and
welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly
reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at
Caste system in India. 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 be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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 lead to a block. Thank you. Kautilya3 ( talk) 23:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Kautilya3 ( talk) 23:29, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Published genetics data on castes cannot be ignored
Some editors here who appear to be of not of the scientific background are reverting edits that cite published scientific research in highly reputed journals, such as the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA.
Who gives them the authority to judge on the scientific merit of published and accepted science research?
In all scientific journals a letter is a shorter research article (Nature, for example) and / or reanalysis of published data in the same journal (PNAS, for example). It is not an "opinion" and unqualified editors should refrain from making such defamatory statements here.
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, you may be
blocked from editing. Thank you.
OhNoitsJamie
Talk
19:14, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
I was about to post on ANI, but as User:Swarm has closed that thread, I'll post here instead.
That apart this is a fact: It is the exact symbolism the evangelical and proselytising campaign called "India for christ" uses.
Please tell me, when that is a fact, and when an avowedly christian "catholic" admin / user reverts the removal of the image without leaving any comment/feedback, what should one reasonably assume? Many thanks!
Mkv, the image has an obvious meaning: cross symbolising Christianity and the India map meaning India. It is quite an apt pictorial representation of "Christianity in India". I don't see why there should be any controversy about it. I think you are going OTT. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 00:20, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Mkv22 ( talk) 17:55, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Grantha script. 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.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. — LeoFrank Talk 12:42, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to insert fringe or undue weight content into articles, you may be
blocked from editing. Articles on Wikipedia do not give
fringe material equal weight to majority viewpoints; content in articles are given representation
in proportion to their prominence. – Please stop using fabricated documents or post 19th-century artificial "fancy" knock-offs as examples. Please do not revert edits based on this basic criteria. Please stop reverting to fabricated documents.
Mkv22 (
talk)
13:29, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Section title is self explanatory. Zchrykng ( talk) 13:50, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Swarm
♠
19:07, 30 April 2018 (UTC)Mkv22 ( talk) 17:33, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Mkv22 ( talk) 19:05, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))