User talk:MCIWS

Battle

I have already read the references, and read and understand your position. I will not be looking at this matter again until tomorrow. There is no value in repeating yourself. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC).

@ Rich Farmbrough ok

Discretionary sanctions notice

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

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 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.

Template:Z33 Thomas.W ^talk 12:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Your edits on Indian Army

Hello. Your edits on Indian Army seem to be less than neutral. Most sources agree on the Kashmir war of 1948 ending in just a UN-brokered ceasefire, with neither side a winner or a loser. An opinion/consensus that your single source doesn't trump. So adding that single source and Indian Victory in bold letters is POV-pushing. Don't make edits like that without a thorough discussion on the talk page first. Thomas.W ^talk 12:50, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, so if I provide numerous neutral source. Then can i add that?

Not without prior discussion on the talk page of the article, and consensus supporting you. And read the discretionary sanctions notice I gave you before making another edit on any article relating to India, Pakistan or Afghanistan, broadly construed. Thomas.W ^talk 12:56, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok sir Thomas.W I will discussed it on talk page. MCIWS (talk) 12:58, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@ Thomas.W please revert edit by one user on Pakistan Army and on Indo-Pak Wars he is continuously pushing POV

@ Thomas.W sir I just reverted his edit because he was pushing POV see - this and please revert this edit.

and his latest edit on Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts & in this Pakistan Army . I've explained him but he is still pushing WP:POV and attacking personally, Moreover he is already violated WP:3RR I will request you to revert his unconstructive edits on those articles and filled an Case against him because he has Violated WP:3RR and CONTINUOUSLY Pushing WP:POV MCIWS (talk) 13:25, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 BRD 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 your 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. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:26, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@ WikiDan61 Ok I will take this matter to the talk page and sir please revert Zadon19 edit as he is continuously pushing POVeven when I've explained him - see Pakistan Army MCIWS (talk) 13:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Help

Someone please report User:Zadon19 he has made almost 7-8 reverts on most of the Indo-Pak Articles within an hour. He is continuously making Unconstructive Edits, Pushing WP:POV and moreover attacking me personally of Having Socks, instead he himself looks like a sock of any pro pakistani account. please administrators please have a look here and also revert his POV edits on Various Indo-Pak Articles. MCIWS (talk) 15:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC) MCIWS (talk) 15:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear MCIWS, you were given very good guidance by Thomas.W earlier today about the need to open discussion on the article talk pages, and achieve consensus for doing contentious edits. However, you seem to have ignored the advice and did similar at a number of other pages, Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts and Indo-Pakistan war of 1947. As such, you have broken 3RR by reverting another editor's reverts at a number of pages, and you are liable to be reported and blocked. So, please desist from edit-warring and open a talk page discussion to arrive at consensus. User:Zadon19, you are equally at fault for edit-warring at all these pages. The same advice applies to you. One more revert from either of you anywhere on Wikipedia will take you to WP:AN3. Please watch your steps. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 15:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

They're already at WP:AN3, both of them, having just been reported by me for their silly edit-warring and POV-pushing. Thomas.W ^talk 15:53, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@ Thomas.W & Kautilya3 I have answered to the report filled against me at WP:AN3 so that's the another matter but please atleast revert User:Zadon19 POV Pushing edits on Pakistan Army & Siachen Conflict please sir MCIWS (talk) 16:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

No more reverts. You need to open talk page discussions on the issues that you are battling. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@ Kautilya3 And you think I need to debate with this POV Pushing Warrior just because of this that I have added neutral sources to Remove Citation needed tag on Siachen Conflict and just because of this that I have writed one line on Pakistan Army according to the Lahore Front , just go through the edit history of both these articles. This is the reason I am asking you to atleast revert this POV pusher edits and also Thomas.W sir revert his this WP:POV edit this MCIWS (talk) 17:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  —Darkwind (talk) 18:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear Sir @Darkwind.........

@ Darkwind Dear Sir, I will not be appealing my block because I myself violated Wikipedia policy @WP:3RR but what I request you to block Zadon19 permanently as I provided enough reasons for it on this please sir have a look at the WP:AN3 On My comments. Thank you MCIWS (talk) 19:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

 MCIWS (talk) 19:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

MCIWS, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi MCIWS! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Missvain (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 19:31, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank You MCIWS (talk) 07:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)