User talk:Kautilya2018

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 20:41, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Indian provincial elections, 1946. 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.

Please do not reinstate contentious edits without discussion, and do not write essays in edit summaries. You should open a discussion on the talk page and resolve the issues before making any further edits. Kautilya3 (talk) 11:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The editor Kautilya3 believes his edits to be God's own word!

The editor Kautilya3 who keeps on reverting edits that are in the public domain, seems to assume his word as God's own word? Why can't Muslim League, who believed in a separate state for Muslims and fought elections on the same agenda, be listed accordingly? Similarly, what is there to hide about Hindu Mahasabha? Didn't it believe in a "united and self-governing" Indian nation? (Citations included in another wiki page on Akhil Bhartiya Hindu Mahasabha). Why the editor has to influence wiki readers in a certain way with his personal description of Hindu Mahasabha by describing it as an outfit who fought elections on militant Hindu platform without providing any credible Citations to it and suppressing Hindu Mahasabha's own accepted principles of "united and self-governing" Indian nation which was part of its constitution? By suppressing facts, the editor is also going against the information provided on Hindu Mahasabha on another wiki page dedicated to it. The clear aim of this editor though very senior as far as wiki editorship is concerned, is my way or highway. He clearly wants to intimidate new editors with his seniority thereby creating conflicts when there are none! Clearly the senior editor at wiki is himself violating core wiki editing policy of maintain a neutral point of view by adding content without corresponding citation! Kautilya2018 (talk) 12:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Kautilya2018", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it is too similar to Kautilya3. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing this form, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you NeilN. Would you call the post preceding this one a WP:Personal attack? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3: It's the typical "you must be biased!" post we frequently see from new editors. There's less tolerance for that sort of thing in this area, though. Kautilya2018, comment on content, not contributors. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:42, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya2018, NeilN and I are still waiting for you to change your user name. Other editors have already complained about getting confused by your user name. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:57, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert

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 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.

Template:Z33 Kautilya3 (talk) 13:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya2018, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Kautilya2018! 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 experienced editors like Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:06, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

April 2018 II

Don't attack other editors and accuse them of "hidden" and "vile" intentions or "bullying", as here:[1][2][3][4] On Wikipedia, we're always supposed to assume good faith of other editors and not assume they have bad intentions. That applies particularly when you do it to an experienced editor who merely disagrees with you about content, and is trying to explain to you about sourcing. Please don't make the editing climate unpleasant here. Bishonen | talk 15:36, 26 April 2018 (UTC).[reply]

I expect a response that is not superficial, is well read and logical. I hope you take a look at what changes I made and did I not provide a citation for it from relevant wiki pages itself. Editors senior or junior should be open and rational. I followed all the rules of wiki with my edits and ended up with them being rolled back by the said editor without him giving a proper explanation of his action. He conveniently ignored my wiki references to push his own version each time. This is unfair, illogical and contrary to the policies of an academic portal that claims itself to be open and free.

By chosing to block multiple times any fair, fact based and well referenced edits and complaining about the other editor being rude does no good to a senior editor. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kautilya2018 (talk • contribs)

This is your first edit to the 1946 elections page. Can you explain what "rules" you have followed in making it? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:54, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My edit was a deletion of the unsourced adjective 'Militant' Hindu platform. Kautilya3 simply rolled back the deletion stating that it is sourced without providing a source on the page justifying the word 'militant'. Source cannot be the editor himself just for being a senior editor. Also, nowhere in the wiki page dedicated to Akhil Bhartiya Hindu Mahasabha [5], is Hindu Mahasabha desribed as a militant Hindu outfit or a party that fought on militant Hindu platform.

I redid the changes once again in my next version with complete edit summary [6]. However, again Kautilya3 rolled them back disregarding the references from relevant wiki pages itself. It is for Kautilya3 to explain-

1 Why he added 'militant' describing Hindu Mahasabha.
2 Where is the source for #1 above.
3 Why he removed the hyperlink added by me for Muslim league pointing to a wiki page dedicated to it?
4 Why he removed the description for Muslim League as a party that believed in a separate state for Muslims?