User talk:Solblaze

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

--RegentsPark (comment) 23:03, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited People's Anti-Fascist Front, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page United Liberation Front. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:12, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hey. I just want to say hi and thanks for your recent edits which have been amazing. Keep up the good work. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 21:32, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for reverting edit in ISI page.

I understand your concerns, But should read the full report where these militant groups are assigned as "terrorist originations" in the report, not just only by India or Indian media.

Upon reviewing your recent edits, I have noticed that the majority of them appear to be biased and reflect your point of view and soon someone will notice it other than me.

Please be aware that Wikipedia is a platform for sharing neutral knowledge and not for promoting individual perspectives or agendas. The majority of your edits feature specific agendas which are not wrong but making edits based on your personal pov is wrong(this affects the impartiality and reliability of Wikipedia).

I don't want to be in any edit war thats why I am not gonna revert your other edits. But you should reconsider the edits that you have made. WP:NPOV

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Thecybergulf (talk) 14:31, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned in the edit summary, according to Wikipedia guidelines, you can't use POV-laden contentious labels like "terrorist." My edits strictly adhere to Wikipedia guidelines and are well sourced. You are expected to assume good faith, and not throw around baseless allegations. However, if you have any specific objection to one of my edits, I am open to discussion. Solblaze (talk) 14:48, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Article talk pages are meant for discussing the article content. Making comments on editor conduct as you have done here is improper. And, if those comments are accusatory, defamatory or malicious, they will be considered personal attacks. If you have complaint against me, you need to take it up with me on my talkl page, or make complaint at WP:ANI. Stating it anywhere else is improper.

And, for clarification, I called "false propaganda", the various claims you were making, not what the RS said. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:28, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually defending you by pointing out emotions can cloud one's judgement on contentious topics so someone wouldn't slap an ANI case against you for deliberately violating guidelines.

And, for clarification, I called "false propaganda", the various claims you were making, not what the RS said

I don't recall you saying that when I asked for clarification - but I'll take your word for it. It is pertinent to note my "claim" of the Kashmir conflict being sparked by Hari Singh and his massacres of Muslims is a direct quote of Snedden, Al Jazeera, and the BBC. Solblaze (talk) 22:03, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Leh. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:34, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A friendly suggestion

@Solblaze

At WP:ARE discussion system is bit different, one needs to write in own section only. If need be you can create subsection in own section itself. I hope this advice helps.

Happy editing Bookku (talk) 12:49, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 § Remove reference to Orphanage bombing?

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 § Remove reference to Orphanage bombing?. Worldbruce (talk) 07:01, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring and threats

Hi, I'm here to express my concerns about the reckless reverts that you've been making on India-Pakistan conflict related articles that come under the purview of contentious topic ([1][2]) and the indecorous threats of hauling people off to noticeboards for absolutely no good reasons that you've given in your very first interactions with them (e.g). These folks have been around for a whole lot more than you and understand the ropes and the way things work here a whole lot more than you've demonstrated thus far in your fleeting editing history. By making these threats and by fomenting edit wars, you not just come across as presumptuous and impudent and vititate the otherwise collaborative environment of this endearing encyclopedia, but also cause disruption to this already contentious part of it. The avenues to thrash out content disputes or seeking inquiry are well established channels (read talk pages) that facilitate content related-discourses, and the dispute resolution boards which you may apply for if talk page discussions don't yield a resolution or consensus. The above is intended as a word to the wise, and I hope you will commit to showing common courtesy to your fellow editors in your interactions with them henceforth. Regards, MBlaze Lightning (talk) 20:05, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Please explain your contributions using a descriptive edit summary. Changing information on Wikipedia (such as numbers and dates) without explanation, as you did at 1947 Poonch rebellion, may be confused with vandalism. Thank you. MBlaze Lightning (talk) 12:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:SpicyBiryani per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SpicyBiryani. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 00:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]