User talk:Aman.kumar.goel

This user tries to do the right thing. If he makes a mistake, please let him know.

Hey there, have to raise any issue? Rather talk to me here than initiating edit war.

Page before November 18, 2019.

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, if you are actually reading this message (as it was delivered by a bot),

It was delighting for me that you could reckon me helpful for mentoring newbies. Unfortunately, I'm myself a new editor who recently has been absorbing markup language on wikipedia. Coding has very remote relations to my job as of now. So, I don't even have much hold of coding I had learnt in past. I edited a document as I can see and interpret how markup works. I'm an editor with a fetish to keep statistics and lists updated. So, I tried, practiced and learnt. But that doesn't mean that I'm an expert editor and actually able to create documentation tasks I'm alien to. It will be my pleasure yet if I'm able to help someone on English Wikipedia. But again I'm afraid how much wait they will have to do. I'm at work for 80-90 hours a week. You accidentally caught the wrong person. Still, thanks for asking. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 03:41, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

November 2019

Hello, I'm Sjö. I noticed that you recently removed content from Newcastle sex abuse ring without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Sjö (talk) 11:56, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

An older unsourced edit was removed with an edit summary. RVV: Reverted Vandalism. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 12:00, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

You removed sourced info, as the source mentioned the Indian background of one or more perpetrators. Your removal of the sourced info appear to be based on your personal opinion and your edit comment was misleading. Sjö (talk) 14:03, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 14:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Newcastle sex abuse ring, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albanian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:26, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Requesting opinion

It would be helpful if you could offer your opinion on Talk:2019 Indian anti-satellite missile test#Requested move 27 November 2019.— Vaibhavafro ^💬 17:48, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Requesting comments on MSMC move

It would be gracious of you to voice your valuable opinion on Talk:Modern Sub Machine Carbine#Requested move 2 December 2019. I have just finished updating that article and have proposed the rename.— Vaibhavafro ^💬 18:24, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Atal Bihari Vajpayee, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Statesman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:39, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	बहुत खूब भाई :) Sagnique (talk) 13:56, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Friendly notice

Hi Aman.kumar.goel. Happy to have a discussion. I see you are a fairly new user, so just a friendly notice: be careful with the Wikipedia:3RR rule since, if you revert once more, you will be blockable. Let's discuss constructively on the Talk Page if there are specific issues. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 17:38, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

DS Alert

I see that you have already been alerted once--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 13:58, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

@DBigXray: I don't think my edit was contentious. What I went on adding was a general one liner consideration that was itself part of sources. As for second on mass shootings, it was my bad who didn't have a look on source and deemed it to be from conflicts. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 14:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for understanding and helping to improve the article. cheers. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 14:07, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

Issue resolved in above section.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Citizenship Amendment Act protests; 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: Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; Do not edit war even if you believe you are right. 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. Please note that the article is under WP:1RR another revert will likely lead to an edit warring complaint followed by a block. DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 13:56, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Red links

Doesnt always mean non notable. It may mean that the some one is yet to start an article ona notable topic. regards. DBigXrayᗙ 12:55, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

A note of concern on your partiality

You made a very surprising comment on my talk page, over the course of repeated unconstructive edits by an ip on the article Indian National Army which I struggled to correct last month. You picked the issue that I had reverted, but appeared to have entirely glossed over and given a free pass (not that it your role to do either) to the other party, which immediately flags your intention and partiallity. I have noticed a trend in India related articles of mass-swamping of similar approaches from a coterie of editors who spring up from nowehere, I take this to be something similar. Nonetheless, be careful that this destroys your own standing as a contributor, and flags you up as potentially disruptive editor. In the spirit that you left a warning message on my talks page (I have been in wikipedia long enough to not need reminding of 3RR from yourself), consider yourself warned.rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 16:08, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

You will be warned of 3RR whenever you will violate it or get close to it. There is nothing wrong with warning you about such edit warring while you are at it. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 16:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Vyommitra

Hi Aman, dropping a note of appreciation for the changes made to the Vyommitra. Csgir (talk) 11:33, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

My pleasure that I could contribute something appreciable. The article however needs a lot of expansion. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 13:57, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

ISRO'S Budget

Hey brother, I reverted your edit on Isro about budget. The budget of Rs1347 cr is given to Department of Space, not only to Isro. ISRO's individual budget will be clarify after DOS will release breaked down budget. I hope you got that. If you feels I'm wrong please ask me. Thanks Brown Chocolate (talk) 19:49, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Noted. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 00:51, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/The Establishment (Pakistan) at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 18:47, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

February 2020

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. Za-ari-masen (talk) 21:35, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

@Za-ari-masen: That was a discretionary sanctions notice not a blocking or warning template, and users making contentious edits are notified about sanctions in place on highly disruptive editing areas like South Asia. Your incorrect warning here to this user and removal of the DS from your talk page is highly problematic, other users need to know that you have been notified about sanctions on topic areas. Gotitbro (talk) 00:45, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Article Seems Confused

The article Vaidya Rama Kant Mishra seems a bit confused. What do you think of this article?Streetlight401 (talk) 06:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree. Will work on it someday. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 09:46, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

February 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Siddha medicine. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:57, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Aman.kumar.goel (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have been blocked for edit warring (not violating 3RR to be specific) and I admit that it was a wrong move on my part to edit war and I am willing to avoid edit war until we have reached a clear consensus. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 16:41, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Per discussion below. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Ping Ivanvector. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 16:41, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

This is your first block for edit warring but I see that you have been warned before. We have a bright-line rule about three reverts, but that is only one technical definition of an edit war. Any time you are repeatedly reverting other editors, you are edit warring, and edit warring is not allowed, period.

Fortunately, our policy on edit warring contains a section describing what you can do to avoid getting into edit wars and finding yourself blocked again. Before I unblock you, can you please summarize the advice given in Wikipedia:Edit warring#How experienced editors avoid becoming involved in edit wars? You may also find the essays WP:ALTREV and WP:ROWN to be useful advice. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:01, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

@Ivanvector: I understand that edit warring is not allowed and participating in an edit war or making reverts in opposition to an edit which requires discussion (not outright vandalism) constitutes edit warring, especially in "controversial topics where views views are polarized and emotions run high, resulting in more frequent edit warring". I agree with this definition and plan to avoid edit warring from now on. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 19:30, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

I trust that you will; please feel free to ask if you need help. I will unblock you momentarily. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Siddha medicine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nandi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:03, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Establishment (Pakistan)

Hello! Your submission of The Establishment (Pakistan) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 07:23, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Delhi Riots article

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at North East Delhi riots. 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. Thank you. Dey subrata (talk) 17:16, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at North East Delhi riots 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 are 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 you being blocked from editing—especially, as the page in question is currently under restrictions from the Arbitration Committee, if you violate the one-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than one revert on a single page with active Arbitration Committee restrictions 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 one-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the one-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Your edits here, when reverted by any user, should have have participated in the talk page rather than removing again, it is considered as edit war and is considered a vandalism. The consensus is not about addition of picture but the removal of picture, so don't play over smart here. You edit of removal here. And don't use NPOV in the article. If such edit behavious continues, I afraid, it will lead you to get blocked again, and this will be permament. Dey subrata (talk) 17:26, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For your diligent work on North East Delhi riots. Thanks for your efforts towards cleaning up a messy but highly crucial article. Bharatiya29 22:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

North East Delhi riots

The edits were made per the request of an admin. Please see the talk page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:57, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Fowler&fowler, which "admin" are you referring to? You have no consensus for your edits and you have just violated 1RR given this recent revert came after revert you made hours ago.  I recommend you to self-revert ASAP to avoid any block. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 03:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Why don't you try to get me blocked? I responsed to a talk page post by admin Vanamonde93. I am a competent senior editor, who has maintained the FA status of India for 13 years. Do you seriously think I do not know how to source? Good night. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:25, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Please also see admin El_C's post welcoming my presence there. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:28, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Funny that even after so much 'hard work' you still don't even know that an involved admin on talk page is equivalent to an involved non-admin editor like you, and also funny that you don't even know that uninvolved admins stay out of content dispute but can decide if consensus was held if it is clear. That is not the case here. As for the rest, see WP:BATTLE. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 03:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

I can't make sense of your language, but why do you have hard work in quotes? I did not use that expression. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 06:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

I am not surprised with that. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 07:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

New message from DiplomatTesterMan

Hello, Aman.kumar.goel. You have new messages at Talk:Pakistan Armed Forces.
Message added 10:16, 7 March 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Request your wisdom here DTM (talk) 10:16, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, something to recharge you

		A glass of Thandai for you
		Here is a glass of Thandai for you. Thandai is a traditional Indian cold drink prepared with a mixture of almonds, fennel seeds, watermelon kernels, rose petals, pepper, vetiver seeds, cardamom, saffron, milk and sugar. For your response over at the talk page of 2020 coronavirus pandemic in India. Here is something to recharge you, cheers. DTM (talk) 14:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC) For more Indian dishes, visit the Kitchen of WikiProject India.

Thanks bud. Sorry for not noticing talk earlier.Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 10:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Revert in Misinformation section

I had added the following line in misinformation section of 2020 coronavirus pandemic in India article which you reverted saying it is an individual opinion

In a bizarre statement, parliamentarian Ramesh Bidhuri of Bharatiya Janata Party claimed that as per experts using Namaste as a greeting prevents contamination from the Covid-19, but using Arabic greetings like Adab or As-salamu alaykum does not as it directs the air into the mouth.

Then can you remove the following line from Discrimination section of same article as this is also individual opinion of Ilyas Sharafuddin

Indian Islamic cleric Ilyas Sharafuddin said in an audio address that "Allah unleashed Coronavirus on Chinese for persecuting Uighur Muslims". Ilyas said that "they the Chinese have threatened the Muslims and tried to destroy lives of 20 million Muslims. Muslims were forced to drink alcohol, their mosques were destroyed and their Holy Book was burned. They thought that no one can challenge them, but Allah the most powerful punished them."

According to this logic, almost every line can be called "individual opinion". So, I don't think you have made a correct revert.

Misfired DS_Alert Warning

The edits at kuladevata are self explanatory.

I added punctuation and made the sentences about nagaraja kuladevata concise and shorter.

Is "unexplained edit" a violation of Wiki terms of service?

Are my edits in question serious enough to warrant a talk message?

I have not made "persistent", "disruptive", or repetitive edits.

I don't deserve to be treated a WP:Vandal with a message User_talk:Porus_D'Canara#DS_Alert for an good faith edit. Porus D'Canara (talk) 06:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Konkan Muslims sourced statmnts removed

Sorry that i did edit warring.

I understand that you are concerned about me getting blocked.

Why has only my account been selected for an edit warring message and blocking?

I have made an effort to comply with wiki policies Special:Diff/946528914

However I understand it is gaming the system according to you.

May I know why the other person edit warring with me was ignored and not given an edit warring?

Is not Neutrality and NPOV one of the most important Wiki terms of service? Porus D'Canara (talk) 12:30, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

I fell that we both of us editors should be treated equally and neutrally

But there is no message about edit warring on the talk page of the other editor as of now

It seems as though the other editor is being favourited Porus D'Canara (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33 — Newslinger talk 10:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Misusing Warnings & Impersonating an Administrator

You left warnings[1] on my talk on "Interest in India, Pakistan, etccc" however I've only edited one article Open Defecation pertaining to this topic. You also aren't an administrator [2] yet put this administrator ruling on my talk? Why? This is impersonating an administrator. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Administrators/Archive_5#Impersonating_admins Also that user has been blocked from edited Open Defecation recently for edit warring. [3], you also did not assume good faith when I stated a post on the talk page by an unregistered IP Special:Contributions/121.6.114.20 is a troll, as they also forgot to sign their comment.

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

---

Qayrawan (talk) 17:25, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism Alert

Disruptive editing and creating on the many pages by being non neutral, please Stop acting such. Saifullah.vguj (talk) 06:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Is this user doing disruptive editing by using two accounts?

and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Amkgp are they both handled by same person and are they providing a biased information on wikipedia. Please do check Saifullah.vguj (talk) 06:47, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Hello I an سب سے بڑی گڑبڑ , I noticed that you recently removed the citation needed tags i put on the strengths of the combatants on Kargil war. It must be remembered that every user has the right to question an uncited fact, if you really think that the tag should no longer be there then cite a source. —Preceding undated comment added 14:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Battle of Chamb 1971

Hi I am سب سے بڑی گڑبڑ I see that you removed all my edits i did on the page Battle of Chamb well much of the information i got from defence journal i had writeen in my own words, only when it came to the exclusively tedious parts did i do some copy pasting and even there i modified parts of the sentences for increased clarification and made sure that the story it told fitted in with the story told from other sources. Even if you object to my edits on the base of copy rights then expunge only those parts that you think violate copy rights, i do not want to start an edit war سب سے بڑی گڑبڑ (talk) 16:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I have seen that you reverted my edit again on the basis that it violates copyright, I had changed the vocabulary and the structures of the sentences, i had shifted the order of facts to make it different and the heavy dependence on one source only occured in the Prelude section where it was the only citation available, it must be remembered that the section Prelude itself was non-controversial, the Battle section uses two sources one Indian and one Pakistani.سب سے بڑی گڑبڑ (talk) 09:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Help required

Hi Aman, I am trying to create a Wikipedia page for author Dr. Sanjib Borkakoty. Wondering if you are able to help if I provide you the information. I do not have adequate expertise with the platform to do it myself. Thanks and regards, Mallika Mallika.borkakoty (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Mallika.borkakoty For layout of biography, see WP:MOSBIO.

You are not supposed to create biography of someone on WP unless the particular person is notable and has a significant coverage in media or academics. See WP:GNG for general details. Sources further you use, must be established reliable sources and not self published blogs. WP:WWIN Wikipedia is not a platform for advertising. Article you create must be free of puffery language, well sourced and written neutrallty throughout for general information and not any promotional content at all. Have eyes throughout other articles how they are written to have an idea. Regards Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 20:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Hi, dear, I'm Anaguaydf, The sources about Pakistan's edge over India in Indo-Pakistani Air War of 1965 are well referenced in the article which are enough to claim it. You appear to be reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Indo-Pakistani Air War of 1965. 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. Anaguaydf (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, again, dear!, you recently deleted my edits on Abhinandan Varthaman, watch full video [4] by ISPR Official, they have added someone video, showing one Indian aircraft by destroyed by Pakistan and felled into J&K, and Indian Army is handling that - Anaguaydf (talk) 14:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@Anaguaydf: Your own observation does not matter, you would need to cite the reliable source supporting your conclusion. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 14:24, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@Aman.kumar.goel: i am not that user Anaguaydf (talk) 14:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Appeared to be an error caused by mobile version of Wikipedia, but still you know what I am trying to tell you. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 14:36, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Warning

Your recent editing history 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. Wolfagain1 (talk) 05:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history 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.-Kthxbay (talk) 08:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.-Kthxbay (talk) 09:29, 8 May 2020 (UTC)