User talk:Karnataka

I regularly blank this page without keeping an archive of talk messages. Check the page history for all messages I may have received from others.

Please stop

@Karnataka. Re your recent edits, please kindly note that if there are any personal problems, the most appropriate venue is my talk page. You may want to review WP:WIKIHOUNDING and WP:WIN. Thanks and regards, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 05:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

I can’t believe you are still doing that after weeks, [1].

Re your recent revert, I’m *not* implying anything. Please comment on article content rather than editors and pls AGF. I hope that revert is not a POV-pushing attempt to say that war is right. Labelling whatever edit one disagree with as having POV-problem is not collaborative editing and is bordering on WP:PA, WP:HOUND, and that is not your first time (E.g., 1, 2). I think that’s really enough. This should be the end of it. BTW, you have been in violation of WP:PRESERVE for multiple times already. Please review this and adjust you editing style. Thanks and regards, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 00:30, 6 September 2024 (UTC); --Dustfreeworld (talk) 19:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Dustfreeworld I am not harassing you, like your post is implying - you are the first person that I've ever had an encounter like this. I am saying that the war is not wrong, nor it is right. Please speak about your justification for adding a Bible verse (when a large part of the dispute is due to religion?) and the Wrongs don't make a right article (who exactly is wrong? and what is right? is Hamas' right, or is Israel right?) As Wikipedia editors, we do not make that conclusion, referring to a POV-pushing attempt to say that war is right (so is this war right, or wrong?). You have a very different view of understanding PRESERVE and you include it in almost all of your reverts - it is difficult to retain content that can only be fixed if removal is the only option. PRESERVE is not your one-way ticket to ensuring that everything you add onto this site will remain how you want it.

Every edit you make on this site can be challenged, and will be challenged if there is disagreement - this is why collaboration and BRD is very useful, even though BRD is optional. Consensus is ensuring that absolutely no-one disagrees as long as there is a valid reason for the disagreement. Answering my questions in brackets in the above paragraph will be a start. You even stated editorial judgement and common sense in your edit summaries - did you forget that both of these are subjective? If you think that only your editorial judgement and your common sense is valid here, is that really consensus?

In the suicide article - I also mentioned POV-pushing with this because of your statement at Talk:Suicide methods (the page has a high page view that's almost 8000 per day. Their lives are precious and shouldn't face higher risk because of the time wasted here - this isn't a neutral way of thinking as some people do support suicide when necessary, but your statement doesn't account for this. It's interesting how you never responded to my response to your concern about that here, so I just removed the post altogether.

I really don't want to add this part here, but you're the one that linked the content-removal templates so I'll do so anyway. Those templates link to WP:CRV, where the first sentence states Content removal is the removal of material that provides information from an article - note how I only removed links, not article information therefore I never even did remove content and I'm not even "violating" anything at all. When I removed the suicide image, I however did mention you on all the talk pages, which you did see so I have informed you one way or another.

What I removed is not content, and I was not the first person to remove the links. I will be taking this to the talk page for further opinion, and I do hope that you read the entirety of this reply. — Karnataka 01:24, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Karnataka, you are not answering my complaint on your problematic behaviour of potential WP:WIKIHOUNDING, WP:ABF and repeated untrue claims.

And sorry I really find your post too long. If every editor who misunderstand policies keep following me, reverting my edits, asking me to read their long posts, and even making untrue claims about me, and asking me to respond, (likely because of WP:WIN, although you already WIN at the suicide articles but still seem unsatisfied), it’s just a time sink and I find it really harassing and it’s tiring for me to satisfy such needs. Again, that’s enough. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 01:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Just to help you understand, PRESERVE doesn’t mean you can’t disagree with an edit, but what you should do is discuss on talk page first, instead of reverting outright. Besides the war article, your reverts at the suicide articles and David Pui [2] are obvious violations of PRESERVE. I believe I’m gentle enough not adding the warning templates here, but just adding a link to them in my comment above. But not only that you didn't strike out your untrue claims. You are not self-reverting your problematic/ policy-violating edits. You are following me around and are keeping on with the same problematic behaviour. All these are really exhausting my patience. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 01:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Dustfreeworld It's funny how you tell me that I should do is discuss on talk page first when you are the one that tells everyone that BRD is optional. I'll say it once more - PRESERVE is not your one-way ticket to ensuring that everything you add onto this site will remain how you want it. I didn't "win" anything - you have the full ability to re-add the crisis hotline image but you have chosen not to. Multiple editors have shown that they disagree with the link additions, yet you insist on keeping them. Is this what you call consensus? Or will you keep fighting and saying that only your editorial judgement and consensus is correct? Even though multiple editors disagree with your addition of the links (which once again, isn't content), are you trying to "WP:WIN" by keeping those links on there at all costs? — Karnataka 15:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Question from Diegomelendez.co (17:15, 16 August 2024)

Hello, I would like to create my biography page, how could I do it? --Diegomelendez.co (talk) 17:15, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Diegomelendez.co you're usually discouraged from making articles about yourself, but Wikipedia:YOURSELF will provide you information you need if you'd still like to proceed — Karnataka 18:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much Karnataka Diegomelendez.co (talk) 19:12, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Nanette unsolved on User:Nanette unsolved/sandbox (11:35, 20 August 2024)

Hi Kamataka is there a page off Wikipedia i can get some help please? Like facebook or something? I don't understand why my article is just sitting here and no actions happening. Is there a way to delete this i feel completely despondent after all the work I have done. I realise there's not many editors or volunteers but I never knew it would be so hard to get something published. I've been working on this for many years in collaboration with others and i Just keep getting links to more rabbit holes through Wikipedia. I just need a group to join to get some clear easy answers please. Thanking you Nanette unsolvedNanette unsolved (talk) --Nanette unsolved (talk) 11:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

@Nanette unsolved there are many places to get answers, however most collaboration usually happens on talk-pages (like this one), or discussion venues (potential articles are reviewed by Wikipedia:Articles for creation, their help desk is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk).

You might have removed the text at the top of the article when you made the sandbox page - this shows the instructions to submit the article.

I've submitted your article for review on behalf of yourself, but as there is a large number of unreviewed articles it can take up to 4 months for a review to be completed.

If you'd like your article to be deleted, just type {{db-u1}} at the top of the page and an admin will delete it. — Karnataka 14:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

@Nanette unsolved I've reviewed your article and have decided to accept it. Your article can be viewed normally at Nanette Ellis — Karnataka 20:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Karnataka OMG thank you so so much I so appreciate this <3 This is amazing Nanette unsolved (talk) 00:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Karnataka sorry to bother you again, I had problems with the original referencing- citations. I had them all there but when i went to put them all in order they were giving different numbers and put them all out of order. So thats where the citations are missing. I will try to add them back I hope it doesn't muck them up again. Nanette unsolved (talk) 09:54, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Karnataka the references I was adding them in the reuse feature the citations, but it was putting them all out of order. sorry couldn't edit above. Nanette unsolved (talk) 09:56, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Nanette unsolved - the numbers do not matter, and the references do not need to be in a specific order. Just make sure that the reference you've used matches the portion of the article that it is used for. — Karnataka 09:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Nanette unsolved the numbers correspond to the order that the reference is first used in the article, just ignore the numbers and make sure that all the information itself has a reference attached to it. — Karnataka 10:01, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Karnataka thankyou so much thats a huge help will work on this now its late but dont want to let them be left without references. Thankyou again for all your help Nanette unsolved (talk) 12:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Karnataka could you please help me categorize the page please and I'm confused about the references which were all in the original edit that you will see. So sorry to be a bother. also I clicked on the link to remove the template of edit as it doesn't get removed automatically and not sure how to do this so viewes don't see this when they head to the page please. I clicked on all the links but they are not easy to follow. one of the editors removed them all in one of their edits. I have been trying to edit it but confused on the first edit next to Boronia. Does it need an edit to the case or to boronia please?

transcript copied i'm referring to ...

Personal life

[edit source]

Nanette Mae Ellis was a 41-year-old divorcee and single mother of two boys, at the time of her death. She lived at 39 Manuka Drive, Boronia Victoria Australia.

Nanette Ellis worked as an advertising manager for The Free Press in Belgrave, located in the Victorian Dandenong Ranges.^{[failed verification]} The Free Press was part of the Leader Associated Newspapers in Blackburn. She had no known criminal associations and led a quiet routine life prior to the events leading up to her murder. She was well-regarded by her colleagues and community.^{[citation needed]}

here were all my original edits References:

1. 9 News[9]

2. Victoria Police[7]

3. Mamamia[5]

4. National Tribune[12]

5. Ranges Trader Star Mail Article[11]

6. Herald Sun Article[13]

7. Nanette Mae Ellis Cold case murder Boronia Victoria 1984 Australia (Wilson)[14]

8. Public Records of Victoria[15]

9. We remember - Ancestry

10. Find a Grave [1]

11. Crime Stoppers [2]

12. [3] Australian True Crime podcast

1. ^ Jump up to:a b Ward, Rachael (2024-02-10). "Tormented family's plea for clues over mother's murder". The Age. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

2. ^ Jump up to:a b "Boronia, Victoria", Wikipedia, 2024-07-25, retrieved 2024-08-08

3. ^ Jump up to:a b "Belgrave local newspapers | Australian Newspaper Directory - Newspapers.com.au". www.newspapers.com.au. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

4. ^ Jones, Michael (2016-05-19). "Dandenong Ranges Map - Attractions, Tourist, Route Map, Melbourne PDF". Dandenong Ranges Point. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

5. ^ Jump up to:a b Webb, Emily (2017-04-06). "TRUE CRIME: This mum had a rock thrown through her window. Days later, she was murdered". Mamamia. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

6. ^ Jump up to:a b "'Someone must know': 40 years since her murder, Nanette Ellis' family is still seeking answers". SBS News. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

7. ^ Jump up to:a b c d "Nanette Ellis". www.police.vic.gov.au. 2023-01-25. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

8. ^ Jump up to:a b "Search for answers continues in four-decade-old cold case of Melbourne mother". www.9news.com.au. 2024-02-10. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

9. ^ Jump up to:a b c https://www.news.com.au/reward-and-new-evidence-could-crack-the-30yearold-mystery-of-who-murdered-mother-nanette-mae-ellis/news-story/44c42a3551b253851ffb9c0af60352c2

10. ^ "Cold cases". www.police.vic.gov.au. 2024-03-05. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

11. ^ Jump up to:a b Hui, Jin (2024-02-19). "Search for answers in 40 year old murder case". Ranges Trader Star Mail. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

12. ^ Jump up to:a b c Hui, Jin (2024-02-19). "Search for answers in 40 year old murder case". Ranges Trader Star Mail. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

13. ^ https://www.heraldsun.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=HSWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Frp.liu233w.com%3A443%2Fhttps%2Fwww.heraldsun.com.au%2Ftruecrimeaustralia%2Fpolice-courts-victoria%2Fnew-bid-launched-to-solve-nanette-ellis-1984-murder%2Fnews-story%2F15bc7fb22968c466289daf165ec90c8a&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&v21=GROUPA-Segment-2-NOSCORE

14. ^ "Facebook". www.facebook.com. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

15. ^ "Homepage | PROV". prov.vic.gov.au. Retrieved 2024-08-08.

Nanette unsolved (talk) 02:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Nanette unsolved I'm really sorry I didn't really understand how I'm meant to help you. Is it ok if you tell me again clearly?

For categories, the help page H:CAT will show you how you can categorise the page if you fully read it, feel free to try and if you need help with this you can ask me — Karnataka 06:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Karnataka my page Nanette Ellis is saying down the bottom it says... This article needs additional or more specific categories. Please help out by adding categories to it so that it can be listed with similar articles. (August 2024)

Then it says this... at the top for all to view in a box with an exclamation mark ... This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)

This article needs additional citations for verification. (August 2024)

(This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (August 2024)

(I'm not sure what orphan means and it needs to be linked to other pages?) I thought I had already linked it by the categories? and when I do a search it comes up with similar articles any way so it must be linked to other articles.

Also it has a failed verification in the first under her personal life . I've added Boronia and I did originally add the news article about Nanette verifiying she was murdered and where she worked but one of the editors seemed to have removed it. and all the other stuff above is what i had in the article originally that was removed. It has all my references in it for verification .

Hope this explains it better.

Nanette unsolved (talk) 07:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Amarji25 (03:46, 29 August 2024)

Hey I am Amar a new to Wikipedia here's mine question:

I can easily find out whether the paragraph written here has been written through an advertisement or just like that, then I want to ask whether I should delete that entire paragraph? Or remove some words --Amarji25 (talk) 03:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Amarji25 it's best to edit the paragraph to remove the advertisement, but if that's not possible feel free to delete — Karnataka 13:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Question from GnarlyWedge (17:39, 31 August 2024)

Hi. How do I find out about mirroring Wikipedia? --GnarlyWedge (talk) 17:39, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@GnarlyWedge unfortunately, this mentoring service is for asking about editing Wikipedia itself. it's encouraged to ask this off-site — Karnataka 13:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Question from Aymanalsayyad (08:59, 2 September 2024)

how can i create my first article --Aymanalsayyad (talk) 08:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Aymanalsayyad see WP:YFA — Karnataka 13:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)