| Revision as of 15:34, 6 September 2014 editLindashiers (talk | contribs)179 edits →Shiva← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:35, 7 September 2014 edit undoAmritasyaPutra (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,667 edits →Could you check this discussion and provide comments if any.: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
| ::If "''nonsensical removal''" is your usual edit summary expression then perhaps you'd be better off editing elsewhere. I removed the '''cite''' because it is vague, incomplete and misleading, and also because the '''content''' before it is a load of '''speculative''' POV pushing crap. Now if you have nothing specific further to add about my reverts I'll reinsert them after a decent interval. BTW: If you have additional reliable sources - CITE them. ] (]) 15:32, 6 September 2014 (UTC) | ::If "''nonsensical removal''" is your usual edit summary expression then perhaps you'd be better off editing elsewhere. I removed the '''cite''' because it is vague, incomplete and misleading, and also because the '''content''' before it is a load of '''speculative''' POV pushing crap. Now if you have nothing specific further to add about my reverts I'll reinsert them after a decent interval. BTW: If you have additional reliable sources - CITE them. ] (]) 15:32, 6 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
| == Could you check this discussion and provide comments if any. == | |||
| Could you check ] discussion and provide an independent comment if any. Regards. --] 01:35, 7 September 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:35, 7 September 2014
See also:
- User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship - Any tips/advises on recent edits.
- User talk:Bladesmulti/Grammar - Any copy editing, grammar, formatting tips.
- User:Bladesmulti/Issues & articles - Any update about recent issues.
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 1 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
.
Remember
Do you remember Septate? JimRenge (talk) 14:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
- Just talked about him with NeilN. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- I read your comment. You should realize that his edits on islam/religion in country xy, his corrections (?) of statistical data and addition of inappropiate images of mosques create even more serious problems. Besides of WP:UNDUE, OR, NPOV there is WP:ICANTHEARYOU. I wonder when this will come to an end. JimRenge (talk) 14:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- He has special hatred for Hinduism, Shia Islam. He had been blocked for removing images of Muhammad on Islam. This will end only after a topic ban, maybe not for whole religion subject but at least for the pages about Hinduism. I have seen his horrible swapping of religious population stats, NeilN, User:DeCausa and 1 more have had watch over Septate for that, I wouldn't care much, but like you've said that his amount of disruptive editing seems to be endless, true! Bladesmulti (talk) 17:12, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- "Wikihounded". What do you mean? I reported him to AN3 for edit warring with deceptive edit summaries once and he was blocked for it. He has been caught several times deliberately making dishonest edit summaries to covertly make an edit he wanted. And he has admitted and apologized to dping that and then he's repeated it. I have warned him on his talk page as a result. I suggest you strike "wikihounded". DeCausa (talk) 20:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- User:DeCausa I know that the term usually reflects the bad side, but Wikihounding is the term when you go by contributions of the user, for both good or bad. Other para, Misplaced Pages:HA#NOT can be read and it support the meaning that I was using. Like every other policy, this has 2 sid es as well. One admin told me before that wikihounding or going through contribs is recommended if you are reverting horrible edits. Bladesmulti (talk) 01:39, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- No, that's not correct. It's always "bad", see WP:WIKIHOUND: "Wikihounding is the singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor...The important component of wikihounding is disruption to another user's own enjoyment of editing, or to the project generally, for no overriding reason." What you linked was defining what is not "wikihounding". DeCausa (talk) 05:49, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Watch over is correct term, thanks decausa! Bladesmulti (talk) 10:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- User:DeCausa I know that the term usually reflects the bad side, but Wikihounding is the term when you go by contributions of the user, for both good or bad. Other para, Misplaced Pages:HA#NOT can be read and it support the meaning that I was using. Like every other policy, this has 2 sid es as well. One admin told me before that wikihounding or going through contribs is recommended if you are reverting horrible edits. Bladesmulti (talk) 01:39, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- "Wikihounded". What do you mean? I reported him to AN3 for edit warring with deceptive edit summaries once and he was blocked for it. He has been caught several times deliberately making dishonest edit summaries to covertly make an edit he wanted. And he has admitted and apologized to dping that and then he's repeated it. I have warned him on his talk page as a result. I suggest you strike "wikihounded". DeCausa (talk) 20:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- He has special hatred for Hinduism, Shia Islam. He had been blocked for removing images of Muhammad on Islam. This will end only after a topic ban, maybe not for whole religion subject but at least for the pages about Hinduism. I have seen his horrible swapping of religious population stats, NeilN, User:DeCausa and 1 more have had watch over Septate for that, I wouldn't care much, but like you've said that his amount of disruptive editing seems to be endless, true! Bladesmulti (talk) 17:12, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- I read your comment. You should realize that his edits on islam/religion in country xy, his corrections (?) of statistical data and addition of inappropiate images of mosques create even more serious problems. Besides of WP:UNDUE, OR, NPOV there is WP:ICANTHEARYOU. I wonder when this will come to an end. JimRenge (talk) 14:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
@JimRenge,DeCausa, Look at talk:Religion and homosexuality,talk:Ayurveda and tell me is this my hatred for Hinduism? No explanation for my hatred for Shia Islam.Septate (talk) 08:17, 5 July 2014 (UTC) When it comes wikihounding, Bladesmulti's wikihounding played an important part in developing my interest in Hinduism and religion in particular. I was much interested in editing biology and physics articles (As evident from my edit history) before. And now JimRenge is doing the same thing.Septate (talk) 08:22, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- On ayurveda you are giving useless sources and want hindu traditional medicine to be changed to indian traditional. On religion and homosexuality you are trying to fabricate that hinduism forbids homosexualiy, then say that it says nothing, that is hatred. But they know that you are always into Ididnthearthat. Bladesmulti (talk) 10:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
July 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Irfan Habib may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- *[
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:51, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Saffron terror
Hi, I support you in saying that unleashing "saffron terror" does not equate to being a terrorist organization. However, removing the "saffron terror" idea entirely is unreasonable and it would amount to a destructive edit. So, please mention the "saffron terror" idea elsewhere before you remove the current description. Uday Reddy (talk) 22:38, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
"saffron terror" is found to be an oxymoron term coined by secular congress leaders for their vote bank policies,none of the terror accused is proven to be guilty in court to this date and there is nothing attributed to Hinduism about those terror attacks. I think the page "saffron terror" must be deleted.Rim sim (talk) 05:35, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- Try a AFD but nothing will happen because term is notable. Bladesmulti (talk) 12:26, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ayurveda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charak. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Bladesmulti
Appreciate your succinct edits & explanations. --AmritasyaPutra✍ 05:33, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. Bladesmulti (talk) 07:47, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Stop removing comments atleast.
Hey will you stop removing my comments from the talk pages? AbhinavKumar1289 (talk) 13:53, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
- Socks are not allowed to edit wikipedia and because you have shamelessly violated your editing benefits I think you should just stop now. Try requesting unblock after 1 year or more, but on your main account Siddheart. Bladesmulti (talk) 14:12, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
- Bladesmulti I have compassion for you. May god guides you on the right path. AbhinavKumar1289 (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
- Says the one who don't believe god. Bladesmulti (talk) 14:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
- Bladesmulti I have compassion for you. May god guides you on the right path. AbhinavKumar1289 (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Shiva
Please discuss your wholesale reverts to my recent edits, accompanied with a dismissive edit summary. To put a fine point to it, the sources and content removed are crap, and their on-page age is irrelevant when it comes to policy and Hindu Dharm.
- That is usual expression for edit summaries "A likely story!" "more original research" etc. I am not sure why you considered to be unreliable source. I know that 2 paragraphs are unsourced but I just looked around and already found sources. Maybe you should assume good faith. Bladesmulti (talk) 13:30, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- If "nonsensical removal" is your usual edit summary expression then perhaps you'd be better off editing elsewhere. I removed the cite because it is vague, incomplete and misleading, and also because the content before it is a load of speculative POV pushing crap. Now if you have nothing specific further to add about my reverts I'll reinsert them after a decent interval. BTW: If you have additional reliable sources - CITE them. Lindashiers (talk) 15:32, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Could you check this discussion and provide comments if any.
Could you check this discussion and provide an independent comment if any. Regards. --AmritasyaPutra✍ 01:35, 7 September 2014 (UTC)