| Revision as of 19:47, 22 June 2015 editMar4d (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers84,737 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:09, 22 June 2015 edit undo82.11.33.86 (talk) I have account nowNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == WP:CANVASS == | |||
| Your post is inappropriate as it violates ] and the article is not under the scope of the project. This is a policy violation. Don't edit war. If you want to choose not to cooperate, then we can discuss your conduct with an administrator. Thanks, ''']''' (]) 17:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| Do no delete my comments, I read WP:CANVASS, says "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it is done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus." ] (]) 17:28, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :: No, it is not. You need to read and understand ]. If you want to broaden participation and maximise relevant input, you should post at the Pakistan, Iran or Afghanistan noticeboards. The article in question is not under the scope of the noticeboard where you are posting, and comes under canvassing. I am going to revert you. Your edit warring is non-productive; it seems you have been in conflict with several users as your talk page shows as well as several articles. If you persist with this attitude, there is a strong chance you would ] long. Please read up core Misplaced Pages policies and educate yourself. Thanks, ''']''' (]) 17:34, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::Do not remove my comments, is 3rr violation. ] (]) 17:36, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::: No, it is '''not''' a 3RR violation. This is not an article, this is a noticeboard used for discussion, which you are using inappropriately. Also, read up ], which applies when there are more than 3 reverts (you've made the same reverts). Once again, please take heed of the advice given to you and stop ]. ''']''' (]) 17:39, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::: I search on talkpage rules, you breaking them. ] ] (]) 17:41, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::It may be a friendly notice, but its still canvassing because it is indiscriminate cross-posting to an unrelated subject. Pakistan has nothing to do with India. The next time you canvass someone I will take you to ANI. --] <small>(])</small> 18:06, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::"Pakistan has nothing to do with India" ] ] (]) 18:46, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::But that's not a reason to go canvassing people at the Indian noticeboard, as it is outside the scope of Pakistan. --] <small>(])</small> 19:01, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::If he can post it to Iran and Afghanistan noticeboards, there is nothing wrong with posting it there. People saying that's "indiscriminate cross-posting to an unrelated subject" or that 'Pakistan has nothing to do with India' simply do not understand the region. They used to be the same country! ] (]) 13:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::And you are crying wolf again despite being told not to. In any case you have been blocked for 1RR violation. --] <small>(])</small> 18:07, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::{{ping|ToonLucas22}} Pakistan regularly accuse India of supporting insurgency, so has plenty to do with India. Is no violation according to canvass. ] (]) 19:06, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::But the noticeboard you posted in is '''still''' outside the scope of Pakistan. That's what matters. --] <small>(])</small> 19:07, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::According to who? I disagree strongly. And I think anybody arguing otherwise is simply arguing from a position of ignorance about the region. ] (]) 14:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::: According to commonsense. —] <sup>] </sup> 15:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::Commonsense says the exact opposite. It's hard to think of two countries more related to one another than India and Pakistan. ] (]) 16:08, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::: So what you propose is that while discussing ] one should go post about it at Pakistan Notice Board to get consensus? Really? Being related does not allow for poking into every topic that is related to Pakistan. China and Pakistan are more closely related than India, but would that allow for some IP from let's say Ukraine to post about ] at the Pakistan Notice Board? No, not unless he wants to push POV and get support through canvassing —] <sup>] </sup> 16:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::He was told "you should post at the Pakistan, Iran or Afghanistan noticeboards" -- it sounds like you disagree with that. If so, I have no opinion. But if he can post it on those three, posting it on India is perfectly fine. And no, Pakistan and China are not more closely related. India is the single most closely related country to Pakistan. ] (]) 18:20, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::: He was 'told' right. You didnt answer my question? Why should someone, who wants to push a POV which is largely supported and propagated by Indians, will ask support from Indians? Especially when the topic has no connection to India whatsoever? Would it be OK for me to post about let's say Pakistan's Motorways at the Indian Notice Board or about India's Farming at Pakistan's notice boards? Nobody minds Indians or for that matter anyone editing topics related to Pakistan, that's what makes Misplaced Pages Fun, but it surely does not include canvassing and asking support from corners which has no connection to the topic especially when the board watchers have a POV on the topic. If some Indians come and support the IP in the RfC he has raised, no one has a problem, but when he go running for support at a board which is as per you 'related' is not understood. Going by that definition the IP which is from UK should also be allowed to go UK's notice board because it is related to UK too? Drawing relations is easy, logic isnt. —] <sup>] </sup> 18:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::::If he was right to be told that he should post to the Afghanistan and Iran noticeboards, then he was wrong to be told he should not post to India. Your absurd and irrelevant hypotheticals do not change that. "corners which has no connection to the topic" and there is your error. There is a connection. If Afghanistan and Iran have a connection, then India also has a connection. ] (]) 18:49, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::::: Lol.. Afghanistan and Iran does not have a connection, but the Balochistan Page has a connection with both Afghanistan and Iran because The Balochistan "Region" is spread across these two countries, which is not the case with India, and hence {{ping|Mar4d}} has rightly told him to post it at the Afg and Iranian boards. Posting it at Indian Board is like posting an info related to "Roads in San Antonio" at a board of Venezuela just because they are 'related' by Spanish Language..lol.. That's one twisted logic my friend. Anywaz, let the admins decide, I have said enough. Anyone with two eyes know that it was an canvassing attempt by the IP.—] <sup>] </sup> 19:33, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::: {{ping|TripWire}} There is no such thing as common sense on Misplaced Pages, we go by policies and guidelines. So why don't you just back off, and stop prodding and baiting the IP? Or you might find your own part in all of this being scrutinised. ] ] 16:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::: Apologies for not going in details and not being formal while editing. Just that I wish some admin could also have intervened when the IP was baiting and flaming me upon my every edit.—] <sup>] </sup> 16:12, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| * {{ping|Handpolk}} I believe you have misunderstood me, and are also misrepresenting what I have said. I said the Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan noticeboards were relevant places for input as ] is located in these three countries and therefore comes under the direct scope of either WikiProjects. I most certainly did not endorse for the issue to be cross-posted to non-related noticeboards, or to be used as a ] point. Please do not misquote me. ''']''' (]) 19:45, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Blocked? == | |||
| {{ping|Bbb23}} I was not told of WP:ARBPIA or 1rr. How do I know? ] (]) 18:08, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :When you edited the page, there was a big colorful warning at the top in a box letting you know that what you were doing was sanctionable.--] (]) 18:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Bbb23}} I did not see it? Was no intentional. ] (]) 18:14, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| And what Gulf war has to do with Palestine-Israel? ] (]) 18:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == ] block == | |||
| <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px">]To enforce an ] and for violation of ] on the page ], you have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''48 hours'''. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions. <p>If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the ] (specifically ]) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. --><span style="font-size:97%;">{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE{{!}}arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN{{!}}administrators' noticeboard]]. ''Your reason here OR place the reason below this template.'' ~~~~}}</span>. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the ] on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. ] (]) 18:10, 21 June 2015 (UTC) <hr/><p style="line-height: 90%;"><small>'''Reminder to administrators:''' In May 2014, ArbCom adopted a ]: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" ). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."</small></p></div><!-- Template:uw-aeblock --> | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|reason=Please copy my appeal to the ] or ]. I did no see notice on page when I reverted, was honest mistake. I use talk also explain why I revert. I am no reverting again, I am sorry for mistake. ] (]) 18:19, 21 June 2015 (UTC)|accept=Unblocked . You've agreed to stop warring at ] and will create an account that you will use when making any future edits to articles covered by ]. ] (]) 16:52, 22 June 2015 (UTC)}} | |||
| *Unblock request copied to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard. --] <small>(])</small> 18:39, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you ] (]) 19:07, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :You're welcome. --] <small>(])</small> 19:16, 21 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| {{tea}} | |||
| Take a break, and come back later. Don't be impatient. Read each every detailed explanation and links mentioned in ] and ]. Take your time and come back. | |||
| --<span style="border:1px solid #0072BC;padding:1px;">] ]</span> 04:25, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| thank you ] (]) 09:33, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|EdJohnston}} I agree with you proposal. Will make account ] (]) 09:33, 22 June 2015 (UTC) | |||