User talk:ISoham

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, ISoham, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 18:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks isoham (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ambala district, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Punjabi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Charaka[edit]

Hi, I see you're doing some editing to this article - good luck with it. What it mainly needs is some references for the many claims made. There should be a list of Charaka's works, and as importantly a list of books, reliable papers etc about him, cited in the text. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013[edit]

Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Muhammad Iqbal. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. 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. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. SMS Talk 08:56, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi User:Smsarmad. I'm not sure you've gone through the page history. If you'd have, you'd know better.
  • Foremost, You'd know that there is no edit war on the page, outrightly rendering your post redundant!!!!!!
  • You'd know that it's because I have already created a link to the talk page Talk:Muhammad Iqbal which you've asked me to do herein, since you have no idea that it's already done!!!
  • You'd know that only edit that I have made is tagging the article for lack of WP:RS and pushing WP:POV. Despite counterfactual information, I have not removed anything!!!
  • You'd know that let apart, reverting thrice in a day, I have reverted only once
  • You'd know that User: Darkness Shines has reverted my summarised edits more than once without reason
  • You'd know to issue the edit warring warning to User: Darkness Shines instead
  • You'd know that the section I have tagged is violating a consensus that had earlier been reached on that page

But, then you don't seem to know any of it! One infers, it is because you want to impose your POV and WP:OR on editors

Also.

  • It is you have have been recently threatened with a block for disrupting
  • If you think that you can overwhelm an editor by posting falsehood, you should think again
  • So, please stop posting funny posts and instead focus and not getting blocked yourself for pushing WP:POV and disregarding consensus

isoham (talk) 10:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

ISoham, my above message is a pre-written template message to inform new editors about Wikipedia's Edit Warring policy. Having an on going discussion on the talk page doesn't mean you can continue reverting or your edits won't be counted as reverts, that means that even if you are discussing the issue at the talk page while reverting repeatedly you are still edit warring. Your first edit was adding a dubious/disputed tag to a section while your second and third edits are reverts, if you have any doubt you can ask any experience editor. The three revert rule is just a bright line that clearly puts you on the other side and reverting thrice in a day is not your right. One can get blocked even if he/she hasn't broken the 3RR rule and has done only one revert a day. Darkness Shines is already well aware of the Edit warring policy and the 3RR rule and he can get reported or blocked without a prior recent warning, so I don't need to leave him a similar message.
I see you wasted a lot of your time researching on me but you failed to see that almost every editor who gave me a warning recently currently stands blocked (I don't mean to imply here that they got blocked for those warnings but actually they themselves were disruptive). I would suggest you to please calm down and don't take an editing dispute so seriously. Happy Editing! -- SMS Talk 11:58, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi User:Smsarmad. Thanks for writing. I know that having discussion doesn't mean edits are not counted, and that 3RR rule is only an upper limit. And I don't think my third edit counts towards 3RR. Notwithstanding any of it, the point is I'm in discussion mode, and only arguing against editors violating Wikipedia:Consensus. Besides, it doesn't required an aeon, just a peek instead, at your page to decipher warnings. Cheers. isoham (talk) 12:33, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 10 March[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:39, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited North India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ghaziabad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brahmaputra River, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Putra (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Merge discussion for List of English words of Tamil origin [edit]

Merge-arrows.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of English words of Tamil origin , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Cnilep (talk) 06:24, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

May 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Himalayan Expressway 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:
  • * For better monitoring of mishaps, it is fitted with video incident detection system (VIDS.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:41, 30 May 2014 (UTC)