User talk:Nobita456

January 2022

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Dhoyin have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Dhoyin was changed by Nobita456 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.936662 on 2022-01-15T05:51:41+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 05:51, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notification

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.

-- Ekdalian (talk) 06:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Sadgop

It is clear that you are only here to push an agenda 2409:4053:2E05:C810:0:0:5BCB:3F0E (talk) 14:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Please start a discussion at the talk page of Sadgop article.If you continue doing edit war like this,The admins might block you. Nobita456 (talk) 14:40, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Community sanctions notification

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 South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—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 these sanctions. 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.

--RegentsPark (comment) 19:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Any further reverts such as this one and you will be topic banned from all caste related articles. --RegentsPark (comment) 19:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC) Misunderstanding on my part. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:23, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

February 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Baidya. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:13, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

yes file a complain against me.let the Admins decide who is right.Nobita456 (talk) 06:16, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

I assume that you are cognizant of (1) neither me nor Ekdalian nor LukeEmily being supportive of your edits and (2) my queries remaining unaddressed? TrangaBellam (talk) 06:51, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Article block from Baidya

I have page blocked you from Baidya for two weeks because you have continued to edit it aggressively and non-collaboratively. I've no idea what you meant by restoring the POV section tag with such an edit summary,[1] well after Luke Emily who added the tag said it could be removed and also explained to you that the sourcing you want to add is not reliable enough for contentious issues. You had rather curiously suggested it was "not fully unreliable", which is clearly not good enough. After Vanamonde explained to you so fully about NPOV and sourcing and consensus over on my page,[2] you still seem to be under some misapprehension regarding what neutrality means here. You wrote "Aparnita Bhattacharya's source is not fully unreliable and we can use it under WP:SCHOLARSHIP,we have to give her views also to make this article neutral".[3] No, we don't. "Neutral" does not mean that minority views or aspects should be given as much weight as the majority view; please see the section WP:UNDUE of the NPOV policy. Note that I haven't so far blocked you from the article's talkpage. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | tålk 20:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC).

Hey Bishonen I really think this block is not needed.I took that Aparnita book into WP:RSN and then a senior and an admin told me to use this book as a secondary source.I used lochan books as primary and used the aparnita book as secondary which gives the same view.and second point which you pointed out,I reverted Ekdalian because luke emily didn't give green light to that discussion.after luke emily agreed I didn't have any objection regarding neutrality.please unblock me,I am not doing any edit war at all. Nobita456 (talk) 20:49, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Nobita456, you're right, it was me that got the chronology mixed up, sorry about that. Your re-addition of the tag was indeed before Luke Emily weighed in on talk. I hesitate to unblock you, because I still think you edit too aggressively, and that you don't have a good grip on what "neutrality" means, per your comment that I quoted above. And while you're not edit warring at the moment... only a couple of days ago, you did. But since part of my reason for blocking you was a mistake on my part, I will unblock. I hope you will indeed edit less aggressively from now on. You have been unblocked, happy editing. Bishonen | tålk 21:25, 10 February 2022 (UTC).

I mentioned the "neutrality" word because luke put a NEUTRALITY dispute tag at that section.anyway thanks for understanding. Nobita456 (talk) 22:16, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

IMO, you haven't actually mixed up the chronology, Bishonen; see here. I am sure Nobita456 is following the talk page since they are most active there, to say the least! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 06:07, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey ekdalian luke put that tag,and thats why I wanted him to remove it,he asked for our opinions but not everyone gave green light also luke was not clear.as later we all agreed,I didn't oppose for once.this ishu is really small, don't make it so big,thanks. Nobita456 (talk) 11:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Well, I know, Ekdalian, but I wasn't referring to that, but to this, which is clearer and which replies directly to, and pings, Nobita. I'm not as bothered about the earlier post that you link to. Nobita, btw, I think it's time you learned to ping users when you want their attention. They won't know you've mentioned them just because you type their name. Bishonen | tålk 11:46, 11 February 2022 (UTC).

exactly that was the reason.thanks Bishonen.I will mention them properly from now.thanks Nobita456 (talk) 11:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

question about Bengal society

Since you and EkDalian are both from Bengal, I was just curious about the current social(not ritual) status of communities? What is the relative social position of Bengali Brahmins, Baidyas and Kayasthas in the 21st century? Is it disputed? Thanks LukeEmily (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

just a suggestion

hi Nobita456, I honestly think your edits are a bit too aggressive - especially related to Baidya community. Fox example: I think you could have waited for consensus on vaidya. I think other editors may not like the pattern. Maybe I am wrong. You may want to slow down because it hardly matters if things get delayed by a day or two (unless it is something very crucial or derogatory).LukeEmily (talk) 23:09, 14 February 2022 (UTC) (you can delete this message if you want after you read it - if you don't want it on your talk page - it was only a good faith suggestion/observation).

that information was there since very long.and I think it is unrgent to change it.I provided you the source.do you still think Baidya and kayatsha rank together in social status? if then you can revert my edits,thanks. Nobita456 (talk) 23:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

February 2022

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring, as you did at Brahmin. 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 ~~~~}}.  Bishonen | tålk 16:52, 15 February 2022 (UTC)