User talk:Aman.kumar.goel

This user tries to do the right thing. If he makes a mistake, please let him know.

Hey there, talk to me here.

Talk archives

New message from DiplomatTesterMan

Hello, Aman.kumar.goel. You have new messages at Talk:Pakistan Armed Forces.
Message added 10:16, 7 March 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Request your wisdom here DTM (talk) 10:16, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, something to recharge you

		A glass of Thandai for you
		Here is a glass of Thandai for you. Thandai is a traditional Indian cold drink prepared with a mixture of almonds, fennel seeds, watermelon kernels, rose petals, pepper, vetiver seeds, cardamom, saffron, milk and sugar. For your response over at the talk page of 2020 coronavirus pandemic in India. Here is something to recharge you, cheers. DTM (talk) 14:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC) For more Indian dishes, visit the Kitchen of WikiProject India.

Thanks bud. Sorry for not noticing talk earlier.Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 10:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Revert in Misinformation section

I had added the following line in misinformation section of 2020 coronavirus pandemic in India article which you reverted saying it is an individual opinion

In a bizarre statement, parliamentarian Ramesh Bidhuri of Bharatiya Janata Party claimed that as per experts using Namaste as a greeting prevents contamination from the Covid-19, but using Arabic greetings like Adab or As-salamu alaykum does not as it directs the air into the mouth.

Then can you remove the following line from Discrimination section of same article as this is also individual opinion of Ilyas Sharafuddin

Indian Islamic cleric Ilyas Sharafuddin said in an audio address that "Allah unleashed Coronavirus on Chinese for persecuting Uighur Muslims". Ilyas said that "they the Chinese have threatened the Muslims and tried to destroy lives of 20 million Muslims. Muslims were forced to drink alcohol, their mosques were destroyed and their Holy Book was burned. They thought that no one can challenge them, but Allah the most powerful punished them."

According to this logic, almost every line can be called "individual opinion". So, I don't think you have made a correct revert.

Misfired DS_Alert Warning

The edits at kuladevata are self explanatory.

I added punctuation and made the sentences about nagaraja kuladevata concise and shorter.

Is "unexplained edit" a violation of Wiki terms of service?

Are my edits in question serious enough to warrant a talk message?

I have not made "persistent", "disruptive", or repetitive edits.

I don't deserve to be treated a WP:Vandal with a message User_talk:Porus_D'Canara#DS_Alert for an good faith edit. Porus D'Canara (talk) 06:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Konkan Muslims sourced statmnts removed

Sorry that i did edit warring.

I understand that you are concerned about me getting blocked.

Why has only my account been selected for an edit warring message and blocking?

I have made an effort to comply with wiki policies Special:Diff/946528914

However I understand it is gaming the system according to you.

May I know why the other person edit warring with me was ignored and not given an edit warring?

Is not Neutrality and NPOV one of the most important Wiki terms of service? Porus D'Canara (talk) 12:30, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

I fell that we both of us editors should be treated equally and neutrally

But there is no message about edit warring on the talk page of the other editor as of now

It seems as though the other editor is being favourited Porus D'Canara (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice

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.

Template:Z33 — Newslinger talk 10:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Misusing Warnings & Impersonating an Administrator

You left warnings[1] on my talk on "Interest in India, Pakistan, etccc" however I've only edited one article Open Defecation pertaining to this topic. You also aren't an administrator [2] yet put this administrator ruling on my talk? Why? This is impersonating an administrator. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Administrators/Archive_5#Impersonating_admins Also that user has been blocked from edited Open Defecation recently for edit warring. [3], you also did not assume good faith when I stated a post on the talk page by an unregistered IP Special:Contributions/121.6.114.20 is a troll, as they also forgot to sign their comment.

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

---

Qayrawan (talk) 17:25, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism Alert

Disruptive editing and creating on the many pages by being non neutral, please Stop acting such. Saifullah.vguj (talk) 06:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Is this user doing disruptive editing by using two accounts?

and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Amkgp are they both handled by same person and are they providing a biased information on wikipedia. Please do check Saifullah.vguj (talk) 06:47, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Hello I an سب سے بڑی گڑبڑ , I noticed that you recently removed the citation needed tags i put on the strengths of the combatants on Kargil war. It must be remembered that every user has the right to question an uncited fact, if you really think that the tag should no longer be there then cite a source. —Preceding undated comment added 14:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Battle of Chamb 1971

Hi I am سب سے بڑی گڑبڑ I see that you removed all my edits i did on the page Battle of Chamb well much of the information i got from defence journal i had writeen in my own words, only when it came to the exclusively tedious parts did i do some copy pasting and even there i modified parts of the sentences for increased clarification and made sure that the story it told fitted in with the story told from other sources. Even if you object to my edits on the base of copy rights then expunge only those parts that you think violate copy rights, i do not want to start an edit war سب سے بڑی گڑبڑ (talk) 16:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I have seen that you reverted my edit again on the basis that it violates copyright, I had changed the vocabulary and the structures of the sentences, i had shifted the order of facts to make it different and the heavy dependence on one source only occured in the Prelude section where it was the only citation available, it must be remembered that the section Prelude itself was non-controversial, the Battle section uses two sources one Indian and one Pakistani.سب سے بڑی گڑبڑ (talk) 09:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Help required

Hi Aman, I am trying to create a Wikipedia page for author Dr. Sanjib Borkakoty. Wondering if you are able to help if I provide you the information. I do not have adequate expertise with the platform to do it myself. Thanks and regards, Mallika Mallika.borkakoty (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Mallika.borkakoty For layout of biography, see WP:MOSBIO.

You are not supposed to create biography of someone on WP unless the particular person is notable and has a significant coverage in media or academics. See WP:GNG for general details. Sources further you use, must be established reliable sources and not self published blogs. WP:WWIN Wikipedia is not a platform for advertising. Article you create must be free of puffery language, well sourced and written neutrallty throughout for general information and not any promotional content at all. Have eyes throughout other articles how they are written to have an idea. Regards Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 20:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Hi, dear, I'm Anaguaydf, The sources about Pakistan's edge over India in Indo-Pakistani Air War of 1965 are well referenced in the article which are enough to claim it. You appear to be reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Indo-Pakistani Air War of 1965. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page. Anaguaydf (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, again, dear!, you recently deleted my edits on Abhinandan Varthaman, watch full video [4] by ISPR Official, they have added someone video, showing one Indian aircraft by destroyed by Pakistan and felled into J&K, and Indian Army is handling that - Anaguaydf (talk) 14:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@Anaguaydf: Your own observation does not matter, you would need to cite the reliable source supporting your conclusion. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 14:24, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@Aman.kumar.goel: i am not that user Anaguaydf (talk) 14:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Appeared to be an error caused by mobile version of Wikipedia, but still you know what I am trying to tell you. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 14:36, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Warning

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Wolfagain1 (talk) 05:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.-Kthxbay (talk) 08:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.-Kthxbay (talk) 09:29, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Closing reports you authored

As a matter of proper procedure, closing reports should be left to someone uninvolved. Not a big deal, just an FYI for future reports. El_C 14:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Robert McClenon (talk) 18:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Gautama Buddha, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

You can be very sure that Samuels does not state that the Buddha was born in a Hindu-family, as you stated with this edit, in which you also removed a source. This kind of pov-pushing and messing with the sources is unacceptable. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

It seems that I had added 700 bytes of content from a previous version. Fact that you removed the content over your personal belief against a single word information does reek of WP:POV pushing. Further, kindly further move discussion to talk page of relevant article. My talk page may remain for people sending me alerts only. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 07:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, from a DR/N volunteer

This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard case still awaiting comments and replies. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} DRN Volunteer18:54, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

ARBIPA sanctions reminder

Hi Aman, you have been alerted about the ARBIPA sanctions.

When fires rage and sanctions are issued, people who stoke the fires from the sidelines are also issued equal amount of sanctions. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

DRN Case Update

This is to inform you that we are awaiting your input at the DRN. The case in question can be located at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Anjana_Om_Kashyap. If you are no longer interested in participating, please let us know on the DRN in the case where your comments have been requested. If you do want to continue, please add your comments. If we do not hear from you within 24 hours, the case will be closed out as 'failed'.

Thanks,

Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 00:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC) _{DRN Volunteer}

Burhan Wani

Hello! Respective user, I am User:Pojitibu, I mistakenly sent you wrong message on Burhan Wani i press the wrong keys, I don't know what is wrong in my fixings, explain me! THANK YOU Pojitibu (talk) 10:07, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

You've got a cool talk page

Hi,

Really like the way your talk page is formatted.

Amazingcaptain (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Soomro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sindhi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding can the subject journalist stand on her own. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Anjana Om Kashyap".The discussion is about the topic WP:BLP.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 17:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC) _{DRN Volunteer}

Hello, from a DR/N volunteer

This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard case still awaiting comments and replies. If this dispute has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties and no further comment is made at the opened filing, it may be failed and suggested that the next logical course of action requests for comment. Please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Failed". If the dispute is still ongoing, please add your input. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 16:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC) _{DRN Volunteer}

Inclusion of Ottoman Empire as Great Power

The issue of an inclusion of Ottoman Empire have long been discussed in both of talk pages in Template_talk:List_of_great_powers_by_date#The_Ottoman_Empire or Talk:Great_power#Powers_in_the_table.... We did not decide the table by merely personal preference, but reliable sources in correspondence to each particular age which are the only thing we are looking into. if you have read them through and still dispute the current version, you would need to open a new topic or extend your points before further change.150.116.17.93 (talk) 08:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Kindly have a look through ongoing discussion at Talk:Great power what you just stated and contribute for concensus. Dismissal as "personal opinio" sounds vague. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 17:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Possible Resolution on DRN

Hello Aman: There is a possible resolution that has been proposed by the moderator on the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. You may add your input here.
Thank you. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 16:13, 22 May 2020 (UTC) _{DRN Volunteer}

Hello, from a DR/N volunteer

This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard case still awaiting comments and replies. If this dispute has been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties, please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Resolved". If the dispute is still ongoing, please add your input. Galendalia (talk) 18:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Two-nation theory (Pakistan), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jammu and Kashmir (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:35, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Question

I am asking this question in my capacity as an administrator: are you connected in any way to NavjotSR? Please do not edit further until you have answered this question. creffett (talk) 22:25, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Not at all Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 04:13, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Opposition to the partition of India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indian independence (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Question

Is there anyway i can get you in confidence regarding the 500 club. What are the changes that i have to make in order to make it more meaningful and valid. If i remove the elite word and make it "countries in above list whose reserves are above 500" or some other way. I spent a lot of time to get all of those reference so please tell me what i need to do regarding this. These are stats and i don't think that there is any reason that it can be called wrong, i have provided the timeline for countries also. Is there anyway you can help me with this please. Gagan Kaushal (talk) 08:58, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Gagan Kaushal WP:SYNTH barrs you from reinterpretation of data with aim to make a directory. It doesn't mean that your analysis is factually incorrect. But you would need to prove that Elite Club with reserves > $500 billions has been covered significantly by at least 2-3 good sources. It would be attributed to unnecessary puffery as well otherwise. Unless you have sources covering nationstates with Forex > $500 billions separately, we won't have another section for them. Unless they are called Elite by sources, we won't attribute this word. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 09:03, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

So if any relevant source mentions the countries above 500b as a separate group then i m good to go right. Gagan Kaushal (talk) 10:33, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Well yes. And if you want to add any word like "Elite" etc., make sure at least two high quality sources use that. Not random blogs but mainstream sources. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 11:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

If i change the topic from 500b which attributes puffery if i change that to "top x countries reserves timeline" which is a familiar term and media also mention top 3 or top 5 countries with high forex reserves would that be relevant. Because almost every media agency covers that. Even if you go to South Korea reference i have given in the list and download it you will find they are mentioning top 10 countries separately. Is that enough to dodge puffery. Gagan Kaushal (talk) 11:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC) economics times have mentioned 500b as magic number although i can't provide you something of the reference elite but there is definitely intriguing about half trillion. I see that you are also a space enthusiast. If we talk about landing on moon soft or hard there are only few countries that have done it and media also mentions those as elite club. But yet you can't dodge puffery don't you think its a problem in wiki.

I guess it's fine. Just change the title of section from The 500 to "Timeline of forex exceeding $500 billions by country". I will provide you a good table as well. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 11:59, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, If we talk about landing on moon soft or hard there are only few countries that have done it and media also mentions those as elite club. But yet you can't dodge puffery don't you think its a problem in wiki. If attribute is given by multiple reliable sources, it won't be deemed puffery. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 12:59, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean by providing a table?? Gagan Kaushal (talk) 02:51, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Ever seen tables on articles on Wikipedia? It's best way to summarise statistical in for for comparison rather than paragraph where no one is going to read it. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 10:24, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

References

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Edithgoche (talk) 03:45, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Correction

China didn't detain any Indian soldiers.

See

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-asia-53102629

https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-china-denies-seizing-indian-personnel-during-galwan-valley-face-off-2828683

https://www.dw.com/en/china-denies-seizing-indian-troops/a-53869186 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ILoveEatingBats (talk • contribs) 16:38, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Please reply only at the article talk page to keep the discussion at one place. Regards, ⍟ Field Marshal Aryan ⍟ 16:42, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for contributing to some of the important India related articles. बृहस्पति (talk) 08:14, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The India Star
		Dear Aman.kumar.goel, thank you for your contributions to WikiProject India-related articles, especially your recent edits to the article about the All India Momin Conference. Keep up the good work! You are making a difference here! With regards, AnupamTalk 08:42, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

Mz7 (talk) 22:12, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

About WP project

Hi @Aman.kumar.goel: Please remove WP Discrimination & fascist project from Talk:Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh Talk:Hindu nationalism and Talk:Hindutva. These projects does not reflect the main article. And, add WP Conservative project instead. Thanks--Amrita62 (talk) 19:58, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

COVID-19 pandemic in India

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.

Please carefully read this information:

A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
The specific details of these sanctions are described here.

Broadly, general sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

In this edit, with an edit summary of Fixed template, you modified the Wikidata call to allow unsourced data into the article. This is in breach of the consensus at Wikipedia:Wikidata/2018 Infobox RfC #Discussion and you need to self-revert immediately. You are aware of the discretionary sanctions in force for pages related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, and I'll note that community discretionary sanctions are also in force for pages related to COVID-19. --RexxS (talk) 18:50, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@RexxS: I actually restored previous template which was calculating infection rate with respect to total tests (which was earlier displaying 0% for some error). The number of tests around which template data revolves have actually been sourced from ICMR website. Aren't they? Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 18:54, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Noted and understood per concensus on other page. Regards Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 19:11, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

I see you have now left an edit summary of Reverting myself till dispute resolution. Please let me know if you are raising a dispute, and if so, where. I should explain that I have no intention of becoming involved with a content dispute; my only intent here is to facilitate a project-wide consensus in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator. --RexxS (talk) 20:20, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

RexxS I acually reckoned that data was correct per citation there in box and later realised that your concern was something else. So, no issues now. It would be a bit helpful if you could help me out whether it is necessary to source every single entry on wikidata (given what I was trying to display article was a derivative of another data set itself). If restriction remains, I am going to try some other method or remove that displaying incorrect data. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 05:02, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

It really is necessary to provide sources on Wikidata for every item you want to import into Wikipedia from there, with the obvious exceptions of things like images and identifiers (which are their own reference). Anybody viewing facts and figures in Wikipedia should be able to find within a couple of clicks what the source is for those facts and figures, and our whole policy of verifiability is based on that premise. If anyone entering an updated figure on Wikidata simply adds reference URL (P854) (or stated in (P248) if not online), then anyone can verify the data, and that helps potentially 300+ other Wikipedias as well. --RexxS (talk) 16:08, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Your disruptive behaviour

When alerting other editors about discretionary sanctions, you need to make sure if they had been alerted in last one year or not. Issuing alerts disruptively, as you did here (less than one month after an earlier alert), can get you sanctioned yourself. When someone leaves an edit summary "see talk page", it means the edit has been explained at the talk page. This is WP:COMMONSENSE, nothing dubious. And quit claiming a consensus in discussions without proper evidence, see WP:CONSENSUS to know how a consensus is reached. --Zayeem ^(talk) 19:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page about your misunderstanding. You should keep discussion at one place. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 00:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Aman.kumar.goel, it looks like you are still edit warring on Bangladesh liberation war despite my report at the WP:ANI discussion. Za-ari-masen (talk) 08:57, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm really tired explaining you dozens of times the difference between WP:EW and WP:DR, meaning of WP:CANVASS (and why I'm not canvassing when I'm tagging anyone to discuss a non content specific dispute with you) Why don't you have a look over guidelines? Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 10:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

All your reverts on Bangladesh liberation war are in content disputes, that too without consensus. WP:EW can only be discarded when a revert is made against obvious vandalism. Are you suggesting the editors who you reverted were vandalizing the article? Za-ari-masen (talk) 10:38, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

WP:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

You have been reported at WP:AE, please see the proceedings here. Za-ari-masen (talk) 14:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)