User talk:Afghan.Records

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello, Afghan.Records, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made to Khalji dynasty seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Introduction and Getting started
Contributing to Wikipedia
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Re Packer&Tracker (talk) 02:07, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Khalji dynasty—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 01:35, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Starship 24 (talk) 22:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:40, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Khalji dynasty. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 20:17, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are trying to vandalize I see. I have added further details with citations included. But you have been deleting them for no reason. You have turned this page into a propaganda site. Afghan.Records (talk) 21:37, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Further accusations of vandalism will be treated as personal attacks. If they happen here on this page while you're blocked, I'll revoke your writing access to this page. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:39, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Khalji dynasty

Since you are currently at 7RR, maybe you should consider using the article talk page? --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:17, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the RR came from nationalist propaganda artists, I incldued multiple citations for each claim. All of them from academic sources such as Oxford, Cambrdige, Unesco. But the current ones are from non acadmeci sources of nationnalist self proclaimed historians. Afghan.Records (talk) 22:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I misread this first and thought you were referring to the authors of the cited sources. Here, too, and in your edit summaries, further personal attacks or incivility may lead to a topic ban from the area, or a block from editing that doesn't automatically end. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for using Wikipedia as a battleground for edit warring. 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 ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:37, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copy & pasting violation

Your recent edits, to the Khalji article appear to have been copy and pasted verbatim from the source(s). You need to paraphrase the information to avoid plagiarism.

"Contemporary historians clearly distinguish the Khalajis from the Turks" --Andre Wink,The Making of the Indo-Islamic World C.700-1800 CE, page 80.

Directly copied from the book. --Kansas Bear (talk) 14:46, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Afghan.Records! Your additions to Khalji dynasty have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:08, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from battleground comments

Consider this your first and last warning for commenting on the ethnicity(believed or otherwise) of other editors.

Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles, or nurture prejudice, hatred, or fear. Every user is expected to interact with others civilly, calmly, and in a spirit of cooperation. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:45, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Pashtuns. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.
Please do not delete sourced information or use false edit summaries - Arjayay (talk) 08:48, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Pashtuns. 'Do not removed sourced content' Fancy vißes (call) 00:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that in this edit to Ghilji, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 03:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Pashtuns, you may be blocked from editing. HistoryofIran (talk) 00:33, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 01:04, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Bactria. 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:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Bactria. Thatoneguylol101 (talk) 21:37, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Kanguole 16:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for continued edit warring, failure to assume good faith and battleground mentality on the page Bactria, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of one month. 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.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|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. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily.

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "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" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 03:15, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a community block, as per [1], so any appeal to this block must be done at WP:ANI, and not to an individual administrator. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 03:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously you cannot be edit WP:ANI, so if you want to appeal, post your appeal here, ping/notify an editor/admin to transfer your appeal to WP:ANI. starship .paint (RUN) 00:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appeal to be unblocked, the reason to my understanding is because of a disagreement on a talk page. Which I did not break any rules in. @Dennis Brown @Starship.paint I also can’t appeal in WP:ANI because I am blocked. Afghan.Records (talk) 22:36, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I absolutely think your response is inadequate and has no chance of succeeding, I would suggest you post a more comprehensive response to all of the dissatisfaction that editors have raised at WP:ANI (see diff above by Dennis) about your editing. starship .paint (RUN) 00:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please click on permalink to ANI thread. Please read the ANI thread and address the issues presented there. Please copy
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
to the bottom of your talk page. Address the concerns raised by filling in "your reason here". Thanks, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to quote some issues raised in that thread. source misrepresentation, pov pushing and using poor sources ... history of not responding to their own talk page messages ... lack of civility when interacting with other editors ... restored his edits, ignored other editors' concerns, and started edit warring again. Please read through Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks, I suggest this route: You, as a blocked editor, are responsible for convincing administrators: that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again, and you will make productive contributions instead. WP:POV, WP:EW, WP:CIVIL. starship .paint (RUN) 02:54, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, he has to convince the community as a whole. I may have executed the block, but it wasn't my judgement, it was a discussion that clearly had a consensus to block him. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 05:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, Dennis. That was just the quote that I lifted from the essay. starship .paint (RUN) 07:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Afghan.Records. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Girth Summit _(blether) 11:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]