User talk:CalicoMo

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. 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!

ThethPunjabi (talk) 18:29, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

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.

Kautilya3 (talk) 19:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for being a voice of reason and your words were very true

Hello, I appreciate you acting as a voice of reason and logic in that debate regarding the sources, balance, and bias on Amritpal Singh’s article. Unfortunately, your criticisms about the shortcomings of Wikipedia and its vulnerability to state-backed disinformation and propaganda is ringing true in this instance. Hopefully more sources will come to light that offer a more balanced, objective, and neutral perspective, which are not connected to the Indian regime nor influenced by them (the misinformation/disinformation of Indian media/news outlets and their connections to the Indian government are well-known and referenced). Unfortunately, some editors are refusing to acknowledge or understand this and would rather argue, silence, block, and stall any attempts at addressing this problem on the website. I will continue improving the article with the goal that it will meet WP:NPOV and WP:BALANCE at some point. The attempts by some to intimidate, threaten, and insult me (by a certain user on here) will not dissuade me from doing so. I agree with your observations on that particular user and it’s a shame that sections of Wikipedia are highjacked by these individuals who force their views on judgments on others whilst ignoring WP rules, guidelines, and policies (which they love to cite) when it comes to their own behaviour and actions. ThethPunjabi (talk) 02:14, 22 March 2023 (UTC)