User talk:Electra90
Hello, Electra90, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Simplified Manual of Style
- Your first article
- Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.
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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place "{{helpme}}
Automatic invitation to visit WP:Teahouse sent by HostBot
[edit]
|
Hi Electra90! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Rasikh Salam
[edit]Please do not edit war on this page (or any other page for that matter). Please use the article's talkpage to discuss the issue. If you continue to edit-war, you face being blocked from editing. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
May 2021
[edit]
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Gulmarg. 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.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. 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. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 10:01, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hello; Warning about three-revert rule is duly noted. However shouldn't the same apply to the ones who are reverting my edits. Also it is a matter of principle. I would like to ask for instance, who gives you the right to rename the our places or stick to version that suites you in contravention to what locals call it? We (Kashmiris) don't dictate you on what you call or do not call the places where you live. Now coming directly to the page in question. Tell me, what historical evidence do you have that 'Gulmarg' was called "Gauri marg" ever in our history. Simply quoting a book from some Indian author that doesn't give any evidence of it whatsoever doesn't qualify as a genuine citation. It is like one of those claims which claim Mecca and vatican to be ancient hindu temples. It is a claim, not supported by history. Also, why does this figure in the etymology when clearly, etymology is supposed to simply depict the meaning of the current name.--Electra90 (talk) 13:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- I find it extremely ridiculous that you have dubbed my edit in etymology as folklore. Perhaps you have no idea that Marg in Kashmiri and persian means a meadow and we have lots of them. What is folklore and a false one at that without any historical background is the gauri marg. There was no such place ever. Give me one historical evidence in terms of any piece of writing from that era which mentions the place as Gaurimarg. There is a place called gormarg on Baramullah to Poonch road. It is seems that you are hell bent on hegemonizing us and thrusting your hindi names down our throats. You mention this in etymology only for that purpose.
Hello Electra90, first of all, when an edit is revered, you must discuss it on the talk page and try to achieve a WP:CONSENSUS. All editors are equal on Wikipedia and nationalist profiling is frowned upon. If you do it again, you will get reported.
Secondly, Wikipedia is created in accordance with its polices. Please read through the "Five pillars" article in the welcome message above. You can only make arguments based on those policies, not your beliefs.
The source you cited for contesting the "Gauri Marg" claim is an opinion column in a newspaper. It is not a reliable source, and you can't use it on Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:55, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hello Kautilya3: You will get reported for promoting a brahmin fascist agenda and forcing brahmin names on us. You do not own wikipedia. It is not a property of govt. of India or the RSS. The sources you quoted by no means prove that such a place existed at any given time. It is a statement with no historical backing. You base your claims on myth and books that parrot that myth. We have living memory of us and our ancestors. We are the residents. What you are doing is an assault on us, on your history, our memory our culture and our language.
- The place is called gulmarg and has always been so, is a reality. You are thrusting your unsubstantiated beliefs on us on the basis of your religion. It is not my religious belief. Gulmarg is a neutral and a secular name. However you can't digest it. You did not know that marg means a meadow. Many of you also don't know that Nag ( for example in anantnag) means a spring in Kashmir and not your Nag devta. You (plural) are obsessed with thrusting your beliefs down our throats. It is a pattern that we have observed.
- You can not interpret wikipedia rules as you please. Here is what is going to happen. You cite a reliable source for example Rajatarangini mentioning the name of Gulmarg as Gaurimarg; or a document of that era denoting so; or any official document or writing of that time mentioning the name change and i will take back my claims. Otherwise, the etymology section is going to mention the origin of the name gulmarg and in the history section, it is going to be mentioned that such and such books claim that old name was gauri marg and this is contested by locals for the lack of historical evidence. --Electra90 (talk) 17:48, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
ARBIPA sanctions alert
[edit]
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.