User talk:Grandioseallen

November 2016

It may not have been your intention, but one of your edits, specifically one that you made on Syed Ali Shah Geelani‎, may have introduced material that some consider controversial. Due to this, your edits may have been reverted. When adding material that may be controversial, it is good practice to first discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them, to gain consensus over whether or not to include the text, phrasing, etc. If you believe that the information you added was correct, please initiate that discussion. More importantly, read up on our Biographies of living persons policy. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, since you've edited in articles related to the controversial IND-PAK conflict

using the words like "terrorists" instead of the more neutral "separatists" fails WP:NPOV (also see WP:TERRORIST).
using just sources from one country (like the Indian media) and treating their allegations as facts and giving too much weight to it fails WP:UNDUE.
be advised about WP:EDITWAR and WP:3RR, editors routinely get blocked for edit warring due to this being a widely contested topic area. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:39, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grandioseallen, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Grandioseallen! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Samwalton9 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Policy violation 1

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Tarek Fatah. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Jytdog (talk) 22:05, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Policy violation 2

Your recent editing history at Tarek Fatah shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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. Jytdog (talk) 22:05, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]