User talk:IAmPushpak

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Drat8sub#atkmb See and make both articles same please — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.131.75.21 (talk) 11:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Hello, I'm HickoryOughtShirt?4. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Organizer have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 18:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to List of Bollywood films of 2018, 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. Can you explain the 'Rating' column and its use? It might help to add it back. Vivek Ray (talk) 05:41, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, IAmPushpak, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete 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! Vivek Ray (talk) 07:01, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

fixing needed

atkmb - Assistant coach* And short name AMB (see mohun bagan subpage) last, mb subpage should have moved jerseys as on atkmb says not released (Merge request also outdated) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.87.72 (talk) 19:02, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Mohun Bagan A.C.. 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. 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. Drat8sub (talk) 20:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November 2020

Hello, I'm Opalzukor. I noticed that you recently removed content from Mohun Bagan without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Opalzukor (talk) 08:46, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Opalzukor, I believe I have mentioned the reason of my edits in the talk page as well as the discussion. It is clearly a vandalism in the name of the original page Mohun Bagan AC. Hope you will help in deleting this page. IAmPushpak (talk) 08:51, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article is already listed on AfD, it'll get deleted anyway. In the mean time, the article shouldn't be blanked so as to provide evidence for the Afd discussion. Thank you for your time. Opalzukor (talk) 08:59, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Opalzukor, Ok thanks for the clarification. IAmPushpak (talk) 10:17, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Hi IAmPushpak! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Mohun Bagan A.C. that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. NZFC^(talk)^(cont) 21:02, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Mohun Bagan A.C. 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NZFC^(talk)^(cont) 21:02, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NZFC, thank you for pointing it out here. As I mentioned in my previous edit, ATK Mohun Bagan FC is not considered as a merged club or a new entity. The former club ATK FC gave up their footballing licenses and Mohun Bagan is playing the ISL as ATK Mohun Bagan FC. There has been a lot of discussions regarding this issue and I believe that to avoid any further controversies or confusions, it would be best to change the link to 'See Also' or remove the redirect. IAmPushpak (talk) 20:35, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kia ora IAmPushpak, I think you will find that since then the consensus has changed as a lot of the first votes on it were WP:SPA accounts, which is why there are three articles now and the ATK Mohun Bagan FC page is fully protected to stop users removing it. It was decided that there is a Mohun Bagan article, a ATK article and then the ATK Mohun Bagan FC one to represent the new merged club. NZFC^(talk)^(cont) 20:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NZFC, Well the ATK Mohun Bagan article was created and now is being managed by the fans of the rival club of Mohun Bagan. They have even made it fully protected . Though anyone can edit whatever they want, but logically, it is not considered as a merged club. From the club president to the owner of the now defunct ATK FC, nobody calls it a merger anymore. Sanjiv Goenka did mentioned it but since ATK FC cancelled their license, there has been no mention of a merger from him either. So I believe a 'See Also' will better serve the purpose rather then calling it a merged club directly. IAmPushpak (talk) 21:03, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IAmPushpak it doesn't matter who edits it and it was protected to stop people removing it again. I think you need to gain conseus from WP:FOOTY if you want it as See Also because Football Wiki normally treat these situations as a new page. NZFC^(talk)^(cont) 21:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ATK Mohun Bagan FC

Hi, I've declined all of your multiple deletion requests on this article for the following reasons:

{{prod}} tag: This article has already been discussed at WP:AFD, and thus is not eligible for the proposed deletion process.
{{db-g3}} tags: This is not clear vandalism (eg "Fred was here!!!"), so the CSD G3 criteria does not apply
{{db-attackorg}} tag: This is not obviously an attack or threat towards an individual or an organisation, thus the CSD G10 criteria does not apply
{{db-g14}} tags: This is an article, not a disambiguation page, thus the CSD G14 criteria does not apply.

If you feel like this article should be deleted, you are welcome to nominate it for deletion using the articles for deletion process, but you will need to make a reasoned argument why the subject should not have an article, and you should read and understand these policies before doing so. stwalkerster (talk) 20:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Mohun Bagan A.C., you may be blocked from editing. You have been already warned before. Kindly comply with the policies and the discussions happened. Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 06:35, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The link redirects to a vandalised page that steals info from this page. To avoid controversies, it's better to maintain 'See Also' format" - There are no controversies. Now, if you want to create deliberately, by going against consensus and policies, then its a different thing. And what do you mean by stealing? No one owns the articles!
Squad information are part of ATKMBFC. Why adding in MBAC article?
Same thing in rival* Same tries. This has been discussed here and a consensus has been reached based on reliable sources. If you can't accept the truth, i.e. the merger, that's not Wikipedia's fault.
And refrain yourself from making personal attacks, otherwise this might put you in trouble. Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 07:09, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The link redirects to a vandalised page that steals info from this page. To avoid controversies, it's better to maintain 'See Also' format" - There are no controversies. Now, if you want to create deliberately, by going against consensus and policies, then its a different thing. And what do you mean by stealing? No one owns the articles! - If it isn't stealing, then why don't you write the sections of ATK Mohun Bagan FC page by your own? Why is it word-by-word copy from the sections of Mohun Bagan AC page? I wrote them and you are stealing it.
Squad information are part of ATKMBFC. Why adding in MBAC article? - If it is so, then why there isn't a separate page for SC East Bengal (football) and East Bengal (Cricket) ?
Same thing in rival* Same tries. This has been discussed here and a consensus has been reached based on reliable sources. If you can't accept the truth, i.e. the merger, that's not Wikipedia's fault. - If ATK Mohun Bagan is a separate entity, then what is a Kolkata Derby in ATK Mohun Bagan page? Who called a match between ATK Mohun Bagan and SC East Bengal a derby?
And refrain yourself from making personal attacks, otherwise this might put you in trouble. - At least I didn't resorted to talk page to give a warning to someone. I will again repeat myself. Keep yourself confined to editing SC East Bengal page. No one asked for your favor to edit Mohun Bagan AC page. IAmPushpak (talk) 19:47, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. 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. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:49, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article behaviour/reversions

Hello,

There are several things to cover here, so please let me know if you need any clarity on it. It covers Mohun Bagan A.C. and ATK Mohun Bagan FC.

You must stop stating editors disagreeing with you and reverting your edits are committing vandalism. That is a direct example of not assuming good faith - a key Wikipedia requirement. Vandalism is the wilful attempt to damage Wikipedia, and nothing in what I've seen indicates that is occurring.
You are also veering into edit-war territory by reverting their reversions, without further explanation than saying they are biased and not entitled to revert your edit. Those reverting have (now) provided reasons, and as the editor trying to make changes, the onus is on you to explain why they do not apply. This discussion shouldn't be taking place through edit summary and should be had on a talk page. I've let one of them know, and this is to let you know.
The grounds about separating information may or may not apply - that's a content dispute issue, but again either has, or should be, settled by talk page discussion first, rather than by edit war. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:54, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you check properly, you will find that all the informations from Mohun Bagan AC page has been removed and copied to ATK Mohun Bagan FC page. If it was to be done, why the same hadn't been done in case of East Bengal and SC East Bengal page? Why only an editor of a rival club would do these kind of stuffs?
This isn't the first time this is happening. The user named Arnab Saha has been doinf this to Mohun Bagan AC page for quite a long long time. Why would an editor of a rival club would get the priority?
Again, not the first time this is happening. Arnab Saha does this repeatedly. IAmPushpak (talk) 19:52, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen any instance of that editor claiming vandalism on what would appear to be GF edits. If you are indicating they have, please provide a diff. They wouldn't get priority from being "part of a rival club", but you haven't really addressed the relevant issues, their reasoning in edit summaries has been fairly detailed, whereas your's has not. I'm not quite sure why your third point is there, unless it was felt to be some type of poetic symmetry. I haven't reviewed the East Bengal pages. They could be either flawless or flawed reasoning there, but it wouldn't change the circumstances here - we call it "other stuff exists". An issue in another page may mean it also needs fixing, but can't be used to defend an error in actions here. Nosebagbear (talk) 00:48, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merging proposal of MBSG into MBAC

I have seen that you have commented under the proposal in a positive way, that you believe the the MBSG a continuation of the MBAC per their social media pages. But as per Wikipedia:Merging#Step 3: Discuss the merger, it's better to add a prefix before your comment with Merge or Don't merge, so that it's easy for the closing admin to understand the consensus. So I would request you to add the required prefix before your comment. Thank you. Drat8sub (talk) 07:21, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also want to add that kindly read WP:CANVASS, since I have noticed that your sole purpose here is Mohunbagan, so I just requesting you to go through the guidelines so that there is no scope of Canvassing. Thank you. Drat8sub (talk) 07:47, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In your comment along with social media page that I ahve already mentioned, you have mentioned some "offcial documents", can you please provide link to those document, because it would be great to see such documents to reach a consensus. Drat8sub (talk) 07:52, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]