User talk:Lalit Jugtawat

Charan history

Hi Lalit Jugtawat. I understand that Charan history is important to you, but please try to source your info properly. You can try to work it ou at User:Lalit Jugtawat/Charan history. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:42, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jonathan..I am here. How can I help you with.

Sanctions

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

You have to stop reinstating rubbish at Charan that depends on Raj sources for verifiability. The consensus of the Wikipedia community is that those sources are not reliable. - Sitush (talk) 09:09, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have little IQ Sitush. Out of sheer frustation you use words such as "rubbish". The fact is that you are not a scholar on Indian history.

If some one is writing a page of history which belongs to Raj Era which sources you would believe. And in countries like India history writing was limited to certain priviledged castes such as Brahmins, charans , sometimes rajputs and the british. So where would you get sources other then these. Try to understand the things from a different view point. Also, i am writing about medieval history and not modern times. Times have changed and so the modern thinking is different from what was the perception of caste in past. Also i have included sources which were written in modern times but again to write the medieval history where would they go, nowhere but to the writers of medieval times. I have included hindu sources and british and soon i will write some muslim sources as well. I have excluded sources like James Tod , though he had fair knowledge of indian culture atleast more than what people like you have. But since wikipedia disapproves it i ha e also excluded the same. All the articles/ facts i am citing are always written by third party independant people. So my stand is clear, and wikipedia has to understand this thing. The thing that when writing medieval history of india where to find the right source. Sometimes rigid rules need to be reviewd again. Also i am going to expand the article in differant time periods anciant, medieval and modern. So again i will provide authentic sources which were written in those times.

I will try to get in touch with wiki admin to discuss the matter. Lalit Jugtawat (talk) 18:39, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a Wikipedia admin, you can discuss it with me. If you persist in using unreliable sources and/or making egregious personal attacks such as "You have little IQ Sitush" (on two different pages, no less), you will be blocked from editing. Please see Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Comment on content, not on editors. Even if you find Wikipedia's principles "rigid", you have to abide by them. Bishonen | talk 23:25, 18 October 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Charan and sanctions

Hi, I see that you're back at the Charan article and it seems like there is little improvement. I think you need to perhaps explain on the article talk page - Talk:Charan - what it is that you are trying to do. Someone may be able to make more sense of it if you do that.

I know you have been told before but I think it is important that you are reminded of the special regime that applies to articles such as that, so please note the information below. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Charan

Hello Mr. Sitush, thanks for contacting me.Actually , this time i have cited a sourse which has been confirmed by you as i saw no objection on it for a long time. So i got that book in its latest edition 2011 and wrote the article out of it. This is an authentic source as per wikipedia standards as it is written by a professor of History and Ex-Head of the department of History at University of Rajasthan. The language used in the online version at Archives.org is full of spelling mistakes and thats why it may look gibberish. None the less the information provided is correct. In fact the author discusses every important caste in this book. He has provided his sources in the book which if you like i can write in the article. But I thought his reference alone would be sufficient so skipped his sources. If you want me improve the language i can provide that too. I also recently added two line from Encyclopedia Brittanica which confirms my take on self immolation practices of Charans in case he fails to comply with his promise. This caste has played an extremely important role in the history of India but in comparison to other castes it has very little population. Therefore its very difficult to provide much information on this caste. Also since wiki does not approve british sources it has become all the more difficult. I have also purchased the book Ayeen Akberi (Gladwin's Translation) and would soon provide information from it. Now i can do two things: 1. If you want me to elaborate on the matter in contribution to the battles i can do that. 2. I can change the words and language to improve the readability but then it might not match the exact words written in the book. Let me know how can we move further. I saw you comment later so added the article again and asked the Admin to intervene for that. So dont take it otherwise. Thanks. Lalit Jugtawat (talk) 03:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead citations

Please see WP:CITELEAD. The lead does not need citations, if it summarized the content that is sourced in the article body. utcursch | talk 17:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please do not add unsourced original research, as you did here. I recommend going through Wikipedia:Tutorial if you haven't already done that. utcursch | talk 17:25, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

Hello, I'm Sitush. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, Nagnechiya Maa, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sitush (talk) 07:43, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Legal threat

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

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 ~~~~}}.

-- Ed (Edgar181) 14:40, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lalit Jugtawat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have read the policy in this regard.

Decline reason:

That's good. Now you must explicitly and unambiguously retract your legal threat, and then tell us what policy is in this regard. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 15:12, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Lalit Jugtawat (talk) 14:53, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unblocking

{

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lalit Jugtawat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I hereby retract the legal threat explicitly. The wiki policy in this regard is not to give any legal threat to any user or one may be blocked either temporarily or permanently. I have always contributed to wikipedia with strong and reliable sources,however sometimes I just add the fact but the source later. This user Sitush seem to be following me on my edits and removes them without even looking at the sources. He is proactive particularly in my edits. I can prove this if the Admin wants. He has removed my contributions many times despite that they were according to wiki guidelines. I was not aware that it is an offence to sue somebody on wiki else i would have refrained from it.

Decline reason:

I initially accepted as the legal threat was withdrawn, but there are other issues that need addressing. The discussion is ongoing, and I await fuller exploration of the matters at hand. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:22, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@Edgar181: Since this user has retracted their legal threat, do you see any other barrier to an unblock? I have some thoughts about that but I wanted to hear from you. 331dot (talk) 14:41, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With the retraction, the reason for the block no longer stands. Please feel free to proceed as you see fit. Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:44, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To follow up, you need to look into WP:dispute resolution as a policy mandated way to resolve conflicts.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:52, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite your sources as you go, using template:cite-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:53, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Dlohcierekim: yes, the threat was withdrawn but the issue of WP:NOTTHEM remains and they're wrong to say that they were unaware of WP:NLT. As this thread shows, not only were they aware of it but they said that they didn't care less about it. Yes, that may have been bravado but this is a long-term disruptive contributor and they will need a short leash.

Lalit Jugtawat, I know you have had alerts in the past and that one is still current but I am taking no chances here, despite one of the messages being shown to you at the start of this year. Please ensure that you have read and understand the implications of the information in the following two alert boxes. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 07:52, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for the block was NLT, not NOTTHEM, so with the blocking admin's concurrence, it seemed the thing to do. However, Lalit Jugtawat, you should understand that his unblocking is a boon. If you make me look like an idiot by continuing disruptive behavior and not owning your own conduct, and not seeking WP:dispute resolution, I can assure you will be indefintiely blocked with little prospect for unblocking. Please read and heed the DS notices you have received. TBH, if you are some sort of caste warrior, of which I was unaware, I should not have unblocked you. Once again, this is a boon. Please do not squander it. As I understand the DS system, you are perilously close to the edge of a precipice. Please watch your step. Sitush, feel free to ping me if matters get out of hand.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:19, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I really need some Aricept as I did not unblock. Bishonen thoughts on unblocking.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:22, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My point regarding NOTTHEM was that even in their unblock request they are devoting most of their effort into denigrating me and making unfounded claims of stalking, removals contrary to policy etc. That's possibly because they're not interested in the concept of consensus regarding the sources they use (if any) - they just want the articles to say what they want them to say and, yes, certainly at some of those articles it has looked like attempting caste glorification etc. - Sitush (talk) 13:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These are my thoughts, since I was pinged: now that the user has withdrawn the legal threat, they should no longer be under a block for legal threats, but I'm not sure they should be unblocked, for all that. Long-term caste warriors who show themselves incapable of, or unwilling to, understand our sourcing policies should certainly be blocked, and not left at large to waste the time of constructive editors. @Sitush: the sourcing issues, as described out of Lalit Jugtawat's own mouth, are very obvious and very serious, and so is their aggressiveness and persistent assumption of bad faith. But I'm uncertain of how much of a caste warrior they are. What do you say? Could you give examples, please? That aspect might make the difference between a block of a few weeks, and an indefinite one. In my opinion. Bishonen | talk 15:04, 17 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

They have long absences from WP and a narrow focus when they are here. The narrow focus is quite typical of someone who is from a particular community and either wants to promote that community or denigrate its opposition (eg: we often get SPAs from the Gurjar and Rajput castes, who don't seem to get along, going to articles about their "opponent" to play games). In this case, the interest seems mainly to be in Charan and their associations. Lalit Jugtawat hasn't, to my knowledge, explicitly said they're connected to that caste, as some people do, but they certainly have a considerable interest in it.

Attempt to glorify by attachment to Charans? - unsourced, even though they're well aware of WP:V
This from way back is hopeless and caste-serving

In between - eg: at Charan in October 2016, there is a lot of jarring terminology and creation of favourable quotefarms, eg: here.

I've seen worse from others, and probably not all of what they have done is bad, but it strikes me as a glorification agenda. Others may think differently - two who may have opinions are pinged just below. I don't think they need an indef but they do need to up their game in many respects, and do it quickly.

Not a caste issue but look at this
Ditto for this, where they were reverted once by Utcursch and then again by RegentsPark on the same day. - Sitush (talk) 16:32, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on any page about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or a topic ban. The discussion leading to the imposition of these sanctions can be read here.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:General sanctions/South Asian social groups.

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 recently 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 any 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.

Unblock discussion

I do not understand many of the terms written by you guys. What I know is that i have been editing wikipedia with a serious devotion and would like to contribute further. It seems that my behaviour has annoyed certain people. I have already retracted my legal threat so what am I supposed to do now. Let me know. Thanks. Lalit Jugtawat (talk) 18:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would read the discretionary sanctions notices and affirm understanding by saying what they mean in my own words. I would not repeat edits like this but instead follow the One-revert rule in adding or removing content. If reverted, I would discuss and achieve consensus before making changes. This appears to have been unsourced and gives the impression of being promotional(?) of Charan. I'm not at all knowledgeable about these subjects, so perhaps further discussion with those who are will give more useful feedback.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:47, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unblock discussion

Yes I do agree to one revert policy and would only edit when I have source with me. Lalit Jugtawat (talk) 18:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked and re-blocked for one week

In response to your question what you are supposed to do now, Lalit Jugtawat: I am not very impressed by your response to Dlohcierekim's suggestion, as you only answered the simplest part. What about the discretionary sanctions notices, especially the bit about our "expected standards of behavior"? You have behaved badly here and ignored our collaborative rules. I told you back in 2016 that you mustn't attack people, and you're supposed to comment on content, not on editors.[1] My post is still on this page! And you have ignored it. It's only two days since you posted this on Sitush's page, and then this, where you repeated your legal threat even though he had warned you that legal threats will get you blocked. (Therefore, I'm not impressed by your statement that "I was not aware that it is an offence to sue somebody on wiki else i would have refrained from it". You were aware of it, at least if you read what people say to you at all.) Your first post, this one, is full of insults and assumptions of bad faith. What makes you say Sitush is not a scholar on the subject? How do you know? He is a well-informed academic who uses modern academic sources as we are supposed to do. Furthermore, it's absolutely none of your business whether or not he 'belongs to the culture'. Belonging to the caste you are writing about is not a plus, the contrary if anything, since many people come to Wikipedia for the purpose of glorifying their own caste and to cherrypick sources, whether reliable or not, that agree with them. (Sitush has given examples above of you attempting to glorify the Charan caste.)

I hope you can become a constructive member of the Wikipedia community; as Sitush says above, you make useful edits too, and we have certainly seen caste promoters who behave worse. Therefore, I'm now only giving you a block of one week for persistent personal attacks, instead of an indefinite block for caste promotion. This is on the assumption that you now, in 2018, know better about sourcing than you expressed in 2016,[2] when you apparently believed that you're supposed to use medieval sources when you write about medieval history. (That's what we call primary sources; normally, we use reliable secondary sources. If you're not sure what I mean, please have a careful read of the page WP:Reliable sources.) I have changed your block from indefinite to one week. Please use it to follow the links in this message and read them. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 20:55, 17 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

unblocking

Thanks Bishonen. I learnt many things from your message about which I was not aware earlier such as good faith and types of sources primary,secondary and tertiary etc. It was good to learn these important things and I must have learnt them earlier. Lalit Jugtawat (talk) 18:52, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply on my talk page

Sorry for the delay but I have replied to the question you asked on my talk page. - Sitush (talk) 09:47, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

Hello, I'm Utcursch. I noticed that you recently removed content from Karkoṭa Empire 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 the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please explain on the article's talk page why you think these are "non-independent sources" and "false references". utcursch | talk 15:18, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chandragupta Maurya

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Chandragupta Maurya, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 19:09, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Chandragupta Maurya. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. utcursch | talk 23:58, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]