User talk:Re12345

Welcome!

Hello, Re12345, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to List of active separatist movements in Asia does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! DBig Xrayᗙ 08:09, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Hello, I'm DBigXray. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to List of active separatist movements in Asia seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DBig Xrayᗙ 16:59, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RS

Wikipedia is not a reliable source.Slatersteven (talk) 11:59, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Indo-Pakistani War of 1947–1948. 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. Kautilya3 (talk) 17:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your recent talk page comments on Talk:Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 were not added to the bottom of the page. New discussion page messages and topics should always be added to the bottom. Your message may have been moved. In the future you can use the "New section" link in the top right. For more details see the talk page guidelines. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DS Alert

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.

Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 21:55, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Indo-Pakistani War of 1947–1948, 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) 10:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Template:Kashmir conflict, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 22:18, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3, Are you seriously suggesting that "2019 border skirmishes" should not link to the 2019 border skirmishes? Re12345 (talk) 11:06, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please check your edit and explain the rationale for your changes. See WP:ONUS. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:16, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's self explanatory, if you read the edit summary or my first reply. Under Border skirmishes, "2019" should link to the 2019 border skirmishes, NOT the pulwama attack. And the 2019 strike in Kashmir was in Indian administered Kashmir, NOT in Balakot, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Re12345 (talk) 11:23, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Kautilya3. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Leh seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please note that wording changes to the lead would need to be agreed globally accross WikiProjects India and Pakistan, and need to be applied uniformly across the region. Kautilya3 (talk) 16:53, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Operation Zarb-e-Azb, you may be blocked from editing. Assessment and confirmations of the operation's success or lack thereof should proceed from the reliable sources, preferably scholars. Wikipedia doesn't need your POV in infoboxes. Turn over a new leaf before this errant POV pushing and source misrepresentations get you in deep trouble. MBlaze Lightning (talk) 07:20, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Editorkamran (talk) 18:43, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:SpicyBiryani per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SpicyBiryani. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 16:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]