User talk:Talkadu

Mamta Sagar

Hi @Talkadu, you are currently engaged in an edit war with me. I can see that you are a new user, so this is forgivable, but please familiarize yourself with a few concepts first. On Wikipedia, we use something called the BRD cycle: you make a Bold edit; another editor Reverts you; you Discuss on the talk page. You do not go back and forth and revert so that you can preserve your preferred version of a page. We are clearly in disagreement on what should or shouldn't be kept on the Mamta Sagar page, so now it's time to start a discussion on the appropriate talk page. Please do not simply go back and revert, as this activity may result in a ban for you. Thank you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 08:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are undoing what I am doing without reading my brief explanations. You are not following the rules from BRD. Just you alone acting without giving a chance for others to read it to rectify. It looks like you not know how Wikipedia works.

The point is Mamta Sagar's page does not qualify to be on English Wikipedia. You may move her page to Kannada Wikipedia.

I suggest you nominate her page for deletion in 7 days and let us see. Let consensus decide rather than you and I decide alone on this. If you do not do it, I may have do it for others to kick in.

I am looking forward to seeing your explanations for the following concerns. Let you give the original author to comment or rectify on this page. Otherwise, I may have to presume you are the author for Mamta Sagar.

1. Did she get any notable awards from organizations/academies from Karnataka or India?

2. Yes, she writes poems as thousands write in Karnataka but she did not earn any notable awards so far. Do not list local awards.

3. The way her page is written, it is all mixed up. It looks like she is an organizer with no awards on it. The author who wrote this bringing in her academia, poetry writing, activist etc. One thing is enough to qualify. She is a jack-of-all-trades but master of none.

4. She may have a PhD bur her career is not consistent as I read her page. She has been teaching since 2017 and she is not a professor. There is no link to justify this. There are zero citations in Academia for her work - see ZSTOR for her. Hope you understand the academia standards for professors to qualify on Wikipedia. There are various numbers set for professors to qualify. ZSTOR is one of them. Each publications in Academia should have many citations in Liberal Arts the discipline she has chosen.

5. Is she as an activist? Is it recognized by the Karnataka state or any agency? Do you find any notable rewards for her?

6. Travelling to participate overseas is not considered as notable. Nowadays all travel abroad and make their own stories.

Do not to be foolish to revert things you undoing. without justifications. You are the only one fighting for her. Let you keep my concerns on her page and let others other than you react on her page before you decide to undo what I comment or flag.

I am fed-up with your attitude and her page. Make her page short, precise and up to the point with the necessary and sufficient references. Talkadu (talk) 13:30, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are undoing what I am doing without reading my brief explanations. You are not following the rules from BRD. Just you alone acting without giving a chance for others to read it to rectify. It looks like you do not know how Wikipedia works.

The point is Mamta Sagar's page does not qualify to be on English Wikipedia. You may move her page to Kannada Wikipedia.

I suggest you nominate her page for deletion in 7 days and let us see. Let consensus decide rather than you and I decide alone on this. If you do not do it, I may have do it for others to kick in.

I am looking forward to seeing your explanations for the following concerns. Let you give the original author to comment or rectify on this page. Otherwise, I may have to presume you are the author for Mamta Sagar.

1. Did she get any notable awards from organizations/academies from Karnataka or India? List it on her Inbox page.

2. Yes, she writes poems as thousands write in Karnataka but she did not earn any notable awards so far. Do not list local awards.

3. The way her page is written, it is all mixed up. It looks like she is an organizer with no awards on it. The author who wrote this is bringing in her academia, poetry writing skills, activist attitude etc. One category is enough to qualify. She is a jack-of-all-trades but master of none.

4. She may have a PhD bur her career is not consistent as I read her page. She has been teaching since 2017 and she is not a professor. There is no link to justify this. There are zero citations in Academia for her work - see ZSTOR for her. Hope you understand the academia standards for professors to qualify on Wikipedia. There are various numbers set for professors to qualify. ZSTOR is one of them. Each publications in Academia should have many citations in Liberal Arts the discipline she has chosen.

5. Is she as an activist? Is it recognized by the Karnataka state or any agency? Do you find any notable rewards for her? List only the references which fetcher her notable awards.

6. Travelling to participate overseas is not considered as notable. Nowadays many look to travel abroad and make their own stories on return. Maybe she was participating in them.

Do not to be foolish to revert things you undoing without justifications. You are the only one fighting here for her. Let you keep my concerns on her page and let others other than you react on her page before you decide to undo what I comment or flag.

I am fed-up with your attitude and her page. Make her page short, precise and up to the point with the necessary and sufficient references.

Note: I have to post this again as there were one or two editing problems. Talkadu (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Talkadu, your attitude is confrontational and uncooperative. If you deem Sagar non-noteworthy, then nominate her page for deletion, don't fight with other editors. FYI, I'm unfollowing your userpage, so if you wish to continue this conversation, please tag me. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 17:44, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is the question of following the wikipedia rules. You did not wishh to answer my questions you asked me why Sagar is not a wikipedia notable. Do not remove the flag I set until I nominate her page to delete in a week. It looks like you wrote her page or you are she. Thanks. Talkadu (talk) 18:44, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 19:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are the one started using abusive language at me and continued to use without understanding the reasonings I gave you on the TALK page and you are failing to answer them. I am happy I am now relieved from working on such pages. I have lots of things to do, block me as long. Now I feel happy I am releived from this dirty work. Hope you have a job to live. If people like you continue to work with Wikipedia, Wikipedia standard will go down oneday. BLOCK here to. Best. Talkadu (talk) 20:06, 24 November 2023 (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, as you did at Mamta Sagar, you may be blocked from editing.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:40, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen you have been instructing others not to delete Templets whereas you is engaged in deleting templates set by others. Is it fair? In addition, you use words like "Ridiculous" etc. at others. Check it and be fair.

I am sure one day Wikipedia will be a dumpster rental place if people like you to continue to work like this. Talkadu (talk) 16:20, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 19:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

He/she was abusive at me all along- Read it if you have time. He was not ready to listen to the reasonings I gave as per requested. Thank God I am releived now. It is his/her unfriendly nature - he/she does not wish to read and understand. It is his foolishness. I am sure he/she is a short tempered person. I wish him/her the best. Thanks. Talkadu (talk) 20:19, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even I asked for a speedy deletion and the consensous decide on it. He was not ready to help me on that. He did only undoing what I did without explaining to me.If he thinks what I was doing was disruptive, his is also. Do not unblock me unless you want to set the speedy deletion of the page for the reason I wrote there. THANKS. Talkadu (talk) 20:26, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

You have been blocked for 72 hours from editing for contravening Wikipedia's policy against harassment and personal attacks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

You are not permitted to call another editor a "liar" or a "jerk" on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk)