AsOd19
AsOd19, you are invited to the Teahouse!
edit
|
Hi AsOd19! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 27 January 2019 (UTC) |
Welcome AsOd19!
I'm S0091, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
| To help get you started, you may find these useful: | When editing, follow the 3 Core Content Policies:
|
Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the 
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.
Please be aware
edit
|
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. |
Please read the information at User:Sitush/Common#Castelists, stop edit warring at the Baidya article in contravention of the consensus mentioned in the Castelists thing, and start following our methods. If you do not, you will find yourself banned from editing the topic area or even blocked from contributing to Wikipedia entirely. - Sitush (talk) 12:21, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
January 2019
edit
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Baidya; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. RexxS (talk) 16:43, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Caste lists
editHi, I thought I would try to explain better what the problems are regarding associating someone with a caste identity on Wikipedia.
Firstly, not everyone wants their caste identity to be known - Amitabh Bachchan is a classic example of someone who has publicly said that he does not recognise the idea of caste and does not want to be associated with any particular caste. We have to respect his wishes because he is a living person and we have special rules here for dealing with living people. The same rules would apply to stating any religious belief he might have, or his sexuality, for example.
Secondly, even if someone has not, to the best of our knowledge, specifically said that they do not recognise caste or something similar, we can't just put it out there. As with pretty much everything else said in Wikipedia articles, we must have a reliable source that verifies the claim we are making about them. So, we need to show something decent that "proves" their caste is what we say it is. Random websites are not very good for that; interviews with the person are probably the very best thing. In the case of living people, we absolutely must have a reliable source that shows them self-identifying their caste, which basically does mean an interview or something that they have written about themselves.
Being born into a family that are of a particular caste, or bearing a name that is often associated with such a caste, is also not verification for the person we are writing about. The family issue is largely for the same reasons as I've already said about Bachchan - we assume here that people can choose, or at least can choose whether they want the association made public. With names, well, anyone can choose to use any name they want, and many people who are in fact completely unconnected with the Indian caste system may use names that are similar to ones often associated with it. The singer Helen Reddy, for example, is definitely not a Reddy even though she bears probably the most common name used by members of the caste.
As far as lists of people go, the same rules apply but there is an additional problem. Often people say, as you did, that there is a source in the biographical article that we have about the person but they do not actually check that supposed source themselves. Because pretty much anyone can change an article on Wikipedia, it also means people can add the wrong information about someone, so rechecking sources is an important part of what we do in tricky situations such as this. They must be checked for reliability and the article statement must be verified against what the source actually says, bearing in mind the other points I mention above.
There are other situations that impact on stating someone's caste here - for example, how do we treat someone born of an inter-caste marriage - but off the top of my head these are the ones that most commonly arise and which a lot of people do not appreciate in their haste to say something that they believe to be correct. The rules exist for a reason and are set by consensus of the Wikipedia community to protect both the person and the project, and sometimes also the person's relatives etc. They can't simply be ignored because you think something is obviously "true", and that is why a lot of people get into trouble here when they deal with caste affiliations.
As is nearly always the case here, if you find that someone reverts what you wrote in an article, it is usually best to talk about it rather than reinstate what you had said. You may get agreement for your version, which would be great, but repeatedly reinstating the information without agreement can cause you to break even more rules, notably the one about three reverts in a given period of time. I know Wikipedia advertises itself as the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit but that isn't really true and I personally do not think we should say it: people who break our rules often find themselves unable to contribute because they are blocked or banned from working in specific areas.
I hope this helps. Feel free to ask any questions that you may have but, please, do not put back that list of people again without getting some agreement about it first. - Sitush (talk) 05:00, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Blocked
editYou have never discussed anything on a talkpage, and I can't tell whether or not you're aware of the advice people write for you on this, your own, talkpage. Your way to edit the article Baidya is simply to push your own preferred version in again and again, edit warring. You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. Perhaps that will help you find this page. If you do, make sure you answer the posts here from people who have taken the time to try to explain Wikipedia's rules and principles to you. If you are willing to learn, you may perhaps eventually be unblocked. Bishonen | talk 19:12, 1 February 2019 (UTC).