Truthwins018

Truthwins018, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Truthwins018! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like AmaryllisGardener (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Truthwins018! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Report, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to . The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Truthwins018! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Reverting, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to . The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Notification of discretionary sanctions

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.

--regentspark (comment) 14:57, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Truthwins018/sandbox/Truthwins018

Hello, Truthwins018. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "sandbox/Truthwins018".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

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.

DE

This sort of disruption won't be entertained but better reported. WP:ONUS is on you to provide the link to archives.

Do you have a source that is explicit about 200,000 deaths due to Bangladesh genocide? I see 300,000 as the minimum figure to have been widely accepted.

Furthermore, what makes you think that this source is "Indian and Bangladeshi" source? The figures are approved by Richard Sisson, Leo E. Rose here and they are not "Indian" or "Bangladeshi". ❯❯❯Praveg ^A=9.8 05:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

If you looked into the topic properly, you would have come to know that 200,000 was the accepted figure for a long time , and 300,000 was added recently without any concensus. Established figures cannot be removed without proper reasoning.

WP:ONUS is on the person who is changing an old edit and should find out a good reason for the change Truthwins018 (talk) 15:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

You mean you are beating around the bush since 2021 to change it to "200,000" and calling it a "consensus" followed by this deceptive edit with inaccurate edit summary? That does not count. You are still alone with this POV pushing.

Now that 2 people have already reverted your gross underestimation together with misleading "according to Bangladeshi and Indian sources," which you haven't even explained, I am telling you that you need to stop WP:STONEWALLING. ❯❯❯Praveg ^A=9.8 05:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

I was asking for the 200,000 figures on the 1971 indo-pak war page, not on the genocide page as it was already so. If you oppose the figures, start a section under the talk page and explain why you want to change the figure which was already in place since long. Gain concensus Truthwins018 (talk) 08:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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. Jeppiz (talk) 14:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

@Jeppiz: I realize that an edit war had emerged on the 1971 genocide page. The reason was a change in old figure without any talk page discussion by a user. Anyway I admit that this shouldn't have been done and will try to respect wikipedia rules and not cause or let anyone lead to any disruption in the future. Thanks Truthwins018 (talk) 19:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC)