User talk:Hashid Khan

Links to user pages and sandboxes[edit]

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to user pages or sandboxes, as you did at Mughal–Rajput wars. Since these pages have not been accepted as articles, user pages, sandboxes and drafts are not suitable for linking in articles. and such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been deleted, please do not re-add any such links, thank you - Arjayay (talk) 11:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024[edit]

Hello, I'm Swadge2. I noticed that you recently removed content from Chudasama (surname) 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 your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The inline citations supported the content. Swadge2 (talk) 14:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The citations don't match the text provided in the page Hashid Khan (talk) 14:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How so? The first source lists Chudasama under surnames of the Mer caste, and there is a quote provided from the third source listing Chudasama as a surname of the Banghi caste. I can't access the second reference so unable to verify that one. Is there something that I'm missing though? Swadge2 (talk) 14:39, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Sanskritisation, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:42, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sanskritisation. 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:

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. Ekdalian (talk) 18:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:59, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dealing with "The citations don't match the text provided in the page" claims can be extremely tough, so making them incorrectly can be extremely disruptive. Looking at [1], I think I have found at least one example where your claim is factually incorrect. Others have complained about similar issues above and in other reverts of your edits, such as of [2]. I thus have to assume that you're intentionally removing text with an incorrect justification. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]