Informer3
March 2023 edit
Hello, I'm Philipnelson99. I noticed that in this edit to Communism, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Philipnelson99 (talk) 03:47, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Swastika. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 04:27, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Swastika shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:40, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- Consider how you would feel if another editor tried to understate and de-emphasise the values of South and southeast Asians as you are trying to do with people from the rest of the world. Nazism led to the deaths of 20 million people in the USSR, six million Jews and almost eradicated the religion and culture of the survivors, and many many more. If you persist in this campaign, you are likely to have your editing rights restricted or removed completely. Please stop.
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. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:41, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
- Nazism have got nothing to do with swastika's religious value. I am just adding one word of how swastika is being seen in the Western world versus globally and when I say "globally" I mean those countries away from West which sees swastika as a religious emblem. So there should be a written difference between this and I will edit it back to where it was, to write the "Western world" prospective on the article. Informer3 (talk) 01:32, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- So are you saying you will continue to make edits against consensus? That you will ignore consensus? Binksternet (talk) 01:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- I might ask for your permission to use a slight edit to add the word "Western world" after nazi mention so not to harm Asian sentiments first Informer3 (talk) 01:54, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- Nothing you are doing with the swastika issue is "slight". You are trying to right a great wrong, which is not the job of Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 05:08, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- I don't see rectifying some more details as a so-called "great wrong" because I can clearly see that in Asian nations the swastika is being used in temples and only the Western world sees it according to Nazi significance not the Asian countries. Now that's a wrong thing Informer3 (talk) 06:19, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- Nothing you are doing with the swastika issue is "slight". You are trying to right a great wrong, which is not the job of Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 05:08, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- I might ask for your permission to use a slight edit to add the word "Western world" after nazi mention so not to harm Asian sentiments first Informer3 (talk) 01:54, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- So are you saying you will continue to make edits against consensus? That you will ignore consensus? Binksternet (talk) 01:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 16:54, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
March 2023 edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. - Your explicit threat of sockpuppetry is also a factor in this block. Cullen328 (talk) 18:06, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
