User talk:Garudam
Hello, I saw that you struck out this peer review nomination with the comment 'Blocked sock', but User:GtAM6 isn't currently blocked, and I couldn't find any past block logs for them. Could you please clarify why you made that change? – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:38, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Please see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tiipu. However I must say that they're not blocked yet but confirmed to each other. Garuda Talk! 13:21, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. – DreamRimmer (talk) 13:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
For guidance
[edit]Hello brother! PWC786 (talk) 17:08, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Why did you reverted my reference of book on Battle of Kaiser-e-Hind Fortress page without giving any reason?
- Please guide me PWC786 (talk) 16:54, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- You don't cite references in the reflist template rather cite after the content body. See WP:REF. – Garuda Talk! 18:05, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Overzealous warnings
[edit]Hey, I was looking at User talk:PWC786, I don't think all of the warnings there are warranted. Please refrain from overzealous warning to the point of biting newbies. Sohom (talk) 17:58, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- I see. However, note that they are editing around WP:ARBIPA, which, of course, falls under the contentious topic area. Moreover I didn't even warn them for their first poor addition; instead, I welcomed them for it. – Garuda Talk! 18:24, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- Right, let me be a bit more direct, can you explain which part of this edit required a warning with the following text:
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Pakistan Army.
- Also, editing in a contentious topic area does not give you, an experienced editor the right to forget/sidestep a core guideline as you've done here. Sohom (talk) 18:39, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- You're right. The use of uw-unsourced4 was unwarranted; uw-delete1 should have been used instead if necessary. I have promptly retracted my warning [1]. – Garuda Talk! 20:01, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Religion in Myanmar 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. — Cerium4B—Talk? • 11:28, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- This is a revenge warning, and no, my reverts were far from WP:3RR violation, I didn't do more than 3 reverts, self reverts shouldn't be in your equation. You must immediately retract your warning. – Garuda Talk! 12:00, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Garudam, you’ve reverted 5 times. Out of those, 4 were mine & 1 was yours. Which is completely a violation of WP:3RR — Cerium4B—Talk? • 12:15, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- Again, see WP:3RRNO. Consider retracting your warning above. – Garuda Talk! 13:07, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Garudam, you’ve reverted 5 times. Out of those, 4 were mine & 1 was yours. Which is completely a violation of WP:3RR — Cerium4B—Talk? • 12:15, 5 February 2025 (UTC)