User talk:Georgethedragonslayer

Hi Georgethedragonslayer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! JarrahTree 12:00, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Lepcha people has been reverted.
Your edit here to Lepcha people was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol.%2022%20Issue11/Version-4/C2211041117.pdf) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 05:49, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Mekong into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk🌴Help out at CCI!} 15:59, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Moneytrees: Thank you for the information, will do that going forward.Cheers! Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 17:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Diogo I Nkumbi a Mpudi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Portuguese. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:43, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:47, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Subhas Chandra Bose, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marathi.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Hindu texts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Assamese.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:08, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of museums in Russia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pokrov.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Malena Ernman, did not appear constructive and has 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. Helper202 (talk) 14:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Georgethedragonslayer, I apologize for the mischaracterization of your edit. I was in a hurry and did not read your edit summaries. Sorry. JimRenge (talk) 15:26, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Season's greetings. -I do support expansion of some English Wikipedia article ,-Many of them are directly or indirectly linked to Women's rights. Some of them may be of interest to you and hence requesting your support in expanding whichever article would interest you.

• My body, my choice an article about a feminist slogan, The article is likely to have some more scope for expansion, even on talk page few more ref sources are given and are yet to be covered.
• Draft:Aurats (word) draft needs expansion support.
• Draft:Avret Pazary fresh draft needs expansion support.
• Draft:Women, conflicts and conflict zones fresh draft needs expansion support.
• Draft:Sexual politics fresh draft needs expansion support.
• Draft:Ex-Muslims need expansion support to improve Ex-Muslim women perspectives
• Superstitions in Muslim societies this too is a new article needs expansion support.

• Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam
• Women in Ismailism I suppose article needs support in expansion.
• Draft:Sexual politics in south Asia
• Draft:Sexual politics
• Draft:Autobiographies of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women
• Draft:Expressions of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women through media ineteractions
• Draft:Urdu feminist literature

Last but not least since long I am looking for support peer reviews @

• Wikipedia:Peer review/Women in Islam/archive1
• Talk:British_Pakistanis#Sectarianism
• Talk:Overseas Pakistani#Following content was censored from the article

also in updating a a feminism related song article You Don't Own Me

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 07:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku: Hey Bookku, sure I would be glad to help out. I'll go through the articles and let you know the ones towards which I can contribute. Cheers,Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 11:33, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, that is very nice of you. I do look forward to your inputs in the articles those interest you. Bookku (talk) 12:02, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku: Hey, to start off, the article Draft:Ex-Muslims is interesting and I would like to add to it. Cheers, Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 15:38, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgethedragonslayer: Hi, It's really important article choice, I am sure your contribution to the same would be certainly add lot of valuable contributions to the article. Looking forward to your content support to the article. Lot of thanks and best wishes. Bookku (talk) 15:46, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Roshni Act, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jammu and Kashmir.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:26, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Malena Ernman. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 05:18, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring does not mean reversion of drive-by edits (that were made weeks ago) which were made against the talk page discussion made at Talk:Malena Ernman#Naming of non notable living children/relatives. You need to be more careful with leaving warnings. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 06:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:58, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dortch Plantation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bearskin Lake.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Georgethedragonslayer,

I am delighted that I could come in use to Wikipedia and am thanked by you for my small edit. Well, I myself have created the pages which I linked- Durlabhavardhana, Durlabhaka (Pratapaditya II), Chandrapida (Karkota dynasty), Kuvalayapida (king)], and Vajraditya II. felt that these pages should be created because information about them was scattered in different Wikipedia articles and even in other websites. I create articles on Indian history a LOT, I am proud of our country's rich history, culture and heritage. If you want me to create an article on Indian History, please leave me a message on my talk page, I would love to create it! (User talk:Tulika and Satvik)

Dear @Tulika and Satvik:, I'm happy to see your deep interest in history and the number of history related pages you have created. I will surely let you know. Cheers, Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 10:51, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Georgethedragonslayer recently a user removed name of Prithviraj Chauhan in List of Rajputs even though rrverted by Editor Abhsihek who is senior he still revert prithviraj Name he has problem with all Rajput related articles so he removed Delibertely name even on Brief list of ruler page kindly u readd and Stop this nonsense.2409:4051:4E91:64BB:ED7C:9672:A699:F307 (talk) 05:00, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi George, it is fine to copy content from another page like you did here. However, you need to make it consistent with the rest of the page. A couple of paragraphs above this line, it was already stated that the Recherlas defeated and killed Kapaya Nayaka. So it doesn't make sense to say they wrested power "after" his death. You also need to worry about blue links when you copy, which may be unnecessary in the target page, and citations as you already noticed. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:40, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Timeline of Indian history, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ahom.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:36, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Timeline of Iranian history, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palestine.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pratyush.shrivastava (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! It's the last day of 2020 and tomorrow will be 2026. Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive 2026. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! -- Pratyush.shrivastava (talk) 18:26, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello, Georgethedragonslayer. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Three Warfares Doctrine, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:02, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly recommend you open a discussion at Talk:Atif Aslam and seek consensus for the changes that you prefer. Wikipedia is a community editing project, and communication is a significant part of that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:20, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That article has existed since 2008 so a discussion on redirecting it would be in order. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 16:34, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@CambridgeBayWeather: Check again. Article was redirected by 2009 per consensus on talk page and was again reverted only by this year and the users restoring the article are clear socks, making their first edit only to this article. They haven't gained consensus for creation. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 05:09, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. My error I've reverted and change to semi for 5 years. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 05:21, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Georgethedragonslayer, you recently made a couple of edits on the Gadhimai festival page, and in your edit summary, you wrote that you were restoring the last good version. No explanation for this was provided, however, and you reintroduced a number of errors and inaccuracies. Why did you make those edits? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 05:59, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Revirvlkodlaku: Because the version before your edits was indeed "last good version". My edit summary was accurate. The festival is over since 2015. To treat it as an ongoing festival, which you are doing, violates WP:RGW. I would recommend you to take a step back and only focus on fixing "errors" that are irrelevant and non-existing to me. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 07:20, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Georgethedragonslayer, it appears clear that you are an inexperienced editor. Your account is not verified and your contributions only go as far back as 2020. You are currently engaged in an edit war with me. The normal procedure on Wikipedia is Bold–Revert–Discuss. This means that you take a bold step, such as the edits you made; another editor reverts your edits; you discuss the issue. Instead, you have gone ahead and reverted the edits that I undid. This constitutes edit warring and is not permitted on Wikipedia. I disagree with the edits you made. You reintroduced errors that were previously removed, you added a bunch of orthographic and formatting errors, and you deleted otherwise valid citations without providing an explanation. Your claim that the festival is over is not supported by any references that you provided. The way to proceed at this stage is for you to bring the issue up for discussion on the Gadhimai festival page. Please do so and I'm sure a consensus can be reached; do not revert again, however, or you will received a warning. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:59, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not Twitter as such there as no concept of being "verified" here. Your personal attacks do not justify your misleading edits like here made without edit summary and against the fact that this festival has been already banned by Nepal since 2015. [1][2] You introduced your problematic edits to the article on February, against the versions stable for years or since 2015. I reverted your edits and now onus is on you to justify your edits on talk page. This is how WP:BRD is interpreted, because your new edits do not cement a stable version. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2021 (UTC):::: There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:35, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Gadhimai festival 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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. RegentsPark (comment) 15:45, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary block, sorry ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:57, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(I had previously set a full block, but this was an unnecessary measure. I have replaced it by the following:) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:44, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply] You have been blocked from editing Anti-Brahminism for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—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 these sanctions. 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.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: I made 2 reverts because the other user who is most likely a sock, created with the purpose to edit war on this page, was causing disruption given he was being offensive by labeling constructive edits as 'vandalism'.[3] I stopped at 2 reverts but to me the user seemed to be a case of WP:DENY with edit warring, bad edit summaries and apparent socking. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 13:34, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Georgethedragonslayer, I have misunderstood the situation. I had seen other revert series at Atif Aslam and Society for Neuroscience, but these two turned out to be unproblematic (removing BLP violations and removing copyright violations, and not even multiple reverts at the latter article). The reverts at Gadhimai festival, and the very recent warning about them, made me think that a full block for a week would be necessary. This is not really the case. Regarding the sockpuppetry suspicion, I'd need specific details about who was evading a block there. If the user is actually a sockpuppet of a blocked or banned user, it was perfectly fine to revert their contributions and I'll remove the block entirely. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: The recent history of the page in question after edits by several users at least confirms I was correct with reverting. There are a number of sockfarms active on this subject of Ambedkar, including Sandesh9822, Amar Singh Okk, Deepcruze and others. This area is too infested with socks that a new account registering just to edit war on this page made it an obvious case of we were not born yesterday. Still, I made sure to leave a warning and refrain from reverting anymore there and started editing something else. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 14:47, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I could probably insist that "edit warring is disruptive even if you are right", but honestly... Two reverts against a single-purpose account that was clearly created to use Wikipedia as a battleground and that may well be a sockpuppet... I'm not sure if that actually justified a block in the first place. Sorry again, and thank you very much for the detailed, correct explanation. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Samgrāmarāja, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kabul Shahi.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Georgethedragonslayer! I am a representative of the Spiritual Council of the Yezidis of Georgia. The Temple of Sultan Ezid was built on our initiative. This temple is the seat of the Spiritual Council of the Yezidis of Georgia. I would like to note that many representatives of the Yezidi community from Georgia, Russia and Armenia took part in the construction of the temple. And the main sponsor of the construction of this temple was the Yezidi flock from Georgia. Therefore, we consider it superfluous to point out that the temple was built with funds from the Kurdistan Region and the Iraqi government. This information is a little untrue. We really hope that you will remove this item. We also want to inform you that the Russian-language version of Wikipedia has an article about the Temple of Sultan Ezid. Here's a link https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Храм_Эзида

I advise you to assume good faith and avoid battleground behavior when talking to other editors in the future before accusing them of "disruptively editing because they personally disagree with the topic". Viewsridge (talk) 15:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Conversion of non-Islamic places of worship into mosques, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jaunpur.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to remove, please do it. Xx236 (talk) 11:31, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Benegal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tulu.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not take aid of poor unindexed journals. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:31, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have concerns about your edit here, where you reviewed and passed a DYK nom. It had two sources given: Dixit and Usmani. I don't see any evidence of Dixit being RS, and Usmani looks like a WP:PRIMARY source. In fact, Usmani's book is in Urdu - did you read the original text or a translation before passing the DYK? Then there are neutrality issues. Without attributing the opinion to Usmani, the DYK hook appears to describe the fringe theory of New Medina as a mainstream theory of the founding of Pakistan.

I saw concerns raised about this by TrangaBellam[4] and RegentsPark[5]. Courtesy ping to SL93 who was also involved in the DYK nom. This is not the first time you've failed to understand what a secondary source is (previously you thought that Al-Waqidi was a "scholarly publication" and a secondary source just because the translation was published by Routledge). And combine this with the fact that an admin, I won't ping them at this time, has called you a "religious warrior". This is troubling.VR _talk 06:19, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We learn everyday and what you have cited is 6 months old outdated issue about which nothing can be done. You appear to be believing on your misrepresentation of RSPS entry of religious scriptures as that entry concerned only religious texts like Quran, Bible, etc. but not the translation of an autobiography with commentaries by scholars. Let me remind you that you are absolutely in no position to nitpick since you don't even know that British Raj era sources are unreliable.[6] If all you are going to do is repeat personal attacks then you need to find something better to do. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 08:49, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is true the DYK was 6 months old, but your other comments are within the last month. A modern commentary on an ancient text can indeed be considered a WP:SECONDARY source, but that's not what you cited. Your comment cited this page which begins with "Abu Abdullah Muhammad b. Umar al-Waqidi related to me that Abdullah b Ja'far related to us from Abdullah b al-Husayn b Ali b Abi Talib who said: ..." This sounds like a first hand account. According to Wikipedia:No original research, "a first-hand account of an event" and "accounts written by people who are directly involved" are WP:PRIMARY. By contrast, WP:GNG requires WP:SECONDARY sources. Even when I pointed out that your source was not secondary, you continued to insist it was. Pointing out, with diffs, that someone is repeatedly using inappropriate sources is not a personal attack.VR _talk 16:33, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresenting my comment is not anything better. The book was published by Routledge and its introduction, as well as commentaries, were written by well-known scholars thus it was enough for establishing notability. If I were to point out anything more about you, then I would cite the blatant falsification of that source by you since you said that "source does indeed mention Banu Fazara, page 564, first paragraph",[7] when no paragraph on 564 exists and it is just an index page with no mention of "Fazara". You need to improve yourself and read WP:STICK. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 08:05, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "page 564", click on this google books link and you will see at the top it is written "[Page 564] THE EXPEDITION OF ZAYD..." The url would suggest it is page "324" but the page itself has written "Page 564". You will see there was no "falsification" here.VR _talk 09:13, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out the flaw in the URL. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 13:45, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgethedragonslayer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Battle of Dewair (1582), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:01, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Georgethedragonslayer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Battle of Dewair".

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. 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!} 03:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Abor Hills, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lakhimpur.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kollur, Udupi district, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Southern Railway.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm User4edits. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Lovely Professional University have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. You added irrelevant information. Please also see WP:UNIGUIDE. User4edits (talk) 11:50, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have removed a statement - The regiment was raised as a pure South Indian Class regiment; with the explanation that not mentioned as such in the source. The source reference very clearly mentions this statement. I have therefore reverted the edit. Kindly go through the reference(s), before changing an article. Thanks. Akk7a (talk) 05:20, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Akk7a. All I see on that source page is a postcard. Nowhere is it mentioned 'The regiment was raised as a pure South Indian Class regiment'. Where are you seeing that? Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 18:05, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, click on the zoom logo on the image and move to the next image using the arrow keys. Should work.Akk7a (talk) 10:34, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Akk7a. Alright, got it, Thanks. I generally prefer to avoid unnecessary casteism and regionalism unless contextually necessary. I'm sure you understand why. Cheers, Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 12:42, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Athani, Belagavi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nandi.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion about the lead sentence is on Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Shambuka. Request your inputs. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 09:29, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted it[8] because the fact remains that he once converted backed by reliable source so it should be in both the lists. Bringtar (talk) 10:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would effectively change the criteria that exists for all of these lists so far. You cannot unilaterally establish a new criteria for only these 2 articles. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 10:17, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Georgethedragonslayer,

I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Shambuka several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Shambuka, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 08:58, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but Frank Joseph known as Frank Collin " is an American former political activist and Midwest coordinator with the American Nazi Party, later known as the National Socialist White People's Party." He published books under the Joseph name, see Frank Collin#Books (as Frank Joseph). Do you mind reverting yourself? Thanks. Doug Weller talk 13:59, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure.Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 17:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can I ask, what should be done to prevent deletion of 1958 East Pakistan-India border clash? And, You said that there was a previous article, which is 80% similar to it. That was deleted, Could you also provide more Information? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 06:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gloria Arieira, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Copacabana.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]