| Revision as of 16:01, 29 October 2024 editBro The Man (talk | contribs)455 edits →Shia islam: Terminology: new sectionTag: New topic← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 13:17, 1 January 2025 edit undoRiteze (talk | contribs)356 edits →Convenient tag for a section name.: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit App talk topic | ||
| (39 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| == ] == | |||
| == Vandalism observed Kannada page by the user Tirukodimadachengunrur == | |||
| I think this was kept but ]. Do you want to nominate this again? ] (]) 19:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| "Pepperbeast" | |||
| If just adding some random source to any piece of information qualifies as "sourced information", then what is the meaning of sourced information. | |||
| I have gone through those attached references and NOWHERE does it attest this information. I'm very much aware of "Iravatham Mahadevan's" works and it's far from what has been claimed here as his findings. This is pure misinformation added by the user '''Tirukodimadachengunrur''', to impose their biased views on the Misplaced Pages readers. In fact even the writing style does not match with that of the referenced document. It's our responsibility to prevent such acts of vandalism and restore genuine information. | |||
| I kindly request you to review the sources before restoring it. TrUtHJan (talk) 07:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)Reply | |||
| Fylindfotberserk | |||
| In contrast Iravatham Mahadevan talks about Old kannada language's influence on Old Tamil and not vise versa. Here the user | |||
| '''Tirukodimadachengunrur''' has explicitly tried to quote that Kannada follows the structure of Old Tamil which is false. Furthermore this user goes on to add that Kannada retains the words once used in Tamil which is again incorrect. It has been presented in a way that's completely opposite to what has been documented by renowned linguist "Iravatham Mahadevan". In point of fact even the other attached source "the history of kannada" has nothing that supports the claims of the user '''Tirukodimadachengunrur'''. | |||
| IRAVTAHAM MAHAVEDAN's views have been nicely put across under the "History" section of the same Misplaced Pages page where you can see how the renowned linguist explain why he thinks Tamil retains many Kannada words and not vice verse as claimed by a few editors here. ] (]) 14:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Not unnecessary == | |||
| == Edit to Adultery page == | |||
| not unnecessary. Some external site might want to link to some particular section. ] (]) 17:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Hello, | |||
| == Unnecessary reversion. == | |||
| I had started to try and rework the Hinduism section on the page as it was bloated, didn't read well and had problems with the sources. However I have seen that these edits were reverse, I thought I would reach out to you here to discuss the section. I am not trying to restate any of the facts, just clean up a number of errors (especially in regards to the sources) and generally make the section higher quality and more legible. I would like to discuss the edits with you here before I make any more edits, to reassure that these edits are genuine and will produce a better article. | |||
| If some other page want to link directly to , how would it do that? ] (]) 17:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Best, ] (]) 13:54, 22 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | : |
||
| :What do you see as the value of deep-linking into a list with limited information? ] ] 17:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == I think your edit was a mistake, I have reverted you == | |||
| ::Since there doesn't exist any independent page/section on Purva Ashadha Nakshatra, other pages are forced to link to the information where it is present. Thus, an anchor is necessary at this point, if another page want to link to this particular nakshatra. ] (]) 17:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::You don't have to make precise links to everything. If the information's not there, it's not helpful to the user. ] ] 22:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::There are not only (wikipedia) users who browse these pages, but external websites might also want to make links to necessary information present there. ] (]) 02:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::There is nothing to be gained by deep-linking to information that isn't there. ] ] 02:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::There is important information about Astrological leader, Deity, Symbol, Indian zodiac, Tropical zodiac and more about the entity. ] (]) 02:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | :::::::Where is it you want to link ''from''? ] ] 03:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::::. ] (]) 03:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | :::::::::OK, no. Don't add unnecessary anchors to Misplaced Pages to suit the needs of your own web site. ] ] 03:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::::::There might be many others who might be trying the same. ] (]) 03:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::::And? Why don't you just put the information on your own page? ] ] 04:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::If a copy of information from wikipedia is placed in one's own page, it will result in duplication of information. Moreover, readers will be deprived of timely updates to the information as and when they take place. ] (]) 04:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::::::Well, I'm sorry, but deleting anchors that nothing on WP links to is just normal housekeeping. WP editors aren't responsible for your web site. Either maintain your own information or link in a sensible way. ] ] 05:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::::Can you suggest any other way (which you think is sensible) of linking? This and its peers are significant topics, each of which deserves an anchor of their own, irrespective of weather they are linked to any external website or not. ] (]) 10:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == January 2025 == | |||
| I think that this edit was a mistake, instead of engaging with what were valid and constructive points you shut down the conversation. I am at a loss for why you would do that, but anyway I have reverted. Have a nice day. ] (]) 16:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | : |
||
| ] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]  according to the reverts you have made on ]. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to ] with others, to avoid editing ], and to ], rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. | |||
| == Name articles == | |||
| Variations of names are a legitimate addition to articles about the history and usage of said names. Most of the variants are included in name dictionaries. i am reverting your deletions and suggest you discuss it on the talk pages before restoring your deletions. Your edits are disputed. ] (]) 03:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Points to note: | |||
| == Shia islam: Terminology == | |||
| # '''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 ] to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an ] or seek ]. In some cases, it may be appropriate to ]. If you engage in an edit war, you '''may be ] from editing.''' <!-- Template:uw-ew --> ] ] 05:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Convenient tag for a section name. == | |||
| I don't believe your recent edit on shia islam is not constructive one. Terminology section is part of the body and should act as a semi full overview. Your edit diminished insight and visibility of the subject. I want to revert it and I'll edit it for clarity if you think it needs more work. ] (]) 16:01, 29 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| A simple convenient tag was added to a long section name which contained some special characters too. is not constructive in this sense. ] (]) 13:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 13:17, 1 January 2025
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
Dutch exonyms
I think this was kept but consensus seems to have changed. Do you want to nominate this again? Bearian (talk) 19:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Not unnecessary
This is not unnecessary. Some external site might want to link to some particular section. Riteze (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Unnecessary reversion.
If some other page want to link directly to Purva Ashadha Nakshatra, how would it do that? Riteze (talk) 17:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- What do you see as the value of deep-linking into a list with limited information? PepperBeast (talk) 17:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- Since there doesn't exist any independent page/section on Purva Ashadha Nakshatra, other pages are forced to link to the information where it is present. Thus, an anchor is necessary at this point, if another page want to link to this particular nakshatra. Riteze (talk) 17:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- You don't have to make precise links to everything. If the information's not there, it's not helpful to the user. PepperBeast (talk) 22:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are not only (wikipedia) users who browse these pages, but external websites might also want to make links to necessary information present there. Riteze (talk) 02:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- There is nothing to be gained by deep-linking to information that isn't there. PepperBeast (talk) 02:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- There is important information about Astrological leader, Deity, Symbol, Indian zodiac, Tropical zodiac and more about the entity. Riteze (talk) 02:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Where is it you want to link from? PepperBeast (talk) 03:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- From here. Riteze (talk) 03:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- OK, no. Don't add unnecessary anchors to Misplaced Pages to suit the needs of your own web site. PepperBeast (talk) 03:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- There might be many others who might be trying the same. Riteze (talk) 03:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- And? Why don't you just put the information on your own page? PepperBeast (talk) 04:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- If a copy of information from wikipedia is placed in one's own page, it will result in duplication of information. Moreover, readers will be deprived of timely updates to the information as and when they take place. Riteze (talk) 04:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Well, I'm sorry, but deleting anchors that nothing on WP links to is just normal housekeeping. WP editors aren't responsible for your web site. Either maintain your own information or link in a sensible way. PepperBeast (talk) 05:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Can you suggest any other way (which you think is sensible) of linking? This and its peers are significant topics, each of which deserves an anchor of their own, irrespective of weather they are linked to any external website or not. Riteze (talk) 10:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Well, I'm sorry, but deleting anchors that nothing on WP links to is just normal housekeeping. WP editors aren't responsible for your web site. Either maintain your own information or link in a sensible way. PepperBeast (talk) 05:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- If a copy of information from wikipedia is placed in one's own page, it will result in duplication of information. Moreover, readers will be deprived of timely updates to the information as and when they take place. Riteze (talk) 04:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- And? Why don't you just put the information on your own page? PepperBeast (talk) 04:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- There might be many others who might be trying the same. Riteze (talk) 03:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- OK, no. Don't add unnecessary anchors to Misplaced Pages to suit the needs of your own web site. PepperBeast (talk) 03:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- From here. Riteze (talk) 03:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Where is it you want to link from? PepperBeast (talk) 03:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- There is important information about Astrological leader, Deity, Symbol, Indian zodiac, Tropical zodiac and more about the entity. Riteze (talk) 02:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- There is nothing to be gained by deep-linking to information that isn't there. PepperBeast (talk) 02:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- There are not only (wikipedia) users who browse these pages, but external websites might also want to make links to necessary information present there. Riteze (talk) 02:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- You don't have to make precise links to everything. If the information's not there, it's not helpful to the user. PepperBeast (talk) 22:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- Since there doesn't exist any independent page/section on Purva Ashadha Nakshatra, other pages are forced to link to the information where it is present. Thus, an anchor is necessary at this point, if another page want to link to this particular nakshatra. Riteze (talk) 17:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
January 2025
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Bluecoats Drum and Bugle Corps. 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. Bgsu98 (Talk) 05:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Convenient tag for a section name.
A simple convenient tag was added to a long section name which contained some special characters too. Your edit is not constructive in this sense. Riteze (talk) 13:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)