User talk:Aman.kumar.goel

This user tries to do the right thing. If he makes a mistake, please let him know.

Hey there, have to raise any issue? Rather talk to me here than initiating edit war.

Page before November 18, 2019.

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to [email protected], so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at [email protected].

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, if you are actually reading this message (as it was delivered by a bot),

It was delighting for me that you could reckon me helpful for mentoring newbies. Unfortunately, I'm myself a new editor who recently has been absorbing markup language on wikipedia. Coding has very remote relations to my job as of now. So, I don't even have much hold of coding I had learnt in past. I edited a document as I can see and interpret how markup works. I'm an editor with a fetish to keep statistics and lists updated. So, I tried, practiced and learnt. But that doesn't mean that I'm an expert editor and actually able to create documentation tasks I'm alien to. It will be my pleasure yet if I'm able to help someone on English Wikipedia. But again I'm afraid how much wait they will have to do. I'm at work for 80-90 hours a week. You accidentally caught the wrong person. Still, thanks for asking. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 03:41, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Sjö. I noticed that you recently removed content from Newcastle sex abuse ring 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 the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Sjö (talk) 11:56, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An older unsourced edit was removed with an edit summary. RVV: Reverted Vandalism. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 12:00, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You removed sourced info, as the source mentioned the Indian background of one or more perpetrators. Your removal of the sourced info appear to be based on your personal opinion and your edit comment was misleading. Sjö (talk) 14:03, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 14:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Newcastle sex abuse ring, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albanian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:26, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful if you could offer your opinion on

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Atal Bihari Vajpayee, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Statesman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:39, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	बहुत खूब भाई :) Sagnique (talk) 13:56, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aman.kumar.goel. Happy to have a discussion. I see you are a fairly new user, so just a friendly notice: be careful with the

I see that you have already been alerted once--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 13:58, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DBigXray: I don't think my edit was contentious. What I went on adding was a general one liner consideration that was itself part of sources. As for second on mass shootings, it was my bad who didn't have a look on source and deemed it to be from conflicts. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 14:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, thanks for understanding and helping to improve the article. cheers. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 14:07, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doesnt always mean non notable. It may mean that the some one is yet to start an article ona notable topic. regards. DBigXrayᗙ 12:55, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You made a very surprising comment on my talk page, over the course of repeated unconstructive edits by an ip on the article Indian National Army which I struggled to correct last month. You picked the issue that I had reverted, but appeared to have entirely glossed over and given a free pass (not that it your role to do either) to the other party, which immediately flags your intention and partiallity. I have noticed a trend in India related articles of mass-swamping of similar approaches from a coterie of editors who spring up from nowehere, I take this to be something similar. Nonetheless, be careful that this destroys your own standing as a contributor, and flags you up as potentially disruptive editor. In the spirit that you left a warning message on my talks page (I have been in wikipedia long enough to not need reminding of 3RR from yourself), consider yourself warned.rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 16:08, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You will be warned of 3RR whenever you will violate it or get close to it. There is nothing wrong with warning you about such edit warring while you are at it. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 16:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aman, dropping a note of appreciation for the changes made to the Vyommitra. Csgir (talk) 11:33, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure that I could contribute something appreciable. The article however needs a lot of expansion. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 13:57, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey brother, I reverted your edit on

Noted. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 00:51, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Za-ari-masen: That was a discretionary sanctions notice not a blocking or warning template, and users making contentious edits are notified about sanctions in place on highly disruptive editing areas like South Asia. Your incorrect warning here to this user and removal of the DS from your talk page is highly problematic, other users need to know that you have been notified about sanctions on topic areas. Gotitbro (talk) 00:45, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Vaidya Rama Kant Mishra seems a bit confused. What do you think of this article?Streetlight401 (talk) 06:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Will work on it someday. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 09:46, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Siddha medicine. 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 ~~~~}}.  Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:57, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Aman.kumar.goel (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have been blocked for edit warring (not violating 3RR to be specific) and I admit that it was a wrong move on my part to edit war and I am willing to avoid edit war until we have reached a clear consensus. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 16:41, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Per discussion below. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ping Ivanvector. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 16:41, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is your first block for edit warring but I see that you have been warned before. We have a bright-line rule about three reverts, but that is only one technical definition of an edit war. Any time you are repeatedly reverting other editors, you are edit warring, and edit warring is not allowed, period.

Fortunately, our policy on edit warring contains a section describing what you can do to avoid getting into edit wars and finding yourself blocked again. Before I unblock you, can you please summarize the advice given in

WP:ROWN to be useful advice. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:01, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@Ivanvector: I understand that edit warring is not allowed and participating in an edit war or making reverts in opposition to an edit which requires discussion (not outright vandalism) constitutes edit warring, especially in "controversial topics where views views are polarized and emotions run high, resulting in more frequent edit warring". I agree with this definition and plan to avoid edit warring from now on. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 19:30, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I trust that you will; please feel free to ask if you need help. I will unblock you momentarily. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]