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

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

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

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]

@

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]

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]

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-

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 2025. Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive 2025. 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.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.

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]

@

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

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 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