Amaan4210

Welcome

Hello, Amaan4210, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! - wolf 09:13, 21 December 2020 (UTC) Getting started Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Dokri

October 2020

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Nigerian Armed Forces, 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. Kaizenify (talk) 09:25, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

January 2021

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of countries by level of military equipment; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that 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:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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. - wolf 14:15, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Further note

You need to self-revert as disputed content should not be edited until there is a resolution on the talk page. You think your edit is correct, and it very may well be, but the process still needs to be followed, so you need to undo your last revert, and in the meantime I will review your comments on the talk page, and related material, and respond to you shortly. - wolf 14:17, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

February 2021

Hello, I'm TheBirdsShedTears. I noticed that you recently removed content from General (Pakistan) 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 your 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. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 11:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Please read WP:ONUS if you want to add something to an article, it is down to you to make the case, not down to others to make a case for no including it.Slatersteven (talk) 13:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Also I feel wp:editwar is worth a read.Slatersteven (talk) 13:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Could you look

If this Manpower numbers is correct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Armed_Forces Shadow4dark (talk) 22:48, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

Hello, I'm RenatUK. I noticed that you recently removed content from United States 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 your 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. Renat 23:16, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Morocco ordered 13 TB2 Bayraktar

Add this to Bayraktar https://mobile.ledesk.ma/2021/04/16/le-maroc-se-dote-dun-escadron-de-drones-armes-turcs-lefficacite-redoutable/

BBC "not a reliable source"?

Hi. Please explain (diff). Thanks. El_C 12:38, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert

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.

El_C 12:38, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

@El C: This user has developed a habit of removing reliably sourced content by calling the reliable source "unreliable".[1][2] Maybe a milder sanction that would discourage him from removing reliably sourced content is needed. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 03:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Georgethedragonslayer, I have a vague recollection of the June/BBC matter getting resolved in the end (I think). But calling the Hindustan Times unreliable in, what, quoting that Pakistani Interior Minister (?), that just seems plain weird. Amaan4210, are you alleging that they've engaged in fabrications there? I'm afraid this time I'm going to have to insist on a response from you. Which is to say, stonewalling me will be a cause for sanctions. Thank you. El_C 04:49, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

@El C: I expected some acknowledgment from Amaan4210 and promise to do better when I posted the reply above. But it seems that I was wrong.

Amaan4210 went ahead to edit war with a misleading edit summary[3] and double down on talk page by calling it a fabrication by Hindustan Times, and denying the existence of the event in question. [4]

Another editor pointed out the video report from India Today (another reliable source) which confirmed the report from Hindustan Times.[5]

Now agreeing with the existence, Amaan4210 went ahead to misrepresent the interpretations by both India Today and Hindustan Times.

See my response to Amaan4210's claims here for more details about authencity of Amaan4210.

Aside this single talk page and single article, this another latest edit here by Amaan4210 shows that he is edit warring to misrepresent sources elsewhere too. On the cited revert he claim that " clear bias when placing this in the lead section. Also, no sources are provided". The content about "terrorism" and how Pakistan is dealing with it is already covered on article body and the cited source "Understanding Pakistan: Emerging Voices from India", clearly notes "The jehadi terrorism is also posing a threat to the national security of Pakistan" under the chapter "TERRORISM IN PAKISTAN & COUNTER-TERRORISM STRATEGY".[6] Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 03:13, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@El C: I do not understand the reasoning behind my indefinite blocking. Provide a clarification on my talk page to resolve this issue quickly. Amaan4210 (talk) 21:41, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring

You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Pakistan. 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:Pakistan.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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 lead to a block. Thank you. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 23:11, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

September 2021

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. — kashmīrī ^TALK 00:23, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Indefinite block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. Not sure what else I can do to get you to communicate, Amaan4210, save this.

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 ~~~~}}.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Amaan4210 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

You have blocked me on unreasonable grounds. You have failed to provide a reason for blocking my account simply for removing vandalism on the "Panjshir Conflict" article. Please provide a valid reason for your blocking here.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.