User talk:Haani40

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 18:05, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the welcome message.-Haani40 (talk) 18:26, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool down[edit]

Cool down, will you? You're making a lot of fuzz about a minor issue. Invest your efforts in finding a decent book or a scholarly article which argues that the Sufi's didn't aid that much to the spread of Islam in India. And you don't have to ping me each and every time. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 10:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not do anything in anger. I am a calm person by nature.-Haani40 (talk) 16:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contentious topic alert[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

  • adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
  • comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
  • follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
  • comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
  • refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Capitals00 (talk) 16:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024[edit]

Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have 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. Capitals00 (talk) 16:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Read WP: CANVASSING and stop mass tagging editors in your content disputes. Ratnahastin (talk) 06:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ratnahastin: Please at least answer that question. If I have to ask for clarification the next time, where do I ask?-Haani40 (talk) 07:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Haani40! Your additions to Second Modi ministry have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source. You must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. Read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Our policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 19:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also removed content you added to Bharatiya Janata Party campaign for the 2024 Indian general election and 2024 Indian general election for similar reasons. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 20:05, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citations[edit]

Kashmir in Conflict is not a web page, it is a book. So you need to use the "cite book" template. The required fields are author, publisher, and date of publication. Access-date etc. should not be included. url-access=registration can be included if the book is not free, but needs to be borrowed. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A good citation is one that tells the reader everything they need to about the source, without having to click anything. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:07, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I will correct it.-Haani40 (talk) 19:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kautilya3: I have been using this to generate the references I cite which is why that probably happened.-Haani40 (talk) 19:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if you just type a url, the tools assume that you are citing a web site, even thouh for Google Books links, they might be able to recognize the book nature of it.
In your edit, you removed the url, which you need to keep. We want to encourage the readers to look up sources, so we shound't give them a hard time! More importantly, you didn't specify the page where the supporting content is. So, please add the page number(s). This is very important.
For proper instructions, see WP:Full citation. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kautilya3: It took me a long time to find but I finally found this and used it.-Haani40 (talk) 22:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have not mentioned the url but this is the archived url.-Haani40 (talk) 22:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If I submit the ISBN, it gives the results correctly, using the template for citing books.-Haani40 (talk) 07:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is right. Then you may need to add the url's manually when available. It is a good idea to add url's. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:38, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need dates for books. Just the year is enough. Inside the book, you only see the years printed. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:37, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The date was mentioned in the archive url, so I added it.-Haani40 (talk) 14:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead fixation[edit]

Hi Haani, I am afraid you are exhibiting WP:Lead fixation. Please read that essay.

The lead summarises the article and, so, it is best written by people that understand the article well and have contributed to it. New editors can of course make suggestions if there are glaring mistakes or omissions. That was the case with your suggestions for the Aksai Chin page, but it is not so for the other pages where you are trying to insert the same content.

In general, it is not healthy to always attempt to edit leads of the articles. You should be spending much more time editing the bodies of articles rather than the leads. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:38, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks.-Haani40 (talk) 09:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Abhishek0831996. Thank you. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:57, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Haani, sorry if you misunderstood. You are not "forced" to comment in the ARE case. It is entirely up to you, whether you want to comment or not. Also, if you make allegations against editors, you need to provide diffs showing the behaviour you are alleging. I suggest that you withdraw your current comment and write a proper one (if at all you want to write one). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please move your comments to your own section. You can't write in other editors' sections. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:58, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rules[edit]

I saw you mention WP:PG for the rules you have been reading. I never knew that page even existed, and I don't find it particularly useful. All the information you need is in the Welcome message at the top of this very page. The "five pillars" page describes all the rules succinctly, and gives you links to the detailed policy pages. The rest of the Welcome message contains links to help articles. So, please look through them whenver you get a chance.

One other thing I should point out, because it is high time now! You need to start using the preview button in the editing window, to make sure that your posts are full and correct before you commit them. You are making too many edits over and over for the same post, which is mildly annoying when we look through the edit history. If you do this on peoples' user talk pages, it is even more annoying because they get a ping for every edit you make. Cheers, and all the best! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:12, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOLLOWING[edit]

WP:FOLLOWING is discouraged. You need to find your own articles of interest. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:26, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing at Annexation of Junagadh[edit]

Howdy. Please be more careful in your sourcing. The newworldencyclopedia article you added here as a source is a clearly labeled fork of Wikipedia (they copy material directly from here and then modify slightly). It cannot be used as a reference. There's a similar problem with that Business Insider India piece you added here; the material there is generally the same as our article when it was published. The material in our article is far older, so they appear to have just copied from here. Sam Kuru (talk) 16:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I am new here and now that you have told me, I will follow your advice.-Haani40 (talk) 16:42, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

  • adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
  • comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
  • follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
  • comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
  • refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Morbidthoughts (talk) 22:21, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Few tips[edit]

Hi Haani40, thanks for your contributions, just wanted to share a few tips,

  • Its not a good idea to include a book's promotional quotes directly in the article.
  • Any summary of the book has to backed by a WP:RS

You can use the following links to search for sources,

  • books.google.com
  • news.google.com
  • scholar.google.com

Even Microsoft CoPilot will help when starting a new article/section.

I have cleaned up the article on RNS Singh, always maintain a objective tone and state the facts.

You can reach out to me via talk page or email (if I don't respond on time). Thanks, --TheMandarin (talk) 15:56, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks!-Haani40 (talk) 17:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tendentious editing[edit]

If you continue to make tendentious changes to Narendra Modi, you risk being topic banned from Indian subjects. Did you read RegentsPark's edit summary here before you again wrote "This is not about the person, so it is a WP:BLP violation"? Did you understand it? And have you read what the policy WP:BLP actually says? I recommend you to do that before you refer to it again. Bishonen | tålk 18:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

I have never been blocked or topic banned before. Please give me a lighter sentence like a block of 24 hours first (like other new editors) if I continue such behaviour (but I will seek suggestions from others from now on to avoid trouble).-Haani40 (talk) 19:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do have following suggestions / tips.
    • On Wikipedia one may needs slow down substantially in own area of immediate interests to stay in the race.
  • Voluntarily refrain from South Asian and any contentious topic editing at least for 2 months.
  • My perception is you may need to work a little on comprehension.
    • Avoid reacting immediately
    • Try to see if there are more sides to any aspect before reaching to conclusion.
    • Try to study different side views than which attract you immediately.
    • Just observe discussions by others on various talk pages, RfCs, and notice boards without getting involved for some months.
    • Write down in your sandbox even before joining discussions on talk page.
    • Read and use more academic sources from Google scholar and google books.
Happy editing
Bookku (talk) 06:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't react immediately. I am a calm person by nature. I always provide reliable sources for my edits (at least for the last 500 edits). I have been searching and using google books, google scholar and even archive.org for reliable sources.-Haani40 (talk) 06:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I perceive either you are failing to give enough importance to cross-checking and verification of the information for accuracy and things are getting misrepresented for some reason from you.
  • Wikipedia:Teahouse#WP:BLP_violation you asked some question and within 20 minutes you made this edit check next comment at Teahouse of @Cordless Larry expressing apprehension that what you are quoting may amount to misrepresentation. That means you do not wait enough after asking guidance, and may be some issue out there. Hence suggested you to voluntarily slow down on India / South Asia topics Bookku (talk) 08:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am taking suggestions from others and even avoiding any edit war. I understand South Asia related topics better. God knows what I can edit if I get topic banned from Indian subjects like an admin is threatening (see above). I will try my best to avoid getting blocked or topic banned!-Haani40 (talk) 12:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See after some years you will also suggest new comers not to focus on single topic but gain experience from other topics and refer them to read Wikipedia:Single-purpose account. Even before giving you advice at Teahouse I had given similar advice to some one new who is interested in middle eastern issues. Working other than polarized and contentious areas add to your experience and understanding.
Bookku (talk) 13:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for the advice!-Haani40 (talk) 14:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Think for expanding article Dog whistle (politics) with academic references from Google books and google scholar if the topic interests you. Look for over all expansion and avoid being just India centric. Bookku (talk) 16:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice about AE[edit]

This message is made for notifying you about a discussion on WP:ARE#Haani40 about your edits. Srijanx22 (talk) 18:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Essential summary protocol[edit]

@Haani40

Hi again when you copy some thing from one Wikipedia article to another Wikipedia article you have to use following edit summary.

  • Copy pasting from [[ ]]  ; Pl. see history of [[ ]] for attributions.
    • Fill article name in [[ ]] from where you are copying the content.

It is an essential copyright related protocol, not to be missed. If by mistake you have not done then make a dummy edit with above summary.

I hope above helps. Bookku (talk) 04:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I sure will.-Haani40 (talk) 04:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Achievements of Second Modi ministry[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Achievements of Second Modi ministry, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. AusLondonder (talk) 10:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I myself wanted to delete it.-Haani40 (talk) 12:07, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some more tips[edit]

1) My perception is, though Wikipedia gets listed on google search, practically globally speaking Wikipedia largely caters to curiosity very small minority of readers. Wikipedia neither succeeds to influence masses nor to academic intelligentsia nor media. Wikipedia does not allow many content aspects like some other non-encyclopedia platforms like social media do. Hence Wikipedia is not good tool for any cause promotion. So best way is to maintain your neutrality on this platform. My perception is you can adapt to Wikipedia platform.
2) 'When in Rome, Do as the Romans Do' refers to the importance of adapting yourself to the customs of the people who are in a certain place or situation and behave like they do. So best is to read more and more help/ policy/ guideline/ essay/ discussion board pages as possible to get accustomed at Wikipedia.

Bookku (talk) 04:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Souniel Yadav per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 23:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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).

Haani40 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The check user in the SPI was, "inconclusive". I believe that the filer of that SPI had gone through all my 900+ edits, matched it with some super sock puppeteer with 10 blocked sock puppet accounts (as Toddy1 mentioned in the SPI) and found that 2 articles I have edited are the same as what he edited (and when 2 people are from the same country, if only 2 articles out of 900+ edits match, it is unlikely to be sock puppetry). The sentences used are also different. Please assume good faith and unblock me. Thanks!-Haani40 (talk) 01:09, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The checkuser being inconclusive does not preclude sock puppetry. I don't think you have adequately addressee the behavioral issues identified in the SPI. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hanni40 - you misread Editor Interaction Analyser, which showed that out of 910 edits, 303 were to pages edited by other known Souniel Yadav accounts. That is an impressive overlap.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Toddy1: Some of the sentences I have added are well sourced, so I request you to undo the reverts of my edits. Thanks!-Haani40 (talk) 05:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a sock puppet of User:Souniel Yadav but since he and his sock puppet accounts have edited thousands of articles, anyone from my City can be accused of being his sock puppet and blocked since the articles edited will overlap (since they will write whatever is India related only just like User:Souniel Yadav and his sock puppet accounts).-Haani40 (talk) 05:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Haani40&oldid=1221236684"